The Guardian: Joe Biden's gender discrimination order offers hope for young trans athletes - Discussion Thread

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

35 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

The only thing I know on this subject is that it's very not-important in the grand scheme of things.

I agree with this, which bears the question:

 

Why did sports have to be included in Biden's executive order?

 

Since it's very non-important, and it only impacts a very small # of people, there was no reason to include it in the executive order.

28 minutes ago, Hersh said:

Personally, I'm now waiting for the swarms of boys that are going to be like "if I become a girl for a couple of years, I'll win at sports" to take over and dominate the world. 

This is a strawman argument.

[tshile]

6 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

It's neither snark nor being disingenuous. If transgender woman didn't win, this wouldn't be an issue at all. 

According to you. 
 

that’s not the issue for everyone else. 
 

i see I overestimated your ability to understand that. 

[LadySkinsFan]

Here's some science: sex is biological, gender is a social construct. No matter how much cosmetic surgery, hormones, and language one takes/changes, one cannot change their sex. It's still definition by one's self-image. 

 

If transpersons want to compete as transpersons, develop sports categories for transpersons. This premise actually applies to everything in our society, prisons, bathrooms etc. 

 

I believe in treating everyone decently and with respect. I don't buy into the fiction that people can change sex. I certainly don't advocate for cosmetic surgery and hormones for children even before they are of legal age. If children don't have the maturity vote or sign contracts, how can they determine surgeries/hormones that last for their lifetime? At 70, I look back and can't imagine what this would have been like. I was a tomboy and in youth probably would have been targeted for transition to pseudo male. All without knowing what testosterone would do to my body long term. 

 

Please think hard about the medical industrial complex that is pushing this on vulnerable people FOR PROFIT, without concern for persons' long-term bodily harm and mental harm. All we hear about is the positive stories, not the horror stories of detransitioners. 

[tshile]

7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I agree with this, which bears the question:

 

Why did sports have to be included in Biden's executive order?

 

Since it's very non-important, and it only impacts a very small # of people, there was no reason to include it in the executive order.

Not that I disagree with the grand scheme importance of it - but for the people that actually are impacted by this, youth sports is a place it shows up. And when you’re talking about children (even teenagers) it gets… I don’t know the word. 
 

I mean all of this lives within the context of it impacting an incredibly small percentage of people. 
 

and while I disagree with the way it’s being handled, I have no problem understanding that for the people that are trans, and say, 15 years old, and they would like to play sports… that it does matter. It does have an impact. 
 

not that it’s the only part, but obviously it’s part of the issue with suicide within this group of people - like bathrooms, it’s one thing on a list of many that is a daily reminder about their differences. And, more importantly, how it makes them feel about themselves and what they think others think of them. 
 

I am someone who thinks youth sports are an incredibly part of growing up; they have a lot to offer a kid. Sometimes practice is just the best part of their life, cause home sucks. Lessons in team work, pushing yourself, the concept of competition and what it means to be better (or not) than someone, and what it takes to make yourself better. There’s reasons elite agencies/institutions/military put a high value on someone with a certain athletic background (like being a team captain, or excelling in certain sports)

 

It is an important issue. And when children are involved, it does matter. Just because it’s 1% doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter. 
 

 

[mojo]

On 1/25/2021 at 10:34 AM, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

I agree, there's no fair answer.

 

But I think your point in your 2nd paragraph speaks to a broader issue...at what point does society not bend to your reality that you've created for yourself?  

 

 

 

 

This has been my argument for many topics. I know I sound like an old man but a lot of the teenagers growing up today have the world bending over backwards for them and unfortunately, they have a harsh reality in store for them soon.

[The Evil Genius]

2 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Here's some science: sex is biological, gender is a social construct. No matter how much cosmetic surgery, hormones, and language one takes/changes, one cannot change their sex. It's still definition by one's self-image. 

 

If transpersons want to compete as transpersons, develop sports categories for transpersons. This premise actually applies to everything in our society, prisons, bathrooms etc. 

 

I believe in treating everyone decently and with respect. I don't buy into the fiction that people can change sex. I certainly don't advocate for cosmetic surgery and hormones for children even before they are of legal age. If children don't have the maturity vote or sign contracts, how can they determine surgeries/hormones that last for their lifetime? At 70, I look back and can't imagine what this would have been like. I was a tomboy and in youth probably would have been targeted for transition to pseudo male. All without knowing what testosterone would do to my body long term. 

 

Please think hard about the medical industrial complex that is pushing this on vulnerable people FOR PROFIT, without concern for persons' long-term bodily harm and mental harm. All we hear about is the positive stories, not the horror stories of detransitioners. 

 

With all due respect,  this reminds me of the rigid limited view some had towards marriage and relationships. They denied homesexuality existed,  call it fake and/or labeled it a mental disorder. 

 

Current society has thankfully changed their viewpoint for the most part on that (**** you Texas). I wonder where we will be in 20 years regarding transgender people? 

Edited March 24, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[The Evil Genius]

As an aside, would anyone here have problems with a female to male transitioned athlete succeeding in a men's sport?

Edited March 24, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[TheGoodBits]

5 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

With all due respect,  this reminds me of the rigid limited view some had towards marriage and relationships. They denied homesexuality existed,  call it fake and/or labeled it a mental disorder. 

 

Current society has thankfully changed their viewpoint for the most part on that (**** you Texas). I wonder where we will be in 20 years regarding transgender people? 

It does, and that’s why I struggled with my own opinions on transgendered people for some time (and still do). Fwiw one of my buddies from college came out as transgender a few years ago so I do at least know someone personally who has transitioned from male to female. 
 

Here’s the thing though. It’s also reality. If someone wants to change themselves from male to female, even up to the point of getting surgery, they don’t end up functional female genitals. At best they end up with something that is supposed to resemble female genitals. And the idea that people would let a child go through with permanent changes like is crazy to me. Imo it’s totally different from sexual orientation. And people do struggle with sexual orientation and identity as they grow older, and sometimes that orientation ends up kind of fluid. For kids, you’ve got to leave them room to figure that out and encourage them to NOT make permanent decisions until they definitely have that fully understood. 

[tshile]

27 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

As an aside, would anyone here have problems with a female to male transitioned athlete succeeding in a men's sport?

From a consistency standpoint - yes

 

but also I’d think doing that makes your competition harder. I’m trying to think of a sport where it doesn’t. Maybe something like gymnastics? Not even sure that’s true. At the crux of it for me is an unfair playing field. I’m trying to think of what sport being a woman genetically would advantage you…

[TD_washingtonredskins]

6 hours ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Again, follow the science and let the NCAA/IOC do their work.  If they decide that some measures need to be more restrictive to trans athletes, to make the playing field more level in certain sports, then that’s fine.  Rules and regulations get changed all the time.

 

Its a complicated subject and there’s plenty of gray area to move around in if you’ve got the courage.  
 

However, pretending that you ever gave a damn about amateur swimming and lining up behind DeSantis and Donald Jr and the Proud Boys because you think they know better than the NCAA/IOC, and now you’re all about “fairness” for women?  That ain’t gonna fly.  Nobody should ever fall for that bull****.  And despite T-dog’s protestations to the contrary, always use your negative indicators…if you end up with a hood on you and a torch in your hand, get the hell outta there and change your ways. 

 

This is a huge problem if I'm reading this correctly (maybe I'm not). 

 

You're letting who might be on a certain side of an issue cloud your opinion on an issue. That's never a good place to be, in my opinion. I don't ever think individuals should align themselves with sides or people, but with their own moral compass. So, if you think biological males should compete against biological females, then great. But if you're allowing the fact that DeSantis and Trump, Jr. don't like it to sway your opinion, then that's bad. And that's how it seems like most of our country (on both sides) is operating these days. 

 

"Biden likes what? F that...not me!" 

 

Back to on topic...

 

I really don't think it's complicated at all...it is unfair. I also don't think it's fair to paint everyone as "suddenly caring about women's sports" because they show empathy. They didn't have to follow women's swimming previously to understand how their daughter or sister or girlfriend might feel if they busted their ass for 10 years to get to a certain level in a sport, only to have their opportunity jeopardized or taken by someone with huge physical advantages. My daughter recently became a competition cheerleader...you could say I'm suddenly interested in the integrity of competitive female sports even though the women's NCAA swimming championships likely would have never hit my radar without the Lia Thomas news. 

[Hersh]

3 hours ago, tshile said:

According to you. 
 

that’s not the issue for everyone else. 
 

i see I overestimated your ability to understand that. 

do you have an issue with transgender male playing in a men’s league?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 hours ago, mojo said:

This has been my argument for many topics. I know I sound like an old man but a lot of the teenagers growing up today have the world bending over backwards for them and unfortunately, they have a harsh reality in store for them soon.

 

Definitely...

 

Zooming back in, people should feel as comfortable and happy with who they are as they want. But, that doesn't mean that all societal rules need to be so malleable that they can fit every idea that everyone has. It's impossible to accommodate some things. Even though (in relatively short order) society has basically accepted that a man can identify as a woman virtually overnight, we can't just throw out every guideline and rule so that they can shower, pee, play sports, etc. with other women on their own terms. That's a tall order and sets up potentially damaging circumstances to the rest of the people. 

 

It's OK for individuals to still hear from time to time that it isn't always just about them. 

[bearrock]

I have struggled with a particular line of question for transexuality for a while.  I'm not sure if it is because I'm right, wrong, ill-informed, bigotry, or some combination of the above, but here goes.

 

Can the concept of transexuality exist independent from the notion of gender normative characteristics?  We have biological sex.  Male, female, intersex, etc.  For a very long time, we equated the biology of sex with gender, which appears to be a combination of physical and behavioral characteristics.  Men are stronger than women.  Women are more caring than men.  Boys like blue.  Girls like pink.  You get the picture.

 

The biology of sex has not changed.  Men still have the reproductive organs men have and women still have the reproductive organs women have.  We realize now that there are uncertain cases in between, but they always existed, we just didn't pay as much attention to the cases that doesn't fit squarely into the male/female binary sex categories.  

 

Gender and the notion of gender normative charateristics and behavior has gone through an upheaval.  Some boys like guns, some boys like princesses.  Some girls like dress up, some girls like superheroes.  Men can have long flowing hair, women can have short buzz cuts.  We have come to acknowledge and accept, rightfully so, that your biological sex does not and should not define your behavioral characteristics.  We have also come to realize that while biological sex taken as a group may lend some generalities in terms of physical characteristics, it is not determinative in individual cases.  When taken as a group, the average biological male may be faster than the average biological female at a 100M dash.  We also see that the fastest biological male is faster than the fastest biological female.  But it gives us no information as to whether random biological male A is faster or slower than random biological female B.

 

Moving on to transexuality.  I understand transexuality as a person with biological sex A, whose innate personality, preference, and character does not match the gender characteristics defintion of gender A.  But what exactly is gender characteristics of gender A?  Isn't it really just a grouping of broad generalizations and stereotypes that society has associated (often times completely inaccurately) with a particular biological sex?  If society recognized from the very beginning that every individual is unique and that you can't possibly group people into two binary buckets of characteristics and hope to have anything near accuracy, would we still have the notion of transexuality?  In other words, in a world without the concept that certain sex or gender has certain normative characteristics, is it even possible to have the concept of transexuality?  

 

We hear about children who knew from a very young age that they had gender dysphoria.  Little Billy always wanted to play princess and put on make up.  If we don't make princess and make up the domain of girls, than isn't Billy just a biological male that likes to play princess and put on make up?  

 

At the end of the day, if gender is supposed to describe a person's physical and behavioral characteristics, than it seems more accurate to perceive everyone as having their unique gender rather than having to choose from a handful of categories.  How does the gender male/female describe a particular individual any better than gender Unicorn?  Or gender Jedi Master? (Can I have that one?)  Just because a person doesn't fit the societal normative definition of the male gender, it doesn't mean that person would fit the societal normative definition of the female gender all that well either.  Maybe it fits better than male, but it's still probably going to be pretty inaccurate.  Thus is the nature when you try to divide billions of individuals into a handful of broad categories.  So at the end of the day, what is transexuality?  Isn't it really about the failings of the antiquated notion of gender normative behavior and characteristics?  If we all agreed that notion of binary or small number of gender categories is an extremely flawed concept, do we still have transexuality or do we just recognize individuals as all unique?

[Forehead]

5 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

I was thinking about jokes when wording it to try to avoid them. 😂

 

I'm laughing that someone named "The Good Bits" is who called you on it.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

8 minutes ago, bearrock said:

I have struggled with a particular line of question for transexuality for a while.  I'm not sure if it is because I'm right, wrong, ill-informed, bigotry, or some combination of the above, but here goes.

 

Can the concept of transexuality exist independent from the notion of gender normative characteristics?  We have biological sex.  Male, female, intersex, etc.  For a very long time, we equated the biology of sex with gender, which appears to be a combination of physical and behavioral characteristics.  Men are stronger than women.  Women are more caring than men.  Boys like blue.  Girls like pink.  You get the picture.

 

The biology of sex has not changed.  Men still have the reproductive organs men have and women still have the reproductive organs women have.  We realize now that there are uncertain cases in between, but they always existed, we just didn't pay as much attention to the cases that doesn't fit squarely into the male/female binary sex categories.  

 

Gender and the notion of gender normative charateristics and behavior has gone through an upheaval.  Some boys like guns, some boys like princesses.  Some girls like dress up, some girls like superheroes.  Men can have long flowing hair, women can have short buzz cuts.  We have come to acknowledge and accept, rightfully so, that your biological sex does not and should not define your behavioral characteristics.  We have also come to realize that while biological sex taken as a group may lend some generalities in terms of physical characteristics, it is not determinative in individual cases.  When taken as a group, the average biological male may be faster than the average biological female at a 100M dash.  We also see that the fastest biological male is faster than the fastest biological female.  But it gives us no information as to whether random biological male A is faster or slower than random biological female B.

 

Moving on to transexuality.  I understand transexuality as a person with biological sex A, whose innate personality, preference, and character does not match the gender characteristics defintion of gender A.  But what exactly is gender characteristics of gender A?  Isn't it really just a grouping of broad generalizations and stereotypes that society has associated (often times completely inaccurately) with a particular biological sex?  If society recognized from the very beginning that every individual is unique and that you can't possibly group people into two binary buckets of characteristics and hope to have anything near accuracy, would we still have the notion of transexuality?  In other words, in a world without the concept that certain sex or gender has certain normative characteristics, is it even possible to have the concept of transexuality?  

 

We hear about children who knew from a very young age that they had gender dysphoria.  Little Billy always wanted to play princess and put on make up.  If we don't make princess and make up the domain of girls, than isn't Billy just a biological male that likes to play princess and put on make up?  

 

At the end of the day, if gender is supposed to describe a person's physical and behavioral characteristics, than it seems more accurate to perceive everyone as having their unique gender rather than having to choose from a handful of categories.  How does the gender male/female describe a particular individual any better than gender Unicorn?  Or gender Jedi Master? (Can I have that one?)  Just because a person doesn't fit the societal normative definition of the male gender, it doesn't mean that person would fit the societal normative definition of the female gender all that well either.  Maybe it fits better than male, but it's still probably going to be pretty inaccurate.  Thus is the nature when you try to divide billions of individuals into a handful of broad categories.  So at the end of the day, what is transexuality?  Isn't it really about the failings of the antiquated notion of gender normative behavior and characteristics?  If we all agreed that notion of binary or small number of gender categories is an extremely flawed concept, do we still have transexuality or do we just recognize individuals as all unique?

 

This is very well-said! 

[TheGreatBuzz]

So I’ve been kicking around for a day or so if I should make this post or not.  The reason that I had even thought of making this post was purely coincidental but I was concerned that it would appear as though I was targeting LadySkinsFan as a poster instead of attacking her positions regarding transgenders.  I went pretty hard at her a few days ago (and I believe she totally deserved it) and was concerned how it would look if I came back for another blow without something new prompting it.  But in light of her last post, I think me posting this is warranted.

 

BLUF:  LSF’s opinions and talking points are bat**** crazy and should be treated as such.  In an attempt to somehow justify her beliefs, she uses a Federalist author who has argued that the trans movement is funded by George Soros to get us comfortable with the idea of turning our society into cyborgs.

 

One of the podcasts I routinely follow (It Could Happen Here with Robert Evans) is this week doing a bit about the topic of transgender people and attacks on them, etc.  It is a five-part series that is being released as each part each day of the week.  Episode 2 is titled “TERF island”.  I remembered that I had first heard the term “TERF” on here a while ago and went back to find it.  If you are interested in that whole exchange, the first quoted post below by LSF is there.  Read a page before and a page after and you’ll get the gist.  After I reviewed that exchange, I went on to listen to that episode (I’m listening to them all but part 2 is what really stood out).  I encourage you all (including you @LadySkinsFan) to listen to at least that episode.  It discusses the War on Trans People, how it came to be, how it gets exploited, how the followers are manipulated, etc.  It occurred to me that TERFs are quite similar to Trump supporters, if not even the full-blown QANON crazies, in the irrationality and the fervor of their “beliefs”.  While it is fun to just sit back and laugh at those type of people, it is also important to recognize how they get manipulated by others, much like members of a cult.

 

Here is a link to the podcast episode I referenced above:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/it-could-happen-here/id1449762156?i=1000554807427

*warning:  The expert they have on is NOT a great public speaker.  But what she says is worth listening to if you can get past her speaking manner.

 

Anyway, here are some thoughts:

 

On 1/21/2021 at 6:38 PM, LadySkinsFan said:

 

I'll answer your last comment first. I find it sad that rich males mostly got on the trans train when in the early 80s it was mostly males who had hormones and surgery to render them transsexual. Below is an article by Jennifer Bilek writing about the billionaires behind the trans movement. 

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/01/the-billionaires-behind-the-lgbt-movement

 

Here's a blog about how the trans movement, lots of articles here.

 

https://www.the11thhourblog.com

 

Here's a link to a video of Jennifer explaining transhumanism and autogynephilia, which is a sexual fetish of men imagining themselves as women to get off.  It's a long video because it's a very involved conversation with her and an interviewer discussing this topic, which is eye opening. 

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9kQ_o0G7D38&feature=share

 

Homophobe is used to vilify same sex attraction. For example, if a woman or man who is same sex oriented turns down a trans person of the opposite sex, the homosexual is labeled a homophobe even though they aren't opposite sex oriented. Which is just ridiculous.

 

Thank you for your apologies. We don't call ourselves TERF, which is a slur for Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist, basically because we don't want to have sex with born males who likely still have their male sex organs. That's not same sex oriented. So we got labeled something that's crept into our language to the point that you didn't know the history of the usage of that term. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is worth noting, and sums up the quality of LSFs thoughts on transgender people, that the person that she first references is Jennifer Bilek.  She is mentioned at the very beginning of the podcast (3:10 to be exact) and it goes pretty deep into her background and what led her to where she is today.  If you aren’t aware, Jennifer Bilek is a writer for The Federalist.  And if you aren’t aware of the the quality of The Federalist, it is rated as “BIAS: Hyper-partisan Right” and “RELIABILITY:  Unreliable, Problematic”.  (Sources below)

https://thefederalist.com/author/jenniferbilek/

https://adfontesmedia.com/federalist-bias-and-reliability/

 

So to sum it up, LSF is parroting talking points from a far-right, hyper-partisan media organization.  Jennifer Bilek wrote an article in 2018 that, in part, suggested that George Soros is behind the funding for the trans movement (link below).  Let that sink it.

https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

 

Next in the above quote she links to a video of Bilek “explaining transhumanism and autogynephilia.”  LSF was kind enough to give us a definition for autogynephilia but not for transhumanism.  Perhaps because she knew that would sound TOO bat**** crazy?  But alas, I come to save the day.  Transhumanism is defined as “social and philosophical movement devoted to promoting the research and development of robust human-enhancement technologies that would augment or increase human sensory reception, emotive ability, or cognitive capacity.”  https://www.britannica.com/topic/transhumanism  TL;DR:  It’s pretty much the idea of turning humans in to some sort of half-human, half-robot cyborg.  

 

For those that can’t or don’t listen to the podcast, here is a part that I think is important describing our friend Bilek (I am using quotes but typing this out in a way that gets rid of the stutters, etc so it can be read more clearly, the message itself isn’t changed.  it is at 6:50 in the podcast).  “…she has these 2 weird angles, the transhumanism angle and then she has this incredibly, what be comes an increasingly anti-Semitic angle”.  “So she is following the money, where she follows the money to is trans rights are a conspiracy to usher in transhumanism”.    

 

The podcast also goes into how the term TERF came to be and what it means.  I’m not going to type all of it out because I am not transcriping an entire podcast.  But *surprise*, it isn’t what LSF describes above.  And she says she doesn’t call herself a TERF, yet somehow mirrors the beliefs and talking points of a TERF.  And is TERF a slur?  I mean i guess it is insulting.  But it seems pretty well earned to me.  Akin to calling someone a Trumper.  Sure it has a negative connotation but is usually earned.

 

 

1 hour ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Please think hard about the medical industrial complex that is pushing this on vulnerable people FOR PROFIT, without concern for persons' long-term bodily harm and mental harm. All we hear about is the positive stories, not the horror stories of detransitioners. 

 

This gets debunked in the podcast as well.  In regards to the “horror stories of detransitioners” that we apparently don’t hear about?  

“news outlets across the U.K. and the United States covered the phenomenon of detransitioning. The BBC dedicated an hour to the topic on two of its flagship programs in late November,”.   I guess George Soros forgot to buy off BBC.  

 

And how common is this detransitioning?  Sounds like about 0.4%.

 

“In a 2015 survey of nearly 28,000 people conducted by the U.S.-based National Center for Transgender Equality, only 8 percent of respondents reported detransitioning, and 62 percent of those people said they only detransitioned temporarily. The most common reason for detransitioning, according to the survey, was pressure from a parent, only 0.4 percent of respondents said they detransitioned after realizing transitioning wasn’t right for them.”

 

Both of the above quotes are from this article:  https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/media-s-detransition-narrative-fueling-misconceptions-trans-advocates-say-n1102686

 

 

 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Interesting information @The Almighty Buzz

 

When it comes to "detransitions" though, I would think there are a couple of things at play that I'd be concerned about as the trend continues to grow...

 

1) Reversals would almost certainly become more common if procedures continue to become more common (The Washington Post stated that reassignment surgeries quadrupled from 2000-2014). 

2) Reversals would almost certainly become more common if procedures become allowed at younger ages and/or without parental consent (think of the things you did in your teen years or the phases you went through)

[China]

2 hours ago, tshile said:

From a consistency standpoint - yes

 

but also I’d think doing that makes your competition harder. I’m trying to think of a sport where it doesn’t. Maybe something like gymnastics? Not even sure that’s true. At the crux of it for me is an unfair playing field. I’m trying to think of what sport being a woman genetically would advantage you…

 

Synchronized swimming?  Seeing as there is no male synchronized swimming, at least at the Olympic level.

[LadySkinsFan]

3 hours ago, bearrock said:

I have struggled with a particular line of question for transexuality for a while.  I'm not sure if it is because I'm right, wrong, ill-informed, bigotry, or some combination of the above, but here goes.

 

Can the concept of transexuality exist independent from the notion of gender normative characteristics?  We have biological sex.  Male, female, intersex, etc.  For a very long time, we equated the biology of sex with gender, which appears to be a combination of physical and behavioral characteristics.  Men are stronger than women.  Women are more caring than men.  Boys like blue.  Girls like pink.  You get the picture.

 

The biology of sex has not changed.  Men still have the reproductive organs men have and women still have the reproductive organs women have.  We realize now that there are uncertain cases in between, but they always existed, we just didn't pay as much attention to the cases that doesn't fit squarely into the male/female binary sex categories.  

 

Gender and the notion of gender normative charateristics and behavior has gone through an upheaval.  Some boys like guns, some boys like princesses.  Some girls like dress up, some girls like superheroes.  Men can have long flowing hair, women can have short buzz cuts.  We have come to acknowledge and accept, rightfully so, that your biological sex does not and should not define your behavioral characteristics.  We have also come to realize that while biological sex taken as a group may lend some generalities in terms of physical characteristics, it is not determinative in individual cases.  When taken as a group, the average biological male may be faster than the average biological female at a 100M dash.  We also see that the fastest biological male is faster than the fastest biological female.  But it gives us no information as to whether random biological male A is faster or slower than random biological female B.

 

Moving on to transexuality.  I understand transexuality as a person with biological sex A, whose innate personality, preference, and character does not match the gender characteristics defintion of gender A.  But what exactly is gender characteristics of gender A?  Isn't it really just a grouping of broad generalizations and stereotypes that society has associated (often times completely inaccurately) with a particular biological sex?  If society recognized from the very beginning that every individual is unique and that you can't possibly group people into two binary buckets of characteristics and hope to have anything near accuracy, would we still have the notion of transexuality?  In other words, in a world without the concept that certain sex or gender has certain normative characteristics, is it even possible to have the concept of transexuality?  

 

We hear about children who knew from a very young age that they had gender dysphoria.  Little Billy always wanted to play princess and put on make up.  If we don't make princess and make up the domain of girls, than isn't Billy just a biological male that likes to play princess and put on make up?  

 

At the end of the day, if gender is supposed to describe a person's physical and behavioral characteristics, than it seems more accurate to perceive everyone as having their unique gender rather than having to choose from a handful of categories.  How does the gender male/female describe a particular individual any better than gender Unicorn?  Or gender Jedi Master? (Can I have that one?)  Just because a person doesn't fit the societal normative definition of the male gender, it doesn't mean that person would fit the societal normative definition of the female gender all that well either.  Maybe it fits better than male, but it's still probably going to be pretty inaccurate.  Thus is the nature when you try to divide billions of individuals into a handful of broad categories.  So at the end of the day, what is transexuality?  Isn't it really about the failings of the antiquated notion of gender normative behavior and characteristics?  If we all agreed that notion of binary or small number of gender categories is an extremely flawed concept, do we still have transexuality or do we just recognize individuals as all unique?

 

Basically, masculine and feminine characteristics are determined by patriarchal institutions down through the centuries sometimes changing. It's becoming more apparent lately that right wing ideologues are determining stricter characteristics for females what with abortion and birth control restrictions, keeping women out of high level career positions and so on. We're headed back to the 40s, 50s, and 60s in short order. This is very concerning to me and other feminists. We females are losing our freedom and rights. Even here in this forum, I see men use female body parts to call men in a demeaning way. It happens so often, especially in The Stadium, that I have to ignore it because to call out every instance I would do it all day. Without much resolution. 

 

So with males and females relegated to specific characteristics, if someone doesn't go along with them, they must be the other sex, by patriarchal definition. So what you wrote, bearrock, makes perfect sense to me. When I was a teen, I was attracted to girls, so for a while I wanted to be a boy so I could have girlfriends. Thankfully I grew out of that thought because I didn't want to be a boy. Teen girls with autism are the current target of these medical industrial complex people because they are easily manipulated and exploited. Teen girls are often very upset when they go through puberty with their changing bodies and unwanted sexual attention because of it. It's easier to pretend they're male to avoid unwanted attention, and these women become detransition candidates after their voices are permanently changed by testosterone and they've removed their breasts and maybe had a hysterectomy. I speak of females because those are the people I am most familiar with.

[Hersh]

 

 

FWIW and I know it's a couple days ago. 

4 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Definitely...

 

Zooming back in, people should feel as comfortable and happy with who they are as they want. But, that doesn't mean that all societal rules need to be so malleable that they can fit every idea that everyone has. It's impossible to accommodate some things. Even though (in relatively short order) society has basically accepted that a man can identify as a woman virtually overnight, we can't just throw out every guideline and rule so that they can shower, pee, play sports, etc. with other women on their own terms. That's a tall order and sets up potentially damaging circumstances to the rest of the people. 

 

It's OK for individuals to still hear from time to time that it isn't always just about them. 

 

When did society accept that a man can change their identity overnight and shower with women? That has never been the case it's it's just fear-mongering. 

[mojo]

3 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Basically, masculine and feminine characteristics are determined by patriarchal institutions down through the centuries sometimes changing. It's becoming more apparent lately that right wing ideologues are determining stricter characteristics for females what with abortion and birth control restrictions, keeping women out of high level career positions and so on. We're headed back to the 40s, 50s, and 60s in short order. This is very concerning to me and other feminists. We females are losing our freedom and rights. Even here in this forum, I see men use female body parts to call men in a demeaning way. It happens so often, especially in The Stadium, that I have to ignore it because to call out every instance I would do it all day. Without much resolution. 

 

So with males and females relegated to specific characteristics, if someone doesn't go along with them, they must be the other sex, by patriarchal definition. So what you wrote, bearrock, makes perfect sense to me. When I was a teen, I was attracted to girls, so for a while I wanted to be a boy so I could have girlfriends. Thankfully I grew out of that thought because I didn't want to be a boy. Teen girls with autism are the current target of these medical industrial complex people because they are easily manipulated and exploited. Teen girls are often very upset when they go through puberty with their changing bodies and unwanted sexual attention because of it. It's easier to pretend they're male to avoid unwanted attention, and these women become detransition candidates after their voices are permanently changed by testosterone and they've removed their breasts and maybe had a hysterectomy. I speak of females because those are the people I am most familiar with.

I see it everyday at my daughter’s middle school. Sexuality has become a status symbol. Being “queer “ is cool and genders change by the day. These kids are 11-13 yrs old and I realize a lot of it is rhetoric but I’m sure there are many that are acting on it. Personally, I think that can have repercussions later.

[d0ublestr0ker0ll]

17 hours ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

There’s no reason to get yourself twisted up in emotional knots here.

 

This person has dedicated their entire lives towards training/diet for swimming competitions.  They also decided to begin a transition to female at 18 years old.  They have followed every protocol and met every requirement laid down by the NCAA for competition…so they are allowed to compete.  And that’s that.

 

Beal the type of dude who would read the laws about getting locked up for decades for growing and selling marijuana, and say that's that.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

9 hours ago, Hersh said:

 

 

FWIW and I know it's a couple days ago. 

 

When did society accept that a man can change their identity overnight and shower with women? That has never been the case it's it's just fear-mongering. 

 

To the Utah governor's ruling...I don't like the practice of deciding based on a current snapshot of the numbers. I do understand his larger point (as of now, the emotional well-being of those wanting inclusion outweighs the potential issue of those being impacted by that inclusion). Here's the problem with that logic...all of the statistics are apples to oranges to bananas to grapefruit. And, as I previously mentioned, a current snapshot. The trans suicidality and attempted suicide percentages, for example, are scary and jarring numbers...but do we have any evidence how many of those kids play sports, want to play sports, or are feeling that way related to sports in any way? 

