Transgender Athletes

[maniak]

They don’t use it ‘to insult’ me. They use it to label me, and it is one that I have CHOSEN to take offence to. Just as when I use the term ‘transgender woman’, it is with the intention to describe/label, not to insult, but offence is still taken. We both have the right to take offence, and mine is as valid as anyone else’s, regardless of any malicious intent or not.

OK, I'll ask it differently, when was the last time some used those terms to label you? I'll be honest, in my decades on this earth, not a simgle human being reffered to me as cis man or biological male. Never. But maybe I'm missing some obvious context.

 

[Grylte]

OK, that's good to know.

What circumstances are you thinking of? I regularly watch women's football and women's handball and I've never heard the term cis woman being used.

I have seen it being used different places, especially in discussions like this.
So happy i'm not living in the US, where these things tend to go crazy, people are either extreme on one side or the other.

As i said in my previous post, i do my best to never offend anyone, and treat every person i meet with respect, but i still have opinions on things like trans women in sports.
The problem now is that if i say i'm against it, i'm a bigot.
It's a bit like with racism. I have opinions about immigration to my country, i'm not against it, but if i ever say anything negative about it, i'm a racist.
I don't like religion, but if i say anything negative about islam, i'm somehow racist.

People are so fecking extreme today, that issues like these can't be discussed properly.

Ninja edit: Didn't mean to take thread off topic, just wanted to make a couple examples for comparison.

 

[The Boy]

Apparently referring to biological women as biological women is considered by some as transphobic, too.

it may not be transphobic but it suggests that sex is binary and that’s widely accepted not to be the case.

 

[maniak]

I don’t need to hang out with a transgender person to know that such a person would be at an advantage in the sporting arena when compared to a cis woman. It’s basic science, and common sense. That’s literally what the topic is centred on.

All of this and that about coffee, and spending time with obfuscation of a very simple discussion.

Me having coffee with a trans person to understand their life story doesn’t change the basic premise I’ve mentioned above.

Edit: and let me add - the basic premise I’ve mentioned above isn’t a ‘gotcha’ moment.

Well, to be honest this latest round of discussion is about school sports, which as I've said before is a bit different. If you want to talk about the olympics or professional sports, sure, what you say is true and there is no good solution in my view, all solutions will feck someone over.

But school sports for me are different because I don't see school sports as being solely about competition and winning at all costs, I see them as a necessary part of many teenager's lives, something they need to be mentally and physically healthy, something they can use to feel part of a team or make friends. So in his case, knowing transgender people helped shape my opinion, the struggles some go through in their normal lives, the bullying they suffered in school, etc, made me realise that I can't accept another form of exclusion, especially inflicted on young kids.

So I may be wrong and maybe it's just my experience, but knowing transgender people and their life story, as you put it, may change your priorities and it did change mine. Or maybe not, but it will definitely make you think twice.

 

[Gambit]

Of course not, I'm not proposing any laws to punish people. My original point is that if someone chooses to use those terms they know some may find offensive, it makes conversation more difficult and it's not a stretch to assume they might not be engaging in good faith.

I'm not stating any laws of punishment, things around this conversation are so confusing that people may not know that some find it offensive but also even if it is, doesn't mean it should be ruled out of discussion. For instance say a transperson had a child who refused to refer to them as their mum/dad on the transpersons persons insistence does that mean their child is in the wrong refusing, because they're offended by it. This is why as far as I'm concerned unless the wordings are offensive regardless of the in context of the discussion there should be no gates to definitions being closed despite who declares.

 

[maniak]

I'm not stating any laws of punishment, things around this conversation are so confusing that people may not know that some find it offensive but also even if it is, doesn't mean it should be ruled out of discussion. For instance say a transperson had a child who refused to refer to them as their mum/dad on the transpersons persons insistence does that mean their child is in the wrong refusing, because they're offended by it. This is why as far as I'm concerned unless the wordings are offensive regardless of the in context of the discussion there should be no gates to definitions being closed despite who declares.

That's a bit unrealistic though, because whether you like it or not, whether it's your intention or not, if you use words the person talking to you finds offensive, the debate is dead before it starts. You can use them, for sure, but you can't act surprised and claim "yeah it's impossible to debate this".

 

[Carolina Red]

it may not be transphobic but it suggests that sex is binary and that’s widely accepted not to be the case.

I’m well aware that intersex people exist. That said, calling an actual biological female a biological female in the context of a discussion about sports isn’t transphobic in the least.

 

[The Corinthian]

it may not be transphobic but it suggests that sex is binary and that’s widely accepted not to be the case.

Mammalian sex is binary though. Anything outside of that paradigm is due to abnormalities/mutations etc etc in utero.

 

[Anustart89]

Mammalian sex is binary though. Anything outside of that paradigm is due to abnormalities/mutations etc etc in utero.

You'd think that deviations from the biological norm being called syndromes (Turner's, Klinefelter etc) would be a clue, but apparently not.

 

[Gambit]

That's a bit unrealistic though, because whether you like it or not, whether it's your intention or not, if you use words the person talking to you finds offensive, the debate is dead before it starts. You can use them, for sure, but you can't act surprised and claim "yeah it's impossible to debate this".

I've not stated that, and adding a definitive closure to a contradiction of discussion outside of context or understanding is just foot stamping. Norhave I stated that on the side of my debate am I acting surprised and ending a conversation. If some one said to me that they find my wording offensive I would want to know why and explain context. You have to be able to take offense and discuss it to change minds. Shutting off the conversation at offense becomes a stance and not a discussion.

 

[Rozay]

OK, I'll ask it differently, when was the last time some used those terms to label you? I'll be honest, in my decades on this earth, not a simgle human being reffered to me as cis man or biological male. Never. But maybe I'm missing some obvious context.

Likewise, it will be uncommon for me to label people 'transgender women’ because this entire never-ending airwave dominating conversation about trans rights is in reality about an incredibly small minority of people and I can’t say that I am forced to address trans people with great frequency.

So to answer you question, the frequency is about equal, and the validity of feelings is also equal.

 

[maniak]

I've not stated that, and adding a definitive closure to a contradiction of discussion outside of context or understanding is just foot stamping. Norhave I stated that on the side of my debate am I acting surprised and ending a conversation. If some one said to me that they find my wording offensive I would want to know why and explain context. You have to be able to take offense and discuss it to change minds. Shutting off the conversation at offense becomes a stance and not a discussion.

In this thread it was explained why some terms may be considered offensive and it was just laughed off or people just doubled down. It's quite different from trying to understand something.

 

[Gambit]

In this thread it was explained why some terms may be considered offensive and it was just laughed off or people just doubled down. It's quite different from trying to understand something.

I'm not this thread. Nor are my opinions

 

[maniak]

Likewise, it will be uncommon for me to label people 'transgender women’ because this entire never-ending airwave dominating conversation about trans rights is in reality about an incredibly small minority of people and I can’t say that I am forced to address trans people with great frequency.

So to answer you question, the frequency is about equal, and the validity of feelings is also equal.

Well, not you personally, but you hear it being said on tv and so on. I suspect you don't see it about yourself.

And even though it's subjective, I can't agree on the validity of the feeling. Something being used as an insult is quite different from something being used as a descriptor.

 

[Rozay]

Well, not you personally, but you hear it being said on tv and so on. I suspect you don't see it about yourself.

And even though it's subjective, I can't agree on the validity of the feeling. Something being used as an insult is quite different from something being used as a descriptor.

Just because a trans woman takes offence to being referred to as a trans woman does not mean that the intention was to insult.

 

[maniak]

I'm not this thread. Nor are my opinions

I was pointing out an instance where the context made something offensive and therefore made debate impossible, because you said "as far as I'm concerned unless the wordings are offensive regardless of the in context of the discussion there should be no gates". I don't think you can separate context from the words used.

 

[maniak]

Just because a trans woman takes offence to being referred to as a trans woman does not mean that the intention was to insult.

Mate, the expression I'm criticizing is calling a transgender woman a biological male. something often done by transphobes.

 

[The Boy]

Mammalian sex is binary though. Anything outside of that paradigm is due to abnormalities/mutations etc etc in utero.

You'd think that deviations from the biological norm being called syndromes (Turner's, Klinefelter etc) would be a clue, but apparently not.

You’d think that when researchers in the science of sex believe this may affect upto one in a hundred people, people would begin to realise that it’s far more common than originally thought. It’s roughly the same regularity as red hair or twice as common as twins.

But no people still seem to think it’s fine to refer to these real people with real feelings as deviations or abnormalities.

Language is a very powerful weapon.

 

[Gambit]

I was pointing out an instance where the context made something offensive and therefore made debate impossible, because you said "as far as I'm concerned unless the wordings are offensive regardless of the in context of the discussion there should be no gates". I don't think you can separate context from the words used.

Of course you can,. I could literally say the most offensive word possible, the context of it is more important.

 

[The Corinthian]

You’d think that when researchers in the science of sex believe this may affect upto one in a hundred people, people would begin to realise that it’s far more common than originally thought. It’s roughly the same regularity as red hair or twice as common as twins.

But no people still seem to think it’s fine to refer to these real people with real feelings as deviations or abnormalities.

Language is a very powerful weapon.

It’s not though. These type of abnormalities range from 0.5% to 1.7%. These are mutations/abnormalities/complications in utero that mean a baby doesn’t fit the male / female sex binary. So we’re talking about a very very small set of the world’s population. And it 100% is an abnormality. It’s basic science.

 

[Halftrack]

ffs biology isn’t transphobia. How can you possibly think that?

No, but referring to trans women as "biological men" is a tried and true transphobic dog whistle, and you've spent enough time in these threads, agreed with enough transphobic shit that has been posted, and had enough shit explained to you, that I'm not about to give you the benefit of the doubt.

What's transphobic about that?

What's not transphobic about referring to trans women as "biological men"?

We're at a time where you have to agree with everything they want, or you're a transphobe, basically.

Yes, trans people are the real problem. Nail on the fecking head, hats off to you!

Your allowed to disagree with an opinion and not be transphobic. For instance I disagree with pretty much all religions, cultures, sacred cows, doesn't make me phobic of any of them. If it fits in the eyes of others, I don't care.

You've read me wrong, I have no issue with people disagreeing on this issue. What I do have an issue with is frequent trans issue thread poster @fergieisold blurting out problematic shit and claiming/feigning ignorance.

 

[fergieisold]

No, but referring to trans women as "biological men" is a tried and true transphobic dog whistle, and you've spent enough time in these threads, agreed with enough transphobic shit that has been posted, and had enough shit explained to you, that I'm not about to give you the benefit of the doubt.

What's not transphobic about referring to trans women as "biological men"?

Yes, trans people are the real problem. Nail on the fecking head, hats off to you!

You've read me wrong, I have no issue with people disagreeing on this issue. What I do have an issue with is frequent trans issue thread poster @fergieisold blurting out problematic shit and claiming/feigning ignorance.

But, errrr, trans women in women’s sport are biological men. Quit with the the dog whistle shite.

 

[RedPed]

No, but referring to trans women as "biological men" is a tried and true transphobic dog whistle, and you've spent enough time in these threads, agreed with enough transphobic shit that has been posted, and had enough shit explained to you, that I'm not about to give you the benefit of the doubt.

What's not transphobic about referring to trans women as "biological men"?

Yes, trans people are the real problem. Nail on the fecking head, hats off to you!

You've read me wrong, I have no issue with people disagreeing on this issue. What I do have an issue with is frequent trans issue thread poster @fergieisold blurting out problematic shit and claiming/feigning ignorance.

Mind you don't fall off that box. The world is fecked, I tell you.

 

[Escobar]

More women than men are in favor of transgender rights. Luckily most women realize this is not us vs them. It's a tragic tactic, trying to pit cis women against transgender women.

I said once the brainwashing wears off. Once they see the impact it actually has on women

 

[maniak]

I said once the brainwashing wears off. Once they see the impact it actually has on women

Oh you're one of those people. I'll slowly back away.

 

[stepic]

But, errrr, trans women in women’s sport are biological men. Quit with the the dog whistle shite.

So trans women are women until they start competing in sports, then suddenly they become biological men?

right.

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

More women than men are in favor of transgender rights. Luckily most women realize this is not us vs them. It's a tragic tactic, trying to pit cis women against transgender women.

How are you so confident with regards to your claims on what women want ? How do you know this and what do you have to support this knowledge? Is it just from your conversations over coffee, reading stuff on the forum, your job, here say..what's your source?

 

[stepic]

How are you so confident with regards to your claims on what women want ? How do you know this and what do you have to support this knowledge? Is it just from your conversations over coffee, reading stuff on the forum, your job, here say..what's your source?

plenty of polling suggests this

yougov polling as an example: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society...-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

(Scroll just over half way down)

there are more transphobic men than women. Which is why you have far right and fascist groups supporting gender critical rallies.

 

[hobbers]

plenty of polling suggests this

yougov polling as an example: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society...-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

(Scroll just over half way down)

there are more transphobic men than women. Which is why you have far right and fascist groups supporting gender critical rallies.

That polling still says that women are in line with the consensus on the vast majority of issues, from access to womens spaces to competing in sports to gender reassignment for under 16s.

 

[maniak]

How are you so confident with regards to your claims on what women want ? How do you know this and what do you have to support this knowledge? Is it just from your conversations over coffee, reading stuff on the forum, your job, here say..what's your source?

Reading articles that mention polls.

 

[stepic]

That polling still says that women are in line with the consensus on the vast majority of issues, from access to womens spaces to competing in sports to gender reassignment for under 16s.

not suggesting otherwise. But nonetheless women are less transphobic than men.

it’s also a generational thing. Older people are far more likely to be against trans rights compared to younger people, partly because there are likely to be more younger trans people as it becomes (slightly) more normalised. The same polling shows if you know or have spoken to trans people the more likely you will support trans rights. Like most things - racism, homophobia, views slowly change and as a society we grow, as evidenced by younger people’s far more tolerant approach.

 

[balaks]

What's not transphobic about referring to trans women as "biological men"?

You what? Are we going to just ignore basic biology now?

 

[balaks]

So trans women are women until they start competing in sports, then suddenly they become biological men?

right.

Surely you can be both biologically a man but also a trans woman? Is that not how it is? You can't change your biology after all even with hormone replacement, surgery, etc. Not trying to be a dick here but surely this is obvious?

 

[Scarlett Dracarys]

plenty of polling suggests this

yougov polling as an example: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society...-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

(Scroll just over half way down)

there are more transphobic men than women. Which is why you have far right and fascist groups supporting gender critical rallies.

Reading articles that mention polls.

Thanks I'll have a read.

 

[stepic]

Surely you can be both biologically a man but also a trans woman? Is that not how it is? You can't change your biology after all even with hormone replacement, surgery, etc. Not trying to be a dick here but surely this is obvious?

I think the point maniak is making is around the sensitivity and inclusivity of the language being used. If you’re a trans woman, being referred to as a man in any context is going to be problematic. It’s additionally confronting because, as he says, it’s commonly used (by others) as an insult. I appreciate others may be referring to the fact a trans person is born with a sex that doesn’t align with their identity - this is why more inclusive language is usually used to describe this fact - ie trans people being ‘assigned’ their sex at birth, rather than referring to them as the very thing they are not.

Most likely some people will scoff at that kind of language, but it’s simply just a way of being respectful and inclusive.

 

[berbatrick]

Men telling women how women should think about being women doesn't sit quite right with me.

women are generally more supportive of trans rights, i couldn't find a poll on this issue with gender crosstabs but i'd expect it would follow the same pattern. here are two othe rpolls with gender crosstabs on trans issues.

but of course, those stupid women might not yet understand what's good for them, we need men to correct their thinking:

And funny enough, women had to fight for their rights for centuries, and now comes the next thing. They will fight this hard, once the brainwashing wears off

...

Yeah, sooo strange (irony on) that we dont have any transgender man that wants to compete against man, for example in MMA or basektball.

Transgender wrestler forced to compete in girls tournament is booed after winning in final

Texas authorities will not let Mack Beggs compete against male wrestlers despite his requests to do so

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...forced-mack-beggs-texas-america-a8227601.html

 

[Carolina Red]

Transgender wrestler forced to compete in girls tournament is booed after winning in final

Texas authorities will not let Mack Beggs compete against male wrestlers despite his requests to do so

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...forced-mack-beggs-texas-america-a8227601.html

Beggs had to wrestle in the male division in college at an NAIA program and, to my knowledge, never cracked the starting lineup.

The gap in physicality between top level female and 3rd level down the totem pole male wrestling is that big.

 

[berbatrick]

Beggs had to wrestle in the male division in college and, to my knowledge, never cracked the starting lineup.

Good for him, he literally requested it before and after that transphobia-imposed farce on him and the women wrestlers.

 

[Carolina Red]

Good for him, he literally requested it before and after that transphobia-imposed farce on him and the women wrestlers.

If you recall, I’ve stated multiple times that I disagree with Texas’ ruling on that case.

 

[berbatrick]

If you recall, I’ve stated multiple times that I disagree with Texas’ ruling on that case.

good, i agree with you on that.
not sure why you're taking this personally given that my reply wasn't to you, it was to someone saying that "we dont have any transgender man that wants to compete against man".