Transgender athletes

[iNow]

It should be noted that failure to accept trans individuals as they identify can legitimately be viewed as a type of prejudice. In fairness, your comments suggest a lack of acceptance and empathy for this community, even outside the narrow boundaries of elite athleticism.

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

I'm debating if trans people should be competing against biological women, in elite sports. … If you can point to ANY post of mine that shows hate or prejudice against gay people, I invite you to quote it. 

 

[TheVat]

17 hours ago, mistermack said:

 

Most straight people would view it as sexual assault by deception, or rape by deception, depending on how far it went.

The article you later posted doesn't support your assertion of "most straight people...."  All the article does is reflect someone's opinion that present rape statutes could be interpreted to pin "rape by deception" on a sexual act with a trans person.  I don't see either polling, or expert legal opinion, or actual incidents reported, on this.  

Given the facial bone structure (and ghost of 5 o'clock shadow) of the opining tv personality, I feel confident that her sexual partners will be quite aware that she is trans.  

Edited July 8, 2023 by TheVat
bowkjfisisjfjosp

[MigL]

4 hours ago, iNow said:

It should be noted that failure to accept trans individuals as they identify can legitimately be viewed as a type of prejudice.

Let us consider a thought experiment.
You are a single man of dating ae, INow ( you wish ! ), and a pre-op Trans woman approaches you.
She is very 'masculine' in appearance, but identifies as a female, and she asks you out.
Would you go on a date with her ?

And if you did go for a 'few beers' and she interpreted it as a romantic situation, and wanted to have sex, would you refuse ?
And what would be your reason for refusing ?

By your definition, quoted above, every straight person is prejudiced.
And by extension every gay person is also.

They get a 'label' stuck to them , by run-away 'wokeness', simply for being who they are, liking what they do, and disliking what they don't.

[iNow]

24 minutes ago, MigL said:

By your definition, quoted above, every straight person is prejudiced.
And by extension every gay person is also.

Your logic here is weak, or at least the analogy laughable.

You are basically claiming (even if only implicitly) that not being attracted to nor wanting to have sex (refusing an advance) automatically means I’m discriminating against the entire gender or class with whom that individual happens to align themselves. 

I might refuse advances from a female (and in fact I have on a few occasions), but that doesn’t make me a misogynist nor a woman hater. Likewise, I might refuse advances from a gay male (and here again in fact I have on a few occasions), but that doesn’t make me a homophobe. Finally, I might refuse advances from a trans or queer person (see above), but that hardly makes me anti-trans or transphobic. 

I am primarily advocating for a world with fewer needless divisions; for a world where more people express more positions of acceptance other humans as individuals and not as stereotyped monolithic labels. 

When people refuse to accept a trans person how they identify it is a type of prejudice… whether or not they happen to be hitting on you. There’s not reason for it beyond fear and lack of experience/exposure.

And to repeat my previous position, I support merit based approaches to divisions in elite sports… you either meet the criteria for that group or you do not. Gender and pubic plumbing need not ever enter the equation. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by iNow

[MigL]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

You are basically claiming (even if only implicitly) that not being attracted to nor wanting to have sex (refusing an advance) automatically means I’m discriminating against that the entire gender or class with whom that individual aligns themselves. 

I'm not claiming that; you are.
Here

4 hours ago, iNow said:

It should be noted that failure to accept trans individuals as they identify can legitimately be viewed as a type of prejudice.

But you haven't answered the questions
Would you refuse to go on a date ?
Would you refuse to have sex ?
And most importantly, why ??

[iNow]

Forgive me. I’m pretty slow. A bit of a dotard, really. Gonna need someone to speak slowly and softly to explain this to me like I’m in kindergarten. 

I suggested that not accepting trans people for who they are… continuing to call them he when they identify as she or making rude insinuations about castration, for example… itself might legitimately be considered a form of prejudice. 

You then jumped tracks and suggested that I’m accusing people of being phobic for rejecting a sexual advance in a night club. 

What point are you trying to convince me and others of with this line of reasoning?

1 hour ago, MigL said:

But you haven't answered the questions

Because not only are they personal in nature, but they’re also an irrelevant distraction with no worth. 

I prefer to make my dating and sexing decisions based on the individual qualities and characteristics of the individual before me. Who cares how they identify if I find them attractive and wish to act on it? You sure as shit shouldn’t since it’s my cock and not yours. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by iNow
sp

[mistermack]

5 hours ago, iNow said:

It should be noted that failure to accept trans individuals as they identify can legitimately be viewed as a type of prejudice. In fairness, your comments suggest a lack of acceptance and empathy for this community, even outside the narrow boundaries of elite athleticism.

Charles Darwin had a similar dilemma. He kept his trap shut for decades, rather than point out to people that they are apes, descended from a common ancestor of Chimps, Gorillas and Orangs. There was great pressure for him to accept humans as made in God's likeness etc etc, and he knew that it would upset millions to publish his origin of species. 

In the end, he saw reality as more important than a cosy delusion, and that's how I see the transgender issue.

