University of Otago student association gives "sportswoman of the year" award to a man.

[Metaphor]

Why would it be 'uncivilized'?

Do you think it is uncivilised to deny calling Rachel Dolezal black?

Based on what little I know, I thought Dolezal's treatment very shabby. Apparently, what she actually did earned her a good deal of respect amongst the politically correct. Then someone made it all about race.

So much for MLKj, and his "judged by the content of his character, not the color of his skin" bullshit. How quaintly obsolete in the modern world.
Tom

I think you might be misremembering the facts of the Rachel Dolezal story. Dolezal did not have a good outcome when her deception was discovered.

But I'm interested in why Toni supports the affirmation of men identifying as women, but not the affirmation of white people identifying as black people.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Based on my conversations with trans folks, even they don't usually have a problem. If your presentation and behavior don't attract attention, women ignore strangers about the way men do. Of course, changing/shower facilities are different, but those are relatively rare and usually not as needful as a quick pee.

Tom

The issue is with the changing/shower facilities. Restrooms usually have stalls making differing anatomy a non-issue.

 

[TomC]

I think you might be misremembering the facts of the Rachel Dolezal story. Dolezal did not have a good outcome when her deception was discovered.

I don't claim to know all the facts. I sincerely doubt that anyone does know all the facts.

My understanding is that Ms Dolezal was recognized as an activist for black people and issues black people cared about. Until racism got in the way and she got booted out of the Woke community because she wasn't black enough.

That's racist as hell, IMHO.

Sorry MLKj, the world has moved on without you.
Tom

 

[thebeave]

I think you might be misremembering the facts of the Rachel Dolezal story. Dolezal did not have a good outcome when her deception was discovered.

I don't claim to know all the facts. I sincerely doubt that anyone does know all the facts.

My understanding is that Ms Dolezal was recognized as an activist for black people and issues black people cared about. Until racism got in the way and she got booted out of the Woke community because she wasn't black enough.

That's racist as hell, IMHO.

Sorry MLKj, the world has moved on without you.
Tom

People were mad because she was a fraud, despite her good intentions. People don't like getting bullshitted (at least I don't).

And its not that she wasn't "black enough". She wasn't "black at all". She was actually a chapter president of the NAACP prior to being outed.

 

[Metaphor]

I think you might be misremembering the facts of the Rachel Dolezal story. Dolezal did not have a good outcome when her deception was discovered.

I don't claim to know all the facts. I sincerely doubt that anyone does know all the facts.

My understanding is that Ms Dolezal was recognized as an activist for black people and issues black people cared about. Until racism got in the way and she got booted out of the Woke community because she wasn't black enough.

That's racist as hell, IMHO.

Sorry MLKj, the world has moved on without you.
Tom

Rachel Dolezal wasn't 'black enough', because she wasn't black at all, though she 'identified' as black, told people she was black or mixed race, and was the president of a local NAACP chapter. She passed as black. She was widely pilloried when the truth came out and she lost her job.

I have put the challenge repeatedly to Toni. Why, if identity is paramount, should male-born people who 'identify' as female deserve treatment as female, including legal recognition and social affirmation? Why doesn't Rachel Dolezal deserve legal recognition and social affirmation as black?

It is my experience that gender ideologists who trumpet the primacy of gender identity over sex do not trumpet Dolezal's racial identity over her actual race? What's the difference?

If Rachel Dolezal is a fraud, why aren't trans people who pass labelled as frauds also? Or indeed, even the ones who don't pass. Gender ideologists say that gender identity must be respected no matter the sex or presentation of the person in question.

 

[TomC]

Based on my conversations with trans folks, even they don't usually have a problem. If your presentation and behavior don't attract attention, women ignore strangers about the way men do. Of course, changing/shower facilities are different, but those are relatively rare and usually not as needful as a quick pee.

Tom

The issue is with the changing/shower facilities. Restrooms usually have stalls making differing anatomy a non-issue.

OK.
We agree about that.

Can we agree that the need for special places to shower and change is also vanishingly rare? Nobody really needs to go to the public swimming pool if the facilities aren't what they prefer?
Tom

 

[Jarhyn]

Based on my conversations with trans folks, even they don't usually have a problem. If your presentation and behavior don't attract attention, women ignore strangers about the way men do. Of course, changing/shower facilities are different, but those are relatively rare and usually not as needful as a quick pee.

Tom

The issue is with the changing/shower facilities. Restrooms usually have stalls making differing anatomy a non-issue.

OK.
We agree about that.

Can we agree that the need for special places to shower and change is also vanishingly rare? Nobody really needs to go to the public swimming pool if the facilities aren't what they prefer?
Tom

Not true.

Take what you have said in another light: imagine you have parents or friends who the pool was important to. Or you have a niece or nephew pestering you to go. Eventually, the social pressure creates a need.

It would be simple enough to mandate going forward that there be at least one "family/personal" accomodation. I'm just of the opinion that eventually, we would have 3-4 of them and then just one "common", with real stall doors. Perhaps a side area for urinals, for those that don't care to be known to be able to use them. Or whatever. You can all do things dumb ways and bicker over whatever you want.

Am important part of life is recognizing when something is fucked up.

We fucked up with imperial/metric.

We fucked up with his/hers. It should really be public/private. Oops. Most people mostly right most of the time... Implies everyone can be a little wrong sometimes, in both "everyone at the same time" and "each member of all indivuduals". It might be too late to fix it, in both "maybe it's now permanent" and "maybe it's too late for us already and it doesn't matter."

Sometimes people are forced to go by circumstances of family and social leverage. It would be nice to be able to accommodate a "family option", either for those who feel fear and shame because of the "family crowd", or those of the "family crowd" who fear and shame trans people they would have to share space with.

 

[Trausti]

This pattern of men winning awards by pretending to be women is getting out of hand.

 

[thebeave]

This is a news story I came across yesterday about a boy's Australian under-18 Netball team that won the championship playing against a girls's under-18 team. I'm not familiar with Netball (sorta like basketball, I guess) as its apparently not a US sport. But it does seem to be a sport that is mostly popular among females. Evidently, there was a boy's Netball team that wanted to play competitively, but there wasn't enough other boys teams to even make a league, so in the interest of "inclusion" they were permitted to play in the girls leagues. I am a little confused though, as its not clear if the boys team thought they belonged there and were taking the competition seriously, or whether the whole thing was a setup to troll the "inclusion" ideologues. I feel bad for the girls team, and understand their anger and disappointment. Though this not technically a trans story, it does illustrate pretty well I think what the future of girls and women sports is headed for if/when a transwomen team is permitted full access to play against nontranswomen.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo9rub4g8mk[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Jarhyn]

This is a news story I came across yesterday about a boy's Australian under-18 Netball team that won the championship playing against a girls's under-18 team. I'm not familiar with Netball (sorta like basketball, I guess) as its apparently not a US sport. But it does seem to be a sport that is mostly popular among females. Evidently, there was a boy's Netball team that wanted to play competitively, but there wasn't enough other boys teams to even make a league, so in the interest of "inclusion" they were permitted to play in the girls leagues. I am a little confused though, as its not clear if the boys team thought they belonged there and were taking the competition seriously, or whether the whole thing was a setup to troll the "inclusion" ideologues. I feel bad for the girls team, and understand their anger and disappointment. Though this not technically a trans story, it does illustrate pretty well I think what the future of girls and women sports is headed for if/when a transwomen team is permitted full access to play against nontranswomen.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo9rub4g8mk[/YOUTUBE]

This is a hollow desire in light of the fact that this not what I see being argued for by saner voices who you could otherwise join.

I personally argue that inclusion in sports league should be on the basis of hormone exposure, and measured on the basis of last meaningful exposure as a function of time threshold.

We can set the time thresholds later. For now, it's perfectly reasonable to say that those who have undergone testosterone based puberty cannot compete professionally.

To that end, it is UNREASONABLE to force those with testicles to undergo such puberty against their will.

It is also UNREASONABLE to force those who in increasing numbers have not been pushed through such a puberty, out of league participation.

 

[Arctish]

This is a news story I came across yesterday about a boy's Australian under-18 Netball team that won the championship playing against a girls's under-18 team. I'm not familiar with Netball (sorta like basketball, I guess) as its apparently not a US sport. But it does seem to be a sport that is mostly popular among females. Evidently, there was a boy's Netball team that wanted to play competitively, but there wasn't enough other boys teams to even make a league, so in the interest of "inclusion" they were permitted to play in the girls leagues. I am a little confused though, as its not clear if the boys team thought they belonged there and were taking the competition seriously, or whether the whole thing was a setup to troll the "inclusion" ideologues. I feel bad for the girls team, and understand their anger and disappointment. Though this not technically a trans story, it does illustrate pretty well I think what the future of girls and women sports is headed for if/when a transwomen team is permitted full access to play against nontranswomen.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo9rub4g8mk[/YOUTUBE]

This story is as old as boys playing field hockey and girls joining little league baseball teams.

