Transgender women still running and winning as females six months since ban

RunRagged wrote:

runontheragged wrote:

As a straight white man, I know that in certain areas -a women or a minority or gay person or even a vet will get preference over me. But you know what, I am willing to accept that for the greater good. It means that people have more opportunities. I am quite sure than 99% of girls who will NEVER have to deal with this are going to be okay. And to the 1%, I'm sorry, I really am. (just as I am sorry for every HS girl in CO who has to race Addy Ritz every week). It sucks for you but allowing trans people to play sports are more important than your feelings. Sports are the 1 thing that keeps kids engaged and trans kids are more likely than other kids to have problems. So why take away the 1 thing that can help them??

But the issue here isn't "allowing trans people to play sports." The issue is allowing male people in female sports.

I'm not advocating that "trans people" of either sex be excluded from sports or treated unfairly in any way. I simply think male people should be excluded from female sports

In my view, the exclusion of male people from the female category of sport - and from spaces & services meant to be female-only - should apply across the board to all male people. All male people regardless of the opposite-sex "gender identities" and other unusual qualities that some males might have, or claim to have, that you believe entitles them to special privileged access to female sports and spaces that no other males get.

In teling me that "allowing [male] trans people to play [female] sports are more important than your feelings," you've said the quiet part out loud. But even so, you've not framed your position honestly.

You're not arguing that the rights of "trans people" across the board to play sports are more important than my feelings and the feelings of other members of my sex. You're arguing that male people who wish to be and claim they are girls/women are more important than all the female people on earth who actually are girls/women.

Also, I don't believe for a minute your claim that all your life you've been making personal sacrifices and putting up with unfairness so that "a woman or a minority or a gay person or even a vet will get preference" over you because you're "willing to accept that for the greater good." That sounds like a bunch of self-aggrandizing baloney to me.

But even if it is true that all of your life you've been nobly stepping aside, taking the back seat and willingly withstanding blatantly unfair treatment so as to insure that members of other historically less favored groups get preference over you, that's not what's going on here.

You're not offering to give up your own right to fairness and safety in sports in order to help out a group you perceive as downtrodden. You're telling girls and women that we, and we alone, must be forced to forfeit fairness and safety in sports - and generally take it on the chin - for the sake of males. All so you can pat yourself on the back and tell yourself what a good, generous, stand-up guy you are.

Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:

225 W wrote:

It's not just "the right wing." In this forum alone several people claiming to be Democrats or Liberals have indicated that they agree with "the right wing" about this insanity. And that's a sentiment expressed quite abundantly elsewhere.

I'm unsure why you are so dismissive about the complaints. It is strange that when people with a mental disorder - a dysphoria - insist on being recognized for something which by nearly all familiar measures they are not, you express anger at the people not affirming these delusions.

Please educate yourself.

Gender incongruence has been moved out of the “Mental and behavioural disorders” chapter and into the new “Conditions related to sexual health” chapter. This reflects current knowledge that trans-related and gender diverse identities are not conditions of mental ill-health, and that classifying them as such can cause enormous stigma.

Link:www.who.int/standards/classifications/...

runontheragged wrote:

RunRagged wrote:

But the issue here isn't "allowing trans people to play sports." The issue is allowing male people in female sports.

I'm not advocating that "trans people" of either sex be excluded from sports or treated unfairly in any way. I simply think male people should be excluded from female sports

In my view, the exclusion of male people from the female category of sport - and from spaces & services meant to be female-only - should apply across the board to all male people. All male people regardless of the opposite-sex "gender identities" and other unusual qualities that some males might have, or claim to have, that you believe entitles them to special privileged access to female sports and spaces that no other males get.

In teling me that "allowing [male] trans people to play [female] sports are more important than your feelings," you've said the quiet part out loud. But even so, you've not framed your position honestly.

You're not arguing that the rights of "trans people" across the board to play sports are more important than my feelings and the feelings of other members of my sex. You're arguing that male people who wish to be and claim they are girls/women are more important than all the female people on earth who actually are girls/women.

Also, I don't believe for a minute your claim that all your life you've been making personal sacrifices and putting up with unfairness so that "a woman or a minority or a gay person or even a vet will get preference" over you because you're "willing to accept that for the greater good." That sounds like a bunch of self-aggrandizing baloney to me.

