• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Because law, you mean?

It's amazing how you dismiss all trans-rights as 'feels' and yet somehow don't dismiss the 'feels' of the women who want to discriminate. I guess bigot feels trump trans feels?

In any case there is I have learned little point in debating the topic. My interventions currently are only to point out the frequent mis-statements of the law that seem to pass for argument in this thread.
Click to expand...

Yaniv, with the lovely Oger's support, was testing the law. His actions revealed the law to be an ass.
 
JihadJane said:
Yaniv, with the lovely Oger's support, was testing the law. His actions revealed the law to be an ass.
Click to expand...
According to the relevant wiki:
In October 2019, the Tribunal ruled against Yaniv and ordered her to pay $6,000 in restitution split equally among three of the service providers. The ruling was critical of Yaniv, with Devyn Cousineau stating that she "targeted small businesses, manufactured the conditions for a human rights complaint, and then leveraged that complaint to pursue a financial settlement from parties who were unsophisticated and unlikely to mount a proper defence."
Click to expand...
 
Trans-women have the right to be treated with dignity and respect.

Does that mean they have the right to participate in female sports? That's a real hard question as biological women have a athletic advantage against biological men.

One could argue that trans-women might quickly and easily dominate female athletic events. Would that be fair to the biological female athletes?
 
Hercules56 said:
Trans-women have the right to be treated with dignity and respect.

Does that mean they have the right to participate in female sports? That's a real hard question as biological women have a athletic advantage against biological men.

One could argue that trans-women might quickly and easily dominate female athletic events. Would that be fair to the biological female athletes?
Click to expand...

It's not really a hard question and you've answered it yourself. No, biological males have no business in women's sports. We segregate sports by sex for a reason.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Yes. Unless that was considered sufficient reason for an exclusion by a court. You would need to take that to court to establish a precedent and I don't think it has been yet.

I don't see any reason why it would be seen as sufficient reason.

ETA: I don't have personal experience of using them but my understanding is that most if not all waxing salons are not single sex anyway. I believe back, sack and crack is the expression?
Click to expand...

I find it a bit concerning that you seem to think that females should be FORCED BY LAW to handle the genitals of males whenever those males want them to.

It's actually creepy, dude.
 
JihadJane said:
Yaniv, with the lovely Oger's support, was testing the law. His actions revealed the law to be an ass.
Click to expand...

Well actually the law in Canada appears to have found that performing a brazilian on a vulva and on a scotum are different products and thus that this isn't discrimination.

However it also appears that the motivation behind Yanniv going after these businesses was racism and greed. The court appears to have agreed that Yanniv was targeting businesses because he was anti-immigrant and because he wanted to get damages from them.

I hadn't realised that a number of the complaints Yanniv made related to waxing not of the genitals but of arms and legs. Denying this service would appear to be transphobia but of course he didn't have proper legal representation in the court and his motives appear to have been questionable in any case.
 
He lost in court, you may recall. And the existence of a law doesn't prevent people from arguing that that law is wrong or unjust.

And no, I'm not going to dismiss as "feelz" the very real issue that waxing male genitals is a different texhnique that requires different materials and different training from waxing female genitals, or indeed the concerns of a woman about allowing a man to come into her own home and get naked in front of her.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
One could argue that trans-women might quickly and easily dominate female athletic events. Would that be fair to the biological female athletes?
Click to expand...

We've been over that ground a few times, and it's actually what the original OP was about.

While some sports have caved in to the idiotic idea that blokes in panties should be allowed to compete against women, the tide does seem to have turned and it's not going to happen widely.
 
theprestige said:
The thing about public policy is that citizens are not required to debate only in terms of what the law currently is.
Click to expand...
The claim was about what the law currently is.

Ziggurat said:
Does that mean that in the UK, brazilian waxers would have to wax Yanniv's lady balls?
Click to expand...
They may have a plausible claim for a "exceptional circumstances" exception. They may also be able to claim that the client in this case is asking for a service they are not providing to anyone, or that it requires expertise they don't have. Also if they think the client is disruptive they may refuse the client on that basis.

Rolfe said:
Allowing raped women access to a female doctor
Click to expand...
Definitely an "exceptional circumstance".
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Because law, you mean?

It's amazing how you dismiss all trans-rights as 'feels' and yet somehow don't dismiss the 'feels' of the women who want to discriminate. I guess bigot feels trump trans feels?

In any case there is I have learned little point in debating the topic. My interventions currently are only to point out the frequent mis-statements of the law that seem to pass for argument in this thread.
Click to expand...

You have declared that all bigotry is bad, and that anyone who believes that transwomen are not women is a bigot, therefore you win.

You're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't make it logical.
 
The Atheist said:
We've been over that ground a few times, and it's actually what the original OP was about.

While some sports have caved in to the idiotic idea that blokes in panties should be allowed to compete against women, the tide does seem to have turned and it's not going to happen widely.
Click to expand...

Yes I could see that. This issue is about fairness. I can see that it would be nice to allow trans-women compete in female sports, but it may not be FAIR to biological women to do so.
 
None of these males who became transwomen was excluded from participation in sport. They were all competing in the male division, albeit mostly with indifferent success.
 
Hercules56 said:
Yes I could see that. This issue is about fairness. I can see that it would be nice to allow trans-women compete in female sports, but it may not be FAIR to biological women to do so.
Click to expand...

That's the nub of the issue, and why there need to be stringent rules to allow them to compete.

Sport demands a level playing field by excluding drug-taking, so it has a responsibility to exclude people with an unfair biological advantage.

I think that will happen, because cases like the girl in the video I posted a couple of weeks back will destroy their sports if men are allowed to compete against women, and they all have vested interests in keeping the money rolling. I don't know of a single sports watcher who would pay to see blokes who couldn't make the grade in men's events suddenly turning up in women's events and winning.
 
Meadmaker said:
You have declared that all bigotry is bad, and that anyone who believes that transwomen are not women is a bigot, therefore you win.

You're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't make it logical.
Click to expand...

That didn't really add anything to the discussion at all did it? And completely missed the point.

My point was to highlight that there is a trend amongst certain posters here to declare that anti-trans women have 'concerns' or 'fears' but that trans-people only have 'feels'. That alone suggests prejudice and transphobia.

A raped woman asking for a female doctor is just as much about 'feels' as a trans woman doctor not wishing to be treated as a man in her job. A woman not wanting to wax a sack is just as much about 'feels' as a transwoman wanting her sack waxed.


At least be honest about that.
 
Rolfe said:
None of these males who became transwomen was excluded from participation in sport. They were all competing in the male division, albeit mostly with indifferent success.
Click to expand...

What is the relevance of that point?

If all the transwomen compete in the female division then nobody is denied participation in sport either.

If everyone competed together nobody would be denied participation in sport.

You seem to be arguing that nobody has a right to special or different treatment based on their gender or sex provided they are allowed to participate? Do away with women's sport entirely in that case. Women can participate with men with mostly indifferent success. I doubt anyone would think that is the best solution.
 
The Atheist said:
That's the nub of the issue, and why there need to be stringent rules to allow them to compete.

Sport demands a level playing field by excluding drug-taking, so it has a responsibility to exclude people with an unfair biological advantage.
Click to expand...

Sport is the very epitome of pitting people with unfair biological advantages against each other. Sport has never been about a level playing field. It's about being able to create a spectacle. The issue of transwomen competing in sport is a largely social one not a biological one.

I think that will happen, because cases like the girl in the video I posted a couple of weeks back will destroy their sports if men are allowed to compete against women, and they all have vested interests in keeping the money rolling. I don't know of a single sports watcher who would pay to see blokes who couldn't make the grade in men's events suddenly turning up in women's events and winning.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree but 'people who couldn't make the grade in men's events turning up in women's events and winning' is what women's sport is. And people pay to watch it. So it's more a matter of perception than biology again.
 
Just to reiterate a point made multiple times upthread, the more we slice up our eligibility criteria (e.g. sex, weight, height, disability, amateur vs. professional status) for various and sundry sports leagues, the more people get the chance to compete. This is probably good, from a humanistic perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom