• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
mumblethrax said:
I didn't say they were advocating it. They're enacting it.
Click to expand...

No, they aren't.

And I rather think the people who think there's a conspiracy to replace women with men, driven by the same extinction anxieties that serve as an organizing principle for other replacement theories, are a bit frothier than I am.
Click to expand...

I don't think this description applies to anyone in this thread.
 
The NCAA has already been persuaded by that. They're not "nobody in particular", last time I checked.
Click to expand...
You think she said "I'm a woman so I should compete as a woman" and the NCAA said "Ok?"
 
Last edited:
mumblethrax said:
No, they weren't.

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out...-becomes-target-transphobic-rhetoric-rcna9074

They were persuaded in large part by sympathy generated by transphobic attacks on her.
Click to expand...
That narrative can always be played. It will always be possible to say "people said mean things". Mean things were said about the people who complained, does that mean that they were in the right and Lia Thompson should be dropped because of what people on her side did? This is a one way argument. It only works if you have already picked your side.

Second, it includes the equivocation of saying calling using her old name and implying that her performance may have been to do with being born male is transphobic. "phobic" is another thing where the definition has changed in a way that is remarkably convenient to the same people who want to change the meaning of "woman".

mumblethrax said:
Which is one reason why it's stupid and counter-productive to do this ****. Americans by and large are sympathetic to trans rights, but not terribly sympathetic to the idea of transwomen participating in women's athletics. But if you're an ******* about it....
Click to expand...
To not be accused of being transphobic, one would have to not talk about how Lia Thomas was born male and complain about it. The only way to avoid claims of transphobia is to agree with transactivists.

What could one actually do to oppose Lia Thomas that would not get described as hateful transphobia and thereby lose in your analysis? Remember the sexist comments to the Ghostbusters 2016 trailer that was used to paint its critics as misogynists. Was that even a tenth of a percent of the comments? How is this a winnable standard? This is "heads I win, tails you lose" stuff.
 
d4m10n said:
Certainly the NCAA didn't provide an alternative explanation here, we can safely assume the linguistic/cultural shift drove them to ignore the relevant sports science.
Click to expand...
They established a trans-inclusive policy in 2010 and she transitioned in 2019 so it seems unlikely.
 
Last edited:
mumblethrax said:
No, that's not the argument that swayed them.
Click to expand...

Oh? What was it then? I am sincerely hoping there is some other argument that makes sense and squares the circle of trans identity in sex-segregated contexts.

And phrasing aside, that was in fact the practical application and result: Thomas said she identified as a woman and wanted to compete as a woman, and the NCAA said "OK". Whatever it was they were swayed by, in practical terms it amounts to exactly that argument. Or something else entirely different that somehow arrives at the same practical result through a completely different line of reasoning that nobody has yet elucidated.

So. What argument to do you believe it was, that swayed the NCAA in Thomas's case?
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Oh? What was it then? I am sincerely hoping there is some other argument that makes sense and squares the circle of trans identity in sex-segregated contexts.
Click to expand...
Basically "we don't have evidence that transwomen have a competitive advantage after one year of testosterone dissipation."

I guess they have pretty good evidence now.

And phrasing aside, that was in fact the practical application and result: Thomas said she identified as a woman and wanted to compete as a woman, and the NCAA said "OK".
Click to expand...
Well, no. She's participating under rules that were already established. That's not really on her.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
...because identity > reality.

Once you've assented to the linguistic shift, you have to accept all the consequences thereof.
Click to expand...
It should probably be said that sex-segregated athletics aren't woven into the fabric of the universe. It's more like "social reality changing."
 
Last edited:
mumblethrax said:
Basically "we don't have evidence that transwomen have a competitive advantage after one year of testosterone dissipation."

I guess they have pretty good evidence now.


Well, no. She's participating under rules that were already established. That's not really on her.
Click to expand...

Sophistry. On both your part and the NCAA's.

Of course Lia's choice to participate as a woman is on her. If she'd wanted to continue competing with the men the NCAA wouldn't have stopped her.
 
theprestige said:
Of course Lia's choice to participate as a woman is on her. If she'd wanted to continue competing with the men the NCAA wouldn't have stopped her.
Click to expand...
No, not sophistry. In general, it's a bad idea to punish people for following the established rules. It's not material that she had a choice.
 
mumblethrax said:
Basically "we don't have evidence that transwomen have a competitive advantage after one year of testosterone dissipation."
Click to expand...
Why one year instead of one day? They didn't have any evidence of how long it takes for hormone replacement to even the proverbial playing field, assuming it actually does at some point.

I think it's fair to assume the NCAA was allowing identity to override other considerations, such as fairness.
 
Last edited:
Well I've written before about my total lack of respect for "athletes" who intentionally downgrade their bodies to compete at a level below their true physical ability. As far as I'm concerned, Thomas and her ilk are scumbags for doing it, and the NCAA is scumbags for allowing it instead of repudiating it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom