Trans activists: Trans women should not be required to suppress testosterone to play on women's teams

[Metaphor]

“banging a pussy if it’s attached to a man.” We live in such stupid times.

One can only, as ever, admire your open-mindedness and your liberal and progressive mindset.

Apparently, quite a few aboriginal and/or native/indigenous cultures were, in the past (and indeed some still apparently are) more relaxed than we are about gender fluidity and about having more than just two fixed categories. And I read that a lot of such tolerance was very heavily discouraged by invading white, 'western', conservative, christian colonists.

So it's not entirely clear which times are/were stupid about this.

Really? It's entirely clear to me.

Men don't have pussies, 'attached' or not. Bodies have zero spirits, let alone two or more.

Trans activism has produced a bizarre new alienation of body parts from people. Imagine saying "I'm a woman with a pussy attached", or "I'm a man with a cock and balls attached", as if the genitals were an afterthought.

 

[Trausti]

“banging a pussy if it’s attached to a man.” We live in such stupid times.

One can only, as ever, admire your open-mindedness and your liberal and progressive mindset.

Apparently, quite a few aboriginal and/or native/indigenous cultures were, in the past (and indeed some still apparently are) more relaxed than we are about gender fluidity and about having more than just two fixed categories. And I read that a lot of such tolerance was very heavily discouraged by invading white, 'western', conservative, christian colonists.

So it's not entirely clear which times are/were stupid about this.

Name one society or culture - just one - that did not recognize the distinction between male and female, man and woman.

 

[Jarhyn]

“banging a pussy if it’s attached to a man.” We live in such stupid times.

One can only, as ever, admire your open-mindedness and your liberal and progressive mindset.

Apparently, quite a few aboriginal and/or native/indigenous cultures were, in the past (and indeed some still apparently are) more relaxed than we are about gender fluidity and about having more than just two fixed categories. And I read that a lot of such tolerance was very heavily discouraged by invading white, 'western', conservative, christian colonists.

So it's not entirely clear which times are/were stupid about this.

Really? It's entirely clear to me.

Men don't have pussies, 'attached' or not. Bodies have zero spirits, let alone two or more.

Trans activism has produced a bizarre new alienation of body parts from people. Imagine saying "I'm a woman with a pussy attached", or "I'm a man with a cock and balls attached", as if the genitals were an afterthought.

Says you. Really, it's entirely clear to me.

Men have whatever genitals, modified or otherwise, that their development and life bestows upon them. A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body.

Transphobia has produced a disgusting alienation of who someone actually is in favor of paying attention to a mere trivia of anatomy rather than any actual driver of fundamental self. Imagine saying "I assume to know what is in your pants and insist that you abide by MY assumptions," as if the person themselves, the person being discussed, who they are, is merely an afterthought.

 

[Metaphor]

Men have whatever genitals, modified or otherwise, that their development and life bestows upon them. A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body.

Transphobia has produced a disgusting alienation of who someone actually is in favor of paying attention to a mere trivia of anatomy rather than any actual driver of fundamental self. Imagine saying "I assume to know what is in your pants and insist that you abide by MY assumptions," as if the person themselves, the person being discussed, who they are, is merely an afterthought.

Biological sex is not a "trivia of anatomy". Anatomy is part of biological sex but not all of it.

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Men have whatever genitals, modified or otherwise, that their development and life bestows upon them. A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body.

Transphobia has produced a disgusting alienation of who someone actually is in favor of paying attention to a mere trivia of anatomy rather than any actual driver of fundamental self. Imagine saying "I assume to know what is in your pants and insist that you abide by MY assumptions," as if the person themselves, the person being discussed, who they are, is merely an afterthought.

Biological sex is not a "trivia of anatomy". Anatomy is part of biological sex but not all of it.

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

A lot of these pro-trans activists miss the point of sports. The point is fun. It should be fun to watch. Sports is never fair. Superior genes is what it's all about. Any moron knows that. We like the illusion of fairness. So the obvious markers of unfairness needs to be hidden. If any group is easily identified and stick out like a sore thumb we react. Because it ruins the fun. We don't like it if we in advance can easily work out who will win. It kills the suspence. It's especially sensitive regarding male/female because these are the two categories we have chosen to separate.

If only trans men wouldn't win so disproportionally much, we'd be fine with it.

Which doesn't explain why we're somehow fine with Ethopian/Kenyan runners winning marathons because of their weird bone structure. But I can't think of any other?

 

[ruby sparks]

“banging a pussy if it’s attached to a man.” We live in such stupid times.

One can only, as ever, admire your open-mindedness and your liberal and progressive mindset.

Apparently, quite a few aboriginal and/or native/indigenous cultures were, in the past (and indeed some still apparently are) more relaxed than we are about gender fluidity and about having more than just two fixed categories. And I read that a lot of such tolerance was very heavily discouraged by invading white, 'western', conservative, christian colonists.

So it's not entirely clear which times are/were stupid about this.

Name one society or culture - just one - that did not recognize the distinction between male and female, man and woman.

Because that's what I said. Not. Nice try. Fail.

 

[J842P]

Men have whatever genitals, modified or otherwise, that their development and life bestows upon them. A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body.

Transphobia has produced a disgusting alienation of who someone actually is in favor of paying attention to a mere trivia of anatomy rather than any actual driver of fundamental self. Imagine saying "I assume to know what is in your pants and insist that you abide by MY assumptions," as if the person themselves, the person being discussed, who they are, is merely an afterthought.

Biological sex is not a "trivia of anatomy". Anatomy is part of biological sex but not all of it.

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

A lot of these pro-trans activists miss the point of sports. The point is fun. It should be fun to watch. Sports is never fair. Superior genes is what it's all about. Any moron knows that. We like the illusion of fairness. So the obvious markers of unfairness needs to be hidden. If any group is easily identified and stick out like a sore thumb we react. Because it ruins the fun. We don't like it if we in advance can easily work out who will win. It kills the suspence. It's especially sensitive regarding male/female because these are the two categories we have chosen to separate.

If only trans men wouldn't win so disproportionally much, we'd be fine with it.

Which doesn't explain why we're somehow fine with Ethopian/Kenyan runners winning marathons because of their weird bone structure. But I can't think of any other?

In basketball, there is a clear height advantage. And there are no height classes.

In combat sports, usually there are weight classes.

 

[ruby sparks]

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Seriously though, Jarhyn said 'person, who they are'. That is largely determined by the brain. It may differ from their biological sex, obviously.

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

separate identity-specific sports should be private only

This whole thing is so silly. Arguing about who has what hormones or testosterone or cock size etc.

It's all very simple: The NCAA and the Olympics and all other sports that have some state or gov't involvement should ELIMINATE SEPARATE WOMEN'S AND MEN'S SPORTS altogether and have all the competitions open to everyone no matter what their category.

And meantime, if you want separate sports for women or handicapped or this or that race or LGBTQMXW identity etc., go ahead and form your own private sports activity. You can have Little League and girls' basketball/softball and other sports that divide people into separate groups or identities and get support from private businesses and donors and paying spectators, etc. -- there's no lack of resources for any imaginable sports activity for this or that identity group.

Why should it be any more complicated than that? Everyone is free to start up their own separate this or that for any group demanding recognition. And meanwhile the programs that are officially recognized for all of society have to be totally open to ALL competitors no matter what or who they are, and gender-neutral and neutral on ALL identity categories of any kind.

 

[Jarhyn]

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

I know it's hard for you to understand but do try.

Seriously though, Jarhyn said 'person, who they are'. That is largely determined by the brain. It may differ from their biological sex, obviously.

Yeah, like how hard is it to understand that "who you are" is defined by "what decisions you make, what knowledge you have, what words you say."

My penis says no words. It speaks no volumes. It has no friends.

My penis doesn't write Software. My penis does not pay my mortgage, my penis doesn't mow the lawn or make supper.

My penis does two or three things, two of which could be accomplished with a not-penis (albeit trivially differently). The only function or thing that it does uniquely is get hard so I can insert it in things and I don't even like doing that for the vast majority of interactions with it.

I could live my life exactly as I do now, sans penis.

It is the least significant and least useful part of my anatomy.

When it comes to biological sex, there are two elements that are actually meaningful: what shape your brain has, and what hormones it gets exposed to, and for trans people in today's world, that's exactly their one, desired puberty. They are most meaningfully, their "trans" sex.

 

[prideandfall]

It's all very simple: The NCAA and the Olympics and all other sports that have some state or gov't involvement should ELIMINATE SEPARATE WOMEN'S AND MEN'S SPORTS altogether and have all the competitions open to everyone no matter what their category.

the reason that doesn't work is because sportsballs are by their nature a cultural function based on performance accolades - IE, people like this garbage because they get to pretend that their fandom for so-and-so has a physical impact on the outcome of the game.
they also like to hero worship participants who are good, and a business is built around endorsing the good players.

if men and women were all just mashed into the same leagues together there would basically never be any 'good' female players ever again because the most acclaimed female of any given sport can only compete at a mid-tier level compared to men.

Why should it be any more complicated than that? Everyone is free to start up their own separate this or that for any group demanding recognition. And meanwhile the programs that are officially recognized for all of society have to be totally open to ALL competitors no matter what or who they are, and gender-neutral and neutral on ALL identity categories of any kind.

it's more complicated than that because as soon as you do that, you immediately have SOMEBODY who wants into this or that separate group that somebody else doesn't think should be there and then this entire shit-show starts over again.

 

[prideandfall]

I could live my life exactly as I do now, sans penis.

to be completely fair though...
yes, you could do that *now*, because you've already had it your entire life. but if you hadn't had it your entire life, you couldn't live your life exactly as you do now because you wouldn't be who you are now, because huge swaths of your living experience would be radically different.

more than anything else, this is the sticking point for me from a purely philosophical position on the whole trans issue.

When it comes to biological sex, there are two elements that are actually meaningful: what shape your brain has, and what hormones it gets exposed to, and for trans people in today's world, that's exactly their one, desired puberty. They are most meaningfully, their "trans" sex.

i'm afraid this is inaccurate, because there is a third: how you are treated by literally everyone you ever encounter in your life and what life lessons and personality-shaping social pressures are applied to you and how that shapes who you are.
now, i'm not saying that these 'life lessons' are necessary or good, but they do exist and they are a huge component to personality development in humans.

as an example:
i've never in my life met a woman who's sexuality wasn't shaped by society's pressure on her to not enjoy sex.
whether they caved to that pressure and developed a complex about it, or they rebelled against it and found their own sense of sexual freedom, or if they had a progressive mom who taught them otherwise (or a myriad of other scenarios), basically every biologically female person in the US has the social pressure to not be aggressively sexual drilled into them from before they can even talk, and that is a foundational part of what sculpts who they are and how they interact with the world.

a trans woman will never experience that, can never experience that, because they did not grow up as a female.
a trans woman will never experience the combination of shame and guilt at having her first period, or dealing with the social reaction to developing breasts as a teen.
a trans man will never understand how a lifetime of cultural sculpting makes one expected to suppress their emotions at all times, and to avoid outward displays or 'negative' feelings.
a trans man will never fully understand the internal calibration needed to reconcile society's expectation that you be tough, detached, stoic, and callous towards others with the internal drive to rebel against social expectations and be someone sensitive and honest and open, but also try to figure out how to do that without being seen as a 'faggot' for it.

i know this is kinda getting into the weeds a bit here, this is a derail where i'm going off quite a bit over something that was basically an offhand comment, but this is something that really bothers me about me the trans conversation.

 

[Gospel]

Yeah, sucks for them.

I think the whole point is to find an arrangement that doesn't suck for them.

Is it possible? What is your suggestion?

Transgender league?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Men have whatever genitals, modified or otherwise, that their development and life bestows upon them. A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body.

Also, I have zero idea what you are talking about when you say "A person, who they are, is determined by their brain, not their body". I can't see how that's not completely false.

Seriously though, Jarhyn said 'person, who they are'. That is largely determined by the brain. It may differ from their biological sex, obviously.

Given that the brain is part of the body, that would be literally false. But that is not the central issue, which is one of language, and specifically the meaning of the the word 'man', and whether brains - or minds - weigh more or less than sexual organs in abnormal cases. For that matter, one could just say "A Black person has whatever...", etc., and then the question would be about the meaning of "Black" (and trans racial claims are routinely rejected by those who accept trans gender claims).

This is one of the matters that are generally avoided in debates about trans questions: people either avoid even mentioning the meaning of the words, or they assert they have such-and-such meaning, but arguments in support of the meaning being such-and-such (which probably would be based on observations about how people use these words 'in the wild' - i.e., not while doing activism - and logic), are generally absent.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

When it comes to biological sex, there are two elements that are actually meaningful: what shape your brain has, and what hormones it gets exposed to, and for trans people in today's world, that's exactly their one, desired puberty. They are most meaningfully, their "trans" sex.

i'm afraid this is inaccurate, because there is a third: how you are treated by literally everyone you ever encounter in your life and what life lessons and personality-shaping social pressures are applied to you and how that shapes who you are.
now, i'm not saying that these 'life lessons' are necessary or good, but they do exist and they are a huge component to personality development in humans.

What sort of mind a person has does depend on what you say, but there are further factors: .

a. How a person experiences the world, regardless of how others treat them. Consider your index finger in your right hand, and your tongue. They don't feel the same. For example, if you touch something with one of them, it feels different from touching it with the other. Or consider your hand and your foot. Again, they do not feel the same. And so on. The extent of the differences between the way two different organs (or generally parts of one's body) feel like depend on which parts you are comparing, but there are for sure some differences between the experiences of having a vagina and having a penis and testicles. These ways of experiencing the world are differences between the minds of females and males that are cross-cultural.

b. Cumulative experiences involving 4., but distinct from them. For example, if a person could change (as in some fantasy stories, or as some fish do) their sexual organs, say from having male organs to female ones, then they would experience the world as a female as described in 4., but would have the memories of having experienced the world as a male as described in 4. So, the point is that current experiences and cumulative experiences are different aspects of the mind one can consider, though in practice they go together in humans, normally - but not always: if a male loses his penis in an accident, he no longers experiences the world in at least one distinct male-like manner as described in 4. (though he does not experience it in a female-like manner, either), but he still gets the cumulative experiences of having lived with a penis.

Additionally, "what shape your brain has" (or what sort of mind one has) depends on hormones to some extent, but not just the current hormones, but also the hormones the individual was exposed to earlier, in particular before birth, and during puberty. Furthermore, there may well be differences that result not just from the hormones, but also from the chromosomes; this is a matter for further research.

a trans woman will never experience that, can never experience that, because they did not grow up as a female.

True. And also:

1. A trans woman will never experience having a vagina, but has experienced - and in many cases does experience - having a penis.

2. Many trans women were exposed to male levels of hormones during puberty, and probably before birth - and even if the levels were not male levels before birth, they may have been different from female levels too.

a trans man will never understand how a lifetime of cultural sculpting makes one expected to suppress their emotions at all times, and to avoid outward displays or 'negative' feelings.

Also:

1. A trans man will never experience having a penis, but has experienced - and in many cases does experience - having a vagina.

2. Many trans women were exposed to female levels of hormones during puberty, and probably before birth - and even if the levels were not female levels before birth, they may have been different from male levels too.

 

[Lumpenproletariat]

It's all very simple: The NCAA and the Olympics and all other sports that have some state or gov't involvement should ELIMINATE SEPARATE WOMEN'S AND MEN'S SPORTS altogether and have all the competitions open to everyone no matter what their category.

the reason that doesn't work is because sportsballs are by their nature a cultural function based on performance accolades - IE, people like this garbage because they get to pretend that their fandom for so-and-so has a physical impact on the outcome of the game.

They can have all that in private sports programs designed for whoever wants it, so let them have it all they want in their separate private sports events, which can attract huge audiences in some cases, so they can still pretend whatever they want.

they also like to hero worship participants who are good, and a business is built around endorsing the good players.

Let them do it privately. For the publicly-supported activities there needs to be an objective standard of performance which everyone recognizes.

And some women can participate and compete with men, and get the "hero worship" etc. At the intermediate levels of performance there would be some of the better female athletes, even professionally in some cases. There have been some female football players actually, in college, able to compete with the males. https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...s-has-beat-cancer-critics-and-wide-receivers/

if men and women were all just mashed into the same leagues together there would basically never be any 'good' female players ever again because the most acclaimed female of any given sport can only compete at a mid-tier level compared to men.

What's wrong with "mid-tier" level?

The vast majority of men also can only compete at a mid-tier level. A few females can compete and are superior to 90% of the males, and the rest who cannot compete at the highest levels with males could still have their separate private athletic events which would attract spectators and be commercially viable, where there would be "'good' female players."

There's nothing to prevent women from competing all they want, without requiring by law special separate categories reserved to them only. To create such a special category for women only is in effect to say that women are all crybabies who need make-believe and have to be humored, like children need Santa Claus.

Why should it be any more complicated than that? Everyone is free to start up their own separate this or that for any group demanding recognition. And meanwhile the programs that are officially recognized for all of society have to be totally open to ALL competitors no matter what or who they are, and gender-neutral and neutral on ALL identity categories of any kind.

it's more complicated than that because as soon as you do that, you immediately have SOMEBODY who wants into this or that separate group that somebody else doesn't think should be there . . .

No, that's what we have now with the separate categories for women only, or for handicapped only, where you create these artificial categories, and they squabble over who is qualified to be in the special categories, who has too much testosterone, not enough estrogen, the wrong kind of genitalia, etc. Why should they argue over this and award medals based on the body chemistry, hormones, cock size, etc., rather than on their performance?

. . . and then this entire shit-show starts over again.

No, the only show is that everyone has to compete, and only the best win, by scoring more points, by running faster, jumping higher or farther -- not by being in this or that arbitrary category, and every team recruits the best performers, because performance or merit is the only standard, rather than arbitrary categories which eliminate some and include others who fit the arbitrary guidelines for inclusion.

 

[ruby sparks]

One could very easily think of reasons why all the above is problematical in several ways. But at the same time, it might have at least some merit. I think it should be possible to do it up to a point. Perhaps not for all sports, but for many sports. I think each sport might have to be considered separately. And there are different ways each sport could be adapted.

Similar ideas have been put forward by some. For example, very recently (May & June this year) by Czech sports academic Irena Martínková, in the following two papers:

Unisex sports: challenging the binary
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00948705.2020.1768861

and

Open Categories in Sport: One Way to Decrease Discrimination
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17511321.2020.1772355

This goes beyond just transgender issues, so I am going to start a separate thread.

ETA: thread started:

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?21910-Unisex-unigender-sports&p=816068#post816068

 

[repoman]

It's all very simple: The NCAA and the Olympics and all other sports that have some state or gov't involvement should ELIMINATE SEPARATE WOMEN'S AND MEN'S SPORTS altogether and have all the competitions open to everyone no matter what their category.

the reason that doesn't work is because sportsballs are by their nature a cultural function based on performance accolades - IE, people like this garbage because they get to pretend that their fandom for so-and-so has a physical impact on the outcome of the game.
they also like to hero worship participants who are good, and a business is built around endorsing the good players.

if men and women were all just mashed into the same leagues together there would basically never be any 'good' female players ever again because the most acclaimed female of any given sport can only compete at a mid-tier level compared to men.

Why should it be any more complicated than that? Everyone is free to start up their own separate this or that for any group demanding recognition. And meanwhile the programs that are officially recognized for all of society have to be totally open to ALL competitors no matter what or who they are, and gender-neutral and neutral on ALL identity categories of any kind.

it's more complicated than that because as soon as you do that, you immediately have SOMEBODY who wants into this or that separate group that somebody else doesn't think should be there and then this entire shit-show starts over again.

It might become the sports version of this

 

[Jarhyn]

the reason that doesn't work is because sportsballs are by their nature a cultural function based on performance accolades - IE, people like this garbage because they get to pretend that their fandom for so-and-so has a physical impact on the outcome of the game.
they also like to hero worship participants who are good, and a business is built around endorsing the good players.

if men and women were all just mashed into the same leagues together there would basically never be any 'good' female players ever again because the most acclaimed female of any given sport can only compete at a mid-tier level compared to men.


it's more complicated than that because as soon as you do that, you immediately have SOMEBODY who wants into this or that separate group that somebody else doesn't think should be there and then this entire shit-show starts over again.

It might become the sports version of this

View attachment 28793

Bullshit.

There is most certainly a cycle, and it WILL most likely take the world further from where you wish it was. But the cycle is more like...

"We demand to be served by publicly licensed businesses, and you're still shitty for making such 'private' spaces." And that's the end of it.

If you want to do your private shit, you're allowed and everyone else is still allowed to be critical/I]. We will be critical of your hate whenever you express or communicate or leak it's existence to the public. We will not stop being critical of hate because it is hate. Now, if you decide to let people into your private club because you feel bad over the social pressure, that's on you.

In short, we will always protest discriminatory hate based spaces and we will always push them to the margins and this is the correct shape of nature. When you try to push those spaces onto the public, well, good luck getting a business license. Cry more, and all that.

 

[skepticalbip]

... snip ....

In short, we will always protest discriminatory hate based spaces and we will always push them to the margins and this is the correct shape of nature. When you try to push those spaces onto the public, well, good luck getting a business license. Cry more, and all that.

Yeah, you tell them. Men should not be excluded from those discriminatory women's sports. The fact that the women could not successfully compete with large, muscular, fast men is irrelevant.