by John Cylc

August 11, 2024

In recent years, the conversation surrounding gender equality in sports and military service has intensified. It raises fundamental questions about standards, fairness, and the implications of including individuals of varying genders in traditionally single-gender spaces. I passionately believe that gender should not preclude anyone from participating in sports or military service, if individuals can compete or perform at the same level as their peers. However, it is crucial to maintain rigorous standards across the board to ensure the safety and effectiveness of all involved.

When discussing the participation of women in men’s sports teams, my position is clear: if a woman can compete at the same level as her male counterparts, then she should absolutely be allowed to join. The essence of sports is competition, and the primary focus should be on skill, talent, and the ability to perform under pressure. Similarly, if a woman can meet the stringent requirements to serve in elite military units like Delta Force, the Green Berets, or the Navy SEALs, then she should be welcomed into those ranks. These environments are not about gender; they are about capability and performance. Logically, this concept should apply to all roles in all branches of the militarily.

However, my support for inclusion is contingent upon the unwavering maintenance of standards. Lowering performance benchmarks to accommodate women—or any group, for that matter—creates an imbalance that can have dire consequences. In high-stakes environments like the military, where teamwork, trust, and physical capability are paramount, compromising on standards endangers the lives of all team members. If individuals are permitted to enter such elite units without meeting the same criteria as their peers, it undermines the integrity of the unit and the safety of its members.

The topic of biological men competing against women in sports is another area of concern that warrants careful consideration. Allowing biological men—who may identify as women—to compete in women’s sports raises significant issues regarding fairness and safety. The physiological differences between biological males and females can create an unlevel playing field. These differences often manifest in strength, speed, and endurance, giving biological males an inherent advantage in most sports.

The inclusion of biological men in women’s sports can result in an unfair advantage that compromises the integrity of women’s competitions. It can also lead to dangerous situations, especially in contact sports where physicality plays a crucial role. Protecting the rights of all athletes, including those who identify as transgender, must be balanced with ensuring that competition remains fair and equitable. Promoting inclusivity should not come at the expense of fairness for women athletes who have worked tirelessly to compete at their level.

At the heart of this debate is a commitment to equality and fairness. It is imperative to promote individuals based on their capabilities rather than their gender. I believe that advocating for inclusion must not equate to lowering standards or compromising the integrity of competition. It is essential to recognize that there are numerous areas where women excel, and this should be celebrated without diminishing the achievements of women by comparing them to men in contexts where the physical demands differ.

This philosophy extends beyond gender to encompass a broader spectrum of diversity, including skin color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, and political ideology. Fairness means evaluating individuals based on their abilities, qualifications, and performance rather than on any characteristic that does not pertain to their capabilities. This approach aligns with common sense and the principles of meritocracy, which holds that individuals should rise based on their skills and contributions rather than predetermined categories.

The perception that advocating for rigorous standards is inherently discriminatory often leads to heated debates and polarizing views. Critics might argue that this stance is rooted in a lack of understanding or empathy for marginalized groups. However, it is crucial to distinguish between advocating for equal opportunity and demanding equal outcomes irrespective of performance. The latter can inadvertently perpetuate inequities by fostering environments where individuals are promoted or included without regard to their actual ability to meet the demands of a particular role or sport.

Progressive thinkers may believe in a more inclusive approach that emphasizes diversity at the potential expense of merit-based standards. This perspective, while well-intentioned, often overlooks the real-world implications of such policies. A strong commitment to equality must recognize that fairness and opportunity are not mutually exclusive; they can coexist when grounded in the principles of meritocracy.

In conclusion, the intersection of gender, sports, and military service presents complex challenges that require thoughtful consideration and a commitment to fairness. I staunchly support the inclusion of individuals in sports and military roles based on their ability to meet established standards, regardless of gender. However, I oppose any attempts to lower those standards in the name of inclusion, as it endangers the integrity of teams, and the safety of individuals involved.

Promoting fairness means recognizing and celebrating the unique strengths that individuals bring to the table while ensuring that all athletes compete on an equal footing. It is essential to approach this issue with a balanced perspective, advocating for the rights of all individuals while maintaining rigorous standards that uphold the principles of merit and capability. Ultimately, a commitment to fairness, grounded in common sense, is essential for fostering an inclusive and equitable society.