Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

[lionking]

Olympic equestrian sports
Horse racing
Rifle and pistol shooting
Pool, Snooker, Billiards

Im not so sure about that. Power shots are important at breaks. Men have an advantage..

 

[Olmstead]

Olympic equestrian sports
Horse racing
Rifle and pistol shooting
Pool, Snooker, Billiards

Many of those are debatable. More strength means more control, which means a greater and more consistent accuracy.

 

[d4m10n]

And if you read my post properly you will note that I was talking about any situation where segregation is enforced by regulation or law.

I am still waiting for someone to come up with a situation where it is important to make an enforceable distinction on the basis of gender identity rather than sex.

Okay, you're looking for situations in which government (at some level) makes a legally significant distinction between people who identify as women and people who identify as men and people who identify otherwise. The most obvious example (IMO) would have to be driver's licenses and passports. Granted, this is a relatively new legal trend, but it has been gaining traction for some time now.

 

[Rolfe]

Okay, you're looking for situations in which government (at some level) makes a legally significant distinction between people who identify as women and people who identify as men and people who identify otherwise. The most obvious example (IMO) would have to be driver's licenses and passports. Granted, this is a relatively new legal trend, but it has been gaining traction for some time now.

That's not segregation. These are just ID documents. ID documents can say what they like, what we're arguing about is whether actual legal or regulatory mandated segregation should be done on such an ID marker (no) or on the physical reality of sex (yes).

There is still no situation I can think of where it is appropriate to mandate segregation of people on the grounds of their "gender identity" rather than their sex.

 

[Emily's Cat]

This is the only part where I disagree. I see no problem with trans-gender athletes competing in sports and games where physiological attributes are not a factor, such a ball table sports (snooker, billiards, pool), equestrian sports & horse Racing, car racing and rallying, croquet and rifle shooting.

I don't think any of us disagree with you on that. There are many, many situations (outside of sports as well) where physical biological differences are irrelevant. And in those situations, it does not matter and pretty much nobody cares (except some serious religious fundamentalists, which is an entirely different argument). In situations where sex matters... Well, #SexMatters.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Well, the desire to transcend such limitations has a long history. Transhumanism etc... I know you won't agree, but I see your desire for a society without gender roles, or without sex based stereotypes to be an analogous attempt to escape these limits. Clearly reality is still there. At the moment, I don't think the question is so much whether reality can be escaped, but how much damage can be done in a futile quest to escape it. A society is a complicated thing. If the harm is only women getting pushed out of sports, some sexual assaults, and a bunch of children needlessly sterilised, I think we are getting off lightly.

I really wish you would stop making assumptions about what I believe and what I desire.

Given that we are a sexually dysmorphic species, and that our brains are strongly wired for pattern recognition, there will *always* be some element of sex-based stereotypes.

What I want, is for those stereotypes to be descriptive, not prescriptive. It's fine to say that, in general, females are more empathetic and caring than males of the human species. It's true. What is NOT fine, in my view, is to extend that and say "therefore females shouldn't hold any positions that require them to set aside care in order to make logical decisions". Or to extend it to "therefore females should stick with child-rearing and care-giving roles in society and be barred from anything else".

Do you see the difference there?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Im not so sure about that. Power shots are important at breaks. Men have an advantage..

Also arm length can make a big difference in a lot of shots.

 

[d4m10n]

That's not segregation. These are just ID documents. ID documents can say what they like, what we're arguing about is whether actual legal or regulatory mandated segregation should be done on such an ID marker (no) or on the physical reality of sex (yes).

Where I live, most instances of real world sex segregation are in the hands of private organizations such as the NCAA or YMCA or what-have-you. Only a handful of conservative states have thought to create laws to reinforce these policies, and I cannot endorse the inflexible approach those states have taken, which criminalizes trans men for using the facilities which match their outward appearance.

 

[Rolfe]

Where I live, most instances of real world sex segregation are in the hands of private organizations such as the NCAA or YMCA or what-have-you. Only a handful of conservative states have thought to create laws to reinforce these policies, and I cannot endorse the inflexible approach those states have taken, which criminalizes trans men for using the facilities which match their outward appearance.

Well, you know my position on that.

 

[theprestige]

Where I live, most instances of real world sex segregation are in the hands of private organizations such as the NCAA or YMCA or what-have-you. Only a handful of conservative states have thought to create laws to reinforce these policies, and I cannot endorse the inflexible approach those states have taken, which criminalizes trans men for using the facilities which match their outward appearance.

Another way to look at it is that they criminalize trans men for intruding on safe spaces legally set aside for women.

I think?

Are you saying trans men have the outward appearance of women, and are being criminalized for using the women's restroom?

Do you have an example of such a legal situation?

Also, I think you may be begging the question that trans men commonly have the outward appearance of women. And the question that trans-activism generally requires some conformity to gender stereotypes in appearance, in order to qualify for trans-inclusion.

 

[smartcooky]

Also arm length can make a big difference in a lot of shots.

Sure, height and arm length can give you advantage, but that equally applies within the same sex. Alex Higgins was 5ft 7½in, but that never made him uncompetitive with 6ft 3in Steve Davis whom he beat regularly. female Swedish-American lady Pool player Ewa Lawrence is 6ft 3in, Allison Fisher is 5ft 7in, yet they have regularly beaten each other, and regularly won.
in competition against top male players.

Where male musculoskeletal or cardiopulmonary factors come into play is sports like athletics. I hesitate to bring up mile times here D), but so far, in the history of athletics, 1,4971,663 people have run sub-four minute miles... all of them male. The current men's world record for the mile is 3min 43sec... the women's is 4min 12sec... almost 30 sec slower. Allow men who identify as women to compete against women in sports such as these, and women's sports will lose all credibility.

 

[d4m10n]

Another way to look at it is that they criminalize trans men for intruding on safe spaces legally set aside for women.

Trans men were born female.

They are legally required to use spaces set aside for women in certain states.

 

[LondonJohn]

This is complete rubbish by the way. Swimming classes have always been separated by sex, not gender. There was never any obligation or duty on FINA to allow males into the female events pending the gathering of evidence to prove the bleedin' obvious.

These testosterone-lowering requirements were more or less picked out of thin air to appease these fragile snowflake men who seem to think that the purpose of women's sports it to validate their delusions, because FINA, like other sports, was terrified of the backlash from the trans lobby if they didn't find a way to let them in. There's nothing worse these days than being labelled transphobic! Basically, they caved.

They seem to have been hoping that somehow it would all work out, but the spectacle of a 22-year-old man winning a race by a margin of 32 seconds even with the prescribed testosterone suppression probably concentrated a few minds.

It was never going to work, it never could work, but some heads were buried in the sand.

Your assessment is entirely incorrect. No international sports administration authority would ever have arbitrarily banned (nor will ever ban) transwomen from competing in the women's category*.

In order to instigate bans, it has always been wholly necessary to take those decisions on evidence-based assessments. That held true for Caster Semanya competing in women's events. That held true for Oscar Pistorius competing in able-bodied men's events. And it is holding true - across a whole variety of international sports administration bodies - for transwomen competing in women's categories.


(Can you perhaps guess what might have happened if, say, FINA had arbitrarily banned transwomen from women's swimming prior to gathering sufficient relevant evidence?)


* Unless there were reasonable injury/safety-related concerns

 

[LondonJohn]

I don't really care how it is "defined". No matter what term you use, no matter how draped in euphemism and obfuscating language... at the end of the day, reality exists. And in reality, males and females are different, and those differences CANNOT be transcended.

One of the most frustrating aspects of this discussion (everywhere, not just ISF) is that a whole lot of people seem to believe that they can just wave their hands around and redefine reality out of being. As if the mere act of calling a dog a cat transforms them into a feline.
Words have the meaning we give them. Reality doesn't give a **** about what words we use.

So, per this, does it logically lead to the inference that your point of view is also a blanket rejection of the fundamental validity of transgender identity?

 

[Rolfe]

Your assessment is entirely incorrect. No international sports administration authority would ever have arbitrarily banned (nor will ever ban) transwomen from competing in the women's category*.

In order to instigate bans, it has always been wholly necessary to take those decisions on evidence-based assessments. That held true for Caster Semanya competing in women's events. That held true for Oscar Pistorius competing in able-bodied men's events. And it is holding true - across a whole variety of international sports administration bodies - for transwomen competing in women's categories.


(Can you perhaps guess what might have happened if, say, FINA had arbitrarily banned transwomen from women's swimming prior to gathering sufficient relevant evidence?)

* Unless there were reasonable injury/safety-related concerns

You were asserting that FINA were in some way prohibited or not able to refuse male competitors entry into the female events prior to some sort of investigation being undertaken. This was not and is not the case. FINA were always perfectly at liberty to uphold the sex-based classification of these events and there was no power that could have prevented them.

What they actually did was something different, of course. They caved to the crybullies of the trans lobby out of fear of being called names. The fact that this is what they did cannot however be used as proof that they had no alternative.

 

[Rolfe]

So, per this, does it logically lead to the inference that your point of view is also a blanket rejection of the fundamental validity of transgender identity?

That rather depends on what you mean by "transgender identity", but from what I can gather you mean by it, then yes. Absolutely.

A male cannot become a female, a man cannot become a woman, not ever. Or vice versa. That is the nature of reality. Just as you can call a dog a cat if you like but it will always be a dog, you can call a man a woman but he will always be a man.

There is another way of regarding "transgender identity", as the performance of the perceived social role of the opposite sex, which quite obviously happens, people do it, so in that sense it's "valid". But actually, this whole concept of "valid" in this context seems vacuous to the point of incoherence. People are the way they are and behave the way they behave and whether you put a label "valid" on this is neither here nor there.

But there is no possible way in which a human being can become the opposite sex to the one they were conceived as.

 

[theprestige]

Trans men were born female.

They are legally required to use spaces set aside for women in certain states.

Whichever states? What laws? How is their corresponding outward appearance legally defined?

ETA: Ah, I see my mistake. Yes, transmen being legally required to sex segregate as women makes more sense.

 

[theprestige]

So, per this, does it logically lead to the inference that your point of view is also a blanket rejection of the fundamental validity of transgender identity?

Not speaking for Emily's Cat.

I think transgender identity is perfectly valid, but essentially meaningless for public policy. Like fursonas, or fandom.

On the other hand, I think transsexual identity is completely invalid, but very meaningful in terms of public policy.

And of course I think that when we talk about trans identity, trans rights, and trans accommodations in public policy, we should stop to consider whether we're actually talking about transsexual identity.

 

[LondonJohn]

You were asserting that FINA were in some way prohibited or not able to refuse male competitors entry into the female events prior to some sort of investigation being undertaken. This was not and is not the case. FINA were always perfectly at liberty to uphold the sex-based classification of these events and there was no power that could have prevented them.

What they actually did was something different, of course. They caved to the crybullies of the trans lobby out of fear of being called names. The fact that this is what they did cannot however be used as proof that they had no alternative.

What "lobby" did the IAAF and IOC "cave in" to when they made their original provisional decision to allow Semanya to compete in the women's category?

Oh and I never talked about "prohibition" or "power to prevent". FINA could, for example, arbitrarily impose a ban on all male swimmers over 5ft 10 in height if they wanted to. Nothing would stop them from doing so, and they'd have the power and authority to enforce such a ban in all events that they controlled. But of course they'd very soon a) find themselves up in court in multiple national and transnational (eg CAS) jurisdictions regarding the fairness and proportionality of such a ban, and b) severely tarnish their reputation for competence and evidence-based administration.

QED

 

[shuttlt]

What "lobby" did the IAAF and IOC "cave in" to when they made their original provisional decision to allow Semanya to compete in the women's category?

Oh and I never talked about "prohibition" or "power to prevent". FINA could, for example, arbitrarily impose a ban on all male swimmers over 5ft 10 in height if they wanted to. Nothing would stop them from doing so, and they'd have the power and authority to enforce such a ban in all events that they controlled. But of course they'd very soon a) find themselves up in court in multiple national and transnational (eg CAS) jurisdictions regarding the fairness and proportionality of such a ban, and b) severely tarnish their reputation for competence and evidence-based administration.

QED

I think if one looks into it, there was a lot of pressure and dissembling from the athletic establishment in South Africa. That said, I basically agree with most of your post. It is very hard to do a blanket ban on trans-women. The push to include them seems to me to be entirely consistent with the rights based international legalism that has developed since WW2.