Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

[Emily's Cat]

Don't you think you're being a bit presumptuous here?

No. They are being realistic.

In the real world, we are all aware that there are material physical differences between males and females. It's only in fantasy land where everyone is totally androgynous and females have an equal chance to beat males in athletic performances.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Do you have numbers then? I know trans women get all the headlines, but that's hardly a reliable way to survey the population. Are there more trans girls trying to play K-12 sports than trans boys?

Numbers of what? The numbers of transgender identified females that are NOT getting spots on male teams?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I’m pretty sure recalling you saying that you would accept transwomen that pass well enough for women into women’s spaces. Pejic would be one of those in my opinion.

I personally as an individual would be willing to make accomodations in many situations. That is not at all the same as supporting a blanket legal policy to that effect.

More to the point... those few transgender identified males who manage to pass well enough to not be clocked as male... well, they're not going to get clocked as male.

Also, settle down a bit. I have spoken to many women about this.

I really, really, really hope that was intended to be humorous.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

And how successful do you think post puberty trans boys would be in athletic competitions against boys? How many would get anywhere near scholarships?

You really do not know much about this issue.

Why are you narrowing things to post puberty? Hormone blockers and pre-puberty transition isn't exactly unheard of, and seems likely in the nearish future to be a very common path for trans youth.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Numbers of what? The numbers of transgender identified females that are NOT getting spots on male teams?

I was pretty clear. Any data on the gender breakdown of trans youth participating in school sports? How many trans boys vs trans girls are participating in school athletics? The implication (to my reading) of your comments is that it's fairly lopsided.

 

[Ziggurat]

Why are you narrowing things to post puberty?

Because that's when the differences are most pronounced.

Hormone blockers and pre-puberty transition isn't exactly unheard of, and seems likely in the nearish future to be a very common path for trans youth.

Considering the havoc it does to their health, I hope not. But the trans activists don't accept allowing transgirls and transwomen who haven't gone through puberty to compete against females but prohibiting those who have from competing. That's not an acceptable compromise to them. So that's what the debate is going to focus on.

 

[theprestige]

Why are you narrowing things to post puberty? Hormone blockers and pre-puberty transition isn't exactly unheard of, and seems likely in the nearish future to be a very common path for trans youth.

The open question of whether transgenderism can actually occur in prepubescent children is a whole other can of worms that probably deserves its own thread.

 

[d4m10n]

The open question of whether transgenderism can actually occur in prepubescent children is a whole other can of worms that probably deserves its own thread.

It would be quite something if every single diagnosis of gender dysphoria in prepubescent patients was incorrect.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[theprestige]

It would be quite something if every single diagnosis of gender dysphoria in prepubescent patients was incorrect.

It would indeed be quite something. It also wouldn't surprise me.

Perhaps one could start with the open question of how prevalent it actually is, and how many of the "patients" being "treated" have actually been diagnosed.

Trans affirmation via normalization of fiat self-ID has made a dog's breakfast of any serious attempt at gathering valid statistics about whatever medical condition might in fact be manifesting in prepubescent children.

This plus the ideological capture of the medical community is what makes it an open question whether it's actually happening at all at anything like the claimed rate. It also make it an open question whether prepubescent gender dysphoria (where it actually exists) is not best treated by allowing puberty to run its course.

Anyway, these issues probably deserve their own thread.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It would indeed be quite something. It also wouldn't surprise me.

Perhaps one could start with the open question of how prevalent it actually is, and how many of the "patients" being "treated" have actually been diagnosed.

Trans affirmation via normalization of fiat self-ID has made a dog's breakfast of any serious attempt at gathering valid statistics about whatever medical condition might in fact be manifesting in prepubescent children.

This plus the ideological capture of the medical community is what makes it an open question whether it's actually happening at all at anything like the claimed rate. It also make it an open question whether prepubescent gender dysphoria (where it actually exists) is not best treated by allowing puberty to run its course.

Anyway, these issues probably deserve their own thread.

Many issues discussed here probably deserve their own thread. Is it still mod policy that all issues related to transgender people be quarantined here?

 

[theprestige]

Many issues discussed here probably deserve their own thread. Is it still mod policy that all issues related to transgender people be quarantined here?

You'll have to ask the mods. I was trying to explain why I'm content to focus on public policy issues relating to adult transwomen in this thread. Because questions of transgenderism in prepubescent children really is a whole other can of worms.

---

Anyway, fiat self-ID is a piss-poor basis for transcending sex segregation.

There are obvious, rational reasons for sex segregation in sports, prisons, and a few other venues.

Pointing these things out is not transphobia. Ignoring or dismissing these things is misogyny.

"But what about transmen?" is a red herring, intended to avoid substantive discussion of these things.

"But what about prepubescent children?" is a red herring, intended to avoid substantive discussion of these things.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Why are you narrowing things to post puberty?

