|
BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress posted:Housing trans folks in separate facilities seems like the least-messy solutiom Given the relative minority of trans people, this "solution" just ends up being brutal isolation in practice. Colonel Cool posted:I think you're the one working backwards from the endpoint that trans women are women, therefore they should be included in women's sports. It's a self-evident fact. You need some sort of evidence that these women are dominating women's sports to justify excluding them, and you entirely lack that evidence and propose a "solution" that would make it impossible to collect that evidence. The fact that some bigots think that they aren't actually women isn't material to the discussion.
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 12:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:It is not a self-evident fact. Being a woman is not the sole qualifier for participating in women's sports. Do you think trans women who haven't gone on HRT should be able to participate in women's sports solely based on the fact that they are women? Below the college level? I absolutely do not give a gently caress. Bear in mind most of the trans panic bills right now are targeting children in public schools, and I don't see any good reason to give a poo poo if some JV softball player is on hormone blockers or not. At college/professional/(inter)national competition levels, they already have standards that require trans women to be on HRT to qualify (or else exclude trans women entirely); what's the problem you're trying to address with all of these questions you're Just Asking? Do you have any evidence of a problem or all, or just "plausible" questions?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 12:51
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Which gives fuel to people profiting off of raising a moral panic about trans people and doing petty and malicious things like banning kids from sports. You have entirely misplaced the blame here. The outrage is about trans people existing full stop, and there's no evidence that regulations that require HRT have done anything to allay it. The fact that states are passing anti-trans sports bills targeting single-digit numbers of pre-pubescent children is proof that this is not "fueled" by supposed concerns about "competitive integrity". In general, if you are blaming the people targeted for conservative bigots targeting them, then you are the one falling for the conservative bigots' propaganda lines.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 13:11
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I don't agree. I think there exist a notable number of hateful bigots that just hate the existence of trans people. I also think there's a much larger number of undecided people that could be swayed either way and the left has a bit of a credibility problem in their eyes when it consistently refuses to even acknowledge the mere possibility of a problem existing. Well, you can pretend transphobia isn't as common as it is all you like. It's a free country. In the meantime, why have you assumed that "competitive integrity" is a principle more important than allowing trans people to play in the correct gender of segregated sports? You've taken it for granted that that's true, and I don't see any reason to go along with that premise.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 13:18
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Way to literally cut out the back half of the sentence you're quoting. How dishonest! There are lots of dishonest arguments that amount to special-pleading reasons why trans women should be excluded from every women's space in particular, often advanced by people who believe that trans women do not belong in any women's spaces because they are not women. There are just as many well-meaning but myopic people who don't notice their own suspicions of trans women form a pattern that has the exact same effect. The latter are still bigots, they just don't like to think of themselves as such. Colonel Cool posted:Nope. Haven't done that either. Have in fact said that in the end trans women having a competitive advantage may be the unfairness that we end up living with because the alternatives end up being worse. So what, exactly, is the thesis you are arguing? Is there a single declarative statement you're willing to advance as true? Because this sounds like Just Asking Questions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 13:25
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Should trans women not on HRT be allowed to participate in college+ level women's sports? Below the professional level (and bear in mind that NCAA D1 and D2 are professional sports in every sense but pay), who cares. If you're not testing people for PEDs, you don't have any business intruding on their medical privacy. It's important that all of these Just Asking Questions fit into a backdrop of politics where regulators are aggressively targeting children and teenagers and other amateurs. Above that, I don't think you have any widespread problems. Can you point to a single trans woman not on HRT who was demanding to be allowed to play at a professional level in women's sports? Because I can point to multiple women, both trans and cis, who've been caught in this witch-hunt. Now. You answer the question you just asked with an affirmative statement (and not another question), or gently caress off.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 13:32
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Some evidence exists to suggest that trans women may have some level of competitive advantage in sports Come back when you have some evidence that does not label itself inconclusive and not sufficient to make any conclusions in its extract. Because you're using some sketchy stuff to try and force people to accept arguendo that trans women could maybe be dominating sports in some currently-nonexistent hypothetical situation. In the meantime, women's sports continue to be overwhelmingly, incontrovertibly dominated by cis women in reality. Should we exclude cis women from women's sports? Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 13:57
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I don't think a non-transitioning trans woman should be allowed to participate in high level women's sports, assuming it's a sport where biological advantages are substantially important. Come back when it's a problem that is actually happening anywhere at all outside of a South Park episode. Because all of the actual examples involve harassing amateur children or women who are on HRT. edit: Wait a loving second. Why are you Just Asking Questions about women on HRT but only making affirmative statements about women who are not?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:05
|
|
|
Anyone who is Very Concerned about trans women dominating women's sports should be required to name a trans woman currently dominating her sport.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:11
|
|
|
moonmazed posted:chelsea manning Embarrassing the US government is co-ed.  Colonel Cool posted:And I don't find the fact that a tiny and historically oppressed group of people hasn't been able to dominate yet You are concerned now, at the same time that the bigots you acknowledge are trying to use this as red meat to fire up their base, rather than in this hypothetical future where ~competitive integrity~ is somehow threatened. You need to re-examine why you're so concerned about yet another moral panic about GNC women in women's spaces. Those bigots haven't been right any of the last 100 times.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:19
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I refuse to believe that people don't understand the point of the hypothetical, which is pointing out that gender identity is not the sole criteria for having access to women's sports. There's a sneaky rhetorical trick here. Currently, regulators are seeking to ban all trans women from all women's and girls' sports. So you ask a leading question about some trans women in the most highly-regulated sports, a space with so few trans women that they are a rounding error, based on unsubstantiated speculation that someday that might change. People are calling you out on having the same views as TERFs because you are using their argumentation tactics.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:35
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:And those regulators are assholes. People can call me out for whatever they want. You know nothing about me. What I do know is that you're making the same arguments as them. If you find that troubling, the best thing to do would be to reconsider your arguments. It's a credibility problem for you that you are on the same side and making the same arguments as the TERFs and conservatives.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:42
|
|
|
If you're going to pretend that trans women who are not on HRT are an issue in high-level women's sports, you should be required to name one. Because, again, you have that completely nonexistent bogeywoman being used to harass and exclude actual women in the real world like Lia Thomas and Caster Semenya. Don't mistake a South Park episode for real life. Colonel Cool posted:I didn't say trans women not on HRT competing in elite level women's sports is an issue that's happening. People are treating you like you believe it's an issue that happening because you keep bringing it up like it's an issue that's happening. Colonel Cool posted:Should non-transitioning trans women compete in women's divisions? Genuine question. Colonel Cool posted:Should trans women not on HRT be allowed to participate in college+ level women's sports? Colonel Cool posted:And no. I don't think a non-transitioning trans woman should be allowed to participate in high level women's sports, assuming it's a sport where biological advantages are substantially important. Colonel Cool posted:Should trans women not on HRT be permitted to compete in elite level women's sporting events? Colonel Cool posted:And also, answering yes to my hypothetical is why I say the left has a credibility and optics problem on this issue. Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Apr 17, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:49
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Because people keep implying or stating that "trans women are women" is a sufficient argument on the entire subject, regardless of any level of advantage that may exist. Which I think is crazy. Hence the outrageous hypothetical to prove that other criteria are required. You keep bringing up the same "outrageous hypothetical" as mainstream anti-trans bigots.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 14:58
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:Which I think is crazy and I think most people would think is crazy. Huh, heteronormative ideas are popular in a society dominated by heteronormative ideas, go figure.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 15:04
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:And it keeps getting people to say that actually, yes, it should be allowed, no level of sex based competitive advantage is too much. Do you have any evidence that women on HRT have any advantage at all, aside from the two studies you've cited that explicitly say that they are not conclusive evidence that women on HRT have any advantage? If not, what does "competitive advantage" have to do with the discussion?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:So it's saying that trans women definitely for sure have no level of competitive advantage in any physical area whatsoever and the subject doesn't need to be studied any further? You keep pointing to the unsubstantiated possibility that there might, somewhere, someday, be a trans woman who has a physical advantage. You should have to name a single trans woman who has had an advantage before you continue.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:I'm all for waiting and seeing because we absolutely don't have enough data to make strong statements one way or another yet. If you think that trans women belong in women's sports until there is some actual argument otherwise, then you are in agreement with everyone in this thread and have wasted your time on a bunch of "What if" nonsense. If you don't, then you are making a strong statement of exclusion. Colonel Cool posted:Sure I mean I'll admit readily enough that I don't spend a ton of time watching women's sports unless it's an important event related to me personally in some way fuckin lmao
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:00
|
|
|
PT6A posted:And after that, to explain why such a physical advantage is not tolerable in competition while essentially all other physical advantages are. Oh yeah, there's a whole bunch to unpack about what "fairness" means in the context of elite sports and the historical and contemporary reasons that women's sports exist. But if CC can't even name one person who's getting an unfair advantage, then they're wasting everyone's time. Colonel Cool posted:We don't have measurements for that. If you can't even measure it, you're just taking it as assumed that it exists at all. Faith-based exclusion of trans women.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:02
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:It's almost like I haven't been saying anything particularly controversial and a bunch of people got really mad without reading my posts very well. I read your posts fine. You're the one saying that "the left isn't credible" because they don't buy into a bunch of literally-century-old heteronormative bullshit enforced by conservative, racist, and hilariously corrupt national and international regulatory bodies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
Colonel Cool posted:What would you suggest the way is? First, by rejecting the useful idiots who accept the bigots' framing wholesale. If you start from the premise that some people should be excluded until proven otherwise, you're doing the bigots' work for them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:The weirdest thing about this thread is the yo-yo'ing between "there is no performance advantage" and "it doesn't even matter if there's a performance advantage." If your position is the latter then why on earth are you spending 10 pages arguing with someone about the former, when the answer is irrelevant? My brain is bleeding. There's an unresolved, underlying discussion about what it even means to be fair in elite sports. I think a lot of people have essentially dissonant ideas about it, rather than a coherent worldview based on careful consideration, largely because most people do not actually give a poo poo about non-team sports, but do assume that the long-standing authorities must have some sort of reason for their rules, and that reason must be connected to their rhetoric. In practice, it turns out that "fairness" in high-level sports is bullshit and largely written on the fly to exclude the minorities that IOC or NCAA or whatever authorities want to exclude. So women are too infirm to participate in the sports that they are being harassed out of until womens-only leagues are created. (And if a sport is dominated by women, it's illegitimate for high-level competition, of course.) Black people are excluded because of some hateful poo poo about them being "bred" to have natural advantages that turn out to not exist. This trans argument rests on appealing to the assumed sensibility of notoriously conservative, bigoted authorities, even as they ban cis women from competing in women's sports on specious grounds. But lots of people still retain those ideas rather than creating a whole new worldview from scratch. How would you get women more involved in powerlifting or contact team sports or endurance sports when there's obviously a sex hormone advantage but you don't want to encourage PEDs? Is segregation the best way to do that still? Does your utopian ideal even treat "sport" as a measurement of those physical characteristics so heavily linked to sex hormones? What about the history of sports as ways to propagate and enforce gender ideas? There's a lot you could discuss! But not having a fully-formed perfect consistent utopian idea that you're shooting for does not mean you're too inconsistent to argue against obvious efforts to exclude trans women from all areas of society, sports included, in the here and now. It just means that you're not ideologically perfectly consistent, because nobody is and nobody can be. jarofpiss posted:elite athletes are the sum total of the circumstances of their birth, structural advantages they enjoyed as children, access to competetive teams/facilities/etc, support networks encouraging their participation, and then a lot of hard work and talent. well gently caress me i typed all those words and JOP just fuckin blows me away with a better post lol
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2022 16:49
|
|