• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

San Jose State Women’s Volleyball Team Finds Itself at Center of Transgender Debate​


The San Jose State University women’s volleyball team is trying to make the N.C.A.A. tournament for the first time in 23 years. But first, it must find schools willing to play against it.

The University of Nevada, Reno, became the fifth school this season to decline to compete against San Jose State when it pulled out of a game scheduled for last Saturday in response to reports that a player on San Jose’s team is a transgender woman. The others that have decided not to play the team are Southern Utah University, Boise State University, the University of Wyoming and Utah State University.​

 
My lefty friends almost inevitably characterize the legal and cultural conflict described in the above article as one between enlightened progressives on one side and deplorable regressives on the other (a framing somewhat abetted by the Times); I tend to view it as a struggle between the working class (e.g. students sweating it out on athletic scholarships) and the symbolic capitalist class who control the physical and social infrastructure of sport (i.e. gymnasia, rules committees, etc.).
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
My lefty friends almost inevitably characterize the legal and cultural conflict described in the above article as one between enlightened progressives on one side and deplorable regressives on the other (a framing somewhat abetted by the Times); I tend to view it as a struggle between the working class (e.g. students sweating it out on athletic scholarships) and the symbolic capitalist class who control the physical and social infrastructure of sport (i.e. gymnasia, rules committees, etc.).
Click to expand...
I think the progressive habit is to cloak a group as "marginalized/oppressed" and the other as "oppressor." Once a group is cloaked as "marginalized" that group can behave terribly but such terrible behavior will always be excused because they're "marginalized."

GaObFb6boAAmtwn
 
Trausti said:
I think the progressive habit is to cloak a group as "marginalized/oppressed" and the other as "oppressor." Once a group is cloaked as "marginalized" that group can behave terribly but such terrible behavior will always be excused because they're "marginalized."
Click to expand...
I don't think that's quite right. Sorting every cultural conflict into oppressed and oppressor groups is a reflex of those imbued with the as-yet-unnamed successor ideology which aims to replace liberalism. Progressivism, for all its faults, predates this mindset by at least several decades.
 
Trausti said:
I think the progressive habit is to cloak a group as "marginalized/oppressed" and the other as "oppressor." Once a group is cloaked as "marginalized" that group can behave terribly but such terrible behavior will always be excused because they're "marginalized."
Click to expand...
My response to this is somewhat less nuanced and more direct, more along the line of the sentiment expressed on this bumper-sticker. I have taken steps to make sure that my girls and women are able to defend themselves when confronted with one of those men self-IDing as women... if they **** around, they're gonna find out.

FB_IMG_1727094412494.jpg
 
smartcooky said:
My response to this is somewhat less nuanced and more direct, more along the line of the sentiment expressed on this bumper-sticker. I have taken steps to make sure that my girls and women are able to defend themselves when confronted with one of those men self-IDing as women... if they **** around, they're gonna find out.

FB_IMG_1727094412494.jpg
Click to expand...
How do your women know the person is self-iding?
 
d4m10n said:
My lefty friends almost inevitably characterize the legal and cultural conflict described in the above article as one between enlightened progressives on one side and deplorable regressives on the other (a framing somewhat abetted by the Times); I tend to view it as a struggle between the working class (e.g. students sweating it out on athletic scholarships) and the symbolic capitalist class who control the physical and social infrastructure of sport (i.e. gymnasia, rules committees, etc.).
Click to expand...
Really? I view it as a struggle between reality and wish-fulfillment-by-coercion.
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think that's quite right. Sorting every cultural conflict into oppressed and oppressor groups is a reflex of those imbued with the as-yet-unnamed successor ideology which aims to replace liberalism. Progressivism, for all its faults, predates this mindset by at least several decades.
Click to expand...
We might not yet have a catchy name for people to start using sarcastically... but this constellation of views is so tightly tied to progressivism that I think most people can see it for what it is.

I think this bit really captures it well:
We are in a war in which the forces of justice and progress are arrayed against the forces of backwardness and oppression. And in a war, the normal rules of the game — due process; political compromise; the presumption of innocence; free speech; even reason itself — must be suspended. Indeed, those rules themselves were corrupt to begin with — designed, as they were, by dead white males in order to uphold their own power.
Click to expand...
 
