A Philosopher's Blog

Gender Nominalism & Competition

Posted in Ethics, Law, Philosophy, Politics by Michael LaBossiere on June 12, 2015

In the previous essay I discussed gender nominalism—the idea that gender is not a feature of reality, but a social (or individual) construct. As such, a person falling within a gender class is a matter of naming rather than a matter of having objective features. In this essay I will not argue for (or against) gender nominalism. Rather, I will be discussing gender nominalism within the context of competition.

Being a runner, I will start with competitive sports. As anyone who has run competitively knows, males and females generally compete within their own sexes. So, for example, a typical road race will (at least) have awards for the top three males and also for the top three females. While individual males and females vary greatly in their abilities, males have a general physical advantage over females when it comes to running: the best male runner is significantly better than the best female runner and average male runners are also better than average female runners.

Given that males generally have an advantage over females in regards to running (and many other physical sports), it would certainly be advantageous for a male runner if the division was based on gender (rather than biological sex) and people could simply declare their genders. That is, a male could declare himself a woman and thus be more likely to do better relative to the competition. While there are those who do accept that people have the right to gender declare at will and that others are obligated to accept this, it seems clear that this would not be morally acceptable in sports.

The intent of dividing athletes by sex is to allow for a fairer completion. This same principle, that of fairer competition, is also used to justify age groups—as older runner knows, few things slow a person down like dragging many years.  Because of this, a runner could, in general, gain an advantage by making a declaration of age identity (typically older). Perhaps the person could claim that he has always been old on the inside and that to refuse to accept his age identification would be oppression. However, this would be absurd: declaring an age does not change the person’s ability to compete and would thus grant an unfair advantage. Likewise, allowing a male to compete as a woman (or girl) in virtue of gender identification would be unfair. The declaration would not, obviously, change the person’s anatomy and physiology.

There are, however, cases that are much more controversial and challenging. These include cases in which a person has undergone a change in anatomy. While these cases are important, they go beyond the intended scope of this essay, which is gender nominalism.

Some competitions do not divide the competitors by sex. These are typically competitions where the physical differences between males and females do not impact the outcome. Some examples include debate, chess, spelling bees and NASCAR. In these cases, males and females compete equally and hence the principle of fairness justifies the lack of sex divisions. Some of these competitions do have other divisions. For example, spelling bees do not normally pit elementary school students against high school students. In such competitions, gender identification would seem to be irrelevant. As such, competitors should be free to gender identify as they wish within the context of the competition.

Interestingly, there are competitions where there appear to be no sex-based advantages (in terms of physical abilities), yet there are gender divisions. There are competitions in literature, music, and acting that are divided by gender (and some are open only to one gender). There are also scholarships, fellowships and other academic awards that are open only to one gender (in the United States, these are often limited to woman).

Since being a biological male would seem to yield no advantage in such cases, the principle of fairness would not seem to apply. For example, the fact that males are generally larger and stronger would yield no advantage when it came to writing a novel, acting in a play, or playing a guitar. As such, it would seem that if people should be able to set their own gender identity, they should be able to do so for such competitions, thus enabling them to compete where they wish.

It could be argued that the principle of fairness would still apply—that biological males would still have an advantage even if they elected to identify as women for the competition. This advantage, it might be claimed, would be based in the socially constructed advantages that males possess. Naturally, it would need to be shown that a male that gender identifies as a woman for such competitions, such as getting a woman’s only scholarship, would still retain the (alleged) male advantage.

It could also be argued that the divisions are not based on a principle of fairness regarding advantages or disadvantages. Rather, the divisions are to given more people a chance of winning. This could be justified on the same grounds that justify having many categories. For example, there are awards for being the best actor in a supporting role, which exists to create another chance for an actor to win something. If a person could just gender declare and be eligible, then that would create an “imbalance”, much as allowing non-supporting actors to declare themselves supporting actors to get a shot at that award would be unfair.