Having said that, this is a discussion forum, and the subject under discussion is transgender athletes. I wouldn't push my thoughts on "trans individuals" without a clear invitation to debate it. Just as I don't push my atheist beliefs on my christian sisters, but will say what I think, if the subject comes up for discussion.

I reserve the right to have my own thoughts on the subject, and resent any kind of compusion to "accept trans individuals as they identify". I don't accept my own family as god's children. That doesn't mean I hate them, and they are mature enough to disagree without animosity.

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I reserve the right to have my own thoughts on the subject, and resent any kind of compusion to "accept trans individuals as they identify".

Nobody is taking away any of your rights, though that is a funny juxtaposition given the actual topic under discussion. You’re free to believe any silly hateful thing or resent any idea you want, but this part about refusing to accept people for who they are? That’s legitimately considered a form of prejudice.

[mistermack]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

this part about refusing to accept people for who they are? That’s legitimately considered a form of prejudice.

Well, you are just as prejudiced, if that's the case, by proposing that if people claim to be something, then that means that they are what they claim.  That's prejudging their claim to be true, by reason that they claimed it. 

I prefer the evidence approach.

[iNow]

I just LOL’d. Thanks for that, at least. 

“Nuh uh, YOU are!” 😂 

[zapatos]

13 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Well, you are just as prejudiced, if that's the case, by proposing that if people claim to be something, then that means that they are what they claim.  That's prejudging their claim to be true, by reason that they claimed it. 

I prefer the evidence approach.

You prefer the evidence approach with everyone or just with trans people? If someone tells you they are right-handed do you also "resent any kind of compulsion to "accept right-handed individuals as they identify"? How about a person who says they have blonde hair? Do you insist on the "evidence approach" with them? What about the person who claims to be white, or a bit of an introvert? 

If your resentment and evidence approach only applies to people who identify as trans then perhaps you can forgive us for mistaking that for a type of prejudice.

[TheVat]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

Charles Darwin had a similar dilemma. He kept his trap shut for decades, rather than point out to people that they are apes, descended from a common ancestor of Chimps, Gorillas and Orangs. There was great pressure for him to accept humans as made in God's likeness etc etc, and he knew that it would upset millions to publish his origin of species. 

In the end, he saw reality as more important than a cosy delusion, and that's how I see the transgender issue.

 

That analogy suffers in that Darwin was looking at scientific data about speciation, whereas this is more an issue of social acceptance.  People identify themselves in society many ways - outdoorsy, bookish, cat-adoring, devoutly religious, athletic, metrosexual, etc.  We tend to defer to their self-ID, I guess on the principle that they are somewhat self-aware.  We might question someone on an individual level if they seem to be a poseur, but we don't dismiss a whole category as delusional, e.g. all bookish people are just pretending, they just skim wikipedia...

 

ETA - just read Zapatos post, looks like arrived at that point already.  

Edited July 8, 2023 by TheVat
redundancy on my part

[swansont]

53 minutes ago, TheVat said:

That analogy suffers in that Darwin was looking at scientific data about speciation, whereas this is more an issue of social acceptance.  People identify themselves in society many ways - outdoorsy, bookish, cat-adoring, devoutly religious, athletic, metrosexual, etc.  We tend to defer to their self-ID, I guess on the principle that they are somewhat self-aware.  We might question someone on an individual level if they seem to be a poseur, but we don't dismiss a whole category as delusional, e.g. all bookish people are just pretending, they just skim wikipedia...

It’s even more than that, because I don’t think anyone has shown that this is simply a case of “identifying as” in the same way as someone might identify as a cat-lover. There are studies that show genetic factors for gender incongruence, which has to enter into an evidence-based discussion, rather than just assertion and poor definitions.

(though perhaps being a cat-lover is the result of some genetic influence, too)

[zapatos]

On a side note, did anyone else notice that on this and similar topics, most of the people from the more 'liberal' countries  are taking a relatively more conservative position, and the participants from the more 'conservative' country are taking a relatively more liberal position? I know it means nothing but it kind of made me chuckle. 😁

[mistermack]

5 hours ago, zapatos said:

What about the person who claims to be white, or a bit of an introvert?

Or someone who claims to be black ??? 

 

[zapatos]

29 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Or someone who claims to be black ???

So trans people AND black people. Got it.

[dimreepr]

23 hours ago, mistermack said:

I'm well aware that children can turn out straight or gay, and have been for the last sixty years, so your wonderful insight is wasted. If you can point to ANY post of mine that shows hate or prejudice against gay people, I invite you to quote it.

I didn't say you are homophobic, I heavily implied you are transphobic, read again if you don't believe me.

I was just wondering if you would learn anything, if karma gave you the gift of a child that was certain about their sexuality despite the evidence.

23 hours ago, mistermack said:

On this thread, I'm debating if trans people should be competing against biological women, in elite sports.

As are we all, it's just that most of us understand the nuances of life and biology; I fear this debate is a little over your head.

[mistermack]

21 hours ago, TheVat said:

Given the facial bone structure (and ghost of 5 o'clock shadow) of the opining tv personality, I feel confident that her sexual partners will be quite aware that she is trans.  

