Transgender Rights

[prinCZess]

And given that I explicitly stated that trans women participate under hormone level restrictions, I fail to see what claim you believe I'm "alluding to".

I didn't see the former (was it in that post and I just really fucked up and read right over it without engaging brain? Even If not...I will freely admit to not having read the whole thread--which is solely on me and my fault still, but at least a little less embarrassing), and the 'alluding to' statement was referring to is this bit (which I had but then got replaced by the quoted bit by accident).

The current conclusion of the IOC is that, contrary to stereotype, trans women under hormone treatment have no measurable performance advantage over cis women.

It just seems odd to reference or treat the IOCs decision in general as any kind of authoritative item or one that suggests much of anything when it's based on nothing (or seriously lacking study) according to both critics--from both sides of the whole trans issue--and the IOC itself. That was the extent of my point, really. The IOCs shooting in the dark and still going off preexisting presumptions of differences existing, so arguing they studied the issue and determined no performance difference...isn't accurate?

Apologies for my confusion and screw-ups.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Neither the IOC nor the NCAA is globally authoritative, no, but no such global authority exists in the first place. But when we're talking about actual participation in actual sports, the numerous governing bodies which have authority over the individual sports have follpwed the IOC in adopting policies, and that's why I refer back to it -- because it's the general origin point for current policies in place.

And I wouldn't describe fairly extensive consultations with subject matter experts and a reasonably extensive review of the published scientific literature as "shooting in the dark". The IOC policy was set and updated in a solid best reading of the relevant evidence.

 

[FriedCFour]

You're completely ignoring the arguments and evidence I have provided showing that the biology alone is a great deal more complex than that. While intersex conditions are edge cases, they are "the exception that proves the rule" in terms of the actual science and medicine, which cannot be dismissed in good faith as "just psychology". Insisting that "XX is female and XY is male" as an axiomatic absolute as opposed to a convenient rule of thumb is clearly wrong, given that there are such things as actual successful pregnancy carried to term by XY individuals.

Thats entirely irrelevant to anything. You are talking about a birth defect that almost always causes some kind of measurable harm and deficiency to the person affected. That in no way means someone non-intersex is now a woman because they declare themselves to be one. And if you go by the scientific, you cannot say a mere declaration makes you that thing anymore than I become black by saying so.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Thats entirely irrelevant to anything. You are talking about a birth defect that almost always causes some kind of measurable harm and deficiency to the person affected. That in no way means someone non-intersex is now a woman because they declare themselves to be one. And if you go by the scientific, you cannot say a mere declaration makes you that thing anymore than I become black by saying so.

So non-binary definitely don’t exist?

 

[FriedCFour]

So non-binary definitely don’t exist?

In sex? Not really, there are two sexes. The rest are birth defects that almost universally confer infertility along with other health issues. Saying the intersex prove non-binary or transpeople as real is like saying that downsydrome proves we have two human species because the chromosomes are different.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

So non-binary definitely don’t exist?

Non-binary is on the level of psychological gender and social role, as opposed to biological sex. Intersex conditions in biological sex exist, but are independent of nonbinary identities.

Also note that I have not actually argued that intersex conditions refute "normal" gender being binary; I quite specifically called them the exception that proves the rule, and argue that they refute the claim that as an axiomatic absolute, "XX means female and XY means male and that's all there is to it."

 

[FriedCFour]

XX means female and XY means male and that's all there is to it.

With the exception of life long debilitating birth defects.

 

[Deleted member 1]

It is a point of fact that fertile human XY females exist, though they are exquisitely rare. Biology is a messy, complicated effort by life to keep living. That isn’t the point, this is all a substantial tangent. If the transgenderist political ideology was about letting people with physically variant brain conditions transition, then brain scans would be the gold standard of diagnostics. Instead, they have been lobbying for self-identification to be. Why? (yes yes. a brain scan might not exist yet, so physicians would rely on psychiatrists, but it would be the generally accepted gold standard of science.)

Because if you relied on brain scans then you would not be serving an anti-gender political ideology.

 

[Bacle]

It is a point of fact that fertile human XY females exist, though they are exquisitely rare. Biology is a messy, complicated effort by life to keep living. That isn’t the point, this is all a substantial tangent. If the transgenderist political ideology was about letting people with physically variant brain conditions transition, then brain scans would be the gold standard of diagnostics. Instead, they have been lobbying for self-identity to be. Why? (yes yes. a brain scan might not exist yet, so physicians would rely on psychiatrists, but it would be the generally accepted gold standard of science.)

Because if you relied on brain scans then you would not be serving an anti-gender political ideology.

The world would be better off trashing Gender Theory entirely, and going back to biological sex and sexual oreintation when it comes to these matters.

'Gender' as a concept just unecessarily muddies the waters that were previously far more clear.

 

[Deleted member 1]

@Bacle , the essential reality of femininity is a core tenet of my religion, so I am necessarily opposed to transgenderist ideology. I have made my views on this subject abundantly clear earlier in the thread, which to me has addressed everything of interest at this point, so I am going to bow out.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Gender as a concept being unnecessary to you does not make it unnecessary to everyone, and the idea that actual scientific and medical knowledge should be "trashed" simply because it is more complicated is deeply anathema to actually understanding the world.

For the substantial majority of people whose sex and gender are simple and congruent, the interchangeable use of both terms and sixth grade level simplification of scientific knowledge are sufficient. That is not wrong, and I've never argued that it's wrong, only that it's not axiomatically correct or all there is.

For professionals in the field and the minority of people with medical conditions otherwise, the more specific technical definitions of the terminology are necessary and useful, and the more nuanced and complex understanding of current day science is necessary.

 

[Chaos Blade]

Gender as a concept being unnecessary to you does not make it unnecessary to everyone, and the idea that actual scientific and medical knowledge should be "trashed" simply because it is more complicated is deeply anathema to actually understanding the world.

For the substantial majority of people whose sex and gender are simple and congruent, the interchangeable use of both terms and sixth grade level simplification of scientific knowledge are sufficient. That is not wrong, and I've never argued that it's wrong, only that it's not axiomatically correct or all there is.

For professionals in the field and the minority of people with medical conditions otherwise, the more specific technical definitions of the terminology are necessary and useful, and the more nuanced and complex understanding of current day science is necessary.

iirc part of the problem here is less Gender and more the differences between colloquial and scientific uses of Gender and that is where a lot of the issues seem to take root

 

[Sol Zagato]

iirc part of the problem here is less Gender and more the differences between colloquial and scientific uses of Gender and that is where a lot of the issues seem to take root

That and importing terms from the academic fringe.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

That and importing terms from the academic fringe.

Plus, we’ve yet to meet any naturally non-defective biologically hermaphrodite sapient species or even artificial intelligence

 

[MementoMori]

My opinion on the matter:

There are no such thing as a trans person (at least indefinitely) as the name implies they are "crossing" over to the other gender. And when they "finish" their transition they are fully that gender (which is pretty much impossible at this point in time). Which is why at this point they are shit out of luck.

Now whether or not we should create "special" legislations for them, then the answer is no. The whole point of "transitioning" is to fit in if not socially then at least physically, to further isolate them is quite the cruelty.

Onto sports, well I would relegate that decision to the respective sports federations. Although with the recent spree of female world records being broken by trans-men, they better hurry up before we're no longer watching female sports division but the vaguely female was men division.

 

[Nitramy]

Plus, we’ve yet to meet any naturally non-defective biologically hermaphrodite sapient species or even artificial intelligence

Unless you count Bible Black as a real thing, but that would mean your border between fantasy and reality is tenuous at best and nonexistent at worst.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Unless you count Bible Black as a real thing, but that would mean your border between fantasy and reality is tenuous at best and nonexistent at worst.

Eh, you know my time on SB kinda made me find that ironically there are “nerds” getting into the whole fiction changes people’s behaviors by “teachjng them morals and situations”.

Take in mind, I’m pretty sure these guys don’t like the whole, playing violent videogames makes mass murderers thing.

So odds are they’d believe this “Bible Black” to represent a possible situation in the future

 

[Nitramy]

Eh, you know my time on SB kinda made me find that ironically there are “nerds” getting into the whole fiction changes people’s behaviors by “teaching them morals and situations”.

Well I do believe that, but not to the extent a zealot nutjob like Anita Sarkeesian would.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Well I do believe that, but not to the extent a zealot nutjob like Anita Sarkeesian would.

To paraphrase appabend from youtube, “Did you actually change your life just because you heard some nice morals and theme from playing Metal Gear?”

I’m pretty sure plenty of that stuff flies over people’s heads or they just consume that stuff because even if they don’t listen or care for the themes, it’s still fun for things like fight scenes, art, fanservice and emotional moments.

 

[Nitramy]

To paraphrase appabend from youtube, “Did you actually change your life just because you heard some nice morals and theme from playing Metal Gear?”

I’m pretty sure plenty of that stuff flies over people’s heads or they just consume that stuff because even if they don’t listen or care for the themes, it’s still fun for things like fight scenes, art, fanservice and emotional moments.

Fair enough; but what I was going for is that watching a lot of pornography can and does change a person's attitudes towards sex and relationships -- not to the SJW/DiGRA/goon squad extreme of wanting to "OPPRESS WAHMEN", but it's there.

Also, why do a lot of these asshole trans people see normal people (I refuse to use the c-word on principle, fuck Tumblr) as enemies and act obnoxiously towards them?

Not winning you any supporters there, friends.