It sounds like you don't think conservatives actually believe giving puberty blocking drugs to children is child abuse? Is that what you think? My impression is they view all this pro-trans stuff as something like a religious cult. I can imagine a religious cult who practiced FGM having some child abuse issues to contend with. I think that's kind of how they see it.
Trans women are not women (Part 8)
- Thread starter Meadmaker
- Start date
- Status
Thomas is denying women what they want. The right to compete fairly.
Certainly these terms are ill-defined in the sense that they are effectively memes. People know at an emotional level what they mean. You seem quite interested in politics and culture, I have a hard time believing you don't know what it means. It's hardly a secret.
No. It absolutely does not mean foolish. I've given you a partial definition, is there a word or shorthand that works better than "woke" to describe it? I have no interest in using it as an insult, but neither do I want to use three paragraphs to describe something that seems important to me to name and discuss. This has been being discussed for years now... and again, the meaning of the word is hardly a secret.
What would be the better word for the thing I defined? Also, forget 4Chan. I've never posted there and words like "woke" and "red pilled" have rather more reach than 4chan. That is a normie mainstream media view of this that reduces the right to autists and trolls.
Count her as a woman and the competition is fair. All you have to do is stop fighting and accept that she is a woman, and always was a woman. If I hold up 4 fingers, and the party tells you there are 5 fingers.... how many fingers am I holding up? See 5 fingers and a world becomes possible where people can be what they want to be. I think Catholics had an idea called mortifying the flesh. Just mortify the part of yourself that looks at Lia Thomas and sees a man. The problem is that you don't want to believe.
If the other swimmers would just believe that she is a woman, the problem would be solved. They are creating the problem by insisting she is not.
Last edited:
crazycat
Scholar
That photo should do more to convince anybody but TRAs that male-bodied people don't belong in women's sports than any number of postings, editorials, or comments from women's groups.
Great Ormond Street cancels a Zoom conference for trainee child psychiatrists on treatment of youth gender dysphoria, after complaints from activists that some speakers will make attendees 'feel unsafe'. One of the speakers was to be Dr Hilary Cass, author of the recent Cass review interim report.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
In other threads, I have brought up an interesting study of political attitudes in America from a couple of years ago. I heard the author talking on NPR. The primary finding that the author brought up was that in America, most people were slightly left or slightly right, while some were extreme left or extreme right. However, people who were left, either slightly or extremely, were convinced that everyone who was on the right was extreme. Likewise, people who were slightly right thought the people on the left were all extremists.
You are demonstrating the author's findings.
What is actually true is that there are lots of people who oppose puberty blockers and other "gender affirming" medicine. They oppose it, or are at least suspicious of it, based on no other issue than the dangerous side effects of the drug.
There are also people who find something about transgenders morally offensive. This includes some elected officials.
You are saying that the first group, which, at least on this issue, are moderately "right", does not really exist. You are saying that everyone who opposes the use of the "gender affirming medicine" is "driven entirely by bigotry".
Well, technically, you are saying that "supporters of this law", are driven entirely by bigotry, and that is probably closer to correct. For example, I am certainly not a "supporter of this law", so, technically, you are not syaing that I am driven entirely by bigotry.
And yet, you don't seem interested in distinguishing between people who generally oppose puberty blockers or "sex change operations" (to use an old fashioned term) on minors, versus people who support the actions of the Texas Attorney General and Governor. It seems to me that you want to paint all of us with the same brush.
If I'm mistaken, and you don't wish to do that, perhaps you can clarify whether, when you said "supporters of this law", you only intended to actually refer to "supporters of this law", instead of people who oppose most application of puberty blockers.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
In other words, anytime I hear someone criticizing my ideas, I ignore them.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
So will puberty blockers.
So, there's kind of a dilemma here.
ETA: For what it's worth, I remain opposed to the law, for one simple reason. It isn't a law. (Unless I missed something. As far as I know, no law was passed in Texas dealing with "gender affirming care" and child abuse.)
Last edited:
More nonsense. The swimmers Lia is beating are being denied places in swim teams and possibly a livelihood (the best swimmers are professional athletes) and all you are saying to them is “get over it”?
Do you realise that women’s sports will be dominated by transwomen as they follow the path of Thomas and others who can’t be beaten with their untransitioned post-puberty male bodies? And their anguish and disappointment is just their fault?
What callous disregard for natal women.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
If I understand shutit's approach correctly, he isn't presenting a personal opinion of how things ought to be, but rather discussing things on a more philosophical level.
He's illustrating that the core issue here is that the trans-activists insist that Lia Thomas is a woman, and simply following that belief to a logical conclusion. (i.e. a valid conclusion, but not necessarily a sound conclusion.) In their minds, there are no issues of fairness related to her participation in a women's swimming competition. She is just a sort of woman who has a natural advantage over other women. Natural advantages abound in sports, so why should we worry about some specific sort of natural advantage. Women are women, and some are better swimmers than others. Lia Thomas is just one of the women who happens to be a very good swimmer.
We actually have seen people in this thread say that exact thing. Sports are inherently unfair. Some people just have advantages over others. Yada, yada, yada.
So the theory goes. I'm pretty sure that shutit actually believes that Lia Thomas should not be competing as a woman and that not only does it harm women's swim competitions to allow her to do so, but it will, in fact, lead to the downfall of western civilization and the destruction of our way of life.
And, while that seems a bit hyperbolic, I'm not sure he's wrong.
I’m more interested in the destruction of women’s sport. I have had four daughters and two granddaughters. They all loved sport. But already transwomen are bringing their physical advantage to contact sports. I don’t want to see my family injured by unfair advantage.
Note the reference to 1984. He's not actually arguing for this.
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 36,388
Redundant word removed.
Terminology is a battlefield. I’m trying to dodge the grenades.
Yes. Exactly. I'm sorry if my posts have been open to misinterpretation, that wasn't intentional. I find the way of thinking of the trans-activists interesting. If I'm not the conservative person in this conversation, I'll be very surprised. As you say, I take a philosophical approach and I see analogues in the trans-activist thinking to positions on other topics that people maybe feel more warmly about - feminism for example, and liberalism more generally.
I think the ideas of "man" and "woman" and all the cultural baggage that goes with it are tremendously important and foundational. I think desire to change them we see at present is the result of a kind of religious madness.
Hopefully this is clear enough
This kind of reasoning where, if somebody disagrees with me, their motivation must be the same as mine, but inverted, is quite common. You see it in the abortion debate where people who are uncomfortable with abortion are said to be motivated by a desire to subjugate women.
The Observer view on gender identity services for children.
There is a summary of the findings of the Cass report in the Observer today.
"Ideology has no place in medicine. An individual’s healthcare must not be influenced by a clinician’s biases. But an independent review has highlighted that the quality of care for children with gender dysphoria in England has been unconscionably compromised in recent years, partly as a result of adult affinities to an unevidenced worldview."
It is outrageous that activists are still able to shut down debate featuring any speakers that don't conform to the correct ideological perspective, as with the recent cancellation of the trainee psychiatrists conference.
There is a summary of the findings of the Cass report in the Observer today.
"Ideology has no place in medicine. An individual’s healthcare must not be influenced by a clinician’s biases. But an independent review has highlighted that the quality of care for children with gender dysphoria in England has been unconscionably compromised in recent years, partly as a result of adult affinities to an unevidenced worldview."
It is outrageous that activists are still able to shut down debate featuring any speakers that don't conform to the correct ideological perspective, as with the recent cancellation of the trainee psychiatrists conference.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
You need to put a sarcasm tag on this stuff.
Rolfe
Adult human female
That was very interesting, thanks. This is also good.
Parents of Ivy League swimmers write: Letting Lia Thomas swim isn’t fair
Last edited:
- Status