Transgender - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[CM86]

Well that's a super broad question, wanna narrow it down a bit?

Validated? Concerns? Ooh boy!

Are you suggesting I want segregation?

I'm not advocating, merely pointing out segregation is.

 

[Carringbush2010]

You've missed the point, because you didn't read the entire post. From the post that is barely two paragraphs long:

I don't require you to be an expert, CB.

This reads as a child petuantly telling an adult, "You just want me to shush!"

I've not told you to shut it. I've not silenced you in any way. Quite literally, all I have said is that you need to be less definitive with your position. We've seen more or less the same thing play out multiple times - in the Cheese Wars thread when you insisted that Coon to Cheer was a meritless choice; in the What's wrong with Nationalism thread when you said that there was nothing wrong with loving your country; when you said in the Islam thread all of a day ago that you disliked the negative connotation of the word patriarch - that you demonstrate extremely shallow understanding of initial concepts coupled with an inability to move beyond that.

Just take it slow. Take a deep breath. Try to understand for a bit, rather than lashing out. There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Carringbush, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Wow, talk about over sensationalizing!

'Take a deep breath', 'lashing out' (lashing?! really?!)

Do you do this with every poster? Or do I annoyingly live in the back of your mind?

Actually, don't bother replying, we see things very differently and I know you don't like how I 'view' things. Sorry not sorry.

So how about just try to ignore me, and if that's too much for you, just hit the disagree button.

Ok?

 

[Carringbush2010]

View attachment 2081662

If you're tryna point out some sort on inconsistency, you'd be wrong.

 

[big_e]

 

[evolved2]

This is why I said the question of transgender competitors in sport is nuanced - there are still questions that need to be answered. Science has to provide those answers, not the ideologists of either side.

Sport is just a slice of the larger societal pie though.

Absolutely. I'll concede that my position is wrong if it can be shown that transwomen athletes have no (or minimal) physiological advantages over ciswomen.

I'm glad we've found agreement that the decision should be decided by science rather than political considerations or other biases. I recognise that transpeople just want to be included in society and accepted for who they are, which is something I can understand and respect.

Inclusivity is important - in some ways it's more important than sport itself.

Years ago it was uppity blacks ordering us whites to give them their 'rights'. We ruled society then, see, so those 'rights' were ours to give them. IF we saw fit. When those radicals made noise we criminalised it. In many nations we beat them down in the streets. Sometimes, we killed them.

It took race-traitor whites pushing for so-called 'civil rights' and 'equality' alongside the black radicals before things changed and our exclusive paradise was destroyed forever. Now we can't go back again.

Sad, don't you think?

That's an interesting way of looking at things.

Without judging your comparison as being right or wrong, pro-lifers would argue they're providing a voice for the unborn who have no voice of their own. While I think they're ultimately misguided, their intentions are often good.

Getting back to the smaller slice of the pie, again it's vital for the science to speak on the subject before any final rulings take place. For the science to speak there must be results. For there to be results there must be competition. For there to be competition there must be competitors. To measure the competitors there must be inclusion.

All of this needs to be conducted at the elite level. At lower levels competitors will know that they compete for exclusion, and this will definitely shade results. Those for exclusion will try even harder. Those against may not try at all. At the elite level? It's all about the record. The quickest time. The longest distance.

The greatest motivation is always at the elite level, not the lower ones. It's the elite that must be tested.

What data would be measured and how would it be interpreted?

I presume the sample size would be small as there aren't a lot of trans-athletes performing at elite level in each sport. While results will provide part of the story, the error margin for any conclusion based on such a small sample size would be huge, wouldn't it?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

View attachment 2081968

We all know what would make Wondermark the Sealion go away though, don't we? Acknowledgement and respect. Those simple things make Wondermark go away.

 

[Gralin]

We all know what would make Wondermark the Sealion go away though, don't we? Acknowledgement and respect. Those simple things make Wondermark go away.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

That's an interesting way of looking at things.

Without judging your comparison as being right or wrong, pro-lifers would argue they're providing a voice for the unborn who have no voice of their own. While I think they're ultimately misguided, their intentions are often good.

While I don't think that the pro-life position in itself is evil (it is motivated by notions of protection after all) I've always believed jurisdiction lies with the parents, especially the mother who must carry that child to term, and that life itself shouldn't legally start until that unborn baby is at least medically viable outside the womb.

What data would be measured and how would it be interpreted?

I presume the sample size would be small as there aren't a lot of trans-athletes performing at elite level in each sport. While results will provide part of the story, the error margin for any conclusion based on such a small sample size would be huge, wouldn't it?

In all honesty that's something sports scientists would be better qualified to answer. All I know is that if there is an advantage, it should be able to be demonstratively measured.

 

[Gethelred]

Wow, talk about over sensationalizing!

'Take a deep breath', 'lashing out' (lashing?! really?!)

This whole reply serves to lash out at someone you are perceiving as insulting you.

Do you do this with every poster? Or do I annoyingly live in the back of your mind?

... are you really this... basic?

Actually, don't bother replying, we see things very differently and I know you don't like how I 'view' things. Sorry not sorry.

This demonstrates my argument.

Reducing this to the level of humble disagreement is a facile reading of this conversation. I am not disagreeing with you. I am pointing out that your interaction on this and other subjects is shallow. I am keeping my posts to exceedingly simple and direct language to ensure that you cannot misread or misinterpret my meaning.

That you want to dismiss this is not an uncommon way to deal with one's inadequacies. You do need to realise that by choosing not to point this out to you, others are being nice when they do not have to be.

In the past, your reaction to a post like this has been a) to attempt to try and flip this over; 'no, it's YOUR inability to understand (insert 'reality', 'common sense', etc)!', as though simply reusing the words of my initial post to you put your reply on level ground; b) to leave a thumbs down and backpedal as viciously as your little legs can; or c) 'quote where I said that!' specificity traps, in which you use the word 'perception' as though you understood it. Let's see what you decide to run with this time.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I may have misinterpreted that and gone defensive, but I thought Wondermark was a barb thrown at us 'woke whiners' who believe in the evils of universal human rights and such.

Apologies if so!

EDIT: Further info

Of Course The Sea Lion Is Right

Even all these years later, his honor is still worth defending

jessesingal.substack.com

 

[Gralin]

I may have misinterpreted that and gone defensive, but I thought Wondermark was a barb thrown at us 'woke whiners' who believe in the evils of universal human rights and such.

Apologies if so!

EDIT: Further info

Of Course The Sea Lion Is Right

Even all these years later, his honor is still worth defending

jessesingal.substack.com

hmmm Jesse Singal, where have i heard that name before......

oh yeah

his ant trans crusade where a kid joking about identifying as an attack helicopter got turned into an entire "think piece"



**** that guy of course the sea lion is the hero to him

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

hmmm Jesse Singal, where have i heard that name before......

oh yeah

his ant trans crusade where a kid joking about identifying as an attack helicopter got turned into an entire "think piece"



**** that guy of course the sea lion is the hero to him

THAT was the guy? It seems I have woefully misinterpreted things here. And my google-fu sucks!! I reckon I might quietly go re-read Ray Bradbury's short story 'The Jar' and contemplate a few things.

 

[evolved2]

In all honesty that's something sports scientists would be better qualified to answer.

I haven't thought about the debate that way before. I look at it more through physiological differences and similarities, which puts the onus on the inclusivity side to show there's no advantage in each individual sport at elite level. I realise that's quite a challenge though.

For lower level sports, I'm happy for each league/governing body/school to decide.

All I know is that if there is an advantage, it should be able to be demonstratively measured.

I'm not convinced. Showing statistical evidence for a claim isn't always easy, especially with small sample sizes.

 

[kirsti]

I haven't thought about the debate that way before. I look at it more through physiological differences and similarities, which puts the onus on the inclusivity side to show there's no advantage in each individual sport at elite level. I realise that's quite a challenge though.

For lower level sports, I'm happy for each league/governing body/school to decide.

I'm not convinced. Showing statistical evidence for a claim isn't always easy, especially with small sample sizes.

CAS has already ruled that burden of proof on advantage is with IF.

In practice, asking anyone to prove a negative (i.e., absence of advantage) is effectively a ban on participation.

There is currently no definitive threshold of what this “meaningful” reduction should be in a single sport anyway, and finally there is no current scientific work demonstrating specifically what the performance advantages of men over women in a single sport itself could be said to be composed of. This means there is no current threshold of “meaningful” performance advantage reduction that any transgender woman athlete could satisfy.

Therefore, trans women are placed in an uncomfortable double-bind: accused of performance advantage they cannot prove they do not possess.

Banning every transgender woman from playing women’s sport on the basis of risk outcomes of a group level aggregate of physical characteristics that any given trans individual belonging to this group may demonstrably not possess individually cannot be considered reasonable, proportionate or justified.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[kirsti]

You might have a 4WD (trans women athletes) but if the engine is small, maybe a hatchback (cis woman athlete) is better?




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[10571z]

Well good luck to the ladies

 

[Gralin]

View attachment 2089063

Well good luck to the ladies

Good luck with what?

 

[10571z]

Good luck with what?

Having your own spaces..

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Having your own spaces..

Gender-exclusive spaces belong to yesterday, not today.

 

[10571z]

Gender-exclusive spaces belong to yesterday, not today.

I have no issue with private women’s/mens spaces like this to find house mates, friends etc.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I have no issue with private women’s/mens spaces like this to find house mates, friends etc.

But you can just as well stipulate what you're looking for in a general, gender-neutral space can't you? If Bigfooty Personals ever became a thing;

"Single white Female seeking same for rental, $680PW. No Carlton supporters"
"Single Afro-Australian seeking similar for friendships only. Non-drinkers essential so that means no Geelong supporters"

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Wow. Sall Grover, CEO of Giggle was on the Bolt Report just now denouncing the "gender ideology nonsense" that says a man can become a woman. Grover seems adamant that transgenderism should never have a legal basis in that transgender people should never be legally recognised by anything other than their birth gender.

Yeah nah. Ms Grover, please climb into the dustbin of history alongside the racial segregationists and others of a similar exclusionist ilk. Because that is squarely where you belong.

 

[Seeds]

Gender-exclusive spaces belong to yesterday, not today.

So you are against female only sport?

Male and female toilets?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

So you are against female only sport?

Male and female toilets?

Sport is a bit different to gender-exclusive spaces. As for dunnies, I don't mind using a unisex toilet in the least.

 

[Chief]

CEO of Giggle

What would that be?