NYT has an interesting article :
"U.S. Study on Puberty Blockers Goes Unpublished Because of Politics, Doctor Says
The leader of the long-running study said that the drugs did not improve mental health in children with gender distress and that the finding might be weaponized by opponents of the care."

The MD in question, Johanna Olson-Kennedy, is apparently also known for her remark (in a talk about "gender-affirming" surgery) that the risk of allowing teen girls to have double mastectomies was minimal because "If they want breasts later in life, they can go and get them!".
 
Last edited:
Louden Wilde said:
The MD in question, Johanna Olson-Kennedy, is apparently also known for her remark (in a talk about "gender-affirming" surgery) that the risk of allowing teen girls to have double mastectomies was minimal because "If they want breasts later in life, they can go and get them!".
Click to expand...
It's remarkable how willing an MD is to sacrifice the functionality of female breast tissue in order to push an ideology in this way. when those mastectomies are performed, they remove the milk glands completely. Artificial implants don't come with brand new glands, so those young females are giving up their ability to breastfeed and to pass on their antibodies to their infants.

Of course, that's assuming that those young de-breasted females aren't made sterile as a result of the blockers and/or testosterone, and don't end up with vaginal atrophy.

You know what gets me? The carelessness with which the future fertility of these young females is cast aside... while the medical industry is simultaneously lobbying that in-vitro fertilization should be a mandated essential health benefit. Either fertility is important or it's not. This current situation of it being vitally important for currently grown females but totally not at all important for teen and young females who haven't yet got to the point where they want kids really makes me angry.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Really? I view it as a struggle between reality and wish-fulfillment-by-coercion.
Click to expand...
That isn't exactly incompatible with my workers vs. symbolic capitalists framework.

The latter group is vastly more susceptible to ideological capture and delusions of wish fulfillment, the former group is laying hands and eyes on reality.
 
This is absolutely brilliant.

www.thehelenjoyce.com

Joyce activated, issue 96

I’m in Berlin today, at the protest outside the Bundestag against the new gender self-ID law that has just come into force. Around the world women are protesting outside German embassies; I accepted an invitation from the organisers in Germany to come and speak.
www.thehelenjoyce.com www.thehelenjoyce.com
 
d4m10n said:
I don't think that's quite right. Sorting every cultural conflict into oppressed and oppressor groups is a reflex of those imbued with the as-yet-unnamed successor ideology which aims to replace liberalism. Progressivism, for all its faults, predates this mindset by at least several decades.
Click to expand...
The only problem with progressivism is that it's very loosely defined. Nobody ever thought of themselves as the villain in their own story, and nobody ever got far by telling their followers, "not gonna lie to you, these changes will suck hairy ass for most of you." So essentially any change from the status quo can be filed under "progressive".

Point in case, both communism AND fascism were progressive at their time. The idea that fascism sold was to ditch the old ways, with the old bickering of conservatives vs liberals, industrialists vs proletariat, etc, and replace it with something new that's better for everyone. Or Mao's Great Leap Forward, well, there's a reason he called it "forward" not "backwards".

Essentially what I'm saying is that there's a reason why the appeal to novelty is a fallacy.

Now that's not to say one needs to be stuck in the past, but one does need to critically examine whether a proposed new idea is actually better.
 
Rolfe said:
This is absolutely brilliant.

www.thehelenjoyce.com

Joyce activated, issue 96

I’m in Berlin today, at the protest outside the Bundestag against the new gender self-ID law that has just come into force. Around the world women are protesting outside German embassies; I accepted an invitation from the organisers in Germany to come and speak.
www.thehelenjoyce.com www.thehelenjoyce.com
Click to expand...
Exemplary!
 
d4m10n said:
My lefty friends almost inevitably characterize the legal and cultural conflict described in the above article as one between enlightened progressives on one side and deplorable regressives on the other (a framing somewhat abetted by the Times); I tend to view it as a struggle between the working class (e.g. students sweating it out on athletic scholarships) and the symbolic capitalist class who control the physical and social infrastructure of sport (i.e. gymnasia, rules committees, etc.).
Click to expand...
My lefty friends, including those who support trans rights, do not think that trans women should compete on women's sports teams, in most cases.
Well, except for one friend who sees sports league segregation as an entirely social thing.

