Boston Marathon organizers allow males identifying as women to crush female competitors, wiping out decades of athletic progress for real women.
At a Glance
- Boston Marathon now allows runners to compete based on self-identified gender rather than biological sex
- Transgender women runners have significantly displaced female competitors in hundreds of races
- Qualifying times for women are 16.6% slower than men, acknowledging biological performance differences
- Corporate sponsors like Bank of America and Adidas face criticism for undermining women’s sports
Biological Reality Tossed Aside for Feelings
The Boston Marathon, once a symbol of athletic excellence and fair competition, has jumped headfirst into the gender identity debate by allowing runners to qualify in three categories: men, women, and non-binary. What’s particularly telling is that the qualifying time for women is 16.6% slower than for men – an acknowledgment of the biological reality that men and women have different physical capabilities. Yet somehow, this same organization sees no problem with biological males competing in the women’s category if they identify as women.
The non-binary category, which uses women’s qualifying times, has seen both of its winners since inception be biological males. This isn’t shocking to anyone with common sense, but apparently confounds marathon organizers who seem determined to prioritize feelings over fairness.
One Athlete, 338 Women’s Spaces Invaded
The statistics are startling. Riya Suising, a transgender woman, has competed in the female category over 338 times, frequently winning and displacing female competitors who trained their entire lives to compete against other women. This repeated pattern shows it’s not just about inclusion – it’s about allowing biological advantages to steamroll women’s athletic achievements. What’s the point of having separate categories if we’re going to ignore the very biological differences that necessitated them in the first place?
“On a day meant to honor courage and freedom, is this what breaking barriers really means?” – Jennifer Sey
Science doesn’t lie, even when it’s inconvenient for the woke agenda. Men generally have higher VO2 max capabilities, greater muscle mass, different bone structure, and larger hearts and lungs – advantages that hormone therapy can reduce but not eliminate. These aren’t opinions; these are biological facts that significantly impact athletic performance, particularly in endurance events like marathons.
Corporate Sponsors Choose Ideology Over Women
The companies bankrolling this erosion of women’s sports deserve special scrutiny. Bank of America and Adidas have thrown their corporate weight behind policies that effectively diminish opportunities for female athletes. These corporations, desperate to appear progressive, have forgotten that women’s sports categories exist precisely because biological differences matter in athletic competition. Their virtue signaling comes at the expense of female athletes who lose opportunities, recognition, and sometimes even college scholarships.
“An overwhelming majority of Americans, 79% of us, agree that women’s sports must be protected, including most Democrats.” – Jennifer Sey
Alternative Solutions Exist
The debate doesn’t need to be framed as a binary choice between exclusion and unfairness. There are reasonable solutions that respect both transgender individuals’ desire to compete and women’s right to fair competition. Karen Frost from Moms for Liberty suggests a sensible approach: “Nobody is saying that biological boy that identifies as a female can’t compete. Open a new category, an open classification for all athletes that allows anyone to compete in any category.” This common-sense proposal would create space for everyone without trampling on decades of progress for women’s athletics.
“I just got my name and gender change formally processed with the court. After finishing the marathon and being able to run comfortably as the gender I identify with, it was a really big deal for me.” – Dae Seo
Use Your Consumer Power
Americans who care about the future of women’s sports aren’t powerless in this fight. The successful Bud Light boycott demonstrated that when consumers unite around shared values, corporations listen. Bank of America and Adidas might reconsider their position if enough customers make their displeasure known. The 79% of Americans who believe in protecting women’s sports represent enormous consumer power that could drive meaningful change if properly organized and motivated.
The Boston Marathon controversy reflects a broader cultural battle between ideology and reality. Women’s sports exist because biological differences are real and significant. Pretending these differences don’t matter isn’t progressive; it’s regressive, undermining five decades of progress since Title IX. Any solution that truly values both inclusion and fairness must acknowledge biological reality – not run from it.
