4 ms·

Again I don’t take it be saying that. It’s saying that encouraging women to be forced to be in emotional distress to succeed at sport is problematic so we shoul

Again I don’t take it be saying that. It’s saying that encouraging women to be forced to be in emotional distress to succeed at sport is problematic so we should require hrt so that elite sport doesn’t require trans women to skip hrt

rdevilla 6mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47538165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47538165 Such a common pattern, I'm tired of seeing it. "That's not what it's saying, those words actually mean..." again and again, ad infinitum. A perverse form of moving the goalposts. Your reply has no relation whatsoever to what was previously stated, it is a new argument entirely.
- space_fountain 6mo ago
  Nope, I’m consistently saying the same thing. When have I said something else?
  - rdevilla 6mo ago
    > It’s saying that encouraging women to be forced to be in emotional distress to succeed at sport is problematic This was never said by anyone until you came along with that comment, which is a totally different idea (effectively a non sequitur). Can you quote who echoed the same argument?
    - space_fountain 6mo ago
      I said "Sports should only be segregated by this <gender identity> category, except that to remove perverse incentives it’s reasonable to require hrt" That was trying to elaborate on citruscomputing's argument where they said "Otherwise you have trans women having to choose between being more competitive and receiving necessary medical care." I'm rephrasing those two points. Apologies if I initially described that badly, but I'm just restating the perverse incentive they were talking about
      - rdevilla 6mo ago
        > "That's not what it's saying, those words actually mean..." > I'm rephrasing those two points. Quod erat demonstrandum.

rdevilla 6mo ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47538165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47538165 Such a common pattern, I'm tired of seeing it. "That's not what it's saying, those words actually mean..." again and again, ad infinitum. A perverse form of moving the goalposts. Your reply has no relation whatsoever to what was previously stated, it is a new argument entirely.

space_fountain 6mo ago
Nope, I’m consistently saying the same thing. When have I said something else?
- rdevilla 6mo ago
  > It’s saying that encouraging women to be forced to be in emotional distress to succeed at sport is problematic This was never said by anyone until you came along with that comment, which is a totally different idea (effectively a non sequitur). Can you quote who echoed the same argument?
  - space_fountain 6mo ago
    I said "Sports should only be segregated by this <gender identity> category, except that to remove perverse incentives it’s reasonable to require hrt" That was trying to elaborate on citruscomputing's argument where they said "Otherwise you have trans women having to choose between being more competitive and receiving necessary medical care." I'm rephrasing those two points. Apologies if I initially described that badly, but I'm just restating the perverse incentive they were talking about
    - rdevilla 6mo ago
      > "That's not what it's saying, those words actually mean..." > I'm rephrasing those two points. Quod erat demonstrandum.