Because pre-puberty, the athletic differences between males and females are relatively small. Duh.

Hormone blockers and pre-puberty transition isn't exactly unheard of, and seems likely in the nearish future to be a very common path for trans youth.

That doesn't negate the differences between males and females.

Puberty blockers only block the pituitary aspect of puberty, not the adrenal aspect. Height, hand and foot size, lung and heart capacity, etc. are predominantly driven by the adrenal, not the pituitary.

A male will still have a male pelvis and attachment points, as well as greater height and lung capacity, even if given cross-sex hormones through the entirety of their puberty.

Females are not just "males without testosterone". We have fundamental differences in our body structure.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I was pretty clear. Any data on the gender breakdown of trans youth participating in school sports? How many trans boys vs trans girls are participating in school athletics? The implication (to my reading) of your comments is that it's fairly lopsided.

To the best of my knowledge, it IS lopsided. Transgender identified males gain spots on female teams, displacing female participants. Transgender identified females do NOT gain spots on male teams, and are more likely to remain on female teams - depending on whether they're taking testosterone and how the school deals with that.

I'll also note that a whole lot of females identify as "nonbinary" rather than as "men". And they continue to play on female teams.

At the end of the day, females are not competitive against males, and their subjective internal feelings about themselves don't change that.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

To the best of my knowledge, it IS lopsided. Transgender identified males gain spots on female teams, displacing female participants. Transgender identified females do NOT gain spots on male teams, and are more likely to remain on female teams - depending on whether they're taking testosterone and how the school deals with that.

I'll also note that a whole lot of females identify as "nonbinary" rather than as "men". And they continue to play on female teams.

At the end of the day, females are not competitive against males, and their subjective internal feelings about themselves don't change that.

Great, glad we have an understanding of the issue. Got any data to support this?

 

[Ziggurat]

I'll also note that a whole lot of females identify as "nonbinary" rather than as "men".

Which mostly seems to mean they don't like gender stereotypes but they're still absolutely female. Why we need to call that "nonbinary" is beyond me.

 

[Samson]

It would indeed be quite something. It also wouldn't surprise me.

Perhaps one could start with the open question of how prevalent it actually is, and how many of the "patients" being "treated" have actually been diagnosed.

Trans affirmation via normalization of fiat self-ID has made a dog's breakfast of any serious attempt at gathering valid statistics about whatever medical condition might in fact be manifesting in prepubescent children.

This plus the ideological capture of the medical community is what makes it an open question whether it's actually happening at all at anything like the claimed rate. It also make it an open question whether prepubescent gender dysphoria (where it actually exists) is not best treated by allowing puberty to run its course.

Anyway, these issues probably deserve their own thread.

It is pointed about that blind affirmation of gender confusion is unlike any other approach in psychology or psychiatry, and that it is also unique in carting good physical health to bad physical health.
An appropriate thread could be considered the primary point of a forum of this type.

 

[TomB]

You'll have to ask the mods. I was trying to explain why I'm content to focus on public policy issues relating to adult transwomen in this thread. Because questions of transgenderism in prepubescent children really is a whole other can of worms.

True.

There are a lot of aspects of this topic that could be discussed (mostly seperately.

• How is "trans" diagnosed? How is misdiagnosis prevented?
• Assuming correct diagnosis, what treatments should be available at what age? (Note the assumption of confidence in the diagnostic procedure.)
• Assuming correct diagnosis and in terms of the available treatments, what should be the criteria for eligibility in sports leagues?
• Assuming correct diagnosis and in terms of the available treatments, what criteria is needed for access to Bathrooms? Locker Rooms?
• The above assume good faith and accurate diagnosis. What means can be used to filter out bad faith (voyeurs etc.)?
• Can private organizations that provide services (spas, gyms, shelters) make their own judgments and policies on admission/accommodation? In what cases should they have or not have that power?

It seems like a lot of the time when we talk about policy, we end up talking about diagnosis and treatment. Or arguments/proposals are presented that are calibrated entirely towards either "good faith/accurate diagnosis" or "bad faith/misdiagnosis."

Anyway, fiat self-ID is a piss-poor basis for transcending sex segregation.

Agreed. I have no problem, however, in using whatever pronouns someone wants based on self-id, however.

There are obvious, rational reasons for sex segregation in sports, prisons, and a few other venues.

Agreed. I can, however, see instances where it may be appropriate to make exceptions. I would hate to codify an exact formula, however. I know that's unpopular because it can result in inconsistency, but I think individual cases can be different.

Pointing these things out is not transphobia. Ignoring or dismissing these things is misogyny.

Also true. But in the course of pointing these things out, sometimes language can be used which is needlessly transphobic in tone. (This is not unique to this topic.)

"But what about transmen?" is a red herring, intended to avoid substantive discussion of these things.

