Rolfe
Adult human female
Well, there's this. The alarm has been sounded, who’s going to respond?
And this. Lia Thomas and the slow death of women’s sports
Last edited:
Trans women are not women (Part 8)
- Thread starter Meadmaker
- Start date
- Status
Well, there's this. The alarm has been sounded, who’s going to respond?
And this. Lia Thomas and the slow death of women’s sports
Both extremely relevant articles.
p0lka
Illuminator
Yeah that's a guest opinion piece, they mention federal so possibly from the U.S? Their prison system is messed up I think.
They should change the name to 'female sports', it would solve the whole issue in my opinion.
Male sports, female sports. Clearly defined biologically.
Man sports, woman sports. Less clearly defined but go compete and feel happy. Don't complain when one persons woman is another persons man though as it's not clearly defined in the first place.
Last edited:
Wouldn't actually work. Trans-activists are already trying to appropriate the word "Female" as well.
They who? Tell you what. Make a poll that only biological women (i.e. women) can respond to and then we'll do what THEY say.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
From Merriam-Webster.com:
Definition of instinctive
1: of, relating to, or being instinct
2: prompted by natural instinct or propensity : arising spontaneously
Item 2 is the relevant definition. (Item 1 just means it's an adjective related to a specific noun.)
So, universality is not a requirement. Also, if something is instinctive, it doesn't mean that it cannot be overridden by conscious programming.
True......sort of.
I think it's true that three year olds, if not instructed to wear clothes, would be pretty indifferent to the wearing of clothes.
It is also my opinion that 12 year olds would start covering themselves up if coverings were available. i.e. it would arise spontaneously, prompted by a natural propensity, per the definition.
I don't know how to prove or disprove that. My primary reason for the belief is that every culture everywhere has some sort of concept of modesty and some form of clothing, with nudity being somewhat sexual in every culture I'm aware of. I can't say every culture, but it seems extraordinarily common, and I am not aware of any counterexamples.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
Works for me, but let's see if you can get any of the local TRAs to go along.
Meanwhile, some of the people on "my side", i.e. wanting a category for biological female persons, whatever they are called, would also complain about it.
Frankly, it's one of those cases where it would solve the whole issue, except that there are lots of people around who don't want to solve the whole issue. On the left, people don't want to acknowledge that transwomen are not female. On the right, there are people who don't want to acknowledge transwomen as women. (For what it's worth, I'm pretty much in agreement with the right on the issue, except I'm not a stickler about the vocabulary itself. I'm inconsistent in my vocabulary usage. I hardly ever refer to males as "women", but I frequently use feminine pronouns. Maybe that means something.)
ETA: An earlier version confused "left" and "right".
Last edited:
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,720
No. It's a fact that we teach children to wear clothes. We do not know what children would do in the absence of any instruction, or if modesty might manifest without an example. It would be unethical, if not impossible, to find out. Seriously, think what kind of experiment would be required to test this hypothesis, and then think about what an IRB would say to its proposal.
But it's also probably irrelevant. Let's suppose that clothing is socially indoctrinated. So what? That doesn't make it arbitrary or useless. As I said before, I think clothing is necessary for mixed sex strangers to be able to interact with little social friction. If I am correct, then even if clothing is a complete social construct, then it's still a necessary one in modern society, and we should not try to get rid of it.
Meadmaker
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2004
- Messages
- 29,033
I think he's merely addressing my assertion that it is not simply useful, but instinctive.
The role this plays in the transgender debate is where modesty is concerned. A very common response to a complaint that girls and women do not want to be seen disrobed by males is that this is just some silly social convention and we should modify it to be more rational in the modern world. I think that's wrong. I think that tendency is hard wired, and while the instinct can be overcome by social conditioning, i.e. girls can be told that it shouldn't bother them, and they can be made to agree with that, and even match the behavior to that conditioning, I think there will always be an element of underlying anxiety.
In terms that you express, some would say that clothing is only necessary in mixed sex company because society has conditioned us to feel that it is necessary. If we remove the societal conditioning, we would be perfectly happy wandering about naked, in either mixed sex or single sex company. So the theory goes. I don't buy into that theory. I think there's more to it than conditioning. I think the conditioning has been around for so long that we have literally evolved to see nudity as sexual.
5,000 generations is a long time, and humans didn't stop evolving when we first put on an animal skin.
