[ED] Discussion: Trans Women Are not Women (Part 6)

[JoeMorgue]

There's already so much baggage in this thread the plane is overweight and is about the crash in the Andes where we'll have to eat each other to survive so I'm hesitant to throw another bag on the baggage cart but I don't know if adding more stigma and shame to the concept of nudity is the way to go either.

 

[Manger Douse]

They didn't lose to men, they lost to women. Stop trying to muddy the conversation.

Sports women who lose to actual men aren't what we are talking about here, like the Williams sisters losing to a man. That's not the issue here and accusations of "TERF" would make no sense.

Sports women regularly run slower times than sportsmen, that's what was clearly meant by lose to men - and why is that? Why do women who've expressed no opinion on transsexuality have such slower times than men?

 

[smartcooky]

https://www.athleticbusiness.com/locker-room/designing-public-locker-rooms-with-an-eye-on-privacy.html

There's no need for privacy in areas where people aren't nude. People putting on their cleats or shoulder pads don't need privacy stalls.

And, now let me get this right, you don't think that sports people are ever seen naked in a dressing room.

Got it!

 

[theprestige]

But it's not just the women you've just now mentioned losing to men, it's ALL of them losing to men - are they all TERFS to?

Why do women not run as fast as men in your opinion, if not laziness?

I think it's dishonest to say that they're using their transphobia to excuse their loss. It's not like any of them actually said, "I hate/fear transwomen, and that's why I lost this match."

They said something else entirely, which Boudicca dishonestly interprets as "because they're transphobic" for rhetorical purposes. It's just another variant on the whole "dissent is bigotry" canard that gets used to silence opposing voices without having to actually consider or address their concerns in good faith.

 

[theprestige]

Identical to weight divisions in boxing, or age classes.

I think that age can be a decent proxy for weight and skill at the young and old ends of the spectrum.

Also, I'm pretty sure that pound for pound men have more muscle mass and hit harder. So I don't think that co-ed weight classes are going to be a good answer.

 

[Manger Douse]

I think it's dishonest to say that they're using their transphobia to excuse their loss. It's not like any of them actually said, "I hate/fear transwomen, and that's why I lost this match."



They said something else entirely, which Boudicca dishonestly interprets as "because they're transphobic" for rhetorical purposes. It's just another variant on the whole "dissent is bigotry" canard that gets used to silence opposing voices without having to actually consider or address their concerns in good faith.

I'm expecting to see Timex and the manufacturers of Olympic stopwatches any day now

 

[Boudicca90]

I'm tempted to ask "why do you need the 'trans' qualifier if you assert you are a woman?" 'Trans' acknowledges that there is a real difference. But I'm pretty sure that must have been covered several thousand posts ago and also went nowhere.

No, there are differences between cisgender women and transgender women, but we are both subcategories of women. But those differences (like chromosomes and reproductive ability) don't mean much in terms of us both being considered women.

I tend to use it as a distinction when needed, like in this thread. I don't refer to myself as a trans woman in real life because I just want people to see me and treat me as a woman and female like all the others.

 

[theprestige]

I think I get it now:

"I lost to a cisman because he was male" = totally reasonable

"I lost to a transwoman because she was male" = transphobia

 

[Thermal]

https://www.athleticbusiness.com/locker-room/designing-public-locker-rooms-with-an-eye-on-privacy.html

There's no need for privacy in areas where people aren't nude. People putting on their cleats or shoulder pads don't need privacy stalls.

Almost any sport is going to require men put on a cup, so some incidental exposure is in the mix. Also if showering is needed, there's the whole going from towel to street clothes thing.

Surfing in NJ, we tend to get changed on the street, kind of half-assed having a towel around the waist and pulling things on and off. Usually good for a peep show on crowded days. I had a representative of my local law enforcement community once give me a dressing-down over some personal indiscretions that someone evidently called police over.

 

[theprestige]

One thing I am generally loving about this thread is the substantial amount of nonpartisan agreement. Almost everybody, left and right, agrees that transwomen are not biologically female. And almost everybody, left and right, agrees that there is no anti-trans conspiracy to promote trans interests in public policy.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Almost any sport is going to require men put on a cup, so some incidental exposure is in the mix. Also if showering is needed, there's the whole going from towel to street clothes thing.

Surfing in NJ, we tend to get changed on the street, kind of half-assed having a towel around the waist and pulling things on and off. Usually good for a peep show on crowded days. I had a representative of my local law enforcement community once give me a dressing-down over some personal indiscretions that someone evidently called police over.

Seems to me that underwear and cups could be put on prior to exiting a shower stall.

When I played hockey players usually exited the private shower stalls at least partially dressed. The few times we were rinks at with communal showers, nobody used them and just showered at home.

 

[Thermal]

One thing I am generally loving about this thread is the substantial amount of nonpartisan agreement. Almost everybody, left and right, agrees that transwomen are not biologically female. And almost everybody, left and right, agrees that there is no anti-trans conspiracy to promote trans interests in public policy.

Yet we are all, in our own unique ways, still being ********.

 

[Boudicca90]

One thing I am generally loving about this thread is the substantial amount of nonpartisan agreement. Almost everybody, left and right, agrees that transwomen are not biologically female. And almost everybody, left and right, agrees that there is no anti-trans conspiracy to promote trans interests in public policy.

Yep! Liberals and conservatives, united against us!

It just warms my heart.

 

[Elaedith]

I think I get it now:

"I lost to a cisman because he was male" = totally reasonable

"I lost to a transwoman because she was male" = transphobia

I think awareness of the fact that the issue in these disputes is being male rather than being trans manages at some level to penetrate the most robust psychological defences, along with realisation that this undermines the ability to use accusations of transphobia to silence dissent. This prompts the need to assert that transwomen are also really female and/or biological sex is unimportant, a spectrum or whatever.

 

[Meadmaker]

Okay. Let's try a different approach here. Let's take the language off the table as much as possible and still be talking.

100 people consisting of people with both penises and vaginas (that's various people who have either a penis or vagina not people with both oh you know what I mean...) all enter an athletic competition. At the end of the competition the top 10% of people all have a penis. The people with vaginas feel they are not being represented in the sport and start a seperate league where they have a chance of being in the top 10%.

Without using the words man, woman, male, female, trans(X), or any other oblique referencing to the labeling of the sexes and genders answer the following the question.

Is the complaint and actions of the vagina havers valid? Why or why not?

There's another word that I would like to avoid. That's "fair". I won't use it as I provide my answer.

For simplicity, I will address only sports as spectator driven events, but nearly idenitcal arguments apply in educational settings, and to a lesser extent, recreational leagues.

People watch sporting competitions because, for whatever reason, we love to watch displays of athletic ability. We want to see a combination of skill that has been developed practice, natural talent, and physical fitness that comes through training. Specifically with respect to that last element, we want to see athletes that have done everything in their power to maximize their bodies' potential to perform.

Having a vagina is correlated with other physiological, including hormonal, characteristics that limit performance. We want to see people who have developed their bodies to peak athleticism, but a vagina-possessor who has developed their body to peak performance levels will not be able to perform to the same level as a penis-possessor at the equivalent level of training. Indeed, a penis-possessor of mediocre ability can frequently outperform a world class vagina possessor.

In order to showcase the very best, most athletic, performers, there has to be separate leagues for people with penises, and people with vaginas.

If it can be arranged, the same can also be said for physical stature and other characteristics of athletes. For example, in sports where height is an advantage, leagues for short people may be appropriate. However, there often is not enough spectator or athlete interest in, for example, a short person's basketball league, in order to sustain the activity, so having a league specifically for other disadvantage categories (height, weight, age) may not be practical. However, there is almost always support of a league for vagina possessorts, so it is a good idea.

In summary, what people want in spectator sports is an opportunity to see great displays from the very best athletes. The very best athletes with vaginas are likely to underperform lots of the best athletes with penises. Separate leagues should exist wherever possible to showcase these great athletes that are born with physiological conditions that limit their absolute level of performance.

ETA: To answer in the words of the original question, the actions of the vagina havers is valid, i.e. it serves a good purpose, and is the best way to serve that purpose. I don't know if there is a "complaint" as such. They just observe that the best vagina possessors almost always lose to not just the best penis-possessors, but most of the penis possessors.

 

[theprestige]

I think awareness of the fact that the issue in these disputes is being male rather than being trans manages at some level to penetrate the most robust psychological defences, along with realisation that this undermines the ability to use accusations of transphobia to silence dissent. This prompts the need to assert that transwomen are also really female and/or biological sex is unimportant, a spectrum or whatever.

I've been saying pretty much the same thing off and on ever since Boudicca introduced the premise.

 

[Collin237]

IGLYO and the other liberal/leftist organizations you have deemed as anti-trans rights are fully supportive of us and our goals.

Oh? Campaigning "under the radar" like comic-book Russian spies? Advocating surgery on little kids like a Hollywood horror-movie mad scientist?

I've got their theatrics sussed, and I suspect you do too.

 

[Boudicca90]

There's another word that I would like to avoid. That's "fair". I won't use it as I provide my answer.

For simplicity, I will address only sports as spectator driven events, but nearly idenitcal arguments apply in educational settings, and to a lesser extent, recreational leagues.

People watch sporting competitions because, for whatever reason, we love to watch displays of athletic ability. We want to see a combination of skill that has been developed practice, natural talent, and physical fitness that comes through training. Specifically with respect to that last element, we want to see athletes that have done everything in their power to maximize their bodies' potential to perform.

Having a vagina is correlated with other physiological, including hormonal, characteristics that limit performance. We want to see people who have developed their bodies to peak athleticism, but a vagina-possessor who has developed their body to peak performance levels will not be able to perform to the same level as a penis-possessor at the equivalent level of training. Indeed, a penis-possessor of mediocre ability can frequently outperform a world class vagina possessor.

In order to showcase the very best, most athletic, performers, there has to be separate leagues for people with penises, and people with vaginas.

If it can be arranged, the same can also be said for physical stature and other characteristics of athletes. For example, in sports where height is an advantage, leagues for short people may be appropriate. However, there often is not enough spectator or athlete interest in, for example, a short person's basketball league, in order to sustain the activity, so having a league specifically for other disadvantage categories (height, weight, age) may not be practical. However, there is almost always support of a league for vagina possessorts, so it is a good idea.

In summary, what people want in spectator sports is an opportunity to see great displays from the very best athletes. The very best athletes with vaginas are likely to underperform lots of the best athletes with penises. Separate leagues should exist wherever possible to showcase these great athletes that are born with physiological conditions that limit their absolute level of performance.

ETA: To answer in the words of the original question, the actions of the vagina havers is valid, i.e. it serves a good purpose, and is the best way to serve that purpose. I don't know if there is a "complaint" as such. They just observe that the best vagina possessors almost always lose to not just the best penis-possessors, but most of the penis possessors.

It may not be as simple to segregate by genitals as you think, since plenty of trans women have vaginas. And having a penis says nothing about hormone levels since my estradiol and testosterone levels have been within a normal female range for years now.

Physically I have no advantage over a cisgender woman due to the changes I've undergone.

 

[Manger Douse]

Grip strength remains at around 95% in transwomen despite a year of hormone treatment but apparently that's not an advantage

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar...ecrease in grip strength,to-male trans people).

I'd love to see what the difference in strength is from a single morning of self IDing as female

 

[theprestige]

Yep! Liberals and conservatives, united against us!

It just warms my heart. : rolleyes :

Not all liberals. Just a tiny handful from a small subculture on a backwater discussion board.

And I don't think any of us wield any significant influence in the larger society. Except maybe Rolfe. But even in Rolfe's case, you'd probably get more value for time spent by engaging the SNP directly, rather than trying to reason with or against Rolfe here.

Seriously, how did you even find this thread? It's not like you came here for the abstruse skeptical wrangling, or the usual political slapfights, and discovered this particular conversation as a bonus. What is it about this thread, on this forum, that made you say to yourself, "self, these are the people I need to reach, these are the minds I need to change"?