Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

[TurkeysGhost]

Maybe sports participation could be decided on a case-by-case basis? Skills, hormone levels (both natural and medical), and whether or not the person went through biological puberty of their birth sex can all make for wildly different outcomes between different trans athletes. A one-size-fits-all policy probably wouldn't work.

Perhaps the fairest way to do it would involve special consideration in each case? What do you guys think?

Any such balancing of interests has to be predicated in the idea that trans people are valid and that they cannot be discriminated against as a class, which is probably a non-starter for the large population of transphobes in our society. The religious right and TERFs reject such a notion outright.

I have very little faith that this will be settled in any good-faith negotiation. Generally speaking, discriminatory policies are settled by court authority, not through public discourse, and even then the record is pretty spotty.

Recent rulings in the US seem promising, but it's still a long way to go.

 

[Louden Wilde]

So basically the reaction to your post reflects that most activists will never accept anything other than ideological orthodoxy as compatible with 'trans rights'.

And unfortunately (as far as I can tell) one of those tenets is no sex-based rights (at least not for females). Meaning said activists feel there should be nothing (activities, spaces, positions) set aside that are female only.

Hypothetical scenario- there's a large organization that has pledged proportional representation on it's board . The org is ~50:50 male: female. The board, however, is 5 men and 5 transwomen. I'd be curious to see if the posters here who feel that 'Transwomen are women' would be willing to say that the organization has lived up to its promise of equal representation.

 

[Butter!]

I'm referring to the post that started something like "This thread is hell."

Oh haha, well that post isn't deleted. It's still there. And I stand by it.

And the reason this thread is stuck in repetitive hell and can't advance or come up with productive ideas is because (for the most part) people aren't listening to each other and are extremely mistrustful of each others' true meanings and/or intentions.

I also (to repeat myself) think that the thread title is a problem. Its original context (sports only) has long been lost to time, and new people joining the fray are naturally going to view it as transphobic and cruel. I think it should be changed. The OP of the first thread is NOT anti-trans; he was trying to make a point about sports competitions. If you go back to the first installment of the thread, you can see this for yourself. But it's been a long time since then, and I really think we need a new title.

Tell me truly - if this thread had had a different, less caustic title when you discovered it, would you have come in quite as aggressively as you did? I suspect that you came in swinging because the title led you to believe that we were a bunch of hateful alt-righters crapping on trans folks.

 

[Meadmaker]

It seems overwhelmingly obvious to me that the only way to protect everyone's rights in a locker room -- including the basic right to privacy, as in the popular interpretation of the U.S.'s 4th Amendment -- is to provide a row of stalls for people to go in and change clothes. And that this is not a right predicated on sex or gender, but a human right applicable to everyone. This idea seems to be totally alien to everyone else here, and I'm trying to find a way to explain it.

ETA: And also stalls enclosing the showers.

You aren't the first to suggest it, and no one has ever said that doing so would be an offensive suggestion. It has come up many, many, times.

However, it is not without problems of its own. There's a reason that locker rooms exist the way that they do. There is a price to be paid for such a redesign in terms of cost and/or convenience of use. Also a significant topic for discussion in earlier iterations of the thread was a UK study where such construction was adopted for unisex changing areas with individual stalls, and it was found that unisex areas were correlated with high rates of complaints of sexual harassment and assault.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I do think we should probably move to just general overall private public restrooms/locker rooms/etc. It won't be perfect and exceptions will still exist, but it will help.

I do think sports should move to a fully skill/performance based rankings with any one competitor are "clustered" with people in their skill group, regardless of sex/gender/other factors. You play against players who can throw/shoot/dunk/pass/run/pitch/whatever "about as well as you can."

I also harbor zero illusions that that will actually solve anything and we won't just move on to the next thing that isn't good enough.

 

[JoeMorgue]

You aren't the first to suggest it, and no one has ever said that doing so would be an offensive suggestion. It has come up many, many, times.

Hell that was my solution 5 threads ago.

 

[Collin237]

Maybe sports participation could be decided on a case-by-case basis? Skills, hormone levels (both natural and medical), and whether or not the person went through biological puberty of their birth sex can all make for wildly different outcomes between different trans athletes. A one-size-fits-all policy probably wouldn't work.