So you're confident? That seals it then. No sober person would fall for the deception? So you've never seen Mrs Doubtfire? 😄     

Anyway, I feel confident that " Most straight people would view it as sexual assault by deception, or rape by deception, depending on how far it went."   

If they are not decieved, it's not a issue. I'm talking about when people ARE decieved.

I hope that satisfies your appetite for pedantry.

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I fear this debate is a little over your head.

I admit most of your posts are baffling. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, mistermack said:

So you're confident? That seals it then. No sober person would fall for the deception? So you've never seen Mrs Doubtfire? 😄     

Anyway, I feel confident that " Most straight people would view it as sexual assault by deception, or rape by deception, depending on how far it went."   

If they are not decieved, it's not a issue. I'm talking about when people ARE decieved.

I hope that satisfies your appetite for pedantry.

How is anyone being decieved?

If you want to have sex with <insert object here> then, if they're willing, shag away... Unless... You'd be ashamed to admit it, to the pub...

[dimreepr]

On 7/4/2023 at 12:31 PM, dimreepr said:

58 pages and counting, of a discussion about 'them' competing; "I'm Dr Who, I'm sorry I've lost my place, are we past racism yet?"

Page 61, "it's worse than I thought Dr, we're not even past misogyny"

1 minute ago, Michael_123_ said:

It's unfortunate that we society still considers suicide and assisted euthanasia a "bad thing."

It seems that you have strayed OT.

[J.C.MacSwell]

20 hours ago, zapatos said:

On a side note, did anyone else notice that on this and similar topics, most of the people from the more 'liberal' countries  are taking a relatively more conservative position, and the participants from the more 'conservative' country are taking a relatively more liberal position? I know it means nothing but it kind of made me chuckle. 😁

Funny enough I've almost commented on it. Like there are "nouveau liberals" (possibly some AKA "woke") that assume everyone either 1.) used to think in prejudiced ways as they did,or 2.) still do...vs old liberals that...oddly enough given the nature of the topic of this thread...don't see people as "binary" in this regard (call it say, woke or not) and so don't make such assumptions. 

But of course noticing trends such as this, even if there is some truth behind it, is no excuse to pigeonhole any particular individual.

On 7/8/2023 at 4:21 PM, iNow said:

 

And to repeat my previous position, I support merit based approaches to divisions in elite sports… you either meet the criteria for that group or you do not. Gender and pubic plumbing need not ever enter the equation. 

If gender doesn't enter the equation there are many, many XY individuals that can compete favourably with the very few few most elite XX individuals. Drawing the line of any merit based approach is problematic...get it right and by sheer numbers you will see an XY individual on top of the podium most of the time...get it wrong and it's almost a certainty.

Unless of course you re-decide to include gender as part of the criteria...and hope to limit those with XY chromosomes to just a "handful" by some arbitrary means.

 

 

[iNow]

I am fine with merit based approaches. Old fashioned binary leagues are lazy. 

That said, it can also be both. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

50 minutes ago, iNow said:

I am fine with merit based approaches. Old fashioned binary leagues are lazy. 

That said, it can also be both. 

So you are okay with "open", which would be dominated by XY individuals, plus some arbitrary other level that would be also dominated by XY individuals, and exclude some but not all trans females, and perhaps also exclude some of the more gifted XX females?

Let's assume a similar set of bell curves for XX and XY individuals. Ignore the fact that this is for women and men for height.

Is it fair to assume a similar overlap for many sports as to athletic potential, for XX individuals and XY individuals?

Where would you choose to draw the line for the second category? 

You would need to exclude many XX females, including most from the group that elite women athletes currently come from, before it is as likely or more likely that an XX individual would top the podium.

And of course, although "athletic potential" bell curves theoretically can exist, no one could even hope to accurately produce them. In fact, estimating the athletic potential of any given individual is extremely problematic.

Edited July 9, 2023 by J.C.MacSwell

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

So you are okay with "open", which would be dominated by XY individuals, plus some arbitrary other level that would be also dominated by XY individuals, and exclude some but not all trans females, and perhaps also exclude some of the more gifted XX females?

Let's assume a similar set of bell curves for XX and XY individuals. Ignore the fact that this is for women and men for height.

Is it fair to assume a similar overlap for many sports as to athletic potential, for XX individuals and XY individuals?

Where would you choose to draw the line for the second category? 

You would need to exclude many XX females, including most from the group that elite women athletes currently come from, before it is as likely or more likely that an XX individual would top the podium.

And of course, although "athletic potential" bell curves theoretically can exist, no one could even hope to accurately produce them. In fact, estimating the athletic potential of any given individual is extremely problematic.

 The solution will be empirically-discovered as ideas are tried out over time.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Where would you choose to draw the line for the second category?

I’m not here to draw the lines. I’m here to remind you that it’s entirely possible to do so without any reference to sex and gender. 

Said another way, there is no reason transgendered individuals should be prevented from competing alongside the cisgendered folks already doing so. 

Edited July 9, 2023 by iNow