The hypocrisy is visible from space, considering the number of organisations that represent only trans people and not LGB people.
However, I did hear that having a sexual orientation is now transphobic.
[ED] Discussion: Trans Women Are not Women (Part 6)
- Thread starter Emily's Cat
- Start date
- Status
The hypocrisy is visible from space, considering the number of organisations that represent only trans people and not LGB people.
However, I did hear that having a sexual orientation is now transphobic.
Homophobic violence at Pride is acceptable to you?
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
I'm not clutching my pearls about some anti-trans loser getting shown the door. I'm not familiar with what incident this is describing, but based on the context I'm assuming this is what happened.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
I don't think it's hypocrisy, nor is it incoherent.
Testosterone is a steroid that grants an athletic advantage.
When that testosterone is naturally occurring during puberty, it contributes to significant differences between male and female abilities that are extremely difficult to overcome. In some case, such as hormone suppression, it may be feasible for a sufficient amount of that difference to be mitigated to still allow for a reasonably fair competition. In other cases, it may not.
When that steroid is exogenous, it creates a previously nonexistent advantage, just as any other steroid would do.
At present, the male leagues aren't actually exclusively male, they're technically open. In reality, however, females simply are not capable of competing at the same level as males due to those biological differences. Thus, even though females are technically allowed on male leagues, they are effectively excluded by their own biology.
If a female who identifies as a transman takes exogenous testosterone, they will perform better than an unaltered female would do, and it's essentially the same as any other form or doping. Even so, it's extraordinarily unlikely that a female who identifies as a transman would gain enough athletic advantage to allow them to effectively compete against males. So they're more than welcome to give it a go, they're technically already allowed to do so.
I'll reiterated: It's about biology, not about identity.
For a comparison, consider a person who identifies as younger than they are chronologically. Would it be reasonable and coherent to allow a 40 year old person to compete against 10 year olds on a little league team, because of their identity? Or do you think that their biology as a fully developed adult with an adult athletic capability and size advantage should be held as a more significant arbiter of fairness to the children in the league?
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
A bit rich, considering LGB alliance formed as a splinter group of the Stonewall organization in protest to the inclusion of trans rights as a broader pro-LGBT stance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance
The raison d'etre of the group is the opposition of trans inclusion.
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
I am, in fact, just talking about sport right now. I'd prefer to keep talking just about sport, at least long enough for you to answer my questions about sport. After that we can talk about the one or two other areas where I think sex segregation makes sense and trans rights and wants need to be considered as such.
You still seem to be trying to have your cake and eat it too.
If you think there's a strong argument to be made, and that it is made in good faith, what is your objection to making it? That it also makes TERFs happy? You seem to be advocating for bad policy on the basis that it makes TERFs unhappy.
That seems like a terrible reason to have bad policy.
But let's try a different tack:
Why do you think we should consider conferring an unfair advantage due to trans identity?Do you believe there is something about trans identity that should trump fairness (and safety!) in sports?
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Doesn't it give you even a moment of pause to consider that a GAY person was hounded out of a PRIDE parade? Not even for a second?TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Gay people are people and come in all sorts, including bigots that aren't welcome at Pride. Such is life.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
I can post it, I'm in the US where they haven't quite yet decided that the existence of females as a separate sex class is heresy.
https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F14a2ab0c-021e-48f9-a6ec-dc77f9e61a00_1116x1902.png
The general take-away is that a women's rights ribbon = hate crime that makes transgender people unsafe... but actual literal threats of violence against females is no big deal.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Yep. Lesbians who aren't willing to be penetrated by the penises of males who consider themselves to be lesbians are transphobic and need to rethink their genital fetishes.
Consequently, I have three lesbians in my family who used to be out and proud and are now re-closeted due to harassment and sexual coercion from the most oppressed group of people ever.
The raison d'etre of the group is opposition to redefining same-sex attraction as same-gender attraction, the refusal of Stonewall to debate, and ideological disagreement with gender identity/queer theory in general.
As always, the issue here is enforcing ideological conformity and silencing dissent.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
It isn't though. It's opposed to some of the policies of Stonewall, specifically policies that conflate same-sex attraction with same-gender attraction. Those policies intentionally obscure the difference between sex and gender, and have resulted in homosexuals being told that they are bigots for being exclusively same-sex attracted. The conflation of gender and sex in policy and in law erodes the rights of homosexuals, by negating same-sex attraction. There's also a fair bit of evidence that the transitioning of young people is in many cases LITERAL conversion therapy - it converts a young homosexual into a straight transperson.
But if you actually look at their positions, they're supportive of transgender protection from harm, access to appropriate support, and recognition of transgender individuals.
The Cats Protection League advocates for cats. They don't advocate for dogs and they don't advocate against dogs. Dogs are not part of their purview; that doesn't make them dogphobic or bigoted against dogs.
The LGB Alliance advocates for people with same sex attraction. They don't advocate for trans people and they don't advocate against trans people. Trans people are not part of their purview; that does not make them transphobic or bigoted against trans people.
This is not an exact analogy because analogies never are exact.
I am astonished that anyone can excuse homophobic violence at Pride (or anywhere else).
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Sure, that's what they say, but the history of their organization undeniable.
If you splinter off from an LGBT group to make an LGB group, it's pretty clear that the T was the problem.
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Someone should go tell these Pride parades they're wrong about LGB alliance then. I wonder how they got the impression it was just a bunch of TERFs 
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
It's a skeptics forum, let's use some critical thinking skills shall we?
There's a pride parade full of people, including a lot of gay people. One gay person gets kicked out.
Is it because:
1) he's gay
2) some other reason (say, being bedecked in attire from an anti-trans group)
Take as much time as you need.
But the way gender identity ideology has succeeded is by framing disagreement with the ideology (such as believing in attraction to people based on sex rather than gender) as bigotry against trans people.
The closest analogy is with the way scientologists tried to suppress criticism of scientology by framing it as bigotry against a religious minority, and using this to try to destroy the lives of critics (ultimately they were less successful).
If you splinter off a cats' advocacy group from the RSPCA, it's not at all clear that dogs or hamsters or rabbits or llamas were a problem. Furthermore, people can support both the Cats Protection League and the RSPCA at the same time while recognising that the two groups have different aspirations.
Sexual attraction is not the same thing as gender identity. Groups advocating for people who are attracted to their same sex do not necessarily have the skills, experience, information or even the wish to advocate for people who do not express same sex attraction.
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Give this a moment of thought. What do the L, G, and B have in common? Does the T share that attribute?
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
Let's use some critical thinking.
The Trans Activist Groups (not necessarily all transgender people) are pushing policies that are harmful to females and harmful to homosexuals. Those policies increase risk to, and reduce the rights of, females and homosexuals. Those Trans Activist Groups simultaneously label homosexuals and females who object to their policies as bigots, transphobes, TERFs, and genital fetishists.
On the other hand, the homosexuals who wish to maintain their right to same-sex attraction without harassment and without conversion therapy do NOT call transgender people names and do NOT denigrate and dehumanize them. The females who wish to maintain their single-sex spaces without harassment and risk do NOT threaten transgender people with violence, rape, and harm.
Why is that, do you think?
- Status