The 'Trans' Issue.

[John Wright]

3 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

do you think he was wrong disqualifying the winner then John?

As a politician I don’t think he even has the legal right to do so. That’s the action of a non democratic despot. 

It’s up to the governing body to set the rules in a fair and non arbitrary manner.

If they’ve got the rules wrong it’s up to public opinion and athletes to change them.

 

 

[Chinahand]

Which moves the issue back to the substantive one - have they got the rules wrong?

There's always the answer, not for me to say, but that does seem a kop out.

I suppose what I'm wondering is can the Gordian knot be untangled?

John's said:

2 hours ago, John Wright said:

I just think you’ve completely misunderstood, fallen for the Alt Right rhetoric

I again fall back on my main position:

On 3/24/2022 at 1:05 PM, Chinahand said:

In the great majority of cases it is perfectly legitimate to say a woman has XX chromosomes and the sexual characteristics for the insemination and brooding of a child. This simple definition is not all encompassing and the legal protections of the exceptions and the impact this has on wider society is a legitimate area of social, political and legal debate.

Is having this view giving succour to the Alt Right, non-inclusive or pejorative?

Edited March 25, 2022 by Chinahand
Can't spell

[John Wright]

48 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

Which moves the issue back to the substantive one - have they got the rules wrong?

There's always the answer, not for me to say, but that does seem a cope out.

suppose what I'm wondering is can the Gordian knot be untangled?

John's said:

I again fall back on my main position:

Is having this view giving succour to the Alt Right, non-inclusive or pejorative?

Whether they’ve got the rules right or wrong depends on whether they’re fair or arbitrary, within the science and law of the land.

Im not saying I won’t say, just I won’t say without knowing facts, context, parameters.

We don’t have to cut or untangle every Gordian knot. Sometimes there is more than one acceptable and right answer.

You're far too hung up on biological sex. There’s gender, which isn’t biologically determined. And, as I pointed out, male/female, woman/man, boy/girl, can, and do, have different meanings in different situations, different times, different cultures.

Its the inability of the Alt Right, the religious fundamentalists, to recognise there can be any departure from their blinkered, allegedly god determined, straight jacket, views, and recognise that humanity is a broad and varied church, that causes the problems. Anything that supports their politics of hate and exclusion gives succour to their pejorative narrow outlook and their discriminatory, non inclusive, views. Views that, whilst, maybe, sincerely held, are totally arbitrary and unfair.

[Chinahand]

I've heard the phrase about being trapped in the wrong body, and I think there are reasonable lines to be drawn where the gender a person identifies with are an insufficient reason to ignore the physical characteristics their body has given them.  This has relevance especially in sport, but also in other segregated environments. 

Usually behaving with decorum would be sufficient to police behaviour in segregated spaces, but when it comes to prisons and possibly places like rape and domestic abuse refuges I can understand why many people think self identified gender isn't sufficient and physical characteristics matter to.

Erm ... that is the strongest statement I've ever made on this issue.  Interesting! I suppose that makes me non-inclusive.  I wonder how many people would view what I've written as pejorative, or beyond the pale?

[John Wright]

47 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

I've heard the phrase about being trapped in the wrong body, and I think there are reasonable lines to be drawn where the gender a person identifies with are an insufficient reason to ignore the physical characteristics their body has given them.  This has relevance especially in sport, but also in other segregated environments. 

Usually behaving with decorum would be sufficient to police behaviour in segregated spaces, but when it comes to prisons and possibly places like rape and domestic abuse refuges I can understand why many people think self identified gender isn't sufficient and physical characteristics matter to.

Erm ... that is the strongest statement I've ever made on this issue.  Interesting! I suppose that makes me non-inclusive.  I wonder how many people would view what I've written as pejorative, or beyond the pale?

I’m not sure it does, though, China.

The “trapped in the wrong body” is dated medically and off the scale in the community, I suspect.

Im not sure that there is a problem for prisons or refuges if there’s been a proper diagnosis, hormone treatment and surgical reassignment followed by gender recognition certificate. The difficulty is with self certification, possibly with no surgery. So an anatomically correct XY in an XX setting.

Theres no easy answer. All the mtf people I’ve known have had gonad and penis removal, but not all have had vaginoplasty. All of the ftm people I’ve known have had breast removal, but less than a third have had penis construction surgery. So, even in the trans community ( is there such a thing? ) there’s no “normal”.

[manxman1980]

As far as sport goes why not go down the route taken by those with disabilities and add in different classes?

By the way most athletic sports don't have a "male" category.  They are open events so anyone can enter regardless of sex or gender.  The reason women tend not to enter is because they cannot compete with biological males who have had the benefit of male puberty.

So as far as sport and athletics go it should be easy enough to create a new class that would allow transgender individuals to compete fairly and free from discrimination.

[John Wright]

8 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

As far as sport goes why not go down the route taken by those with disabilities and add in different classes?

By the way most athletic sports don't have a "male" category.  They are open events so anyone can enter regardless of sex or gender.  The reason women tend not to enter is because they cannot compete with biological males who have had the benefit of male puberty.

So as far as sport and athletics go it should be easy enough to create a new class that would allow transgender individuals to compete fairly and free from discrimination.

Not sure that what you say is true. There are a very few sports where entry/participation is gender blind. But most there is a mens and womens category.

The number of trans athletes is tiny. Not enough to run competitions. The bigger issue may be what to do with people like Caster Semenya.

[Sheldon]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

So as far as sport and athletics go it should be easy enough to create a new class that would allow transgender individuals to compete fairly and free from discrimination.

Can't we just give everybody a gold medal?

[Declan]

6 hours ago, Chinahand said:

Declan, your last sentence is the issue. What should people do if they don't have that luxury?

 

 

Be pragmatic and compassionate.

[HeliX]

On 3/24/2022 at 1:18 PM, wrighty said:

to suddenly self-declare to be a woman and win a gold medal in a woman’s race.

EDIT: Just seen your follow-up post and it's unfair of me to direct the first two sentences of this post at you. So pretend I didn't

Strange choice of wording. Lia Thomas didn't "suddenly self-declare" and win a gold medal in a women's race. She went through the medical system for several years of treatment etc starting in 2019. Prior to this she was in the top 30-40 or so in the country, competing as a man. 6th fastest in the 1,000 yards freestyle. After starting HRT, she continued to compete in the men's division and did poorly - her times increased by 5-7%, which is generally accepted as about the difference between men's and women's times in the events she competes in (500 yards, 1650 yards) anyway.

Is her competing in the women's races "fair"? No idea. Suspect no-one else here has any real idea either. Who does have an idea, is the sports commissions and regulating bodies, which is good because they're the ones who'll decide ultimately. Maybe they'll get it wrong sometimes, maybe they won't.

Sport is inherently unfair anyway. Did Michael Phelps work for his genetics that give him an obscene wingspan? Nope. Does that give him a big advantage? Yup. Is it "fair" on his competitors who were born without such natural advantages? Nope. What ya gonna do.

Edited March 26, 2022 by HeliX

[HeliX]

On 3/25/2022 at 11:17 AM, Chinahand said:

I can genuinely see in the near future a group of conservative politicised men creating crises in women's sports - some muscled hunk is going to hold a press conference, declare "I am apache attack helicopter AND a women" and insist on being admitted to the women's weight lifting team.

The strategy adopted by a lot of the left is simply unable to challenge this - that in my view is crazy and I don't think we should just go, I've the luxury of not being concerned by this.

The strategy of "it's up to the sporting commission to decide whether that person's hormone levels are appropriate for the competition they wish to enter" is perfectly able to challenge that shithousery.

[Passing Time]

7 hours ago, HeliX said:

EDIT: Just seen your follow-up post and it's unfair of me to direct the first two sentences of this post at you. So pretend I didn't

Strange choice of wording. Lia Thomas didn't "suddenly self-declare" and win a gold medal in a women's race. She went through the medical system for several years of treatment etc starting in 2019. Prior to this she was in the top 30-40 or so in the country, competing as a man. 6th fastest in the 1,000 yards freestyle. After starting HRT, she continued to compete in the men's division and did poorly - her times increased by 5-7%, which is generally accepted as about the difference between men's and women's times in the events she competes in (500 yards, 1650 yards) anyway.

Is her competing in the women's races "fair"? No idea. Suspect no-one else here has any real idea either. Who does have an idea, is the sports commissions and regulating bodies, which is good because they're the ones who'll decide ultimately. Maybe they'll get it wrong sometimes, maybe they won't.

Sport is inherently unfair anyway. Did Michael Phelps work for his genetics that give him an obscene wingspan? Nope. Does that give him a big advantage? Yup. Is it "fair" on his competitors who were born without such natural advantages? Nope. What ya gonna do.

Michael Phelps didn't choose to compete against women

[HeliX]

19 minutes ago, Passing Time said:

Michael Phelps didn't choose to compete against women

Did someone suggest that he did?

Lia Thomas didn't "choose to compete against women" either. She is a woman, fits the criteria to compete in the women's divisions, and therefore competes in the women's divisions.

[Passing Time]

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

Did someone suggest that he did?

Lia Thomas didn't "choose to compete against women" either. She is a woman, fits the criteria to compete in the women's divisions, and therefore competes in the women's divisions.

And on it goes…

[Chinahand]

The central issue in this discussion seems to be whether there are objective criteria that defines a woman or man: or, in this context, if the simple declaration that a person is a particular sex is sufficient. 

A sporting organisation etc may set certain criteria to allow a person compete in a given class but these criteria do not define the sex of the person. 

Helix is it your view that Lia Thomas was a woman the moment she declared this irrespective of morphology or hormone status. If not what is it that allows you to say she is a woman?

I am not trolling here I'm trying to have a reasoned discussion and understand meaning can radically change compared to historical understanding.