Cont: Transwomen are not women - part 13

[varwoche]

... Trans is pretty rare in itself. Rare enough that we could evaluate on a case-by-case basis and not necessarily needing a blanket ban?

That's highly impractical.

Can we agree that someone who has only socially transitioned is different from someone who has taken hormones or even undergone surgery?

Yes but... I thought this branch of the thread only pertained to men who have physically transitioned. I don't accept the concept of social transition, in much the same way that I don't accept Rachel Whatshername as a black person.

That's kinda my point. if a transwoman is short, slow, and weak, do they still have an unfair advantage that means they shouldn't be allowed to participate?

This would only work if there was the sort of ranking system that Joe proposes. Otherwise it's highly impractical, and tough luck life isn't always fair.

 

[JoeMorgue]

All the solutions seem to reduce back to "Just shut up and let the trans person do whatever they want in any situation and demand zero consistency from either trans person to trans person or even within the trans person themself."

 

[Upchurch]

That's highly impractical.

Why? How many cases do you think we're talking about?

Yes but... I thought this branch of the thread only pertained to men who have physically transitioned.

I'm glad you agree. A lot of the memes out there are literally the Ladyballers panic scenario.

This would only work if there was the sort of ranking system that Joe proposes. Otherwise it's highly impractical, and tough luck life isn't always fair.

I agree with everything except the "highly impractical" part.

 

[Upchurch]

All the solutions seem to reduce back to "Just shut up and let the trans person do whatever they want in any situation and demand zero consistency from either trans person to trans person or even within the trans person themself."

Only if you aren't paying attention, maybe. What about allowing a trans person to participate on a case-by-case basis, for example, just "let the trans person to do whatever they want in any situation"?

 

[JoeMorgue]

"Case by case basis" is just "it's complicated" yet again.

We know it's complicated. We heard you the first 20 thousand times. Uncomplicate it.

 

[Upchurch]

We know it's complicated. [snip] Uncomplicate it.

Would you prefer I do that before or after I bring peace to the middle east and solve world hunger?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Would you prefer I do that before or after I bring peace to the middle east and solve world hunger?

Dude you choose to put on the "I'm the Lorax for the Trans People" hat, nobody made you do it.

It's not our fault that you decided to take on the roll of spokesperson for a group but can't answer or explain the simplest basic concepts of what you're defending because it's clear you don't actually know, you just got told "To be a good progressive, defend trans people."

Just keeping saying "It's complicated" and "Duuurrr I don't understand your question" over and over.

 

[Upchurch]

Dude you choose to put on the "I'm the Lorax for the Trans People" hat, nobody made you do it. [snip]

What was that you said about lying and having never said that?

In order to not further trigger Joe, I will point this out to theprestige, without using the shorthand, as yet another instance of that dismissive labeling thing. One could also call it a strawman, but I understand if some don't.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Only if you aren't paying attention, maybe. What about allowing a trans person to participate on a case-by-case basis, for example, just "let the trans person to do whatever they want in any situation"?

What criteria would you suggest for evaluating each case?

 

[Upchurch]

What criteria would you suggest for evaluating each case?

Will this do or do you require an individualized response?

And, as I have already answered, it depends. It depends on the nature of activity/sport/competition. It depends on when in their life the person transitioned. It depends how they transitioned. Hell, it probably depends on the person was like pre-transition.

There is no one single answer to that question without context.

If you click the link there is further expansion on that might save a few duplicate posts.

 

[Roboramma]

Sorry, I misunderstood what you were asking, but I have also already answered this question. I am fine with getting rid of the segregated leagues in pool AND I'm also fine with allowing trans-women participate in the women's league. Either way is good.

As I have also pointed out (but got shouted down because I used the taboo "feminism" word), there is a historic gender role difference in playing pool. I think I also mentioned that it's similar in chess, but that's a different topic. The segregated leagues have an advantage at letting women feel comfortable playing in a sport that is historically dominated by men, without the harassment and other social pressures. (I'll refrain from using the also taboo "safe space".)