There is, and always has been, more than two positions on this issue.
 
Samson said:
A reminder how the battle lines were drawn on male assaults female by Biden decree.

20 1 2021

www.whitehouse.gov

Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation | The White House

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
Click to expand...
As usual, you are misrepresenting something that you do not understand.

This Executive Order was about discrimination in the workplace, in housing, in access to healthcare among other things. Nothing in that EO mandated that biological males be allowed to participate in female sports, nor did in force any sporting organizations to do so.

In fact, there are numerous state sporting organizations, and even state legislatures that have enacted bans or restrictions. They are

Idaho,
Montana,
North Dakota,
Wyoming,
South Dakota,
Iowa,
Utah,
Kentucky,
West Virginia,
Arizona,
Kansas,
Arkansas,
North Carolina,
Oklahoma,
Louisiana,
Mississippi,
Florida

All of the above ban biological males from participating in female sports. a further five states have gone even further. They have also banned biological females from competing in male sports.

Missouri,
Tennessee,
South Carolina
Alabama
Texas

Interestingly, even the NCAA has gone to a sport-by-sport policy.

None of the above would have been possible if the EO did what you claim it does.
 
The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre that preferred rape victims go unsupported rather than sending them to a separate centre that excluded men has been forced to pay a worker £70,000 and issue a proper public apology for her constructive dismissal.

"Judge McFatridge ruled it was "extraordinary" that ERCC had not referred any victims to Beira’s Place and that this seemed "linked inextricably with the matters which led to the discrimination against the claimant"

"Ms Wadhwa – a tran woman -stepped down from her their job after a Rape Crisis Scotland report found she they failed to behave professionally and that the needs of survivors were not prioritised."

Gosh, a man putting their needs before those of women. Just fancy that

www.bbc.co.uk

Edinburgh rape crisis worker constructively dismissed to receive £70,000

The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre must also publicly apologise to Roz Adams who was unlawfully dismissed over her gender-critical beliefs.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
Manger Douse said:
The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre that preferred rape victims go unsupported rather than sending them to a separate centre that excluded men has been forced to pay a worker £70,000 and issue a proper public apology for her constructive dismissal.

"Judge McFatridge ruled it was "extraordinary" that ERCC had not referred any victims to Beira’s Place and that this seemed "linked inextricably with the matters which led to the discrimination against the claimant"

"Ms Wadhwa – a tran woman -stepped down from her their job after a Rape Crisis Scotland report found she they failed to behave professionally and that the needs of survivors were not prioritised."

Gosh, a man putting their needs before those of women. Just fancy that

www.bbc.co.uk

Edinburgh rape crisis worker constructively dismissed to receive £70,000

The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre must also publicly apologise to Roz Adams who was unlawfully dismissed over her gender-critical beliefs.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Bloody good! About time these cosplayers received some consequences for their disgusting behaviour.
 
We have separate Men's and Women's sports because it is a general understanding that Men have several biological advantages to women in athletics. So why would we let biological men who dress as women compete against biological women in sports? What happened to the concept of fairness?

Why not just abandon all sex-segregated sports?
 
Reply to Smartcooky:

I was idle enough to assume Abigail Schrier had it right.
I have not waded through the document but will do.
Thanks for alerting if there is an anomaly.
We know the title 9 revision in September had another bite at the cherry but it seems this also fell short of requiring men and boys in women's and girls' sports.
Trump is hoping to set aside all doubt.
Let us see.
I doubt law suits to prevent this would be popular with anyone, so it looks like a done deal.
 
Last edited:
TomB said:
My lefty friends, including those who support trans rights, do not think that trans women should compete on women's sports teams, in most cases.
Well, except for one friend who sees sports league segregation as an entirely social thing.

