Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[angrysoba]

Self-id is the only way one can become transgender?

To be honest, I don't even know what you mean by "self-id" and I am getting bored with your JAQing off.

 

[angrysoba]

It's interesting you should mention that. I wouldn't call myself a lifelong supporter of all women's sports. My passion for sports came about in a different way. It slowly grew from participating in physical activities through my adult life. It was informed by my own experiences in high school and junior high school, where I was at no time a member of any school sport team, although....well....that's a long story. I could have been. It's not important now.

It's also informed by observation of my own child, and the children of many of my friends.

Whether it is myself, or my peers, or children of my peers, I have watched people put in a heck of a lot of time and work and sweat into trying to get better, and trying to win, and sometimes making it a passion of their lives. For me, that passion and concern about sports wasn't alway there. It has grown over a lifetime.

for spectator sports, I've been a fan of the Chicago Cubs since age 6, but ever since I moved to Detroit I don't follow them. I watched their pennant and World Series victories, but I didn't know the team members' names. I more or less cheer for the Bears. I watch the Olympics fairly religiously, and have since I was a kid, but even that, some years I just don't get around to seeing much of them. So, spectator sports aren't really something I'm into. Yes, I watch a little bit, but not much.

I like the Olympics better than anything else just because the competition seems more pure, and for most of the athletes, winning at the Olympics is the pinnacle of their sporting achievements. Every day, several times per day, for two weeks, you can watch people strive to accomplish that biggest possible step in their sporting achievements. You can see the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat played out over and over.


You might ask, "What's the point of all this? Who cares about your experience?"


The point is that the B.S. in the quoted statement is just ridiculous. Some of us really do give a damn. Some of us care. You or others might think that trans rights are so damned important that any comments about caring about sports in general or womens sports in particular are some sort of smokescreen or pretense, However, that's not just wrong. It's totally clueless.

If you want to try to be insulting, go for a different angle. Go for the, "Oh...you just don't think trans identity is important enough to bother about if it messes up your games." angle.

Because that would be right. Feel free to put a negative spin on it if you wish, but it would be right.

Okay, I accept that you care about women's sports, and what's more, I have said that I think transgender women competing in women's sports are unfair for women especially in strength sports (in some sports there may not be a meaningful difference).

Again, the problem is how the sports are governed and it doesn't excuse transphobic insults or bullying.

 

[Manger Douse]

To be honest, I don't even know what you mean by "self-id" and I am getting bored with your JAQing off.

So why you may not have knowledge of simple terms relivant to the conversation nor the curiosity to look them up, you did get signal your virtue high and wide and that's what this forums about right? Cool

 

[angrysoba]

So why you may not have knowledge of simple terms relivant to the conversation nor the curiosity to look them up, you did get signal your virtue high and wide and that's what this forums about right? Cool

If you have claims to make, you can make them. If you just want to JAQ off that's fine, but you'll have to do that by yourself.

 

[Manger Douse]

If you have claims to make, you can make them. If you just want to JAQ off that's fine, but you'll have to do that by yourself.

JAQing off is a term you should probably look up too as there's been none of that from me - trying to nail someones opinion down isn't it

 

[theprestige]

To be honest, I don't even know what you mean by "self-id" and I am getting bored with your JAQing off.

It's one of the central points of debate in this thread,from the beginning. The question is whether transgender accommodation should attach to simple self declaration by an individual (self-id), or should require some form of medical diagnosis. The implications of public policy based on self-id have been discussed at some length. MD's questions are designed to help us see where you stand on that question, since you haven't been part of the lengthy debate (and apparently aren't even aware of it).

 

[LondonJohn]

I think he has.

However, I think that your question probably has a different element to it. I think the implication is that since Laurel Hubbard was following the rules, she ought to be immune from criticism at whatever damage was done by her participation.

I don't really agree on that point. I think it's a case of "What I am doing is legal, therefore it's ok." I think Laurel Hubbard's participation in that sport made a mockery of that sport. I think the women who won medals made a powerful statement about that when, at the press conference, they simply refused to answer a question about Laurel Hubbard. Maybe some poeple found that offensive or anti-trans, but I thought their silence spoke volumes. Laurel Hubbard was aware, or should have been aware of the consequences of her actions. She was aware, or should have been aware, not only of the damage to the competition, and how her participation deprived a deserving athlete of her chance to participate in the Olympic games, but also of the negative publicity for transgender people and their cause. I'll cut Terry Miller some slack on this aspect, because she started competing at 14 years of age, and was encouraged by adults. However, at 42, Laurel Hubbard is old enough to know better.

This is all utter nonsense.

As angrysoba and I have pointed out to you several times by now: expressing anger/disgust/sadness/whatever at Hubbard for having competed in a women's category is one thing (though, as has also been pointed out, the real target in that case should be the administrators of the sport, and not Hubbard herself)....

.... but choosing to express that anger/disgust/sadness/whatever towards Hubbard by referring to her as "it" is something else altogether. It's anti-transgender animus.

And the apparent fact that a) you cannot see or understand this. and b) you're ploughing on regardless in your rationalisation/excusing of The Atheist's choices here, puts you in the very same boat as him.

 

[LondonJohn]

It's interesting you should mention that. I wouldn't call myself a lifelong supporter of all women's sports. My passion for sports came about in a different way. It slowly grew from participating in physical activities through my adult life. It was informed by my own experiences in high school and junior high school, where I was at no time a member of any school sport team, although....well....that's a long story. I could have been. It's not important now.

It's also informed by observation of my own child, and the children of many of my friends.

Whether it is myself, or my peers, or children of my peers, I have watched people put in a heck of a lot of time and work and sweat into trying to get better, and trying to win, and sometimes making it a passion of their lives. For me, that passion and concern about sports wasn't alway there. It has grown over a lifetime.

for spectator sports, I've been a fan of the Chicago Cubs since age 6, but ever since I moved to Detroit I don't follow them. I watched their pennant and World Series victories, but I didn't know the team members' names. I more or less cheer for the Bears. I watch the Olympics fairly religiously, and have since I was a kid, but even that, some years I just don't get around to seeing much of them. So, spectator sports aren't really something I'm into. Yes, I watch a little bit, but not much.

I like the Olympics better than anything else just because the competition seems more pure, and for most of the athletes, winning at the Olympics is the pinnacle of their sporting achievements. Every day, several times per day, for two weeks, you can watch people strive to accomplish that biggest possible step in their sporting achievements. You can see the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat played out over and over.


You might ask, "What's the point of all this? Who cares about your experience?"


The point is that the B.S. in the quoted statement is just ridiculous. Some of us really do give a damn. Some of us care. You or others might think that trans rights are so damned important that any comments about caring about sports in general or womens sports in particular are some sort of smokescreen or pretense, However, that's not just wrong. It's totally clueless.

If you want to try to be insulting, go for a different angle. Go for the, "Oh...you just don't think trans identity is important enough to bother about if it messes up your games." angle.

Because that would be right. Feel free to put a negative spin on it if you wish, but it would be right.

And would you deliberately refer to a transwoman as "it" if she'd beaten a ciswoman who you'd been supporting?

Because that's the only thing that's relevant in this context.

Boy are some true colours coming into sharp focus right now.......

 

[LondonJohn]

Meh! Sounds like rationalization of transphobia to me.

It sounds like that because that's precisely what it is.

If you think that Laurel Hubbard is cheating, then just say cheating, or anti-social, or what have you. I think the fact that the insults are indistinguishable from transphobia ("it", "freak") are what make people think it is transphobic, just as it would be racist to call a black man who thinks he is white the n-word or terms that are often associated with racism.

Yes. And the very fact that Meadmaker continues to attempt the pathetic "argument" along the lines of "ah but it's OK - and not at all transphobic - to refer to Hubbard as "it" on the grounds of anger (etc) at her having competed as a woman" is both astonishing and very telling.

 

[Darat]

Several posts moved to AAH for being off-topic for this thread. Please keep to the topic of this thread or face further moderation actions.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[Meadmaker]

This is all utter nonsense.

As angrysoba and I have pointed out to you several times by now: expressing anger/disgust/sadness/whatever at Hubbard for having competed in a women's category is one thing (though, as has also been pointed out, the real target in that case should be the administrators of the sport, and not Hubbard herself)....

.... but choosing to express that anger/disgust/sadness/whatever towards Hubbard by referring to her as "it" is something else altogether. It's anti-transgender animus.

And the apparent fact that a) you cannot see or understand this. and b) you're ploughing on regardless in your rationalisation/excusing of The Atheist's choices here, puts you in the very same boat as him.

I look at The Atheist's body of work, and I see someone who is not merely supportive of transgender people, but practically an extremist in that support.

However, unlike the typical woke child, he retains a grasp of reality. As supportive as he is, he still recognizes the truth that he stated when he wrote the title of this thread.

ETA: To amplify on this just a little bit, I look at people like The Atheist or even Emily's Cat, and I see a level of support that I think is stronger and more sincere than I think of many of the trans rights supporters in this thread, because it's a support based on who these people really are, and not some pretense that they are something else. There's no reward in it. There's no self congratulatory declarations of virtue. There's a basic element of saying, "I know you are different, and that's ok.", rather than pretending they aren't different.

One more thing to add, in relation to the things that have been pointed out to me or to others. Yes, you guys have pointed those things out to me. You've pointed out a lot of things to me that I have disagreed with. This is one of them. Yes, I think that transwomen competing as women damages the sport. Depending on the exact circumstances, it can do a little bit of damage, or a lot of damage. I don't think it's wrong to criticize the actual people who are doing the damage (i.e. the athletes) , in addition to the people enabling that damage (i.e. the league organizers and rule-makers). In the case of teenagers, I'll save most of my criticism for the facilitators, but I won't spare a 42 year old from that criticism. Feel free to "point out" that you don't agree, but recognize that you are pointing out an area of disagreement, not some factually correct truism.

 

[Meadmaker]

And would you deliberately refer to a transwoman as "it" if she'd beaten a ciswoman who you'd been supporting?

It would depend on my mood.

 

[Meadmaker]

It sounds like that because that's precisely what it is.






Yes. And the very fact that Meadmaker continues to attempt the pathetic "argument" along the lines of "ah but it's OK - and not at all transphobic - to refer to Hubbard as "it" on the grounds of anger (etc) at her having competed as a woman" is both astonishing and very telling.

As happens again and again and again, you have put yourself in a position where you are stating what someone else's opinion is, and getting it wrong.

Fortunately, most people can read. Unfortunately, an awful lot of people will also go beyond what is written. C'est la vie.

But if you find it "astonishing", then you are easily astonished.

 

[d4m10n]

The question is whether transgender accommodation should attach to simple self declaration by an individual (self-id), or should require some form of medical diagnosis.

Or whether there ought to be a legal process to obtain a gender certificate which may or may not require diagnosis and treatment.

 

[Lord Muck oGentry]

Ah yeah, never heard of it, thx.
I agree regarding male and female definitions, there is no changing them that is reality based at the moment.

gender labels though? very variable.

I can test for male, I can test for female, how do I test for woman?

When you find a female, check whether she is human and an adult. If she is, your work is done. But this works only for Oldspeak. For a Newspeak definition, you must seek elsewhere.

 

[Boudicca90]

I look at The Atheist's body of work, and I see someone who is not merely supportive of transgender people, but practically an extremist in that support.

However, unlike the typical woke child, he retains a grasp of reality. As supportive as he is, he still recognizes the truth that he stated when he wrote the title of this thread.

ETA: To amplify on this just a little bit, I look at people like The Atheist or even Emily's Cat, and I see a level of support that I think is stronger and more sincere than I think of many of the trans rights supporters in this thread, because it's a support based on who these people really are, and not some pretense that they are something else. There's no reward in it. There's no self congratulatory declarations of virtue. There's a basic element of saying, "I know you are different, and that's ok.", rather than pretending they aren't different.

One more thing to add, in relation to the things that have been pointed out to me or to others. Yes, you guys have pointed those things out to me. You've pointed out a lot of things to me that I have disagreed with. This is one of them. Yes, I think that transwomen competing as women damages the sport. Depending on the exact circumstances, it can do a little bit of damage, or a lot of damage. I don't think it's wrong to criticize the actual people who are doing the damage (i.e. the athletes) , in addition to the people enabling that damage (i.e. the league organizers and rule-makers). In the case of teenagers, I'll save most of my criticism for the facilitators, but I won't spare a 42 year old from that criticism. Feel free to "point out" that you don't agree, but recognize that you are pointing out an area of disagreement, not some factually correct truism.

None of you are supportive of us. We have very few actual allies on this board.

You, Emily's Cat, The Athiest, the prestige, et al. All of you hold transphobic beliefs and want to exclude us from society on the basis of our gender and sex, or what you mistakenly believe it to be.

Even sometimes allies like LondonJohn still want to discriminate against us, just in a more limited fashion. So even they have a limit to how much they support us.

 

[d4m10n]

All of you hold transphobic beliefs and want to exclude us from society on the basis of our gender and sex, or what you mistakenly believe it to be.

Literally no one has suggested exclusion from society.

I'm excluded from women's changing rooms, leagues, spas, etc. but that isn't an exclusion from society, it's an assignment to spaces matching my sex.

 

[p0lka]

When you find a female, check whether she is human and an adult. If she is, your work is done. But this works only for Oldspeak. For a Newspeak definition, you must seek elsewhere.

I'm not advocating for testing, the testing thing I said was referring to a previous post regarding dogs legs and whether they were legs or not, by a famous politician that liked tails and comparisons.

In my opinion male/female, no quibbling it's a factual matter.

In my opinion gender, go do what you want, freedom.....

what do you mean by oldspeak and newspeak?

 

[Boudicca90]

Literally no one has suggested exclusion from society.

I'm excluded from women's changing rooms, leagues, spas, etc. but that isn't an exclusion from society, it's an assignment to spaces matching my sex.

I am a woman, therefore I belong in women's restrooms, locker rooms, spas, shelters, and prisons. You want to keep me out of where I belong in society. Trans-exclusionary.

Your argument reminds me of when homophobes would decry same-sex marriage. "They aren't being discriminated against, a gay guy can marry a woman if he wants!"

 

[d4m10n]

I am a woman, therefore I belong in women's restrooms, locker rooms, spas, shelters, and prisons.

You are making an argument from the labels that we've put on these spaces/leagues without delving into why we did so in the first place. We didn't create the WNBA for people who identify (however strongly) with femininity, but for those who never went through the virilizing process of male puberty.

You want to keep me out of where I belong in society.

I don't claim to know where you belong in society. I would assume that the process of designating spaces/leagues/etc. is socially constructed (rather than revealed from on high) and remains under construction to this day.