4 ms·

>Some states that introduced trans sports bans couldn't even cite a single person the bill would affect. Tenesee introduced their bill to ban a single person. W

>Some states that introduced trans sports bans couldn't even cite a single person the bill would affect. Tenesee introduced their bill to ban a single person. Who wasn't even close to the top of her discipline. It's all political posturing. This argument works in reverse as well though. People don't want to throw out the idea of gender to appease a select few. There is a multitude of things that are simply unfair accidents of birth and there isn't a solid line where it's obvious something should be done. With gender issues there seems to be a lot of people with no dog in the fight who have extremely strong opinions but accomodations aren't always made on stuff like this because a few people are experiencing something unfair which they have no control over. It's not "hate", as many people would say, to want to have a conversation about it.

_cenw 4y ago
"Throw out the idea is gender" sounds like you have a very specific view of trans people as gender abolitionists. That's misreading gender as social construction. Social construction doesn't automatically advocate for abolishment, it merely points out that these things are not universal constants. Money is such a construct too, and I don't even have to be anticapitalist to point that out. Also, I get your argument, but the entire premise of trans women stealing college sports trophies is false. It's a bit dependent on specific discipline and how well you manage to retain muscle (it's much harder, and once you lost it, it's gone for good), but generally HRT levels the playing field enough that the olympic comittee, who I trust much more on this than the local republican, does not object to participation. Also, I'd like to point out that the major parts in high end athlete performance are already down to "unfair accidents of birth", even if you don't introduce gender to the issue. A tall person will always have an edge playing basketball. I find it entirely unconvincing that a trans person would solely transition to cheat at sports. The GDR tried something comparable to this hypothetical and the female athletes unknowingly exposed to androgens seemed pretty unhappy about the outcome. So I don't see why you don't see any theoretical advantage on the same spectrum of "unfair accidents of birth". These supposed advantages certainly aren't severe enough that trans women beat cis women consistently.
- parineum 4y ago
  >"Throw out the idea is gender" sounds like you have a very specific view of trans people as gender abolitionists. I am not describing myself. I just understand the position of people that feel that way and don't like to just dismiss them as bigots as most seem to. These people are definitely making a slippery slope argument but they also feel like they're already halfway down the slope. They aren't out there seeing an A and concerned about B, they see it as A, B, C, D, E then F and wonder when G will come. The trans sports thing is F. They're more worried about G, H and I. >Also, I'd like to point out that the major parts in high end athlete performance are already down to "unfair accidents of birth", even if you don't introduce gender to the issue. A tall person will always have an edge playing basketball. That's my point. If all I ever wanted to do was play basketball but I can't because of [accident of birth], which accidents require accomodations?
  - _cenw 4y ago
    You're talking about making exclusion an intervention, not a result of circumstances. Not disallowing trans people to compete is not an accomodation, it's the opposite. These are not actions of equal value. It would be like banning everyone over 2m from basketball so more people down the height distribution curve can compete at the higher levels. That would be, with the same logic as the exclusion of trans people, equitable. But we kind of instinctively know it's wrong.
    - Shaanie 4y ago
      The reason we have women's sports in the first place is essentially a different form of "you have to be below 2m" in order to promote diversity in sports, so disallowing trans people doesn't seem like a much bigger step than disallowing 50% of the population. Personally I don't have a strong opinion on this, especially since trans women taking over women's sports is not a problem yet anyway.
      - conicsl 4y ago
        > Personally I don't have a strong opinion on this, especially since trans women taking over women's sports is not a problem yet anyway. It is a problem - see https://shewon.org https://shewon.org for an increasingly long list of actual women who have been pushed out of winning spots in their sports by men who identify as women.

_cenw 4y ago

"Throw out the idea is gender" sounds like you have a very specific view of trans people as gender abolitionists. That's misreading gender as social construction. Social construction doesn't automatically advocate for abolishment, it merely points out that these things are not universal constants. Money is such a construct too, and I don't even have to be anticapitalist to point that out. Also, I get your argument, but the entire premise of trans women stealing college sports trophies is false. It's a bit dependent on specific discipline and how well you manage to retain muscle (it's much harder, and once you lost it, it's gone for good), but generally HRT levels the playing field enough that the olympic comittee, who I trust much more on this than the local republican, does not object to participation. Also, I'd like to point out that the major parts in high end athlete performance are already down to "unfair accidents of birth", even if you don't introduce gender to the issue. A tall person will always have an edge playing basketball. I find it entirely unconvincing that a trans person would solely transition to cheat at sports. The GDR tried something comparable to this hypothetical and the female athletes unknowingly exposed to androgens seemed pretty unhappy about the outcome. So I don't see why you don't see any theoretical advantage on the same spectrum of "unfair accidents of birth". These supposed advantages certainly aren't severe enough that trans women beat cis women consistently.

parineum 4y ago
>"Throw out the idea is gender" sounds like you have a very specific view of trans people as gender abolitionists. I am not describing myself. I just understand the position of people that feel that way and don't like to just dismiss them as bigots as most seem to. These people are definitely making a slippery slope argument but they also feel like they're already halfway down the slope. They aren't out there seeing an A and concerned about B, they see it as A, B, C, D, E then F and wonder when G will come. The trans sports thing is F. They're more worried about G, H and I. >Also, I'd like to point out that the major parts in high end athlete performance are already down to "unfair accidents of birth", even if you don't introduce gender to the issue. A tall person will always have an edge playing basketball. That's my point. If all I ever wanted to do was play basketball but I can't because of [accident of birth], which accidents require accomodations?
- _cenw 4y ago
  You're talking about making exclusion an intervention, not a result of circumstances. Not disallowing trans people to compete is not an accomodation, it's the opposite. These are not actions of equal value. It would be like banning everyone over 2m from basketball so more people down the height distribution curve can compete at the higher levels. That would be, with the same logic as the exclusion of trans people, equitable. But we kind of instinctively know it's wrong.
  - Shaanie 4y ago
    The reason we have women's sports in the first place is essentially a different form of "you have to be below 2m" in order to promote diversity in sports, so disallowing trans people doesn't seem like a much bigger step than disallowing 50% of the population. Personally I don't have a strong opinion on this, especially since trans women taking over women's sports is not a problem yet anyway.
    - conicsl 4y ago
      > Personally I don't have a strong opinion on this, especially since trans women taking over women's sports is not a problem yet anyway. It is a problem - see https://shewon.org https://shewon.org for an increasingly long list of actual women who have been pushed out of winning spots in their sports by men who identify as women.