3 ms·

> Just because corner cases cause problems doesn't imply we should do away with any attempt to identify anyone as anything. That's a complete straw-man argumen

> Just because corner cases cause problems doesn't imply we should do away with any attempt to identify anyone as anything. That's a complete straw-man argument, no one is arguing for the complete abolition of gender categories. They are there, they are useful, they fit 99% of humans, and 99% of humans can be correctly categorized at birth. It's perfectly fine. The argument is that legal gender shouldn't be compulsory or immutable. As for sports, which still doesn't have anything to do with legal gender, it's obvious that trans women could have an unfair advantage over cis women in sports that require strength or reach or bulk, therefore they shouldn't be able to compete professionally as women. And for sports where there isn't any noticeable difference between genders, it's to whatever governing sports association to decide on their own rules, if they want to allow trans women - fine, if they don't - fine. Whatever.

harshreality 8y ago
Without legal gender, based on something other than "what do you feel like today?", how do you prevent exactly the situation you identify: a trans woman, or worse, a man identifying as a woman for a day, insisting she is a woman for all practical and legal purposes and demanding to compete against women? Without mandatory, biologically-informed, legally meaningful gender labels, how can the discrimination provisions of Title IX and employment law be enforced reasonably and fairly? Anyone choosing to identify as the opposite of their biological gender will be discriminated against. How do you determine whether the discrimination was due to their gender identity or due to the fact that someone doesn't want to deal with someone who has gender dysphoria? And if gender ceases to be mostly-immutable and ceases to have stable legal meaning, how do you conduct a legal proceeding accusing someone of discrimination based on gender? What is it that you hope to accomplish? Are you trying to find ways to reduce discrimination? I think what you're proposing won't do that. Are you trying to allow everyone to "be themselves" and damn the consequences? (We just need to fix society to be compatible with people being themselves, naturally.) Maybe if your goal were clearer... What you said, doing away with compulsory or immutable gender labelling, would do away with any (government or gov't-regulated, which encompasses quite a lot) attempt to identify anyone as anything, so what I wrote might be an improper generalization, but I can't see how that harms the argument, and calling it a straw-man is quite a stretch.
- henrikschroder 8y ago
  > Anyone choosing to identify as the opposite of their biological gender will be discriminated against. Discrimination is when you treat someone unfairly for no good reason, or for a bad reason. Excluding trans women from competing in women sports where being a trans woman carries a significant advantage is not unfair, quite the opposite, it would be unfair for all the cis women who are competing. Therefore it is simply not discrimination. You are the one insisting that sports organizations somehow must use legal gender as the basis for dividing their teams by gender, that is simply not the case. It's a nice default, but any organization has to be free to do whatever they themselves want. > And if gender ceases to be mostly-immutable and ceases to have stable legal meaning, how do you conduct a legal proceeding accusing someone of discrimination based on gender? > What is it that you hope to accomplish? Gender identity is very important to most people, and if your society has legal genders, people who are legally misgendered will be deeply unhappy. Therefore, these people have to be allowed to change their legal gender, or opt out of having a legal gender altogether, if they feel that's the better option. Your argument against this is that it would be "messy" from a legal standpoint, but the harsh reality is that nature is simply messy, and we have to be flexible enough to deal with that. If current discrimination laws can't deal with trans or intersex cases, then we should of course update the laws so that they can deal with those cases in a fair manner. I don't know exactly how, but I'm sure we as a society can figure something out. > What you said, doing away with compulsory or immutable gender labelling, would do away with any (government or gov't-regulated, which encompasses quite a lot) attempt to identify anyone as anything True, that's not a straw-man, it's a gigantic soaped-up friction-less lubricated slippery slope. In the same way that same-sex marriage didn't lead to people marrying their dogs, getting rid of legal gender won't destroy Women's Volleyball, I promise you.

harshreality 8y ago

Without legal gender, based on something other than "what do you feel like today?", how do you prevent exactly the situation you identify: a trans woman, or worse, a man identifying as a woman for a day, insisting she is a woman for all practical and legal purposes and demanding to compete against women? Without mandatory, biologically-informed, legally meaningful gender labels, how can the discrimination provisions of Title IX and employment law be enforced reasonably and fairly? Anyone choosing to identify as the opposite of their biological gender will be discriminated against. How do you determine whether the discrimination was due to their gender identity or due to the fact that someone doesn't want to deal with someone who has gender dysphoria? And if gender ceases to be mostly-immutable and ceases to have stable legal meaning, how do you conduct a legal proceeding accusing someone of discrimination based on gender? What is it that you hope to accomplish? Are you trying to find ways to reduce discrimination? I think what you're proposing won't do that. Are you trying to allow everyone to "be themselves" and damn the consequences? (We just need to fix society to be compatible with people being themselves, naturally.) Maybe if your goal were clearer... What you said, doing away with compulsory or immutable gender labelling, would do away with any (government or gov't-regulated, which encompasses quite a lot) attempt to identify anyone as anything, so what I wrote might be an improper generalization, but I can't see how that harms the argument, and calling it a straw-man is quite a stretch.

henrikschroder 8y ago
> Anyone choosing to identify as the opposite of their biological gender will be discriminated against. Discrimination is when you treat someone unfairly for no good reason, or for a bad reason. Excluding trans women from competing in women sports where being a trans woman carries a significant advantage is not unfair, quite the opposite, it would be unfair for all the cis women who are competing. Therefore it is simply not discrimination. You are the one insisting that sports organizations somehow must use legal gender as the basis for dividing their teams by gender, that is simply not the case. It's a nice default, but any organization has to be free to do whatever they themselves want. > And if gender ceases to be mostly-immutable and ceases to have stable legal meaning, how do you conduct a legal proceeding accusing someone of discrimination based on gender? > What is it that you hope to accomplish? Gender identity is very important to most people, and if your society has legal genders, people who are legally misgendered will be deeply unhappy. Therefore, these people have to be allowed to change their legal gender, or opt out of having a legal gender altogether, if they feel that's the better option. Your argument against this is that it would be "messy" from a legal standpoint, but the harsh reality is that nature is simply messy, and we have to be flexible enough to deal with that. If current discrimination laws can't deal with trans or intersex cases, then we should of course update the laws so that they can deal with those cases in a fair manner. I don't know exactly how, but I'm sure we as a society can figure something out. > What you said, doing away with compulsory or immutable gender labelling, would do away with any (government or gov't-regulated, which encompasses quite a lot) attempt to identify anyone as anything True, that's not a straw-man, it's a gigantic soaped-up friction-less lubricated slippery slope. In the same way that same-sex marriage didn't lead to people marrying their dogs, getting rid of legal gender won't destroy Women's Volleyball, I promise you.