Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

[TheGoldcountry]

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

How ridiculous. This is an argument for eradicating different leagues altogether.

If you dislike sports, which you obviously do, why don't you just let the people who do care on the TRA side make their arguments, since you seem to not have a clue.

 

[Olmstead]

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.

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

In other words, just get rid of female sports altogether, because the separate categories mean that people aren't having fun.

 

[TomB]

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.

This is my point. What someone lives is their lived condition. It is their reality whether it maps to an objective reality or not. schizophrenia is a valid lived condition. So is hypocrisy, referring to contradictory beliefs or self-images that are contradictory to actions. (If those were invalid, no one would have a "valid lived condition.")

One lives life based on what they perceive as real. It's real to them and therefore a valid component of who they are, even if that perception may not be completely factual.

The only way I can see for something not to be a "valid lived condition" is if someone is faking it. That is, saying they experience things (feelings, events, etc.) that they know that they did not actually feel or believe they experienced.

 

[Earthborn]

What about, say, the Olympics? Do you see a place for female-only Olympic events?

I think the Olympics are such a corrupt institution that I don't see a place for it unless it is thoroughly reformed. But at least it has come to realise that trying to rigorously define "woman" in order to keep out some people who may have a genetic advantage over others in Women's sports, is itself a losing game.

The more they care about winning and losing, the more exciting it is.

"Exciting" is not the same thing as "fun".

 

[theprestige]

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 take is misanthropic to the point of insanity. I don't think this view of sports has anything useful or even humane to say about transsexual competition.

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

People have fun when they perceive a fair contest between individuals or teams of similar capability.

What's perceived as fair varies from sport to sport. Most combat sports have weight classes. Some sports segregate by skill level. Pretty much every sport segregates by sex.

But ultimately your "solution" for competitive sports is simply misanthropic. So we're kind of at a dead end regarding what you have to say about transsexuals in competitive sports. You'd solve the problem by just getting rid of competitive sports altogether. And dismiss the interest and enthusiasm of millions of people - including some transsexuals - who actually enjoy competitive sports.

 

[theprestige]

How ridiculous. This is an argument for eradicating different leagues altogether.

If you dislike sports, which you obviously do, why don't you just let the people who do care on the TRA side make their arguments, since you seem to not have a clue.

Earthborn seems to view competitive sports as a kind of madness or depravity. One wonders why he thinks transsexuals should participate in such an institution at all. Isn't it for their own good to be effectively locked out?

 

[Paul2]

I think the Olympics are such a corrupt institution that I don't see a place for it unless it is thoroughly reformed. But at least it has come to realise that trying to rigorously define "woman" in order to keep out some people who may have a genetic advantage over others in Women's sports, is itself a losing game.

"Exciting" is not the same thing as "fun".

For myself, it's think it's fun to get excited over whether my favorite team might win. What do you know that limits what everyone might think is fun?

 

[TomB]

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".

That's a bit different than most of the changing rooms I've seen in department stores. But then, I'm in the U.S.

I have been in the common area of the "women's" changing room many times. Often handing clothing back and forth to my wife or daughter who is inside the cubicle. I've seen a lot of other boyfriends and husbands in there as well. Not to mention male store clerks.

The private spaces are the cubicles. The common areas outside (but within the changing area) are only semi-private. If I were to change in one of those areas on the men's side, I would know I risk having a female clerk, or someone's wife or a girlfriend walk in on me. The awkwardness would be on me.

Also, I think that there is a bit of a cultural shift. Changing rooms now serve a location as opposed to a sex or gender. You try clothes on in the changing rooms near the department you got them. If there are men's and women's clothes in the same area there will often be a common set of changing rooms.

 

[TomB]

I think the Olympics are such a corrupt institution that I don't see a place for it unless it is thoroughly reformed. But at least it has come to realise that trying to rigorously define "woman" in order to keep out some people who may have a genetic advantage over others in Women's sports, is itself a losing game.

"Exciting" is not the same thing as "fun".

But who made you the arbiter of what is enjoyable or "fun?"
Fans even enjoy rooting for the team that loses. And athletes enjoy competing against others even when they lose.

Winning is not a synonym for "fun." But having no chance to be competitive can certainly put a damper on the enjoyment both as a spectator and as a participant. (Which is why we have divisions in sports.)

 

[Emily's Cat]

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.

Hey, that's some progress! At least you recognize them as being males.

 

[Emily's Cat]

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

Lol

'Everybody has a gender identity, even if they don't think they do. It's just that some people are so privileged that they don't have to think about it. That's why some people's gender identities need to be recognized and affirmed, and are incredibly important to their entire being... but other people's gender identities *that they don't believe they have* don't matter. Only some gender identities matter, it's only people who think about their gender identities that matter and are important. People who don't think about their gender identities are just in the way and on the wrong side of history.'

Denigrating doublespeak does not an argument make.

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".

I disagree. Without gender, there can be no gender identity. Right now you are arguing that an atheist has a religion, and therefore has a religious identity.

Gender is a meaningless concept once you force it to be separate from a synonym for sex. It's nothing more than a set of behavioral stereotypes - stereotypes which I reject. And without that meaningless concept one cannot have an identity wrapped up in it.

People can - and do - have dysphoria about their sexed bodies. That is a mental health condition, which should be treated.

 

[Meadmaker]

That's a bit different than most of the changing rooms I've seen in department stores. But then, I'm in the U.S.

I have been in the common area of the "women's" changing room many times. Often handing clothing back and forth to my wife or daughter who is inside the cubicle. I've seen a lot of other boyfriends and husbands in there as well. Not to mention male store clerks.

The private spaces are the cubicles. The common areas outside (but within the changing area) are only semi-private. If I were to change in one of those areas on the men's side, I would know I risk having a female clerk, or someone's wife or a girlfriend walk in on me. The awkwardness would be on me.

Also, I think that there is a bit of a cultural shift. Changing rooms now serve a location as opposed to a sex or gender. You try clothes on in the changing rooms near the department you got them. If there are men's and women's clothes in the same area there will often be a common set of changing rooms.

She said the changing booths were separated from the common room only by curtains, which I would expect only if the common room was also expected to be for women only. Also, the reported conversation confirms that, except that instead of "women only", the interpretation was, "anyone trying on women's clothes".

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Hey, that's some progress! At least you recognize them as being males.

Given that they are likely entirely imagined people and this incident probably never happened, I'm happy to defer to the author's description.

 

[theprestige]

But who made you the arbiter of what is enjoyable or "fun?"
Fans even enjoy rooting for the team that loses. And athletes enjoy competing against others even when they lose.

Winning is not a synonym for "fun." But having no chance to be competitive can certainly put a damper on the enjoyment both as a spectator and as a participant. (Which is why we have divisions in sports.)

Earthborn's view seems to be that we athletes and spectators are not having fun. Rather, we're caught up in a mass hysteria that we mistakenly believe is "fun".

 

[TomB]

She said the changing booths were separated from the common room only by curtains, which I would expect only if the common room was also expected to be for women only. Also, the reported conversation confirms that, except that instead of "women only", the interpretation was, "anyone trying on women's clothes".

The rooms I was describing oftoen also sometimes had curtains rather than doors.

The: "anyone trying on women's clothes" is consistent with the rooms serving an area rather than a gender.

A side anecdote: I've never sen a man slide out of his shirt and pants and try on clothes on the shop floor. But Last august I was shopping for a suit for my mom's funeral. A couple of women were browsing in the men's dress clothing department. then one of them stripped off her shirt and pants to try on clothing in the men's suit section of Macy's. (Which kind of inconvenienced me, because the section I wanted to look at was right next to them.)

The appropriate thing for her to have done would have been to take the clothes to the dressing room. The men's dressing room as the women's dressing room is on the next floor up and inconvenient (just as the men's department in the story was). In other words, I think she should have done exactly what the two men in the story did.

I will point out that other than (maybe) lingerie stores, people generally keep their undergarments on when trying on clothes. (Most places require you to leave underwear on when trying on swimsuits around here.) This is not the same as a locker room.

 

[TomB]

Earthborn's view seems to be that we athletes and spectators are not having fun. Rather, we're caught up in a mass hysteria that we mistakenly believe is "fun".

People who don't value sports often dismiss them, not just as boring, but as bad. But they don't seem to notice that competition is a strong part of most recreational games. Monopoly, Clue, horseshoes, poker, chutes and ladders. They all have winners and losers.

And no one likes to play when they have no chance to win. This is something that one recognizes as a parent when we play with our kids. Most of us, at least, play down to a level where our toddler can win regularly even if we could, if we used our adult strategy skills win easily every time.

Recreational bowling and golf leagues have handicaps to even out competition. Bowlers and golfers strive to reduce their handicap to the point where they can play ion a scratch basis. (Pros, of course, play scratch. Handicaps just allow skilled people to play with their less skilled friends.)

 

[lionking]

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

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.

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

Ask biological women athletes that question. You know, the ones who are being deprived of their passion, safety and even livelihood by male bodied transwomen who were inept when competing as male.

 

[lionking]

How ridiculous. This is an argument for eradicating different leagues altogether.

If you dislike sports, which you obviously do, why don't you just let the people who do care on the TRA side make their arguments, since you seem to not have a clue.

This is abundantly true.

 

[TomB]

Given that they are likely entirely imagined people and this incident probably never happened, I'm happy to defer to the author's description.

What makes them likely imagined?

I will agree with your point that you were using the author's terminology. We have no indication that they were transgender. They may have been putting together a costume or something.

But I think it's a legitimate occurrence and (other than where she changed) an understandably disconcerting event that should be expected as norms change. In other words, I see why she was bothered and don't blame her. But I also don't have a problem with the guys here. Basically, there are no bad guys here.

 

[Meadmaker]

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

Reasonable question.

The answer is that the premise is unfortunate. Their criteria are poor. In my opinion, they shouldn't allow males to compete in the women's division.

If it's a private business, they are of course free to do as they wish.

Where my concern mostly lies is with school and government sponsored sports organizations. Those are mostly run by professional educators, who decide that there are more important factors than sports. Most of the people who become professional educators did not play on the varsity team.