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.”

      • Timii@biglemmowski.win
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        Don’t be obtuse. It’s considered a malady in males, hence the full term “Male hypogonadism”.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Your definition of female:

          “Does not contain male levels of testosterone post maturity.”

          That includes men with hypogonadism.

          It’s not my fault that the medical term doesn’t agree with your definition.

          • Timii@biglemmowski.win
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            Oh? Explain why you think “male” is specified in the disease then if my definition were not correct?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              You defined ‘female’ purely based on testosterone levels. That’s not my fault if it fits some men.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I literally did. I’m not sure why you’re pretending I didn’t, but okay.

                  Again, it’s not my fault that your definition includes some men.

                  By the way, can you find any biologist who agrees with that definition? Because I’ve looked and I can’t.

                  • Timii@biglemmowski.win
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    The definition stands with an express exception due to pathology. The exception that proves the rule.

                    Show me a scientist that doesn’t agree. Good luck when blood test paperwork literally declares the range for males.