The only difference is, back then conservatives trying to maintain separations based on sex played the 'Think About the Boys' card. Apparently, a future All-Star pitcher would quit the game entirely if a girl kept hitting home runs when he was on the mound, therefore letting girls play in the same league as boys would ruin the future of baseball.

And boys in kilts hitting a ball with sticks was part of the gay agenda.

 

[thebeave]

This is a news story I came across yesterday about a boy's Australian under-18 Netball team that won the championship playing against a girls's under-18 team. I'm not familiar with Netball (sorta like basketball, I guess) as its apparently not a US sport. But it does seem to be a sport that is mostly popular among females. Evidently, there was a boy's Netball team that wanted to play competitively, but there wasn't enough other boys teams to even make a league, so in the interest of "inclusion" they were permitted to play in the girls leagues. I am a little confused though, as its not clear if the boys team thought they belonged there and were taking the competition seriously, or whether the whole thing was a setup to troll the "inclusion" ideologues. I feel bad for the girls team, and understand their anger and disappointment. Though this not technically a trans story, it does illustrate pretty well I think what the future of girls and women sports is headed for if/when a transwomen team is permitted full access to play against nontranswomen.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo9rub4g8mk[/YOUTUBE]

This story is as old as boys playing field hockey and girls joining little league baseball teams.

The only difference is, back then conservatives trying to maintain separations based on sex played the 'Think About the Boys' card. Apparently, a future All-Star pitcher would quit the game entirely if a girl kept hitting home runs when he was on the mound, therefore letting girls play in the same league as boys would ruin the future of baseball.

And boys in kilts hitting a ball with sticks was part of the gay agenda.

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

 

[Trausti]

This is a news story I came across yesterday about a boy's Australian under-18 Netball team that won the championship playing against a girls's under-18 team. I'm not familiar with Netball (sorta like basketball, I guess) as its apparently not a US sport. But it does seem to be a sport that is mostly popular among females. Evidently, there was a boy's Netball team that wanted to play competitively, but there wasn't enough other boys teams to even make a league, so in the interest of "inclusion" they were permitted to play in the girls leagues. I am a little confused though, as its not clear if the boys team thought they belonged there and were taking the competition seriously, or whether the whole thing was a setup to troll the "inclusion" ideologues. I feel bad for the girls team, and understand their anger and disappointment. Though this not technically a trans story, it does illustrate pretty well I think what the future of girls and women sports is headed for if/when a transwomen team is permitted full access to play against nontranswomen.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo9rub4g8mk[/YOUTUBE]

This story is as old as boys playing field hockey and girls joining little league baseball teams.

The only difference is, back then conservatives trying to maintain separations based on sex played the 'Think About the Boys' card. Apparently, a future All-Star pitcher would quit the game entirely if a girl kept hitting home runs when he was on the mound, therefore letting girls play in the same league as boys would ruin the future of baseball.

And boys in kilts hitting a ball with sticks was part of the gay agenda.

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

Isn’t the boys’ concern that letting a girl on the team will sap their competitiveness? I mean, the fastest recorded pitch by a woman was just 69 mph. The boys want to win, damn it.

 

[none]

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

Isn’t the boys’ concern that letting a girl on the team will sap their competitiveness? I mean, the fastest recorded pitch by a woman was just 69 mph. The boys want to win, damn it.

Without genital checking who knows..

 

[thebeave]

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

Isn’t the boys’ concern that letting a girl on the team will sap their competitiveness? I mean, the fastest recorded pitch by a woman was just 69 mph. The boys want to win, damn it.

Yeah, that was a factor too, for sure. Though I don't know if a girl playing right field for an inning or two would make a huge difference in the game outcome.

 

[none]

For 95+% of people, a simple division by sex in facilities like restrooms and locker/shower rooms works. And there is an option available for everyone, even if it's not their preference.

When it comes to the public's accomodations, the correct answer is (spaces for any single one), (spaces for nobody), (spaces for anyone who wishes) are acceptable. (Spaces for only some) is not 'public', at all; that is 'private'.

