A record number of athletes openly identifying as LGBTQ+ are competing in the 2024 Paris Olympics, a massive leap during a competition that organizers have pushed to center around inclusion and diversity.

There are 191 athletes publicly saying they are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer and nonbinary who are participating in the Games, according to Outsports, an organization that compiles a database of openly queer Olympians. The vast majority of the athletes are women.

That number has quashed the previous record of 186 out athletes counted at the COVID-19-delayed Tokyo Olympics held in 2021, and the count is only expected to grow at future Olympics.

“More and more people are coming out,” said Jim Buzinski, co-founder of Outsports. “They realize it’s important to be visible because there’s no other way to get representation.”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Sorry, ‘evolution’ is a process and does not come up with definitions. Scientists do.

    Since you apparently can’t find any scientists who agree with you, I think it’s safe to say you’re wrong.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Since you apparently can’t find any scientists who agree with you

      I’m not sure what we’re conflicted here about, so let’s clarify: Are you saying that I cannot find any scientists to agree with me on my claim that males have smaller gametes and females have larger gametes? Also: what’s the standard we’re aiming at here? What do I need to find to convince you that I’m right? Do I need to find a live actual scientist that answers this question for me, or do you need a scientific paper or something? I’m guessing that a basic biology book is not enough for you, since this fact definitely is in every one of them.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        You said it is “an accepted definition” for both, but that there are exceptions, which is not scientific. Definitions do not have exceptions in science. If the definition is not universal, the definition is thrown out and a new one is found. That’s how science works.

        • vga@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          but that there are exceptions, which is not scientific

          Why would you say that? How do you define “scientific”? Might you be conflating it with some pure form of science, like mathematics or pure logic?

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’m sorry, if you think “exception to the rule” is a thing in science, you really don’t understand science.

            That’s like saying there’s an “exception to the rule” of the first law of thermodynamics. There just isn’t because there can’t be. If there was, we would have to redefine that law of thermodynamics.

            • vga@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Would you say that biology is not a science? Is your point that if a theory has exceptions, it needs to be replaced with a better theory?

              I’m not absolutely certain as it’s not exactly my main area of study, but I think nature and biology don’t fit 100% well into such thinking.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                3 months ago

                Is your point that if a theory has exceptions, it needs to be replaced with a better theory?

                Yes, that is literally how science works. Are you really not aware of that?

                • vga@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Ok, so how would you reconcile these two things into one better theory:

                  • males have smaller gametes
                  • females have larger gametes
                  • there are some (about 1%) exceptions to the above two

                  Do you throw it all away because of that 1%?

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Yes. Yes you do. Just like you would if 1% of the matter in the universe violated the first law of thermodynamics.

                    I’m sorry, I’m not going to continue explaining very basic concepts of science to you.