Thanks, I do consider this to be a real response to the question. When it comes to pool, you don't think males do have an advantage over females, and so don't think that transgendered males (trans women) should be prevented from competing with women, not because they are different from other males in not having an advantage, but because there is no male advantage in general.*

If that were the case, I'd be sympathetic to that view (I think I said so in response to your first post in this thread on the subject of pool), though I have reservations which are actually associated with your second paragraph above: whatever the reason that women are underrepresented in pool, and which thus justifies segregation based on sex, I suspect it applies in general. But I am somewhat less concerned about socio-cultural factors that affect representation that biological ones.

That said, I do think there's reason to think that the differences in representation are biological. The evidence that you presented, showing that of the top 100 highest rated players only one (in 59th place) is a woman suggests that something is going on. It certainly could be socio-cultural factors. But there are also good reasons to expect males to perform better in physical activities in general, and Ziggurat earlier gave what I consider convincing arguments for physiological differences that apply to pool specifically.

None of this leads me to certainty, but based on the evidence we have, the best theory seems to me to be that there are meaningful physiological differences leading to the differences in outcomes between the sexes in pool, and that these differences apply with respect to trans women as well as other males. Given that, sex based segregation (as opposed to gender based segregation) seems reasonable.

If evidence were presented that the differences in outcome are not due to physiological differences, I'd update my view, and think there was less justification for sex based segregation, but I wouldn't think there was no justification for it, as explained above.

*EDIT: I paraphrase your viewpoint in part to check if my interpretation is correct, obviously if that paragraph isn't what you think, then please correct my interpretation.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

What criteria would you suggest for evaluating each case?

Will this do or do you require an individualized response?

If you click the link there is further expansion on that might save a few duplicate posts.

I'm not sure why you think linking me back to the same post that prompted my question about that post, would constitute an answer, but whatever: No, that's won't do, I'm afraid.
How exactly would you conduct that interview? What specific criteria would you need to examine, to determine whether an athlete was sufficiently female enough, or male enough, to be allowed to compete in that division of the sport?
Would you accept self-identity without further medical checks?
If not, what physiological features would you need to see, or not see, to make a judgement?
Would the wishes and input of the other competitors be considered?

 

[Upchurch]

I'm not sure why you think linking me back to the same post that prompted my question about that post, would constitute an answer, but whatever: No, that's won't do, I'm afraid.

Because it is the same question asked in a different way, but still void of any context needed to give a meaningful answer, assuming I even know enough about whatever situation you are asking about to give a meaningful answer.

As I said before: it depends. It depends on the type of activity, how and when someone transitioned, how you determine an unfair genetic advantage, and possibly what the person was like pre-transition.

Every other question you had falls under that answer without additional context, except this one and then only partially.

Would the wishes and input of the other competitors be considered?

From a player perspective, why would it be? To competitors usually get to choose who they compete within a league (meant as a generic term)?

From a league administration perspective, that depends on their purpose for having segregated leagues. If they offer separate leagues because they feel biological males are significantly superior to biological females, they may have justification for keeping trans participants out. If they are trying to entice underrepresented groups to participate, the justification to keep trans people out weakens significantly.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm not sure why you think linking me back to the same post that prompted my question about that post, would constitute an answer, but whatever: No, that's won't do, I'm afraid.
How exactly would you conduct that interview? What specific criteria would you need to examine, to determine whether an athlete was sufficiently female enough, or male enough, to be allowed to compete in that division of the sport?
Would you accept self-identity without further medical checks?
If not, what physiological features would you need to see, or not see, to make a judgement?
Would the wishes and input of the other competitors be considered?

"It's complicated."

 

[varwoche]

Trans is pretty rare in itself. Rare enough that we could evaluate on a case-by-case basis and not necessarily needing a blanket ban?

That's highly impractical.

