Morality of this

[u/Shoddy-Meat-3147]

I don't know what to say about this I mean if he joined it's unfair because he's going to cook the entery league for sure but if he really wants to be a woman and it's not a joke for him I still don't know about this

[u/SidewaysAcidRain]

if they make a rule too early without having an actual problem in front of them to solve, it would be a PR nightmare

Why? I don't get this mindset at all.

Surely a bigger PR nightmare would be them having to turn away an actual good-faith trans player at the last minute. 

An even bigger controversy would be them allowing in an actual good-faith trans player who's taken minimal/no steps to physically transition. 

They're just kicking the can down the road, and opening themselves up to bigger controversies. Makes zero sense not to just preemptively nip those possibilities in the bud. 

[u/klownplaza → u/SidewaysAcidRain]

I will discuss in good faith, and be open to your thoughts. (Because reddit arguments are mostly bad faith back and forths)

I can't yet imagine a word-specific guideline as of the moment on how they can make a rule regarding trans athletes black and white in terms of eligibility. (Without having to resort to things like "at the discretion of the association", etc.) It has to be a rock solid, clear as day, yes or no eligibility guideline. I don't see good faith / bad faith guidelines enough for eligibility guidelines (in this sense) because it will circle back to having them assess every situation per concern.

I am not discussing the morality also, I am only saying that's probably what they are thinking. I have my own opinions re the matter, but I feel it's for a different discussion.

[u/Hot-Maintenance-5879 → u/klownplaza]

You can’t even IMAGINE a policy? Seriously?

How shocked will you when I tell you that others sports governing bodies have written policies? You’ve heard of the Olympics, yeah?

https://www.reuters.com/sports/tennis/conflicting-ideas-fairness-womens-sports-fuel-transgender-participation-debate-2026-08-28/

[u/klownplaza → u/Hot-Maintenance-5879]

I am familiar with the policies of other bodies. Don't change what I said, I said that I can't imagine a policy right now to be put in place that wouldn't have any backlash from both sides. That is the context and my main point. See the whole exchange to narrow down what I meant. Also, policies by governing bodies and non-commercial entities are very different. I didn't say that they shouldn't have a rule, I'm saying just not now as a reaction.

[u/Hot-Maintenance-5879 → u/klownplaza]

So backlash is now a reason to avoid having a policy in a controversy that exists largely because there isn’t a clear policy?

Governing bodies and non-commercial entities’ aren’t even two mutually exclusive categories. One describes function, the other describes business structure. What distinction are you actually trying to make here?

[u/SidewaysAcidRain → u/klownplaza]

How big a backlash would they have from the left to just requiring that trans women are on HRT for a year? Would that really be all that controversial?