International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Social Issues & Current Events (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=82)
-   -   Trans Women are not Women (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325369)

Chanakya 8th December 2017 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106628)
B

I think weight classes are equally silly.


Why "silly"? It makes sense to not have a six-and-half-footer fight (or race with) a five-footer, for instance.

Of course, one may prefer to have the fight go on anyway, either for its entertainment value, or because one prefers not to interfere with whatever advantages some competitor has been born with. One may disagree or prefer otherwise, but surely the point of segregation, whether by sex or height or weight or whatever, is reasonable enough?

caveman1917 8th December 2017 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chanakya (Post 12106639)
Why "silly"? It makes sense to not have a six-and-half-footer fight (or race with) a five-footer, for instance.

Of course, one may prefer to have the fight go on anyway, either for its entertainment value, or because one prefers not to interfere with whatever advantages some competitor has been born with. One may disagree or prefer otherwise, but surely the point of segregation, whether by sex or height or weight or whatever, is reasonable enough?

I think Bob has been taking the sarcasm train in this thread.

theprestige 8th December 2017 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elagabalus (Post 12106412)
Quoted so you can't take it away ...

What are you talking about?

quadraginta 8th December 2017 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhatter (Post 12106087)
The logic is circular.

The parent has final say but it's following the child's wishes.

<snip>

We don't even let people tattoo themselves before adulthood.


As it is made clearly and abundantly evident by both the beginning and the end of your post (as well as all that falls between) that you chose to completely ignore the central points of mine, I have to conclude that you have no real interest in engaging in any sort of sincere discourse, but only want to air your uninformed prejudices without the inconvenience of considering any facts which may prove troublesome to them.

Roboramma 8th December 2017 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106626)
I said what earlier

a modernist, abstract, conceptual art phase of sports appreciation. The concept and ideas of the sport take precedence over traditional aesthetic, technical, and material concerns.

And how is that related to having different strokes in swimming, or weight classes in weight lifting (or fighting)?

BobTheCoward 8th December 2017 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12106748)
And how is that related to having different strokes in swimming, or weight classes in weight lifting (or fighting)?

I would group those as traditional, material concerns of the sport.

Roboramma 8th December 2017 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106770)
I would group those as traditional, material concerns of the sport.

And you want to get rid of the material concerns of the sport?

BobTheCoward 8th December 2017 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12106773)
And you want to get rid of the material concerns of the sport?

Yes, sort of. We can just lower their precedence. Reduce it to the pure idea of the sport. Get across the pool with your body. I would consider proposals to get rid of start times, lanes, fixed distances, etc. But I'm fine with just a pure expression of swimming across the pool faster than others.

I think maybe just simply abstract sport is a better fit.

Brainster 8th December 2017 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by This is The End (Post 12105049)
So while it is obviously also discriminatory to have a rule something like:

Womens basketball has a new rule. No transwomen.

It shouldn't really be any different than before... It again is the price of having that sport exist in that way.

I'm not really seeing how there is a "new" problem even in light of the current civil rights environment.

It's sensible, but it flies in the face of the current push for everyone to accept that a transwoman is just as much a woman as a ciswoman.

theprestige 8th December 2017 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainster (Post 12106918)
It's sensible, but it flies in the face of the current push for everyone to accept that a transwoman is just as much a woman as a ciswoman.

I think we're not far from a push to accept that transwomen are even more women than ciswomen.

The Atheist 8th December 2017 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elagabalus (Post 12106412)
Quoted so you can't take it away ...

Utterly pointless, then - I wouldn't change a word and I considered it carefully before posting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106562)
That is kind of a cruel notion that you don't like another woman's body because it is different.

Outstanding. Cruelty doesn't exist anywhere else, I presume?

Not to mention the obvious point that it isn't a woman's body, which is kind of the point of the OP. Women are usually identified by the lack of a penis. Even if it's surgically removed, the body is still not a woman's body - it is a man's body with some cosmetic changes. Inside, they will still reflect the biological gender - you know, things like prostates, uteruses, ovaries...

BobTheCoward 8th December 2017 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Atheist (Post 12107117)
Utterly pointless, then - I wouldn't change a word and I considered it carefully before posting.



Outstanding. Cruelty doesn't exist anywhere else, I presume?

Not to mention the obvious point that it isn't a woman's body, which is kind of the point of the OP. Women are usually identified by the lack of a penis. Even if it's surgically removed, the body is still not a woman's body - it is a man's body with some cosmetic changes. Inside, they will still reflect the biological gender - you know, things like prostates, uteruses, ovaries...

Usually doesn't mean all. As we become more enlightened as a species we become more aware of what actually makes us human.

cullennz 8th December 2017 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12107137)
Usually doesn't mean all. As we become more enlightened as a species we become more aware of what actually makes us human.

Being human doesn't change the fact it's a blokes body

Neither does respecting their wishes in how they want to be identified in life.

Until the fact their body starts to disadvantage others.

Personally think it is weird for her to chose to compete when she knows she has an unfair advantage

Marcus 8th December 2017 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106788)
Yes, sort of. We can just lower their precedence. Reduce it to the pure idea of the sport. Get across the pool with your body. I would consider proposals to get rid of start times, lanes, fixed distances, etc. But I'm fine with just a pure expression of swimming across the pool faster than others.

I think maybe just simply abstract sport is a better fit.

Yeah, no. No one is going to be interested in watching that, except perhaps you.

Marcus 8th December 2017 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Atheist (Post 12107117)
Utterly pointless, then - I wouldn't change a word and I considered it carefully before posting.



Outstanding. Cruelty doesn't exist anywhere else, I presume?

Not to mention the obvious point that it isn't a woman's body, which is kind of the point of the OP. Women are usually identified by the lack of a penis. Even if it's surgically removed, the body is still not a woman's body - it is a man's body with some cosmetic changes. Inside, they will still reflect the biological gender - you know, things like prostates, uteruses, ovaries...

For most purposes I'm willing to consider a transwoman a woman if they have had the surgery, if you have a penis, you're a man, sorry.

Sport is different, even after the surgery there is still too much advantage.

PhantomWolf 8th December 2017 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cullennz (Post 12107308)
Personally think it is weird for her to chose to compete when she knows she has an unfair advantage

Does she have an unfair advantage? The sports bodies obviously believe that there is little enough advantage to allow competition to occur.

We know that when Trans Women undergo hormone therapy that their muscle mass decreases and changes and that bone density decreases (this is an issue with women that take HRT after menopause as well, it can lead to osteoporosis because the HRT strips their bone density.)

With the stand down time meaning that the body will undergo these changes, and their having to be within normal hormonal limits for women, how much of an advantage do they really have? No one seems to be able to quantify it, and in fact the transwomen who have been taking part in sport as women have been getting beaten by naturally born women goes to show that they aren't totally outstripping other women.

It seems to be more a case of people just assuming that if a transwoman finished in the top 5 she was able to do it because she used to be a man, not because she might actually have worked her ass off to get to a level to be in the top 5.

PhantomWolf 8th December 2017 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12107326)
For most purposes I'm willing to consider a transwoman a woman if they have had the surgery, if you have a penis, you're a man, sorry.

What about a man that lost his penis due to accident or illness, is he no longer a man? How about someone that has both a penis and a vigina? How about a Trans-man who hasn't has a Metoidioplasty or Phalloplasty?

Quote:

Sport is different, even after the surgery there is still too much advantage.
Care to quantify what that advantage actually is?

Marcus 8th December 2017 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12107352)
What about a man that lost his penis due to accident or illness, is he no longer a man? How about someone that has both a penis and a vigina? How about a Trans-man who hasn't has a Metoidioplasty or Phalloplasty?

Keep in mind you're asking for my opinion here, people have different definitions.

A man who has lost his penis is still a man.

A person who has both a penis and a vagina is a hermaphrodite.

For women who trans, I take the same line, if they are serious enough to have the surgery, I consider them a man, even if their chromosones are still female. Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to insult someone by using pronouns they don't like, I just call them by their name.
Quote:






Care to quantify what that advantage actually is?
It has already been mentioned in this thread, if you grow up male, you have physical advantages, like height and bone density, that can't be reversed.

The Atheist 9th December 2017 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cullennz (Post 12107308)
Neither does respecting their wishes in how they want to be identified in life.

It becomes one of those cases where I wonder whose sensibilities matter most. There are old ladies who'd be horrified if a trans woman was dropping her bikini and swinging at the swimming pool changing rooms.

Sure, the old ladies aren't politically correct, but pushback against that has given us Trump, and shortly, Roy Moore.

Who wins?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12107326)
For most purposes I'm willing to consider a transwoman a woman if they have had the surgery, if you have a penis, you're a man, sorry.

Really? I thought most people had moved on from that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12107339)
Does she have an unfair advantage? The sports bodies obviously believe that there is little enough advantage to allow competition to occur.
...

It seems to be more a case of people just assuming that if a transwoman finished in the top 5 she was able to do it because she used to be a man, not because she might actually have worked her ass off to get to a level to be in the top 5.

I look at it a weightlifter whose record as a man placed him about 10,000th in the world, but as a woman, far past a natural woman's best age, is rated in the top few in the world and a shoe0in for gold at the CG.

I think her three and a bit decades as a man is still doing the trick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12107352)
How about someone that has both a penis and a vigina?

Interestingly, the first 3 places at the last Olympics for the women's 800m were filled by women who also have internal male organs - presumably testes. They're possibly the three most manly-looking women on the planet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12107396)
A person who has both a penis and a vagina is a hermaphrodite.

You could maybe try the word "intersex". It's an excellent descriptor and it's a lot more accurate than the biological term "hermaphrodite", which doesn't actually cover the physicalities of intersex people.

To those people, it's the gender equivalent of the n-word for coloured people.

Darat 9th December 2017 02:37 AM

At the top professional and amatuer levels wouldn't they have to undergo blood tests for drug use? What about having a rule that any "sex" hormone can't be used?

Roboramma 9th December 2017 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 12107522)
At the top professional and amatuer levels wouldn't they have to undergo blood tests for drug use? What about having a rule that any "sex" hormone can't be used?

Not sure how that's going to help. Wouldn't that just make the problem worse?

Oystein 9th December 2017 05:48 AM

I am a man of the garden variety. My body and its hormones happen to be balanced such that I am not very muscular. As a kid or teenager, I'd train track&field as hard as the other guys, and end up less strong, and consequently I was, and am, mediocre in any sport I try that needs muscle.

I could undergo hormone therapy, surgery and what not to become the testosterone-rich super-male that I honest to FSM I feel is my true nature and destination. Should I be allowed to compete in sports with my brand-new hulkiness? Obviously not.

I kinda feel similar about people treating their bodies in similar fashion to change sex and/or gender: the idea in sports is to compete with the body birth gave you, nurtured only with disciplined diet and hard work. Any manipulation is suspect, even though that's perfectly fine by me outside sports.

Marcus 9th December 2017 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Atheist (Post 12107516)

To those people, it's the gender equivalent of the n-word for coloured people.

Intersex is a more general term, but yes I understand that "hermaphrodite" is considered offensive, even by those for whom it is a more specific biological description.

BobTheCoward 9th December 2017 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12107322)
Yeah, no. No one is going to be interested in watching that, except perhaps you.

We don't all have to love sports the same way.

Roboramma 9th December 2017 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12107609)
I could undergo hormone therapy, surgery and what not to become the testosterone-rich super-male that I honest to FSM I feel is my true nature and destination. Should I be allowed to compete in sports with my brand-new hulkiness? Obviously not.

I don't think it's so obvious. I actually think that should be allowed.

Darat 9th December 2017 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12107559)
Not sure how that's going to help. Wouldn't that just make the problem worse?

Why? It would mean that a transwoman who is taking hormone treatment wouldnt be able to compete. Which is the case for many people who have to take drugs for their medical condition.

caveman1917 9th December 2017 08:48 AM

How about setting limits explicitly per relevant physical observable as determined by the specifics of the sport? For example in boxing you have weight classes, you step on the scale and whatever it reads determines the weight class you're in. And it doesn't matter how you got that weight, or what sex or gender or personality you have.

crescent 9th December 2017 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cullennz (Post 12107308)
Being human doesn't change the fact it's a blokes body

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 12107522)
At the top professional and amatuer levels wouldn't they have to undergo blood tests for drug use? What about having a rule that any "sex" hormone can't be used?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oystein (Post 12107609)
I could undergo hormone therapy, surgery and what not to become the testosterone-rich super-male that I honest to FSM I feel is my true nature and destination. Should I be allowed to compete in sports with my brand-new hulkiness? Obviously not.

I kinda feel similar about people treating their bodies in similar fashion to change sex and/or gender: the idea in sports is to compete with the body birth gave you, nurtured only with disciplined diet and hard work. Any manipulation is suspect, even though that's perfectly fine by me outside sports.

The thing is, though, that Transwomen are taking drugs that significantly and massively REDUCE their ability to compete. The male-to-female hormone therapy is the opposite of performance enhancement, it lowers muscle mass and bone mass, although that takes time to occur.

There is already precedence for measuring testosterone levels in athletes, with some suggestion that it only be measured for transgender or intersex athletes.

Testes are part of the endocrine system, they don't need to be removed to remove the effect they have if the person is undergoing proper hormone therapy.

caveman1917 9th December 2017 10:23 AM

What about using an ELO system? That way sources of competitive (dis)advantage are abstracted out, yet competitions remain fair automatically. And it naturally allows for transitions no matter how long they take, since someone's ELO score adapts to outcomes.

sadhatter 9th December 2017 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12106788)
Yes, sort of. We can just lower their precedence. Reduce it to the pure idea of the sport. Get across the pool with your body. I would consider proposals to get rid of start times, lanes, fixed distances, etc. But I'm fine with just a pure expression of swimming across the pool faster than others.

I think maybe just simply abstract sport is a better fit.

I'm guessing you are not a sports fan.

sadhatter 9th December 2017 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caveman1917 (Post 12107713)
How about setting limits explicitly per relevant physical observable as determined by the specifics of the sport? For example in boxing you have weight classes, you step on the scale and whatever it reads determines the weight class you're in. And it doesn't matter how you got that weight, or what sex or gender or personality you have.

Assuming equal skill my money is on the biological male ten out of ten times.

sadhatter 9th December 2017 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crescent (Post 12107726)
The thing is, though, that Transwomen are taking drugs that significantly and massively REDUCE their ability to compete. The male-to-female hormone therapy is the opposite of performance enhancement, it lowers muscle mass and bone mass, although that takes time to occur.

There is already precedence for measuring testosterone levels in athletes, with some suggestion that it only be measured for transgender or intersex athletes.

Testes are part of the endocrine system, they don't need to be removed to remove the effect they have if the person is undergoing proper hormone therapy.

Reducing their ability to compete against men, leaving them still at an advantage over women.

You can handicap yourself and still retain an advantage, it's all about degree.

sadhatter 9th December 2017 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caveman1917 (Post 12107811)
What about using an ELO system? That way sources of competitive (dis)advantage are abstracted out, yet competitions remain fair automatically. And it naturally allows for transitions no matter how long they take, since someone's ELO score adapts to outcomes.

Why not just trans leagues for sports?

BobTheCoward 9th December 2017 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhatter (Post 12107836)
I'm guessing you are not a sports fan.

I'm a huge sports fan. Just as I am a huge art fan that prefers abstract art, I prefer abstract sport.

Wolrab 9th December 2017 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sadhatter (Post 12107851)
Why not just trans leagues for sports?

Who would watch?

Hercules56 9th December 2017 12:23 PM

If I was a woman and was competing against a trans-woman in a sports event, I would feel cheated as the trans-woman would most likely have a physical advantage over me.

If I was a nation with few medals, I would put lots of trans-women onto my female Olympic track and field team so as to increase the odds of winning.

mgidm86 9th December 2017 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Atheist (Post 12107516)
It becomes one of those cases where I wonder whose sensibilities matter most. There are old ladies who'd be horrified if a trans woman was dropping her bikini and swinging at the swimming pool changing rooms.

Sure, the old ladies aren't politically correct, but pushback against that has given us Trump, and shortly, Roy Moore.

Being horrified by a man's dick in a women's dressing room is not politically incorrect. I would say the man wanting to whip his dick out in a women's changing room is the one causing the problem.

One can have an issue and still respect other's feelings - it goes both ways. Women have a side in this too, it's not all about the trans-person lawyer.

Political correctness has come to mean constantly making concessions to anyone with a gripe. Some of it is legit, a lot is bullcrap. This sports thing - total bullcrap.

It isn't the athletes, or trans-bathroom-users with the agenda either, it is the attorneys who use these people to sue people and make money. Sometimes they may even try and change public policy, but usually the money is enough. There's no public outcry for any of this. It's a manufactured "major issue". It's an issue, sure, but let's get some perspective.

Here's an idea - howzabout a trans-only sports class, where trans men and women can both compete? Should average about equal in the physical strength department ;)

tyr_13 9th December 2017 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 12106356)
But this isn't true. The case we're discussing here is biological males who start with an athletic advantage over biological females, before any hormone manipulation enters the picture. That makes it distinct from the other cases you discuss.

Eh, you're only partially right in that I shouldn't have said 'human manipulation'. Otherwise, it's entirely correct. More below.


Quote:

You're conflating several different sources of athletic advantage. A man who competes against women doesn't become a woman by virtue of the competition. This has no bearing on the gender--biological, psychological, or otherwise--of competitors who seek competitive advantage through other means.

I think you're really stretching here, to prove an unnecessary (and mistaken) point.
Why do you think the source is the deciding factor? It isn't. You're mixing levels of abstraction to make the comparisons not alike when on the salient levels they're alike.

I'll restate with more words you can disagree with. Why do we ban men from competing with women? Why do we ban doped people from competing with women? Why do we generally ban transgender women from competing with cis-women? They have hormonal advantages* that make the competition unfair or unsafe (or less entertaining). We don't ban men just because they're men; we ban them because of the hormonal advantage. We don't ban trans-women just because they're trans-women, but because of the advantage. Same with people who dope. The source of the advantage simply isn't the criteria, but the type and magnitude of the advantage is. The OP saying it's because trans-women aren't women is simply wrong, as the example of women who gain the same advantage through dopping clearly shows. For their idea to be true, we would have to consider women who dope to no longer be women.

It is no stretch. I think you all are turtling to protect outdated concepts.


*Yes, this is an oversimplification but is shorter to type.

quadraginta 9th December 2017 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 12107707)
Why? It would mean that a transwoman who is taking hormone treatment wouldnt be able to compete. Which is the case for many people who have to take drugs for their medical condition.


Are there sports which forbid the regular use of drugs that boost estrogen levels to those of a genetic female and concurrently suppress testosterone production toward the same end?

Marcus 9th December 2017 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward (Post 12107875)
I'm a huge sports fan. Just as I am a huge art fan that prefers abstract art, I prefer abstract sport.

Well that explains it, I'm a professional artist myself, and I don't like abstract art :D


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.