There is, and always has been, more than two positions on this issue.
Click to expand...
That's true (that there are more than two positions), but that one is still seems forbidden on the left. A couple congressman - Seth Moulton (MA) & Tom Suozzi (NY) have apparently taken some tentative steps in this direction (sports issue) and have been attacked by trans-activists on X: 1, 2

Bret Stephens has an op-ed in the NYT on the democratic defeat in which he notes rigidity of the trans-activists:

The dismissiveness with which liberals treated these concerns was part of something else: dismissiveness toward the moral objections many Americans have to various progressive causes. Concerned about gender transitions for children or about biological males playing on girls’ sports teams? You’re a transphobe. Dismayed by tedious, mandatory and frequently counterproductive D.E.I. seminars that treat white skin as almost inherently problematic? You’re racist. Irritated by new terminology that is supposed to be more inclusive but feels as if it’s borrowing a page from “1984”?
 
Manger Douse said:
The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre that preferred rape victims go unsupported rather than sending them to a separate centre that excluded men has been forced to pay a worker £70,000 and issue a proper public apology for her constructive dismissal.

"Judge McFatridge ruled it was "extraordinary" that ERCC had not referred any victims to Beira’s Place and that this seemed "linked inextricably with the matters which led to the discrimination against the claimant"

"Ms Wadhwa – a tran woman -stepped down from her their job after a Rape Crisis Scotland report found she they failed to behave professionally and that the needs of survivors were not prioritised."

Gosh, a man putting their needs before those of women. Just fancy that

www.bbc.co.uk

Edinburgh rape crisis worker constructively dismissed to receive £70,000

The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre must also publicly apologise to Roz Adams who was unlawfully dismissed over her gender-critical beliefs.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
I'm thrilled that Wadhwa is no longer in charge of Rape Crisis Scotland. It's been nutty watching this over the past several years. Crazy that a male managed to get a role that is explicitly reserved for a female in the first place. And even crazier that they stayed this long in the role after it became clear that they had completely failed to disclose their sex, and didn't even have a GRC!
 
Emily's Cat said:
I'm thrilled that Wadhwa is no longer in charge of Rape Crisis Scotland. It's been nutty watching this over the past several years. Crazy that a male managed to get a role that is explicitly reserved for a female in the first place. And even crazier that they stayed this long in the role after it became clear that they had completely failed to disclose their sex, and didn't even have a GRC!
Click to expand...

My own view is that they knew perfectly well from the start, but welcomed the application with open arms so as to burnish their woke credentials. I know he looks fairly effeminate in photos, but these men rarely pass seamlessly at close quarters in real life.

In other news, Sandy Brindley still has a job.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
I am struggling to see the 'evil' in this. Nor do I get why someone would be 'terrified' either.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But the administration did proclaim Levine (left) the "first female" in their position. That is an obvious lie. & I don't think that helped Democrats cause in this election (along with Levine's trans-activism on behalf of children).
 
HansMustermann said:
To be fair, if you start to discriminate on LOOKS, that's a whole other rabbithole.
Click to expand...
Would you please elaborate? To some extent, I think NOT discriminating on the basis of looks is difficult (& often subconscious). And I do think that's relevant to the discrimination that trans-identified people face (e.g. post 947 above).
 
Last edited:
The message I was responding to was about denying someone a woman job because they presumably wouldn't look woman enough from a close range. That kind of discrimination. And that I find to be a dangerous precedent, because there are women with male features and vice-versa. Give them the ol' cheek swab like Samson suggested, or whatever, but unless you're hiring a stripper, or a porn star, or such, starting to deny people employment based on looks just doesn't sit right with me.
 
HansMustermann said:
The message I was responding to was about denying someone a woman job because they presumably wouldn't look woman enough from a close range. That kind of discrimination. And that I find to be a dangerous precedent, because there are women with male features and vice-versa. Give them the ol' cheek swab like Samson suggested, or whatever, but unless you're hiring a stripper, or a porn star, or such, starting to deny people employment based on looks just doesn't sit right with me.
Click to expand...

The job was as head of a rape crisis centre. That is the specific example given in the Equalities Act of a case where it would be legitimate and proportionate to specify that the job was for a woman only. And indeed it was explicitly advertised as such. Nevertheless he chose to apply, pretending to be a woman.

If you think that it's OK to have male people in a centre set up to help women who have been raped, they you're seriously lacking in empathy. And frankly, the very last male people women want to see in a situation like that are male people LARPing as women. That is absolute red flag territory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom