The 'Trans' Issue.

[RecklessAbandon]

20 hours ago, Chinahand said:

People with penises should not use women's changing rooms. 

Unisex changing facilities should be made available. 

Which bathroom should a hermaphrodite use?

[The Phantom]

13 hours ago, Declan said:

Where? There always a naked civil servent or two walking around the gym changing rooms talking about meetings he's had about meetings meat and two veg on display and getting all your stuff wet because he can't shower in private like a civilised human.

There always seems to be one of those guys in every gym changing room.  Old men who are weirdly comfortable in their nakedness.  I've even seen one of them using a hair drier on their balls.  They also seem to do a lot of lunging and bending over based stretches. 

The difference is that there generally aren't any children in a gym changing rooms as they're usually for 16+

Edited May 23 by The Phantom

[Chinahand]

1 hour ago, RecklessAbandon said:

21 hours ago, Chinahand said:

People with penises should not use women's changing rooms. 

Unisex changing facilities should be made available. 

Which bathroom should a hermaphrodite use?

The obvious answer is Unisex. As in facilities for universal sexes. 

But a couple of practical points. It is crazy to convert all toilet facilities etc to unisex. This is a practical issue which effects a tiny minority and generally people tend to prefer sex segregated toilets etc. The women in my office definitely did!

Unisex facilities should be available but if they are not use decorum and the most appropriate facilities.

Toilets, changing rooms all have slightly different issues but basically these are private spaces where people should behave with decorum.

I find the way this issue is overblown political rather than practical. 

 

[Chinahand]

My view is people with penises should not use women's changing facilities. 

Quite definitely 6 ft people with penises who have committed multiple rapes of women should not be placed in to women's prisons. 

The knots gender ideology has tied itself into is very sad. 

And given right wingers a free hit as ideologues defend the undefendable. 

 

 

[Freggyragh]

That's the tragedy of the culture war — on the trans rights issue it gives roasters like Ted Cruz ample opportunity to win hearts and minds by just stating the obvious and shredding the overreach by asking reasonable questions.

[RecklessAbandon]

On 5/25/2024 at 3:10 PM, Chinahand said:

My view is people with penises should not use women's changing facilities. 

Quite definitely 6 ft people with penises who have committed multiple rapes of women should not be placed in to women's prisons. 

The knots gender ideology has tied itself into is very sad. 

And given right wingers a free hit as ideologues defend the undefendable. 

 

 

Being on the same side of an issue as Ted Cruz is not the "win" you think it is.

Also, Gaines is weapons grade bat shit crazy because she thinks trans women have an advantage at chess.

Gaines, a member of the Independent Women's Voice group:

"Donors to IWF have included Donors Trust, the John William Pope Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Scaife Foundations, the Randolph Foundation, and the John M. Olin Foundation.  Another major sponsor is the Charles Koch Institute, while Facebook, Dick DeVos and the Walton Family Foundation have also given money to the organization".

Maybe next time you signal boost people, a cursory look at them would in order.
 

[John Wright]

On 5/25/2024 at 3:10 PM, Chinahand said:

My view is people with penises should not use women's changing facilities. 

Quite definitely 6 ft people with penises who have committed multiple rapes of women should not be placed in to women's prisons. 

The knots gender ideology has tied itself into is very sad. 

And given right wingers a free hit as ideologues defend the undefendable. 

 

 

Maybe give this a read. It’s a really good review. 
 

https://apple.news/A-BgpFquITL-aC_U2ow9-Ig

[Chinahand]

I've decided not to post this in the Olympics thread. 

Below is a long Xcreet explaining XY DSD. 

Biology is complex and often challenges simple characterizations and essentialism. 

What is fairness, what is male and female aren't easy questions, but in sports I think I take the view athletes should be classified by testosterone levels. 

Humans in the vast majority of cases follow two development pathways which can be correlated with both non overlapping levels of testosterone and their external genitalia. 

The few people per 10,000 whose external genitalia don't match with the pathway they have developed under can usually live their lives in privacy but for someone who has developed on the male pathway with male levels of testosterone but female external genitalia there are hugely complex issues when they take part in elite sport. 

Achievements which are exceptional for a female can be routine for a male. An achievement which puts someone in the top 100 female athletes might put them in the top 10,000 males. 

Celebrating the huge efforts and achievement to become a top 100 athlete is understandable. A top 10,000 one less so.

People who have developed without the effects of testosterone have an inherent disadvantage over those who have. Or to reverse it, a body that has had the advantage of testosterone has an unfair advantage over those that have not. 

For me this seems a reasonably understandable way of addressing the issue.

If you have developed under a male testosterone pathway you should not compete against women.

It isn't clear cut and I'd be interested in hearing alternative views but because it involves genitalia there is always a certain amount of sniggering from the peanut gallery. 

Feel for the confusion of humans who are subject to terrible abuse for no fault of their own and who have worked hard to become a top 10,000 athlete. 

 

 

Edited August 2 by Chinahand

[HeliX]

28 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

I've decided not to post this in the Olympics thread. 

Below is a long Xcreet explaining XY DSD. 

Biology is complex and often challenges simple characterizations and essentialism. 

What is fairness, what is male and female aren't easy questions, but in sports I think I take the view athletes should be classified by testosterone levels. 

Humans in the vast majority of cases follow two development pathways which can be correlated with both non overlapping levels of testosterone and their external genitalia. 

The few people per 10,000 whose external genitalia don't match with the pathway they have developed under can usually live their lives in privacy but for someone who has developed on the male pathway with male levels of testosterone but female external genitalia there are hugely complex issues when they take part in elite sport. 

Achievements which are exceptional for a female can be routine for a male. An achievement which puts someone in the top 100 female athletes might put them in the top 10,000 males. 

Celebrating the huge efforts and achievement to become a top 100 athlete is understandable. A top 10,000 one less so.

People who have developed without the effects of testosterone have an inherent disadvantage over those who have. Or to reverse it, a body that has had the advantage of testosterone has an unfair advantage over those that have not. 

For me this seems a reasonably understandable way of addressing the issue.

If you have developed under a male testosterone pathway you should not compete against women.

It isn't clear cut and I'd be interested in hearing alternative views but because it involves genitalia there is always a certain amount of sniggering from the peanut gallery. 

Feel for the confusion of humans who are subject to terrible abuse for no fault of their own and who have worked hard to become a top 10,000 athlete. 

 

 

Presumably you need to set a hard limit somewhere, at which point women nearer that limit still have significant advantage over women far from that limit. There doesn't seem to be an obvious answer as far as I can see.

The issue of fairness in sport is an interesting one. As I mentioned in the Olympics thread, the Olympics (and other elite level sport) is always going to self-select a preponderance of genetic abnormalities. A "normal" human could train twice as hard as Phelps and not come anywhere near him. A "normal" human could train twice as hard as Eddie Hall (who has a genetic abnormality which results in him not producing a normal amount of myostatin, which lets him develop an abnormal amount of muscle) and never come anywhere near deadlifting a half ton. The question then becomes what level of genetic/hormonal abnormality do you tolerate, and how is it fair upon those who through no fault of their own are outside that level?

And that's before we consider people cheating on purpose...

[TheTeapot]

You know the boxer has been in the olympics before right? There might not be anything 'wrong' with her at all. Amateur boxing is corrupt as fuck* and some incredibly shady stuff has gone over the years. It's not just money and bribes either, it's political. Be wise not to believe anything the IBA (AIBA) say.

*The IOC is obviously pretty bad, but AIBA have been disgraceful for years and years.

[manxman1980]

This is really confusing the anti-trans brigade especially those who insist your gender is set by the genitals which you are born with.

It would be amusing if it wasn't so tragic for those involved. 

[John Wright]

On 5/23/2024 at 7:29 AM, wrighty said:

Maybe, but less efficient. Ever been for a pee at a large outdoor concert? Men are in and out, women queue for ages. And would you argue that facilities everywhere have to change their existing male/female changing rooms to avoid upsetting a tiny minority of the population?

 

On 5/23/2024 at 9:32 AM, HeliX said:

No, but I also don't have a problem with people just using whatever bathroom makes them most comfortable. Anything being newly set up should be individual cubicles.

Missed this in May.

i occasionally got to the Amsterdam Opera, Stopera,  for dance performances. Modern building opened between 1986 and 1988. It has amazing access, large foyers and space for public circulation. It’s also liberally supplied, at all levels, with loos. Male and female, each with at least one accessible cubicle.

Interval time there’s a long queue for the ladies, and many ladies go Into the gents. No one bats an eye lid. This fuss seems to be a very Anglo/American thing.

And none of them use the accessible cubicle, unless they’re entitled. But you don’t have to show anything or prove anything.

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, Chinahand said:

I've decided not to post this in the Olympics thread. 

Below is a long Xcreet explaining XY DSD. 

Biology is complex and often challenges simple characterizations and essentialism. 

What is fairness, what is male and female aren't easy questions, but in sports I think I take the view athletes should be classified by testosterone levels. 

Humans in the vast majority of cases follow two development pathways which can be correlated with both non overlapping levels of testosterone and their external genitalia. 

The few people per 10,000 whose external genitalia don't match with the pathway they have developed under can usually live their lives in privacy but for someone who has developed on the male pathway with male levels of testosterone but female external genitalia there are hugely complex issues when they take part in elite sport. 

Achievements which are exceptional for a female can be routine for a male. An achievement which puts someone in the top 100 female athletes might put them in the top 10,000 males. 

Celebrating the huge efforts and achievement to become a top 100 athlete is understandable. A top 10,000 one less so.

People who have developed without the effects of testosterone have an inherent disadvantage over those who have. Or to reverse it, a body that has had the advantage of testosterone has an unfair advantage over those that have not. 

For me this seems a reasonably understandable way of addressing the issue.

If you have developed under a male testosterone pathway you should not compete against women.

It isn't clear cut and I'd be interested in hearing alternative views but because it involves genitalia there is always a certain amount of sniggering from the peanut gallery. 

Feel for the confusion of humans who are subject to terrible abuse for no fault of their own and who have worked hard to become a top 10,000 athlete. 

 

 

 

49 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Presumably you need to set a hard limit somewhere, at which point women nearer that limit still have significant advantage over women far from that limit. There doesn't seem to be an obvious answer as far as I can see.

The issue of fairness in sport is an interesting one. As I mentioned in the Olympics thread, the Olympics (and other elite level sport) is always going to self-select a preponderance of genetic abnormalities. A "normal" human could train twice as hard as Phelps and not come anywhere near him. A "normal" human could train twice as hard as Eddie Hall (who has a genetic abnormality which results in him not producing a normal amount of myostatin, which lets him develop an abnormal amount of muscle) and never come anywhere near deadlifting a half ton. The question then becomes what level of genetic/hormonal abnormality do you tolerate, and how is it fair upon those who through no fault of their own are outside that level?

And that's before we consider people cheating on purpose...

So we have XX, XY, XO, XXY, XXX, sex chromosome combinations, and other genotypes, which give rise to differing observable phenotype.

And then on top of the sex chromosomes there can be genetic mutations, that cause issues with production or absorption or function of hormones affecting, triggering, or changing genetic expression.

Then there are environmental influences.

Some of the mutations and environmental influences may have an effect only in utero, others may be life long.

It was simple when the midwife sexed people at birth and you had documentation, and you couldn’t change it and no one could test.

i don’t claim to know the answer. There’s always going to be someone dissatisfied. There’s always going to be the zealots on both sides.

What I do know is that the treatment has a sex/gender difference of sexual development shouldn’t be humiliated and pilloried and outed like some contestants have been. 

The chances of getting an international agreement for either persons with differences of sexual development is low, or for trans eligibility is miniscule.

[HeliX]

 

 

[Albert Tatlock]

One of my friends is a lesbian and she burnt herself cooking burgers the other afternoon. Now she's LGBTBBQ.