This kind of pontificating makes it hard to take you seriously. In a 50K seat football stadium, dividing the restrooms by sex doesn't make them "private". It's just being reasonable. You cannot just redefine words to suit your personal issues and expect the rest of us to give you special rights.
Tom

Unfortunately, whichever facility you send the trans people to there are issues.

Thus, how about a different approach? Build three facilities. Male/Female/Any. Any means any--it's not restricted to trans people. I think we would soon see that most people would regard it as a non-issue.

If you're building big facilities it's not going to make much difference--it means another door but little other costs as you still need the same amount of space and equipment. If you're building small stuff you've got what we see now--family restrooms.

Build 4 facilities, one to check gender..
Hmm 5 facilities, one to check gender. One to check sex, and 3 more so they can poop...
No 6 facilities, err.. 8 facilities
All those previous facilities and shower rooms do they can change undies after waiting so damn long to use the crapper.

 

[ZiprHead]

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

Isn’t the boys’ concern that letting a girl on the team will sap their competitiveness? I mean, the fastest recorded pitch by a woman was just 69 mph. The boys want to win, damn it.

Abbotsford’s pink-haired pitching phenom throws 83 mph fastball
Baseball prodigy Raine Padgham records impressive throwing speed at recent Baseball BC camp

 

[Trausti]

I remember those "olden days" in the '60's and '70's of a random girl here and there joining a Little League team, but I don't think you have the boys' motivations for disapproval correct. I think the problem the boys had was not fear of girls hitting home runs and humiliating them, but the idea of girls invading a traditionally boys space. Plus, the old "girls are icky and have cooties" canard so prevalent for boys that age. There's also the expectation that boys have to be on their best behavior when girls are around: no burping, farting, cussing, dirty jokes, etc. So, basically no fun. I do not remember anything about boys in kilts playing field hockey, but maybe that was a thing somewhere.

Isn’t the boys’ concern that letting a girl on the team will sap their competitiveness? I mean, the fastest recorded pitch by a woman was just 69 mph. The boys want to win, damn it.

Abbotsford’s pink-haired pitching phenom throws 83 mph fastball
Baseball prodigy Raine Padgham records impressive throwing speed at recent Baseball BC camp

Don’t know why she’s not given the credit as the fastest female pitch; but her top effort is still below the average for MLB pitches and top boys her age are slinging 100 mph.

 

[Emily Lake]

Unfortunately, whichever facility you send the trans people to there are issues.

Thus, how about a different approach? Build three facilities. Male/Female/Any. Any means any--it's not restricted to trans people. I think we would soon see that most people would regard it as a non-issue.

If you're building big facilities it's not going to make much difference--it means another door but little other costs as you still need the same amount of space and equipment. If you're building small stuff you've got what we see now--family restrooms.

Who would you place in the "Any" facility? What guidelines would you employ for housing? Would there be limitations or exclusions related to the type of crimes committed?

Unless you're trans there's no obligation to use the any. If you're scared of opposite-sex genitals stay with the facilities of your gender.

I'm asking for what guidelines YOU would use. Is the "Any" available only to transgender prisoners? Can other prisoners be placed in "Any"? And if prisoners who are not transgender can be placed there, what are the guidelines for their placement? Is this allowing some prisoners to have a choice of prisons, where most prisoners get no choice in the matter? Are there limitations for more violent offenders? Are there "Any" facilities that are minimum security as well as maximum security?

I'm not arguing, Loren, I'm asking for your ideas on this.

 

[Emily Lake]

And that explains why using sportswoman to refer to gender by a university student club is such a crime? If this person had become a transwoman for no other reason than to get to the Olympics, I’d say your rant is a a persuasive argument. However, in this case, it appears to me from what little I have read, that Laurel Hubbard is sincere about her (yes her) gender. So, I think your rant is misplaced and unpersuasive.

Gender is not sex. Women are discriminated against, oppressed, treated as less-than, etc. on the basis of our sex. Just as black americans are discriminated against, oppressed, and treated as less-than on the basis of their skin color.

If a white person were to genuinely and sincerely identify as black, do you think that should entitle that 'assigned white at birth' person to honors and recognitions intended to recognize the accomplishments of black people, simply because they sincerely and genuinely feel themselves to be black? Do you think that transracial person will have actually experienced the challenges and barriers that black people face? What if they lived as a white person for the first 30 years of their life, and then transitioned to a black identity so they could live as their real selves?