100%. Ideologically their position is one of radical egalitarianism that plays with these categories for Machiavellian reasons, but doesn't actually believe in them.
The game is to find a socially marginalised group and define them as "oppressed", and everybody else as it's "oppressor" and then seek to flip the power dynamic between the two groups. Partly this is done by undermining the oppressor classes sense of itself and right to have things that the oppressed class don't.
OK Rolfe, I won't push it. I think trans-activism comes out of, and is the natural result of, politics and ideology that is close to your heart. Having said that, I'll move on and try to confine my conversation with you to other areas.
I genuinely like both you and Emily's Cat and have enjoyed both of your posts for many years.
Rolfe
Adult human female
If you actually read the article you would see that it's from Canada.
Do you think that covers it? Oh it's just a guest opinion piece and Murkans are nuts anyway? This is a serious problem and it's happening in multiple countries across the world.
It would only solve the problem in your head, where you have decided that "woman" is not the word for a female of the species homo sapiens.
Let's have "female" sports. I'm sure I can find a female cheetah that would sprint quite well. (Pun intended.)
As Roboramma already said, concede one word to the trans lobby and they just come after the next one. And we're not conceding this one anyway. Women are the female of the human species. We will not give up our word to be labelled by a word that also describes ewes, mares, cows, bitches, nanny-goats and even female plants.
Rolfe
Adult human female
That will get you accused of transphobia on its own.
Right now, in Australia (or maybe it's NZ?), a woman who runs a social media app for women only, which uses personal approval and face-recognition software to ensure that only women can join, is currently being pursued for a human rights breach for not allowing "transwomen" to join. The very aggressive complaint demands that she should be re-educated, should immediately open up her app to all self-identified "women" and should police women's posts to eliminate anything that might cause hurty-feelings in the male "women".
It might well be chucked out as a nonsense, one would hope so, but who knows these days. Even if it is though, it's costing her a lot of money and a lot of stress right now.
I think this quote from The Terminator could be applied to the idea of finding a reasonable accommodation with trans-activists:
Rolfe
Adult human female
Yes.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Here's another one.
Team GB cycling stars face losing their Olympics places after a trans woman, 21, announced she would now compete in female events
This one is still winning prizes in men's events while suppressing his testosterone. He's now done that for long enough that he's eligible to switch to women's events, and that has been the plan all along.
I still have my doubts that any man with no feelings of autogynaephilia pushing him towards embracing a female "identity" would do this just for the winning, but for the ones who do have a tendency in that direction - and it's not that rare - the prizes and the "stunning and brave" lionisation aren't exactly going to deter them.
Team GB cycling stars face losing their Olympics places after a trans woman, 21, announced she would now compete in female events
This one is still winning prizes in men's events while suppressing his testosterone. He's now done that for long enough that he's eligible to switch to women's events, and that has been the plan all along.
I still have my doubts that any man with no feelings of autogynaephilia pushing him towards embracing a female "identity" would do this just for the winning, but for the ones who do have a tendency in that direction - and it's not that rare - the prizes and the "stunning and brave" lionisation aren't exactly going to deter them.
Last edited:
I feel sorry for all woman athletes
Rolfe
Adult human female
It's a mess. They're not only losing out on team places and prizes, they're being gaslit to accept these men as equally entitled to be in the events as they are, and celebrate them as "stunning and brave". The officials have been completely captured. One woman official was quoted (possibly in the Thomas case?) as saying "I will never support a cis-woman against a woman." The girls are being vilified as transphobes for being uncomfortable with it all.
And people are surprised when we point out that "cis-woman" is offensive?
And people are surprised when we point out that "cis-woman" is offensive?
The terminology was created for activism, and this is how activism works. You identify a stand in for the bourgeoisie who you claim has unearned privilege, and you identify a stand in for the proletariat who you claim are oppressed. Cis-women are just the kulaks of this particular movement.
I think you might be thinking of the quote from the ACLU, when a parent of one of the Ivy League swimmers who competed against L. Thomas contacted them. (Imo it’s even worse that the statement came from the ACLU)
This is the interview with that parent: https://www.youtube.com/embed/O6ihN79Kk-c
She starts talking about this around the 3:30 mark, explaining that she was very careful with her terminology; she wanted to be respectful but she also thought there had to be a better, more fair way to handle this than by robbing the biological women (her term) of fair competition.
- Status