Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[Emily's Cat]

Hey London John, since you're posting in this thread again, how about taking a shot at these questions?

You know, just in case you accidentally missed them...

LJ, since you're so very fond of making analogies to racism and homosexuality...

1) Do you think it would be reasonable and appropriate for white people to demand to be included and centered in activism intended to remove discrimination from black people? Is it reasonable to refer to white people as "black activists" or would it be more appropriate to refer to them as "allies"? If a white person "identified as" a black person, do you think it would be appropriate for them to demand that black people open all black-focused services and events to them as a *right*, based on their identification as black? Should white people who "identify as" black be counted as black when it comes to evaluating whether black people have equitable participation in society, economics, and politics? Should crimes committed by white people be statistically counted as having been committed by black people because those white people "identify as" black? Should crimes in which the victim is a white person who "identifies as" black be considered as potential hate crimes against black people?

2) Do you think it would be reasonable and appropriate for straight people to demand to be included and centered in activism intended to remove discrimination from homosexual people? Is it reasonable to refer to straight people as "gay activists" or would it be more appropriate to refer to them as "allies"? If a straight person "identified as" gay, do you think it would appropriate for them to demand that gay people open all LGB-focused services and events to them as a *right*, based on their identification as gay? Should straight people who "identify as" gay be counted as homosexual when it comes to evaluating whether LGB people have equitable participation in society, economics, and politics? Should crimes committed by straight people be statistically counted as having been committed by LGB people because those straight people "identify as" gay? Should crimes in which the victim is straight be considered as potential hate crimes against LGB people?

 

[d4m10n]

I think I've presented my views on transgender medical treatment for children a few times already.

That you have, to your credit.

It's so much easier to take the other path.

 

[d4m10n]

Interesting op-ed at WaPo by Megan McArdle:

With a few exceptions, such as former Olympian Nancy Hogshead-Makar, almost no one is willing to publicly question whether it is fair to let Thomas compete in women’s divisions, given the clear advantages she seems to have retained from going through male puberty. They are too afraid of losing friends, jobs or educational opportunities by seeming anything less than maximally supportive of trans inclusion. Even conversations I had about the technical details of meets took place on deep background, and after one father spoke to reporter Suzy Weiss on the record, his wife frantically contacted Weiss, begging her not to ruin their daughter’s life by printing his name.

After all my reporting, I am still pondering the seemingly ineradicable tension between the desire for inclusion and the biological reasons we established sporting leagues for men and women in the first place. But I am quite sure of one thing: This is not the kind of atmosphere that makes for good decisions, or healthy societies.

 

[TomB]

Interesting op-ed at WaPo by Megan McArdle:

The article above links to this article as well:

One of the Penn moms says her own daughter warned her against speaking out. “She’s worried about getting into grad school, and she doesnt want my name or hers to come up on Google attached to this.” (Her daughter is hoping to get a graduate degree in biology.)

The parents say their daughters know it’s wrong that Thomas is swimming against them but that they will not risk getting smeared with the label transphobe.

What about Mike Schnur, the Penn coach, who is wearing a mask with a trans flag on Saturday night, where Thomas swims in the 100 yard freestyle? “Politically, he’s as conservative as they come,” says a Penn dad. “He just loves winning and loves his job.” A Penn mom stares at me. “Everyone’s just faking everything.”

On Friday, before the 200-yard freestyle, I spoke with Schuyler Bailar, the first trans athlete (he transitioned to male) in D1 sports who swam for the Harvard's men team from 2015 to 2019. Now a full-time transgender activist, Bailar organized the 300-person letter in support of Thomas. Bailar said those opposed to Thomas are driven by little more than bigotry.
“Most people aren’t saying ‘We hate trans people,’ because they’re not allowed to say that, but they’re disguising it by saying ‘We care about fairness,’’’said Bailar, “It’s an insidious form of propaganda.”

https://archive.fo/U4uBP

I particularly take issue with the highlighted statement. It's a dodge. What it amounts to is that by defining anyone who disagrees with his opinion as some form of bad, he feels he can dismiss any arguments or positions they take without evaluating or responding to them. It's that very attitude that contributes to the atmosphere of fear that apparently keeps the people involved and affected by this particular case from being able to discuss or express their insights on the issue.

 

[lionking]

The article above links to this article as well:

https://archive.fo/U4uBP

I particularly take issue with the highlighted statement. It's a dodge. What it amounts to is that by defining anyone who disagrees with his opinion as some form of bad, he feels he can dismiss any arguments or positions they take without evaluating or responding to them. It's that very attitude that contributes to the atmosphere of fear that apparently keeps the people involved and affected by this particular case from being able to discuss or express their insights on the issue.

As I have said many times, women’s sport will die. It will take some time, but it is inevitable.

 

[Meadmaker]

The article above links to this article as well:

https://archive.fo/U4uBP

I particularly take issue with the highlighted statement. It's a dodge. What it amounts to is that by defining anyone who disagrees with his opinion as some form of bad, he feels he can dismiss any arguments or positions they take without evaluating or responding to them. It's that very attitude that contributes to the atmosphere of fear that apparently keeps the people involved and affected by this particular case from being able to discuss or express their insights on the issue.

It's nuts.

But sports is where it will fall apart for trans ideology. I don't mean support for trans people. That will continue. I just mean the idea that, however you state it, there's no significant difference between people with different types of sexual anatomy. There is a difference. It matters, and sports is an area where that difference can't be simply dismissed.

 

[Ziggurat]

As I have said many times, women’s sport will die. It will take some time, but it is inevitable.

If events continue in their current direction, perhaps.

But it's not inevitable that events will continue in their current direction. That very much remains to be seen.

 

[d4m10n]

What it amounts to is that by defining anyone who disagrees with his opinion as some form of bad, he feels he can dismiss any arguments or positions they take without evaluating or responding to them.

Get on the right side of history, Tom.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I particularly take issue with the highlighted statement. It's a dodge. What it amounts to is that by defining anyone who disagrees with his opinion as some form of bad, he feels he can dismiss any arguments or positions they take without evaluating or responding to them. It's that very attitude that contributes to the atmosphere of fear that apparently keeps the people involved and affected by this particular case from being able to discuss or express their insights on the issue.

It's absolutely dirty pool (pun intended). That's been clear for a while now. And it's fairly blatantly one-sided. There are some males who get censured and harassed for pushing back against the most egregious transgender activism demands... but the overwhelming majority of the people who get threatened, doxxed, and harassed are female.

 

[Rolfe]

That it's transwomen, and never women, who consistently and constantly get uncritical support - especially from males - tells us that everybody knows what a woman is.

 

[Lithrael]

Why do you think it would help that some very few females agree with it? Do you think that your agreement invalidates the way other females view it?

I’m just sticking my oar in to be a counterpoint to the insinuation that men and the wrong kind of trans folks have one opinion and women and the right kind of trans folks have the other opinion. As long as you sound a lot like you’re saying everyone whose opinion ought to matter agrees with you, I’ll feel like saying I’m in the category that you think is entitled to an opinion and I don’t agree with you.

If 25 year olds were allowed to compete it's incredibly unlikely a 12 year old would even show up to tryouts.

I was referring to ST’s statement rather than to what Emily thought it was more like.

As a quick refresher, I do think sport is a tangled problem here, but I also think that situations like the one that sparked this round (someone who transitioned as a toddler making the girls’ team) are way over on the ‘in isolation, not a problem’ end. To me the problem is if/when you get situations where the team is half trans or most of the records are held by trans women, etc, that is, where the cis competitors really do begin to face a very demoralizing situation (as opposed to a boogeyman of one). Like, no matter how women trans women are, if things were working smoothly they wouldn’t have a higher representation in sport than in the background population.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I’m just sticking my oar in to be a counterpoint to the insinuation that men and the wrong kind of trans folks have one opinion and women and the right kind of trans folks have the other opinion. As long as you sound a lot like you’re saying everyone whose opinion ought to matter agrees with you, I’ll feel like saying I’m in the category that you think is entitled to an opinion and I don’t agree with you.

That's fine. Some females are just fine with being exposed to random naked males, and being viewed while naked by random males. If that is your position, that's fine for you. I get a bit prickly, however, when those who think being the object of voyeurism and/or exhibitionism by males is not a problem for them, support policies that override the sexual and safety boundaries of other females.

The fact that you give your consent doesn't mean that I (or any other female) should be forced to relinquish my right to consent. You can't consent on my behalf.

As a quick refresher, I do think sport is a tangled problem here, but I also think that situations like the one that sparked this round (someone who transitioned as a toddler making the girls’ team) are way over on the ‘in isolation, not a problem’ end. To me the problem is if/when you get situations where the team is half trans or most of the records are held by trans women, etc, that is, where the cis competitors really do begin to face a very demoralizing situation (as opposed to a boogeyman of one). Like, no matter how women trans women are, if things were working smoothly they wouldn’t have a higher representation in sport than in the background population.

Situations like... say... dysphoric males setting 'female' swimming records that are so far beyond the records set by females that females have no realistic chance of ever meeting those records?

 

[Meadmaker]

To me the problem is if/when you get situations where the team is half trans or most of the records are held by trans women, etc, that is, where the cis competitors really do begin to face a very demoralizing situation (as opposed to a boogeyman of one). Like, no matter how women trans women are, if things were working smoothly they wouldn’t have a higher representation in sport than in the background population.

I think, though, that this goes back to the statistical significance problem. Basically, a lot of people would say that there are so few situations where transwomen dominate that this is really just a boogeyman, i.e. an invented or at least overhyped situation being used by anti-trans people as an excuse to deny trans rights. My response to that is that 100% of the women who have to swim against Lia Thomas are in that situation. Thomas was a fairly decent male swimmer, and retains most of that ability today. No woman can beat "her".

So are we to tell those women that they are a statistically insignificant portion of the population, so they'll just have to deal with it?


On the opposite side, there are cases like the one that led to the quote from Indiana, where a transgirl who has been treated as a girl since the age of four (or younger? I don't know exactly, but very small) and who would not be setting records if she competed as a girl. Should we deprive them of the right to participate? Ideally, I would say no.

However, how do you write rules that allow that young, athletically unexceptional, transgirl to compete, but forbid Lia Thomas and Terry Miller from competing? I don't see a solution to that problem. I think it comes down to saying that you can participate, and compete, but we aren't going to count your victories. That way, every transgirl can compete, and as long as they aren't winning, no harm done.

Well, no one on the trans rights activist side is going to accept that as a solution. Also, how does that work for team sports? Also, on the women's rights side, if "making the team" is a thing, then that counts as "winning" and the trans girl is still taking a spot on the team from a cis girl, even if she isn't going to win at a district championship level. You end up back where you started, which is telling whatever girls the transgirl displaces that they are statistically insignificant and they just don't matter.

I suspect most people would be willing to compromise. I suspect that most people would be willing to let the transgirl take that last spot on the second string. Unfortunately, it's hard to write the rules in such a way that you allow that, without also allowing Lia Thomas and Terry Miller to set records. So, until someone suggests a workable solution to that problem, I'm going to err on the side of supporting girls' sports, and there's no way to make that work unless you mean biological girls.

 

[Rolfe]

I've just listened to an interesting podcast, where a biologist pointed out that although male advantage in speed is trivial before puberty there are other metrics where the advantage is not trivial, for example strength. The first rush of testosterone that starts the body developing along the male pathway confers significant advantages, even if they're not as dramatic as the advantages conferred by puberty.

She also pointed out that puberty blockers are highly controversial, with more and more evidence emerging that they are by no means safe. To write athletics participation rules in a way that encourages the use of these dangerous drugs would be foolhardy.

We got into this mess by acceding to be "kind" and allow a few genunely distressed men to be treated as women as a legal fiction. To go there again to be "kind" to a small group of children who are genuinely distressed, seems to me to be a very bad idea.

In competitive athletics minute advantages can be critical. It was suggested that the competitor furthest from the starting gun in short sprint races was disadvantaged by the tiny fraction of time it took the noise of the gun to reach his ears, so this was changed to have an audible cue in the same position for every competitor.

Sports governing bodies expend huge effort scrutinising every detail of kit and equipment to make sure nobody has an advantage - tennis raquets, swimming costumes, shoes and so on all have to be within strict parameters. In sports like sailing and motor racing the vehicles themselves have to conform to the strict standards for the class. You don't get to race an F1 car in an F3 race, or vice versa come to that, or a dinghy in a yacht category.

And yet they think it's just fine to allow male-type bodies to compete in the classes set aside for female-type bodies?

Hubbard went to the Olympics to compete in a sport that is dominated by very young women - late teens and early 20s - when he was in his forties, unfit and carrying an injury. If he doesn't have male advantage, where are the unfit, injured 40-something women competing in that class at Olympic standard? The fact is that males are built to lift far greater weights than females.

A female is not simply a male with low testosterone. You can't unboil an egg, and you can't reverse male puberty insofar as body size, shape, muscle composition and so on go. But not only that, you can't reverse the smaller advantages obtained by developing in utero as a male. In a world where the time it takes for the sound of a pistol shot to travel a few yards makes a significant difference, why would you allow this?

Sports authorities have been policy-captured by the trans lobby before women even realised what was going on. The idea that some way has to be found to let males compete in the female divisions was baked into these policies. There is no way. Deminstrating that a male who has lower testosterone is a little less good than he was before he did that to himself goes nowhere near to addressing the issue.

Fairness and inclusion matter for women too. Women's sports were devised to deliver that, for females. Destroying that in the belief that the only person who matters is the boy who wants to be a girl, and that the girls' aspirations to have a chance at winning are of no account, is exclusionary, of a much larger group of people than strict sex segregation is. (In fact strict sex segregation excludes nobody, as everyone is either male or female - not being in the category you'd prefer to be in, but for which you don't qualify, is not the same as being excluded.)

The current case of the swimmer who was good enough to be competitive in the men's division but wasn't making inter-college teams or winning races who is now destroying the women's races is likely to bring all this to a head. After a few record-breaking swims early on, that got a lot of people sitting up and paying attention, he's now blatantly coasting in the early parts of the race and doing just enough at the end to win. He's also deliberately throwing races. It's clear that he can storm through and win any time he decides he wants to, because he's better than just about all the best female swimmers there have ever been.

There is now a small army of mothers of athletic girls getting mobilised, so watch this space. We really don't want to write any more rules to "be kind" to a supposedly tiny group of people we're sorry for, or that we think won't have much of an advantage, only to find that being the thin end of the next wedge.

 

[theprestige]

I think, though, that this goes back to the statistical significance problem. Basically, a lot of people would say that there are so few situations where transwomen dominate that this is really just a boogeyman, i.e. an invented or at least overhyped situation being used by anti-trans people as an excuse to deny trans rights. My response to that is that 100% of the women who have to swim against Lia Thomas are in that situation. Thomas was a fairly decent male swimmer, and retains most of that ability today. No woman can beat "her".

ST's consistent approach to this has been to deny that it's a problem, or that there needs to be any discussion about public policy to prevent the problem, or even elucidate any justification for letting it happen at all, as long as it's a small problem. As long as it's just Lia Thomas, ST seems to think he doesn't have to have an opinion about whether it should be even Lia Thomas, or whether the same "privilege" should be extended to anyone else.

 

[Ziggurat]

She also pointed out that puberty blockers are highly controversial, with more and more evidence emerging that they are by no means safe. To write athletics participation rules in a way that encourages the use of these dangerous drugs would be foolhardy.

Yeah, that's definitely an oddity.

I mean, why do we even have prohibitions on the use of anabolic steroids in sports, for example? It isn't a question of fairness. It would be fair if you let all athletes use them. We prohibit them because their abuse is harmful, and we don't want to give an advantage to those who are willing to harm themselves over those who are not willing to harm themselves because that encourages harm.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not sure that's all of it though. I think there's an inbuilt ethos that sport should be "clean", that competitors should be demonstrating their natural un-enhanced abilities, and that even if something absolutely completely safe were discovered that did what anabolic steroids do, they'd probably ban it.

While at the same time actually compelling one specific set of competitors to take drugs to damage their natural athletic ability. It's nuts.

My feeling is that if boys who never went through male puberty were allowed to compete in female events, we'd soon see situations of fairly promising young boys being steered towards castration (physical or chemical) in order to provide a cadre of "elite female" competitors at international level. If they could do it just to get male singers that would wow opera crows, there are countries that would do it for medals, no question. Look at what they did to actual women in the 1970s.

 

[theprestige]

Personally I have zero respect for any "athlete" who chooses to degrade their physical ability to compete at less than their full potential. To my mind, such people aren't athletes at all. They're scumbags who are exploiting the values of athleticism and competitive sport to satisfy some perverse craving.

 

[Rolfe]

I was trying to think why men do this, and I can think of three reasons.

• Someone who is keen on sports but also has AGP.
• Someone who is basically a scumbag and thinks this is his ticket to winning.
• Someone who is basically a scumbag and thinks this is his ticket to getting into the girls' changing rooms.

I think the third one is less likely, because there wouldn't be such a fixation on winning if it was just about getting to change with the girls.

I think the second could happen, but my guess is it's unlikely to be something a male who is not AGP would consider doing.

I think this is all basically AGP-driven. We can see from the psychology of the many narcissistic AGP men out there that humiliating women and making them uncomfortable is what makes them tick. They get a huge kick, indeed a sexual kick, out of occupying women's spaces and seeing women disconcerted. I'm yet to be convinced that any male has transitioned solely in order to win prizes - although who knows what might happen once certain countries realise that transitioning second-rate male athletes is the ticket to dominance in female categories.

But basically I think Hubbard, Thomas, McKinnon/Ivy (whatever he's calling himself this week) are basically AGP males with at least some narcissism attached, who get their jollies by invading and occupying women's spaces, making them uncomfortable, and winning against them. That's how most AGP-driven trans-identifying males seem to operate, or at least the ones who make the biggest noise in public. We're just seeing how it plays out in sport, as opposed to how it plays out in prisons or domestic violence shelters or Girl Guide camp.

 

[theprestige]

Honestly when you first started on this AGP tear, I thought was pretty conspiracy-theoretical and transphobic. Nowadays I'm wondering just how much AGP nonsense is going on under cover of trans-activism.