Also true. At least in many cases. There are times when bringing trans men into the discussion is appropriate. But they don't face the same issues or have the same impact on men as trans women have on men.

"But what about prepubescent children?" is a red herring, intended to avoid substantive discussion of these things.

Hmmm....
I'm not sure I agree with this. At least not entirely.

For example, I might have a different answer to the sports league question depending on when the onset of treatment was in relation to puberty.

Discussion of puberty status may also affect discussions of diagnosis and treatment options.

But, yes, pre-puberty sports leagues don't need to be segregated.

 

[d4m10n]

Great, glad we have an understanding of the issue. Got any data to support this?

I don't see the point in gathering data if we aren't willing to admit that folks like Hannah Mouncey and Rachel McKinnon and Andraya Yearwood are likely to have a number of physical advantages over their natal female competitors. Without that element of unfairness, why should the numbers matter?

 

[theprestige]

True.

There are a lot of aspects of this topic that could be discussed (mostly seperately.

• How is "trans" diagnosed? How is misdiagnosis prevented?
• Assuming correct diagnosis, what treatments should be available at what age? (Note the assumption of confidence in the diagnostic procedure.)
• Assuming correct diagnosis and in terms of the available treatments, what should be the criteria for eligibility in sports leagues?
• Assuming correct diagnosis and in terms of the available treatments, what criteria is needed for access to Bathrooms? Locker Rooms?
• The above assume good faith and accurate diagnosis. What means can be used to filter out bad faith (voyeurs etc.)?
• Can private organizations that provide services (spas, gyms, shelters) make their own judgments and policies on admission/accommodation? In what cases should they have or not have that power?

It seems like a lot of the time when we talk about policy, we end up talking about diagnosis and treatment. Or arguments/proposals are presented that are calibrated entirely towards either "good faith/accurate diagnosis" or "bad faith/misdiagnosis."

Probably because it's hard to come up with a coherent public policy without having some basis for defining who should be covered by what policy and why.

Way back at the beginning of this thread, my one overarching question was, "if it's not going to be fiat self-ID, then what?" At the time, I naively expected some of the more TRA-inclined critical thinkers on this forum to come up with an answer to that question.

Agreed. I have no problem, however, in using whatever pronouns someone wants based on self-id, however.

I have, over the course of this thread, come to dislike preferred pronouns as a matter of principle.

But it's a relatively minor policy concern, and I don't see any reason to continue debating it here. Not when the sex segregation debate is still in progress.

Agreed. I can, however, see instances where it may be appropriate to make exceptions. I would hate to codify an exact formula, however. I know that's unpopular because it can result in inconsistency, but I think individual cases can be different.

I'd be willing to discuss exceptions, but only in the context of having some agreed-upon rule that is proved by the exception. This is the point we can't quite seem to arrive at.

Also true. But in the course of pointing these things out, sometimes language can be used which is needlessly transphobic in tone. (This is not unique to this topic.)

Tone policing seems pointless. It's not like TRAs are going to agree that transcending sex segregation is a bad idea and should be repudiated, if only we explain it to them in the jargon of Correct Thought. Any synthesis or dialectic that leads to the conclusion that Lia Thomas is wrong to compete as a woman will be condemned as "needlessly transphobic".

Also true. At least in many cases. There are times when bringing trans men into the discussion is appropriate. But they don't face the same issues or have the same impact on men as trans women have on men.

My view is that once the issue of sex segregation of transwomen is addressed, any remaining issues of sex segregation of transmen will be trivially addressable. Mainly due to the lopsided physical disparity between men and women.

Hmmm....
I'm not sure I agree with this. At least not entirely.

For example, I might have a different answer to the sports league question depending on when the onset of treatment was in relation to puberty.

Discussion of puberty status may also affect discussions of diagnosis and treatment options.

But, yes, pre-puberty sports leagues don't need to be segregated.

Fair enough. I will say that issues of sex segregation of pubescent transgirls are probably trivially addressable once the issues of sex segregation of transwomen are addressed.

My overarching premises being:

1. Resolving the public policy debate about sex segregation of transwomen will certainly and simply resolve similar sex segregation issues with transmen, trans children, etc.

2. There's a reason why TRAs continue to balk at debating sex segregation policy, on grounds that "transwomen" isn't inclusive enough for them to contribute.

It's an excuse, like saying that language is "needlessly transphobic".

 

[theprestige]

I don't see the point in gathering data if we aren't willing to admit that folks like Hannah Mouncey and Rachel McKinnon and Andraya Yearwood are likely to have a number of physical advantages over their natal female competitors.

This "gathering data" requirement continues to baffle me. It's another red herring. We have over a century of athletic performance data, across a wide range of sports and sports-adjacent activities. It's yet another excuse to avoid actually discussing public policy solutions to the question of sex segregation.