Of course, this seems to assume that there is a justified distinction between the genders that would ground the claims of unfairness. That is, it would be as wrong for a male to win best actress as it would be for a female screenwriter who never acted to win best actress for her screenplay.  Or that it would be as bad for a male to get a scholarship intended for a woman as it would be for a football player who cannot do math to get a math scholarship. This approach, which would involve rejecting one form of gender nominalism (the version in which the individual gets to declare gender) is certainly an option. This would not, however, require accepting that gender is not a social construct—one could still be a gender nominalist of the sort that believes that gender classification is both a matter of individual declaration and acceptance by the “relevant community.” As such, the relevant communities could police their competitions. For example, those who dole out scholarships for woman can define what it is to be a woman, so as to prevent non-woman from getting those awards. This would, of course, seem to justify similar gender policing by society as a whole, which leads to some interesting problems about who gets to define gender identity. The usual answer people give is, of course, themselves.

 

My Amazon Author Page

My Paizo Page

My DriveThru RPG Page

Follow Me on Twitter

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. WTP said, on June 12, 2015 at 9:28 am

    this would be absurd: declaring an age does not change the person’s ability to compete and would thus grant an unfair advantage.

    Hey, if the saying goes “you’re as young as you feel” why not “you’re as old as you feel”. Throughout my years I frequently hung around with an older crowd. Problem is, due to “attrition” the older you get the smaller the crowd.

    Does someone who truly feels she is black, identifies as such, and has convinced significant numbers of people that such is the case to the point that they elect her head of an NAACP chapter have an “unfair advantage”?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3121061/Local-NAACP-leader-professor-African-studies-outed-WHITE-parents-convincing-community-black-years.html

    In the interest of my new found patience (see what cutting down uses of the word “obvious” does for one’s writing?), I’ll pass on the several lighter fallacies presented here.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on June 12, 2015 at 11:34 am

      That is certainly burning up the social media. Back in the day, some light-skinned blacks would try to pass as white. Considering this reversal will reveal some important stuff about social values and status today.

      As you note, accepting that people can engage in self-identification in regards to gender would seem to entail accepting the same principle in regards to race. Or species, as AJM pointed out. But, I’m guessing that she will not get her own issue of Vanity Fair.

      • WTP said, on June 12, 2015 at 1:23 pm

        Well if I may borrow from some Republican reaction to Jenner and apply it to Dolezal…

        I can only imagine the torment that Rachel Dolezal went through. I hope she has found peace. If she says she’s african-american, then she’s african-american. Our responsibility as human beings is to love and accept everybody. Not to criticize people for who they are.

    • ajmacdonaldjr said, on June 12, 2015 at 11:40 am

      “If there are no biological “races” then what is “race”? For some, the answer to this question is “nothing,” and for others, “merely a nominal kind.” Continue reading: Racial Nominalism, by Ronald R. Sundstrom – http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/0047-2786.00133/abstract

  2. ajmacdonaldjr said, on June 23, 2015 at 8:03 pm

  3. ajmacdonaldjr said, on July 12, 2015 at 8:38 pm

    Mountain Bike ‘Groundhog Day’ as male rider Sylvia Castaneda sweeps Women’s division of Vittor…

    “In a story that will sound like ‘Groundhog Day’ to those familiar with the Michelle Dumaresq saga, a male competitor named Sylvia Castaneda was given the green light by mountain bike racing sponsor Vittoria Tires to compete in the prestigious Eastern States Women’s Cup on the basis that he claims to feel that he is mentally female, or has an internal female essence.

    “Like Dumaresq, who became the male Canadian National Women’s Champion of Downhill Mountain Bike Racing for three years under a similar policy until his retirement, Castaneda ran his first race in the novice female rank and swept the entire division, and just like Dumaresq, beat the top time of the entire elite female professional category by more than two seconds…”

    Continue reading: Mountain Bike ‘Groundhog Day’ as male rider Sylvia Castaneda sweeps Women’s division of Vittor… http://wp.me/p1ePFT-23n via @wordpressdotcom


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: