Cont: Transwomen are not women part XII (also merged)

[JoeMorgue]

Fine not "arbitrary" but "exist only to create subcategories for people who otherwise could not will have a chance at winning" if that doesn't set people off as much, my point remains the same.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yeah, the divisions between men's and women's sports are purely arbitrary aren't they

It's arbitrary in the sense that we don't need to separate at all. Joe is right about that. We don't need to separate boxing into weight classes either.

But we (as in society broadly) want to. We find value in sex segregation in sports. And the thing is, trans athletes are not challenging the existence of this segregation. They only want special exemptions from this segregation. But this segregation isn't based upon gender, it's based upon sex. It's justified because there are huge differences in the athletic performance of males and females. And that's key: the choice to segregate by sex may be arbitrary in the sense that nothing requires any segregation at all, but arbitrary doesn't mean unjustified. The performance difference is real, and it does provide justification, and making exceptions based on gender identity doesn't meet that justification.

 

[Sherkeu]

Fine not "arbitrary" but "exist only to create subcategories for people who otherwise could not will have a chance at winning" if that doesn't set people off as much, my point remains the same.

In that case, 'human' is also an arbitrary category. Surely our mammalian friends on the planet can compete as well. They are sentient beings with unique talents instructed by their dna. Why exclude them? Because they are built differently? Becaquse there are some obvious advantages? I mean the dolphins with always swim faster unless they are in the old or injured category, but who really cares about categories of winning? Let them play!!!
So long and thanks for all the fish...

 

[smartcooky]

In that case, 'human' is also an arbitrary category. Surely our mammalian friends on the planet can compete as well. They are sentient beings with unique talents instructed by their dna. Why exclude them? Because they are built differently? Becaquse there are some obvious advantages? I mean the dolphins with always swim faster unless they are in the old or injured category, but who really cares about categories of winning? Let them play!!!
So long and thanks for all the fish...

Well played!!

 

[d4m10n]

Lesbians not interested in dating trans women can very easily avoid talking to any trans women on a dating app by simply not approving their profiles.

They could do it even more easily if devs were allowed to deploy apps designed exclusively for females seeking females. I'm guessing you'd prefer to make this illegal, but thus far you've avoided taking a stance, for whatever reason.

 

[Cain]

They could do it even more easily if devs were allowed to deploy apps designed exclusively for females seeking females. I'm guessing you'd prefer to make this illegal, but thus far you've avoided taking a stance, for whatever reason.

People don't know what they want in a partner, especially women. Maybe some paternalism is in order.

 

[Sherkeu]

People don't know what they want in a partner, especially women. Maybe some paternalism is in order.

To be fair, I dont think most of the old-school trans women would even try to 'convince' a lesbian that they were phobic for not acquiescing to "lady penis".
From the ones that have been out for decades, they seem to have a common-sense view on themselves and their relation to women.

The paternalism and misogyny though in this thread should panic any woman who reads it. (Granted, many men, like you, in here DO get it, as least logically, as best they can as they have no experience being women)

These days the post-gay-marriage activist companies/philanthropies want segregated groups to converge with the fundraising minority-of-the-day---Trans.
It is NOT LGBTQA+ community, however the media wants to combine them all as if laws are mentioning everyone. It is just T. Only T. Self-genderizing is the one thing upsetting the whole apple cart and the other letters would be doing us a favor to distance from them. "T" is not like the others. T used to be understood but now can be literally anyone at all...no rules, no safeguards for my kids.

Trans 'men'? No one seems concerned about them. Females have been allowed to 'try' to join the male teams for a long time here. Not many make it.
Once in a while you hear of a female football (gridiron) kicker making a team and it makes the local news headline. The exception sort of proves the rule here.

As for trans women? An emboldened and growing number of 'fetish' men have appeared out publicly as 'women' - safe coming out now vs the actual more discreet transsexuals of 20yrs ago who mostly had actual body dismorphia.

This is a problem for actual women. Biological females.
We notice.
It went too far.
We won't allow it.
Like I said before, it was good as it was, and now the legitimate trans people that biological women accepted in certain spaces- at least in western countries- will suffer from the mania of the activist and fetish ones that want unfettered access in all spaces, everywhere, at any age, just by saying 'I am a woman". Self ID.

