Talk:Autumn Burchett

Its fine if Autumn identifies herself as something non-binary, but this totally does not make them the first non-male competitor to win a pro tour. There is a scientific rationale behind the sexes - which btw evolutionarily ONLY were invented for reproductive purposes, and thus it only makes sense to talk sexes, if we talk reproduction -, which goes by the gamete size and types, a body can potentially produce, and the presence of a y-gonosome. Sex is not a spectrum (in contrast to what some Nature OpEds want to tell you), but gender certainly is (or better multidimensional bell curves of trait distributions with huge overlaps). To the same end, gender can be based on self-determination, but sexes cannot. There are no male vaginas, and no female penises (and if so, the concept of sexes would obviously become instantly obsolete). To conclude, Autumn is the first trans*- or queer indidual to win such an event, but i am highly sceptical about their non-masculinity. What would we call the first cis-woman to win a tour then? 88.128.81.205 19:32, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The presence of Y-chromosomes is not what we're referring to here. While a person might be biologically male, they could be described as socially non-male. In this case, it is my view that this would be correct to do. --Sene (talk) 11:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * "What would we call the first cis-woman to win a tour then" -- Burchett being non-binary means the first woman (cis or not) to win a Pro Tour would still be the first woman (cis or not) to win a Pro Tour, so this question is moot. We would simply be able to note the first male, first female, and first non-binary winners in that case. User-100068615 (talk) 21:05, 1 March 2019 (UTC)