 

To your other comment...I don't know about overnight, but in my county we have a what is becoming a very public case of a biological male who identified as a girl. They were afforded all the privileges of a girl: locker room, bathroom, etc. They sexually assaulted another student in the bathroom or locker room so were moved to another school in the county. They did it again at the new school. There is also the Lia Thomas situation at Penn where the other swimmers commented that Lia's male genitalia were exposed in the women's locker room while everyone was changing or getting ready for meets. 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10445679/Lia-Thomas-UPenn-teammate-says-trans-swimmer-doesnt-cover-genitals-locker-room.html

 

So, that isn't specifically showering with anyone, but who cares? It's the same idea that girls are now all forced into an uncomfortable situation all for one person's new reality. No one can make Lia feel badly about herself so the entire team is told to just shut up and deal with it. 

 

Quote

While Lia covers herself with a towel sometimes, there’s a decent amount of nudity,  the swimmer said. She and others have had a glimpse at her private parts.

She stated that team members have raised their concern with the coach, trying to get Thomas ousted from the female locker room, but got nowhere.

'Multiple swimmers have raised it, multiple different times,' the UPenn swimmer said. 'But we were basically told that we could not ostracize Lia by not having her in the locker room and that there's nothing we can do about it, that we basically have to roll over and accept it, or we cannot use our own locker room.'

'It's really upsetting because Lia doesn't seem to care how it makes anyone else feel,' the swimmer continued. 'The 35 of us are just supposed to accept being uncomfortable in our own space and locker room for, like, the feelings of one.'

 

It's their season too. That's what some people fail to realize. It's not fair that everyone needs to be about the 1 trans athlete and all these concessions need to be made while dozens of other athletic seasons or careers are marginalized or impacted. 

[Hersh]

8 hours ago, mojo said:

I see it everyday at my daughter’s middle school. Sexuality has become a status symbol. Being “queer “ is cool and genders change by the day. These kids are 11-13 yrs old and I realize a lot of it is rhetoric but I’m sure there are many that are acting on it. Personally, I think that can have repercussions later.

 

You're sure many are acting on what? 

4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

To the Utah governor's ruling...I don't like the practice of deciding based on a current snapshot of the numbers. I do understand his larger point (as of now, the emotional well-being of those wanting inclusion outweighs the potential issue of those being impacted by that inclusion). Here's the problem with that logic...all of the statistics are apples to oranges to bananas to grapefruit. And, as I previously mentioned, a current snapshot. The trans suicidality and attempted suicide percentages, for example, are scary and jarring numbers...but do we have any evidence how many of those kids play sports, want to play sports, or are feeling that way related to sports in any way? 

 

To your other comment...I don't know about overnight, but in my county we have a what is becoming a very public case of a biological male who identified as a girl. They were afforded all the privileges of a girl: locker room, bathroom, etc. They sexually assaulted another student in the bathroom or locker room so were moved to another school in the county. They did it again at the new school. There is also the Lia Thomas situation at Penn where the other swimmers commented that Lia's male genitalia were exposed in the women's locker room while everyone was changing or getting ready for meets. 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10445679/Lia-Thomas-UPenn-teammate-says-trans-swimmer-doesnt-cover-genitals-locker-room.html

 

So, that isn't specifically showering with anyone, but who cares? It's the same idea that girls are now all forced into an uncomfortable situation all for one person's new reality. No one can make Lia feel badly about herself so the entire team is told to just shut up and deal with it. 

 

 

It's their season too. That's what some people fail to realize. It's not fair that everyone needs to be about the 1 trans athlete and all these concessions need to be made while dozens of other athletic seasons or careers are marginalized or impacted. 

 

So y'all had a sexual assault occur and the kid didn't get arrested or anything? 

 

Per Lia Thomas, that's a failure by the school to provide space. People walking on eggshells are choosing to do that themselves rather than have honest conversations about it. That's not the fault of Lia or any other Trans person. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

4 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

You're sure many are acting on what? 

 

So y'all had a sexual assault occur and the kid didn't get arrested or anything? 

 

Per Lia Thomas, that's a failure by the school to provide space. People walking on eggshells are choosing to do that themselves rather than have honest conversations about it. That's not the fault of Lia or any other Trans person. 

 

https://nypost.com/2022/01/20/loudoun-county-schools-boss-axed-over-transgender-scandal-reports/

 

He eventually did...but the School System originally tried to keep it quiet and move him to another school. 

 

On Thomas...I'm not saying it's Lia's fault or even blaming Lia. What I'm saying is that suddenly everyone needs to bend to Lia's wishes to be treated as a female when he is in fact not the same as the others in that locker room. The girls on the team attempted to have honest conversations and were told not to make anyone feel bad. The fact that every school doesn't immediately have a third space (men's locker room, women's locker room, and...?) is the issue here. I'm also sure that if they had sent Lia to change in a broom closet there'd be a whole big thing about that.