Biology won't be kind to a change like this. At this point men and women are still men and women and not some Brave New World combo manipulated with propaganda. It's not as easy as in a book.

Even so, it has repercussions that grow as media and governmental acceptance grows. We see it in the sports already. Years ago: "It wont happen! It's such a small number! Women are fine!" The 'wont happen' has now happened. Many times ...and more by the day.

My athletic teen, the other students, their parents, her coaches....we all agree. Even in this state of California, where trans participation is legal, the girls will leave the public team and focus on the private one created last year. No question about it.

 

[lionking]

To be fair, I dont think most of the old-school trans women would even try to 'convince' a lesbian that they were phobic for not acquiescing to "lady penis".
From the ones that have been out for decades, they seem to have a common-sense view on themselves and their relation to women.

The paternalism and misogyny though in this thread should panic any woman who reads it. (Granted, many men, like you, in here DO get it, as least logically, as best they can as they have no experience being women)

These days the post-gay-marriage activist companies/philanthropies want segregated groups to converge with the fundraising minority-of-the-day---Trans.
It is NOT LGBTQA+ community, however the media wants to combine them all as if laws are mentioning everyone. It is just T. Only T. Self-genderizing is the one thing upsetting the whole apple cart and the other letters would be doing us a favor to distance from them. "T" is not like the others. T used to be understood but now can be literally anyone at all...no rules, no safeguards for my kids.

Trans 'men'? No one seems concerned about them. Females have been allowed to 'try' to join the male teams for a long time here. Not many make it.
Once in a while you hear of a female football (gridiron) kicker making a team and it makes the local news headline. The exception sort of proves the rule here.

As for trans women? An emboldened and growing number of 'fetish' men have appeared out publicly as 'women' - safe coming out now vs the actual more discreet transsexuals of 20yrs ago who mostly had actual body dismorphia.

This is a problem for actual women. Biological females.
We notice.
It went too far.
We won't allow it.
Like I said before, it was good as it was, and now the legitimate trans people that biological women accepted in certain spaces- at least in western countries- will suffer from the mania of the activist and fetish ones that want unfettered access in all spaces, everywhere, at any age, just by saying 'I am a woman". Self ID.

Biology won't be kind to a change like this. At this point men and women are still men and women and not some Brave New World combo manipulated with propaganda. It's not as easy as in a book.

Even so, it has repercussions that grow as media and governmental acceptance grows. We see it in the sports already. Years ago: "It wont happen! It's such a small number! Women are fine!" The 'wont happen' has now happened. Many times ...and more by the day.

My athletic teen, the other students, their parents, her coaches....we all agree. Even in this state of California, where trans participation is legal, the girls will leave the public team and focus on the private one created last year. No question about it.

Excellent post. The fact that some people in this thread seem to think all that is not important compared to the "rights" of trans women is very telling.

 

[Brainster]

People don't know what they want in a partner, especially women.

Freud observed this.

 

[angrysoba]

I know this thread is quite contentious, so how about a quick laugh.

Lance Armstrong has entered the debate and has some serious thoughts about ethics and fairness in competition:



https://www.mediaite.com/sports/lance-armstrong-wants-to-join-the-trans-athlete-debate-citing-curiosity-about-the-fairness-twitter-promptly-reminds-him-of-his-cheating-scandal/

To be fair, Lance Armstrong's cheating can indeed be seen as a good analogy for transwomen in sports. In both cases we are talking about athletes who benefit from excess testosterone that would not have been available to them.

I think sports is a pretty clear-cut example of where the answer has to be, sorry, transgender athletes cannot compete in women's pro-sports where being transgender is obviously in and of itself likely to be an advatange.

It seems clear that that goes for strength sports and endurance sports.

For chess, darts and snooker, I don't see any reason why it should be.

 

[Brainster]

Fine not "arbitrary" but "exist only to create subcategories for people who otherwise could not will have a chance at winning" if that doesn't set people off as much, my point remains the same.

We could come up with a term for people who otherwise could not have a chance of winning in almost any sport you can name: Women. Other, that is, than the new types of women (with a cock and balls), who are setting new records for women, giving hope that one day another woman can win the decathlon, the way Caitlyn Jenner did back in 1976.

 

[smartcooky]

We could come up with a term for people who otherwise could not have a chance of winning in almost any sport you can name: Women. Other, that is, than the new types of women (with a cock and balls), who are setting new records for women, giving hope that one day another woman can win the decathlon, the way Caitlyn Jenner did back in 1976.

Ooooh, snide.... but fair!

 

[Brainster]

To be fair, Lance Armstrong's cheating can indeed be seen as a good analogy for transwomen in sports. In both cases we are talking about athletes who benefit from excess testosterone that would not have been available to them.

I think sports is a pretty clear-cut example of where the answer has to be, sorry, transgender athletes cannot compete in women's pro-sports where being transgender is obviously in and of itself likely to be an advatange.

It seems clear that that goes for strength sports and endurance sports.

For chess, darts and snooker, I don't see any reason why it should be.

Darts are projectiles in motion; males are better at judging that than females because they have so much experience aiming their urine at the toilet. In snooker height does matter to a point and then becomes a problem again. On chess, I know people hate hearing it but Lawrence Summers was right; one of the consequences of males having greater standard deviations in their intelligence is that they tend to be clustered at the top end of intellectual endeavors, whether we're talking about the faculty at Harvard or chess grandmasters or the final table at the World Series of Poker.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

They could do it even more easily if devs were allowed to deploy apps designed exclusively for females seeking females. I'm guessing you'd prefer to make this illegal, but thus far you've avoided taking a stance, for whatever reason.

I've largely avoided taking a stance because I'm not at all familiar with Australian law, which seems like necessary knowledge.

Even in US law, I'm not really sure how exactly these kinds of seemingly discriminatory businesses are allowed, such as the women's only gym "Curves" in the US.

Generally speaking I do support laws that criminalize discrimination of this kind in public accommodations.

 

[Samson]

I've largely avoided taking a stance because I'm not at all familiar with Australian law, which seems like necessary knowledge.

Even in US law, I'm not really sure how exactly these kinds of seemingly discriminatory businesses are allowed, such as the women's only gym "Curves" in the US.

Generally speaking I do support laws that criminalize discrimination of this kind in public accommodations.

Have you the remotest idea of what criminalizing entails?
Have you been charged with a crime you had to defend?
It is serious stuff that should be reserved for the gravest sins.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Have you the remotest idea of what criminalizing entails?
Have you been charged with a crime you had to defend?
It is serious stuff that should be reserved for the gravest sins.

Boo hoo, the AG told me I can't run my discriminatory business anymore without getting sued into dust.

 

[Samson]

Meanwhile the exemplary activist Stella O'Malley throws only light and no heat on the insanity in this fresh clip

https://youtu.be/TeFTUPag5TQ

 

[lionking]

I've largely avoided taking a stance because I'm not at all familiar with Australian law, which seems like necessary knowledge.

Even in US law, I'm not really sure how exactly these kinds of seemingly discriminatory businesses are allowed, such as the women's only gym "Curves" in the US.

Generally speaking I do support laws that criminalize discrimination of this kind in public accommodations.

A privately run gym is a public accommodation? If US laws hold this to be true they are even more stupid than I originally thought. And I originally thought them monumentally stupid.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

A privately run gym is a public accommodation? If US laws hold this to be true they are even more stupid than I originally thought. And I originally thought them monumentally stupid.

Yes, obviously. A huge part of the civil rights movement was to make this kind of discrimination in privately held venues illegal. Maybe off topic here to discuss whether or not it's a government overreach to forcibly desegregate a private diner or movie theatre against the wishes of the racist owners.

Is this not the case in Australia or in Europe? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[Myriad]

Reactionary bigots in 1923: "Anyone who organizes a females-only club should be thrown in jail."

Progressive bigots in 2023: "Anyone who organizes a females-only club should be thrown in jail."