Perhaps the fairest way to do it would involve special consideration in each case? What do you guys think?

Yes! Actually, I think that there are all kinds of things throughout society that are long overdue for special consideration. If the New Left had adopted post-structuralism, instead of post-modernism, they might have actually accomplished something.

 

[Meadmaker]

Yes, nearly every bathroom stall I've ever used in the US has fairly large gaps at every edge and a very large gap at the bottom.

Nobody likes it, and they are still built this way. Not sure why.

We're cheapskates.

Bathrooms built that way are easier (i.e. lest costly) to clean that ones that offer greater privacy. It's the almighty dollar at work.

I'm not saying it ought to be that way, just saying that's why they are built that way.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I've heard rumors (might be a total UL) that they became popular in the big drug fear craze of the 70s/80s, with the idea that you can't hide in the stall to do drugs.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You aren't the first to suggest it, and no one has ever said that doing so would be an offensive suggestion. It has come up many, many, times.

However, it is not without problems of its own. There's a reason that locker rooms exist the way that they do. There is a price to be paid for such a redesign in terms of cost and/or convenience of use. Also a significant topic for discussion in earlier iterations of the thread was a UK study where such construction was adopted for unisex changing areas with individual stalls, and it was found that unisex areas were correlated with high rates of complaints of sexual harassment and assault.

Interesting anecdote about this.

The pentagon is built with twice as many bathrooms as you might plan for such a building. This was done because of segregation, so the building needed redundant facilities to accommodate keeping whites and non-whites separated.

Society is willing to spend the money if they really care about it. If individual privacy in changing rooms is a concern, then we should scrounge up the cash and change them.

Being cheapskates simply isn't an adequate reason to continue to mistreat trans people.

 

[Meadmaker]

Maybe sports participation could be decided on a case-by-case basis? Skills, hormone levels (both natural and medical), and whether or not the person went through biological puberty of their birth sex can all make for wildly different outcomes between different trans athletes. A one-size-fits-all policy probably wouldn't work.

Perhaps the fairest way to do it would involve special consideration in each case? What do you guys think?

I think for professional sports and probably even collegiate level sports, which are basically minor league professional anyway, this is what is happening.


Where it becomes problematic is the high school level.

 

[Collin237]

I do think sports should move to a fully skill/performance based rankings with any one competitor are "clustered" with people in their skill group, regardless of sex/gender/other factors. You play against players who can throw/shoot/dunk/pass/run/pitch/whatever "about as well as you can."

I agree. Is there a way to make that precise, like a Nash equilibrium or something?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I agree. Is there a way to make that precise, like a Nash equilibrium or something?

No and it would be both unnecessary and stupid to try.

We already separate AA, AAA, and Major League professional sports without making it this hard just by organically and naturally moving players based on performance.

 

[Meadmaker]

Is anyone really going to mourn the group changing room? How many really enjoy being naked in front of strangers, even if you are reasonably sure they are taking no gratification in seeing your nude body?

I don't enjoy being naked in front of strangers, but I can honestly say that between 1976, when I entered high school, and about 2010 I never gave it a second thought.

Right around 2010 I became aware that expectations have changed and that covering up in locker rooms was now the norm. I find it a bloody nuisance trying to conform. It's just harder to keep a towel around your waist on the way to the shower than it is to toss the towel over your shoulder.

 

[Collin237]

Being cheapskates simply isn't an adequate reason to continue to mistreat trans people.

Or, for that matter, gay people, who might be embarrassed about locker rooms feeling sexual.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I don't enjoy being naked in front of strangers, but I can honestly say that between 1976, when I entered high school, and about 2010 I never gave it a second thought.

Right around 2010 I became aware that expectations have changed and that covering up in locker rooms was now the norm. I find it a bloody nuisance trying to conform. It's just harder to keep a towel around your waist on the way to the shower than it is to toss the towel over your shoulder.

I distinctly remember feeling weird about it as a kid, especially during the awkward years of puberty. I suppose everyone just gets used to it as normal. As an adult I don't really care, but I still think the old geezers that sit around naked and socialize in the locker rooms are weird.

Standards have definitely changed over time. It wasn't uncommon in the past for adult staff to supervise children in middle and high school lockers and showers. Now there's much more concern about privacy, especially when it comes to adult-children interactions.

I suppose all the priest, scoutmaster, and teacher rape scandals kinda soured everyone on this. Respecting bodily autonomy and privacy is probably a good idea.

 

[Louden Wilde]

You don't agree?

I would say there are under 5 people who have posted that don't seem onboard, and that's throughout the whole megathread (the parts I've seen anyway).

I agree - I've seen very few posts here that seem to be from "deplorables" (As HRC put it). To be sure, there is a sizeable chunk of the US that is genuinely hostile towards transwomen. But (as noted), I don't think this discussion isn't really about those folks. Rather, I (like many here) am disturbed by the willingness of many moderates, progressives, etc. in the US and around the world to apparently not recognize female-based rights & accept the complete ideology uncritically (I got into this when I started seeing "sex is a spectrum" type posts). As one Mexican feminist I follow on twitter put it:
If you can identify into a demographic that has been mistreated throughout history by your own, then demand that that demographic validate you, accommodate you and include you, AND have everyone bending over backwards to show they support & believe you...
You are not oppressed.
& No woman is raped/murdered/disappeared because of her gender identity.

I have become increasingly convinced that there is an intrinsic misogyny in the movement and that the feminists are correct that are many activists who seem to think that being a woman is a costume/performance.

Something that may be of interest for the thread - Emma Hilton (developmental biologist who has gotten involved in the trans sports debate & is a co-author on a meta study on the subject ) had a discussion with Chase Strangio, ACLU lawyer and trans-activist. Direct link here
- apparently starting at about 45 min in.

 

[Meadmaker]

I distinctly remember feeling weird about it as a kid, especially during the awkward years of puberty. I suppose everyone just gets used to it as normal. As an adult I don't really care, but I still think the old geezers that sit around naked and socialize in the locker rooms are weird.

Standards have definitely changed over time. It wasn't uncommon in the past for adult staff to supervise children in middle and high school lockers and showers. Now there's much more concern about privacy, especially when it comes to adult-children interactions.

I suppose all the priest, scoutmaster, and teacher rape scandals kinda soured everyone on this. Respecting bodily autonomy and privacy is probably a good idea.

I entered junior high school in 1974, and I remember feeling awkward at having to take showers in the large, open, shower area. By high school and age 14, I had stopped giving it any thought.

ETA: I do think a greater awareness of pedophilia was one reason that attitudes changed. Looking back, it is blatantly obvious to me that the head of our local Boys Club was a pedophile who created opportunities to see young boys, and by this I mean prepubescent boys, naked, and we had at least one female gym teacher in high school who rather obviously created opportunities to interact with adolescent females.

 

[Louden Wilde]

Maybe sports participation could be decided on a case-by-case basis? Skills, hormone levels (both natural and medical), and whether or not the person went through biological puberty of their birth sex can all make for wildly different outcomes between different trans athletes. A one-size-fits-all policy probably wouldn't work.

Perhaps the fairest way to do it would involve special consideration in each case? What do you guys think?

Please do check out the article I mentioned earlier. The authors note that male puberty itself confers an advantage. Concluding paragraph:
If transgender women are restricted within or excluded from the female category of sport, the important question is whether or not this exclusion (or conditional exclusion) is necessary and proportionate to the goal of ensuring fair, safe and meaningful competition. Regardless of what the future will bring in terms of revised transgender policies, it is clear that different sports differ vastly in terms of physiological determinants of success, which may create safety considerations and may alter the importance of retained performance advantages. Thus, we argue against universal guidelines for transgender athletes in sport and instead propose that each individual sports federation evaluate their own conditions for inclusivity, fairness and safety.

For those sports where sex clearly makes a difference, I'd argue for separate leagues for trans-folks.

 

[Collin237]

I've heard rumors (might be a total UL) that they became popular in the big drug fear craze of the 70s/80s, with the idea that you can't hide in the stall to do drugs.

Taking pills can't be seen either way. Smoking is recognizable by smell either way. Not that stupidity ever bothered lawmakers.