Cont: Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan

Status
Not open for further replies.
Stout said:
This isn't that though, this is something completely different.

This is about girls getting discouraged about competing in sports because they might be forced to compete against boys. If I was a girl and I was into competitive sports, I would think this sucks.
Click to expand...

But they would be discouraged for reasons of competitiveness? What about same gender discouragement from competition?
 
Darat said:
Not really it's just part of the usual contradictory crap said to us who aren't great at sports


School " it's the taking part that is important not the winning".
Me "Then I can be on the schools football* team despite not being able to kick a ball, great!"
School "No we want our team to win".
Click to expand...

The important part is the participation... for those who can't win.
 
BobTheCoward said:
But they would be discouraged for reasons of competitiveness? What about same gender discouragement from competition?
Click to expand...

I was going to write a response, but then I realized, what's the point? Whatever basis you have for evaluating things has basically no connection to the way that other people evaluate things. I can't even be sure that you're using the same basic definitions of words as everyone else. So there is no point. Real communication here is impossible.
 
BobTheCoward said:
But they would be discouraged for reasons of competitiveness? What about same gender discouragement from competition?
Click to expand...

Well....I just explained the situation to my neighbors 8 year old daughter and she seeded to understand the issue quite well. If her soccer team plays the boys soccer team, she says they'll loose and it's no fun going out for a game knowing you're going to loose.
 
Stout said:
Well....I just explained the situation to my neighbors 8 year old daughter and she seeded to understand the issue quite well. If her soccer team plays the boys soccer team, she says they'll loose and it's no fun going out for a game knowing you're going to loose.
Click to expand...

Which would also happen to me if people of my athletic capability played that same team. What does it matter?
 
BobTheCoward said:
Which would also happen to me if people of my athletic capability played that same team. What does it matter?
Click to expand...

Nothing matters. The universe is an uncaring void, life has no purpose, existence is only pain.

But god (who doesn’t actually exist) forbid we should keep males from competing against females. For some reason, it matters that we not allow people to have female-only sports.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
No that's not what i said. I said somebody who has legally changed gender should be treated as that gender legally. Simply saying it doesn't make it legal though.
Click to expand...

When I posed that question originally, it was in response to Bob's suggestion that "simple declaration" should be sufficient. Under current UK law, it's a rather more difficult process. However, some are in favor of changing the law to make it easier to legally change one's gender. The fewer barriers, the easier it could be for a hypothetical situation like this to occur. If it becomes simply a matter of filling out a few forms, and approval is basically automatic, then it's not all that much different from a simple declaration.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Which would also happen to me if people of my athletic capability played that same team. What does it matter?
Click to expand...

You're approaching it from the level of an individual rather than a population, but still, your point is flawed.

Males and females pretty much equally have the capability to develop skill at a sport. Hand eye coordination, muscle memory and sport-specific technique. Those, should you so choose, you can train. Had you been interested and dedicated enough, at an early age, you could have done this.

Serious athletes in any sport work on their conditioning to be as close to their ceiling as possible for the traits useful to their sport. Beyond the obviously unalterable (height, for example) in most sports the differences between athletes at the higher levels are mostly skill, not physical condition.

Again, barring health issues, anyone can work to optimize their body for their sport of choice, assuming enough interest to dedicate a significant amount of their life to it. This includes you. (Again, an early starting age helps.)

The difference is that, as a population, the ceiling of the physical conditioning part of the equation is significantly higher for males. So yes, if you were to walk onto the field as you are, presumably unfit and unskilled, you would have little chance to win. But that's because you did not make the choice to develop skills and conditioning.

But the girls Stout describes has made the decision to develop the skill and conditioning to compete at her age level. She is just as skilled as the boys, but the physical ceiling is different.

The idea of leagues and classes is to have competition where its mostly about skill, not just physical attributes. So women's sports allow a competition of skill around the female physical ceiling level.
 
TomB said:
You're approaching it from the level of an individual rather than a population, but still, your point is flawed.

Males and females pretty much equally have the capability to develop skill at a sport. Hand eye coordination, muscle memory and sport-specific technique. Those, should you so choose, you can train. Had you been interested and dedicated enough, at an early age, you could have done this.

Serious athletes in any sport work on their conditioning to be as close to their ceiling as possible for the traits useful to their sport. Beyond the obviously unalterable (height, for example) in most sports the differences between athletes at the higher levels are mostly skill, not physical condition.

Again, barring health issues, anyone can work to optimize their body for their sport of choice, assuming enough interest to dedicate a significant amount of their life to it. This includes you. (Again, an early starting age helps.)

The difference is that, as a population, the ceiling of the physical conditioning part of the equation is significantly higher for males. So yes, if you were to walk onto the field as you are, presumably unfit and unskilled, you would have little chance to win. But that's because you did not make the choice to develop skills and conditioning.

But the girls Stout describes has made the decision to develop the skill and conditioning to compete at her age level. She is just as skilled as the boys, but the physical ceiling is different.

The idea of leagues and classes is to have competition where its mostly about skill, not just physical attributes. So women's sports allow a competition of skill around the female physical ceiling level.
Click to expand...

Distinction without difference.

But it is probably an issue with me. I don't understand sports in general. Like the designated hitter rule, why is there only one? Why are there so many Olympic swimming and weightlifting medals? Seems like it only needs four and one, respectively.
 
Last edited:
Puppycow said:
When I posed that question originally, it was in response to Bob's suggestion that "simple declaration" should be sufficient. Under current UK law, it's a rather more difficult process. However, some are in favor of changing the law to make it easier to legally change one's gender. The fewer barriers, the easier it could be for a hypothetical situation like this to occur. If it becomes simply a matter of filling out a few forms, and approval is basically automatic, then it's not all that much different from a simple declaration.
Click to expand...

But again, legally changing your gender is not the same as just saying 'I am a woman' and conflating all these things isn't helpful.
 
Roboramma said:
It seems pretty arrogant to say that you don't understand sports, don't care why other people like sports, but still want to tell them what sports should be.
Click to expand...

Arrogance implies I know better. As a consumer, I care about my enjoyment of a product and not others. I don't care if my consumer preferences make others like a product less.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Arrogance implies I know better.
Click to expand...

No. Arrogance implies you think you matter more. Sometimes that's premised on superior knowledge, but it doesn't have to be. Case in point:

As a consumer, I care about my enjoyment of a product and not others. I don't care if my consumer preferences make others like a product less.
Click to expand...

That right there is arrogance.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Arrogance implies I know better.
Click to expand...
It's your admitted lack of knowledge, combined with your desire to act on that lack of knowledge, that makes you arrogant, so no, it doesn't imply anything of the sort.

As a consumer, I care about my enjoyment of a product and not others. I don't care if my consumer preferences make others like a product less.
Click to expand...

So when you said you will tell others what sports should be, "should" is defined as "what bob likes"? In that case, I really don't see any anyone should listen to you.

It's also interesting to note that this is the first time that you mention that you are giving us your consumer perspective on this issue when until now you seemed to be giving your perspective in general.
 
Roboramma said:
It's also interesting to note that this is the first time that you mention that you are giving us your consumer perspective on this issue when until now you seemed to be giving your perspective in general.
Click to expand...

Good point. It's also worth noting that none of these moves to accept biological males competing against females has actually been drive by fan interest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom