Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[Olmstead]

I dunno. Paranoid schizophrenia is a valid lived condition. It doesn't map to reality, but the goal is to treat it and make accommodations for those who suffer from it, not remove it.

Is that the goal though, or is it the best that modern medicine can hope for?

I think psychaitrist would gladly prescribe a pill that healed it.

 

[d4m10n]

Valid: Psychology/psychiatry shouldn't attempt to remove it.



Invalid: Psychology/psychiatry should attempt to remove it.

I suppose that's as good a definition as any.

 

[Meadmaker]

Wow. WOW.

Another person totally blows the "Oh yeah, I recognise and respect transgender identity as a valid condition" smokescreen briskly away.

I love the faux surprise motif. It's one of your best, but it's kind of overused, especially when you throw in the "I thought you would have known...." variant.


It's in the thread title. If memory serves, that was from 2018. Nothing has changed. I've modified my vocabulary a little bit, and recognized the nature of some of the arguments as mere semantics, but reality still exists. Whatever you call people, which genitals they have still matters.

ETA: To relate my specific comment, some people might not have understood what I meant by saying that to affirm their identity, they should compete as men while dressed as women. Basically, what I'm saying is that being transgender is a valid lived identity, and acknowledging both the transgender aspect and the biological reality affirms that transgender identity. They are women in terms of how they present and identify, but the races are divided by biological sex. Competing in the male division affirms who they really are.

ETA2: Kind of like Quinn. Identifies as a man. Competes as a woman. Everyone says "cool", and identity is affirmed. His transgender identity isn't compromised by competing in the female division.

 

[Meadmaker]

Has anyone said what exactly constitutes an invalid condition?

It took John a few years to get to a definition of "woman". Now you want "valid" and "invalid"?

 

[d4m10n]

It took John a few years to get to a definition of "woman". Now you want "valid" and "invalid"?

If it's crucial to the relevant equal rights arguments, it'd be nice to know what it means.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You describe it as non-private, which is true in a sense, but you fail to mention that it is still nominally sex segregated. Expecting a nominally sex-segregated area to actually BE sex segregated is not exactly unreasonable. And the store's policy, as explained, really makes no sense. They have segregated in not by the sex or even the gender of the person trying on the clothes, but by the gender of the clothes themselves. That's ******* stupid, and serves no purpose.

Perhaps you feel differently, but I really find myself not willing to trust someone who's response to full changing rooms to disrobe in the open to be a reliable narrator on such things.

Perhaps things are different in the UK. I've never been in a clothing store where it would be acceptable to disrobe in the open if the changing rooms are temporarily full.

Imagine writing this article and thinking the men were the weirdos, and not the person who decided stripping down in public was an acceptable response to the changing rooms being occupied.

Sounds to me the author is bending over backwards to find a reason to drum up gender panic.

 

[Meadmaker]

Perhaps you feel differently, but I really find myself not willing to trust someone who's response to full changing rooms to disrobe in the open to be a reliable narrator on such things.

Perhaps things are different in the UK. I've never been in a clothing store where it would be acceptable to disrobe in the open if the changing rooms are temporarily full.

Imagine writing this article and thinking the men were the weirdos, and not the person who decided stripping down in public was an acceptable response to the changing rooms being occupied.

Sounds to me the author is bending over backwards to find a reason to drum up gender panic.

I think you are misunderstanding the layout of the changing room that she is describing. I think "in public" is misleading.


What she is describing is that there is a door to the changing room area. Beyond that door is a women only zone. When you pass through that door, you are in a corridor or some sort of open space, and there are doors (or was it curtains?) to individual changing stalls from that open space, but that open space isn't visible to shoppers in the main floor of the store.

All of the individual stalls were full, so she took off her top in the open space in the middle, but she was still in a "no men allowed" space. She wasn't "in public".

 

[Earthborn]

Do you see a place for women-only sports teams in colleges, for instance?

I'm not from not from a place where educational institutions have their own sports teams, that is more of a North American thing, so the concept is alien to me.

It doesn't prove anything of the sort. And in fact we have mountains of evidence that winner-takes-all competitions are tons of fun for competitors and spectators alike.

I mainly see a lot of participants and fans getting disappointed and complaining about how the winners were cheating or had an unfair advantage. Sound to me like only the winners are having fun.

One answer is that the majority fun should prevail.

The majority doesn't win.

What's your answer?

My answer is that participating is more important than winning, and the more people start worrying about losing, the less fun a game is. In professional sports, the stakes are often too high to make it fun.

Maybe for you. Some of us like it that way.

If you like it that way, maybe you shouldn't complain when the people you want to win, don't.

It's not something that I think about myself, it's objective reality.

Just because you have the privilege of not having to think about it, doesn't mean it is something you don't have.

I am a female human being. I also, however, completely reject gender as a meaningless and harmful concept altogether. I have no gender under the current definition of that term. None at all.

It is not clear to me whether you are talking about "gender" or "gender identity", but you have both. Both are meaningful concepts. Both are potentially problematic concepts, but for very different reasons. The problem with the concept of "gender" is that society makes gendered distinctions at all, while the problem with the concept of "gender identity" is that despite its name, it doesn't have a whole lot to do with "gender".

 

[Meadmaker]

I'm not from not from a place where educational institutions have their own sports teams, that is more of a North American thing, so the concept is alien to me.

Interesting. I never gave it much thought, and it's possible that influences the perspectives of some people discussing the topic.

Are high school sports, where my school's team faces off against your school's team, not a thing in the rest of the world?

My answer is that participating is more important than winning, and the more people start worrying about losing, the less fun a game is.

That's fine for your perspective, but do you have any objection to those of us for whom winning and losing is part of the fun? Yes, I can play casual games or sports, where no one really cares who wins or loses, but that's not as much fun to me as a competitive game. My favorite games, whether board game, sport, or whatever, involve everyone giving 100% and going all out to win the game. That, to me, is fun. That's what makes something a game, rather than an activity.

If you like it that way, maybe you shouldn't complain when the people you want to win, don't.

You;re being deliberately obtuse. In women's sports, I want a woman to win. In high school sports, I want a high school student to win. In "senior" sports, I want an old person to win.


Or should I say "female sports", and "female", or....whatever the preferred vocabulary is, having functional balls gives males an advantage, so I don't want them playing in the all-female league.

And....you know all that.

 

[d4m10n]

The majority doesn't win.

I'm highly skeptical of this claim, at least if we're looking at the fan bases. A winning program will tend to attract fans who've even the least excuse to root for them.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think you are misunderstanding the layout of the changing room that she is describing. I think "in public" is misleading.


What she is describing is that there is a door to the changing room area. Beyond that door is a women only zone. When you pass through that door, you are in a corridor or some sort of open space, and there are doors (or was it curtains?) to individual changing stalls from that open space, but that open space isn't visible to shoppers in the main floor of the store.

All of the individual stalls were full, so she took off her top in the open space in the middle, but she was still in a "no men allowed" space. She wasn't "in public".

I very much doubt this area was intended for people to strip down.

I just think it's funny what utter crap passes as trans panic bait in the Cursed Isle. Woman strips down in plain view and is mad when she is seen. 100% her fault, but a perfect opportunity to drum up some gender panic.

 

[Earthborn]

Are high school sports, where my school's team faces off against your school's team, not a thing in the rest of the world?

Of course not. Why should a school encourage activities that have nothing to do with education?

My favorite games, whether board game, sport, or whatever, involve everyone giving 100% and going all out to win the game.

I agree, everyone giving 100% without social pressure can be fun. When huge commercial interest and national pride are at stake, I think fun disappears.

In women's sports, I want a woman to win. In high school sports, I want a high school student to win. In "senior" sports, I want an old person to win.

If the sports organisation has decided that a person fits the criteria to be eligible to participate, why complain when they win?

 

[Earthborn]

All of the individual stalls were full, so she took off her top in the open space in the middle, but she was still in a "no men allowed" space.

Apparently, there was no "no men allowed"-space. There just was a changing space in the women's clothing department.

 

[theprestige]

I mainly see a lot of participants and fans getting disappointed and complaining about how the winners were cheating or had an unfair advantage. Sound to me like only the winners are having fun.

The majority doesn't win.

Personal perceptions are not good data. Meanwhile the economic data - ticket sales, viewership, sponsors, etc. - tell a different story. Football, basketball, handegg, hockey, baseball, tennis, jai alai, giant slalom, across the entire sporting spectrum, it's clear that millions of people enjoy competitive sports. They enjoy the emotional ups and downs of winning and losing. They enjoy the struggle. Whole communities make it a point of pride to support a home team that has no chance of winning.

Millions of people enjoy putting their mind and body to the test against peers of similar ability and motivation. Hundreds of millions more enjoy watching these contests unfold, picking sides and riding the emotional roller coaster of wins and losses.

My answer is that participating is more important than winning, and the more people start worrying about losing, the less fun a game is.

This sidesteps the issue entirely. Can you rephrase this in terms of where transwomen who want to compete should compete, and why?

 

[Paul2]

I'm not from not from a place where educational institutions have their own sports teams, that is more of a North American thing, so the concept is alien to me.

OK, referencing college sports teams was only an example. What about, say, the Olympics? Do you see a place for female-only Olympic events?

 

[Paul2]

My answer is that participating is more important than winning, and the more people start worrying about losing, the less fun a game is. In professional sports, the stakes are often too high to make it fun.

There are a whole lot sports fans who see it differently than you. The more they care about winning and losing, the more exciting it is. I know that's true for myself. Are you saying I shouldn't enjoy being a sports fan the way that I currently enjoy them?

 

[TomB]

Wow. WOW.

Another person totally blows the "Oh yeah, I recognise and respect transgender identity as a valid condition" smokescreen briskly away.

No. You're wrong.

Recognizing transgender identity as valid does not dictate how to integrate that identity into society. Nor does recognizing transgender identity as valid dictate that the same form of integration is appropriate in all situations.

What Meadmaker is putting forward here is that the appropriate accommodation (I'm presently leaning towards the term "integration" as being more appropriate) for sports differs from the appropriate accommodation in other more socially oriented areas.

From your posts, you actually mostly agree with this, though you like to subjectively separate sports into "elite" and "non-elite" categories when you make in your differential accommodation proposals.

 

[Earthborn]

Personal perceptions are not good data.

The fact that huge numbers of people can be whipped into a nationalistic frenzy and entire countries manage to bankrupt themselves organising such frenzies, is not good data to support the idea that they are having fun.

This sidesteps the issue entirely. Can you rephrase this in terms of where transwomen who want to compete should compete, and why?

If people were just having fun, they wouldn't care so much about the advantage transwomen may or may not have.

 

[Matthew Best]

Are high school sports, where my school's team faces off against your school's team, not a thing in the rest of the world?

They definitely are in the UK.

 

[Emily's Cat]

ETA2: Kind of like Quinn. Identifies as a man. Competes as a woman. Everyone says "cool", and identity is affirmed. His transgender identity isn't compromised by competing in the female division.

Exactly!