Why?

How are people to be evaluated case-by-case? Size? Speed? A note from the PE teacher? Does each school district create its own standards? Each sport within each district? What about boys who were unable to make the boys team but aren't Trans? Are they too eligible for the girls team?

And of course, each boy/Trans who is allowed on the girls team denies a position for a girl. What about those girls?

 

[Upchurch]

When it comes to pool, you don't think males do have an advantage over females, and so don't think that transgendered males (trans women) should be prevented from competing with women, not because they are different from other males in not having an advantage, but because there is no male advantage in general.*

[snip]

*EDIT: I paraphrase your viewpoint in part to check if my interpretation is correct, obviously if that paragraph isn't what you think, then please correct my interpretation.

All good.

If that were the case, I'd be sympathetic to that view (I think I said so in response to your first post in this thread on the subject of pool), though I have reservations which are actually associated with your second paragraph above: whatever the reason that women are underrepresented in pool, and which thus justifies segregation based on sex, I suspect it applies in general.

I would replace "sex" with "gender", especially if we're talking about socio-cultural factors. Sex is biological, gender (and gender role) is societal.

But I am somewhat less concerned about socio-cultural factors that affect representation that biological ones.

Yep. I would guess most of the people still in this thread are somewhere on a scale from "less concerned" to "it doesn't exist". That probable accounts for most of the disconnect, but that's just a guess.

That said, I do think there's reason to think that the differences in representation are biological. The evidence that you presented, showing that of the top 100 highest rated players only one (in 59th place) is a woman suggests that something is going on. It certainly could be socio-cultural factors. But there are also good reasons to expect males to perform better in physical activities in general, and Ziggurat earlier gave what I consider convincing arguments for physiological differences that apply to pool specifically.

The difference is that I provided evidence to support my argument and Zig hasn't. Not that those biological differences don't exist, but that they make a significant difference in professional pool players.

I know people have dismissed the video I posted, but I will point out that it was published by the organization that calculates and tracks those ratings, so it is, at the very least, an appropriate and recognized authority in the subject.

As a disclaimer, it was 6 years ago and many things can happen in 6 years. I previously found some chatter that the rating system had changed in the past few years. So, I take it as true, at least as of 6 years ago.

None of this leads me to certainty, but based on the evidence we have, the best theory seems to me to be that there are meaningful physiological differences leading to the differences in outcomes between the sexes in pool, and that these differences apply with respect to trans women as well as other males. Given that, sex based segregation (as opposed to gender based segregation) seems reasonable.

I understand what you're saying, but what evidence? From what I've seen, there is precious little when it comes to pool that actually breaks down male/female representation and ability. Again, what Zig suggests is conjecture that those biological differences are significant to actual performance.

If evidence were presented that the differences in outcome are not due to physiological differences, I'd update my view, and think there was less justification for sex based segregation, but I wouldn't think there was no justification for it, as explained above.

Likewise, if evidence were presented that the differences in outcome are due to physiological differences, I'd update my view about segregation in pool. There just hasn't been any.

 

[Upchurch]

How are people to be evaluated case-by-case? Size? Speed? A note from the PE teacher? Does each school district create its own standards? Each sport within each district? What about boys who were unable to make the boys team but aren't Trans? Are they too eligible for the girls team?

And of course, each boy/Trans who is allowed on the girls team denies a position for a girl. What about those girls?

Oh. You cut off the rest of my question before answering. Why did you do that?

 

[Upchurch]

"It's complicated."

"Shut up, TRA."

 

[varwoche]

Oh. You cut off the rest of my question before answering. Why did you do that?

I wasn't addressing that aspect. And it was already mentioned in the first quote where I did not cut it off. And because my questions apply no matter.

 

[Upchurch]

I wasn't addressing that aspect.

But that was my question.

And it was already mentioned in the first quote where I did not cut it off.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying here. You mentioned it in what first quote where it wasn't cut off?