But even if it is true that all of your life you've been nobly stepping aside, taking the back seat and willingly withstanding blatantly unfair treatment so as to insure that members of other historically less favored groups get preference over you, that's not what's going on here.

You're not offering to give up your own right to fairness and safety in sports in order to help out a group you perceive as downtrodden. You're telling girls and women that we, and we alone, must be forced to forfeit fairness and safety in sports - and generally take it on the chin - for the sake of males. All so you can pat yourself on the back and tell yourself what a good, generous, stand-up guy you are.

You are making wild assumptions that largely incorrect. Just know that, despite your monologuing and your posture, you don't speak for all women. Most women I know support trans rights, including the right of transwomen to compete.

I idea that you are happy to limit people because they weren't born like you is pretty gross. But by all means, please cite a few more boomers who also think as you do,( it doesn't really help your point).

You act, and largely so does this "sexist" board, as if every transwomen compete does so with malice and the sole goal is make little girls cry. Maybe they just want to live an normally as you do. But you CANNOT allow that!.

Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:

It's true that some transphobes here claim to be "liberal" or "Democrats." But their essentialist ideology is consistent with the basic characteristics of conservatism.

They areintolerant of ambiguity. (A common trait of conservative people.) Everything has to be clear black and white with no shades of gray. So every person has to be male or female and there has to a simple way to separate the two.

They are hostile to unknowns. Anything they don't understand causes serious anxiety. So they try to dismiss and erase it from existence. (Xenophobia is a perfect example of this.) They don't understand why trans people are experiencing their gender incongruence. Therefore, they try to dismiss it as delusion, and their identity as fake.

They define every human with their reproductive function. The most important reason we exist is so that we can procreate. That's why medical transition is considered evil. In their view, making a person infertile is the worst thing anyone can do to another human, other than murder.

mathematics wrote:

runontheragged wrote:

You are making wild assumptions that largely incorrect. Just know that, despite your monologuing and your posture, you don't speak for all women. Most women I know support trans rights, including the right of transwomen to compete.

I idea that you are happy to limit people because they weren't born like you is pretty gross. But by all means, please cite a few more boomers who also think as you do,( it doesn't really help your point).

You act, and largely so does this "sexist" board, as if every transwomen compete does so with malice and the sole goal is make little girls cry. Maybe they just want to live an normally as you do. But you CANNOT allow that!.

Just to be clear on two separate statements that you made:

-It's bad that RunRagged wants to limit people because they weren't born like him.

-You step aside to give opportunities to those not born like you.

Is that not tantamount to limiting people who *are* born like you?

GD wrote:

Oh, the irony! You accuse us of being uncomfortable with ambiguity, yet you sort people into outdated political categories and deem those you disagree with ignorant and immoral. The reason why some "liberals" (left-leaning) and Democrats agree with some conservatives on this issue is that they are united by philosophical liberalism.

We believe that there is a natural world out there that can be understood through democratic processes, such as the scientific method and rational debate. We refuse knowledge-seeking methods that grant some people special authority over the truth and those that attempt to quash debate through brute force or public shaming. The gender theories you advance are rooted in principles antithetical to philosophical liberalism. They argue that some people have special insights about the world due to their social position and demand that all other people comply with these insights or risk losing their jobs or reputation.

RunRagged wrote:

Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:

It's true that some transphobes here claim to be "liberal" or "Democrats." But their essentialist ideology is consistent with the basic characteristics of conservatism.

They areintolerant of ambiguity. (A common trait of conservative people.) Everything has to be clear black and white with no shades of gray. So every person has to be male or female and there has to a simple way to separate the two.

They are hostile to unknowns. Anything they don't understand causes serious anxiety. So they try to dismiss and erase it from existence. (Xenophobia is a perfect example of this.) They don't understand why trans people are experiencing their gender incongruence. Therefore, they try to dismiss it as delusion, and their identity as fake.

They define every human with their reproductive function. The most important reason we exist is so that we can procreate. That's why medical transition is considered evil. In their view, making a person infertile is the worst thing anyone can do to another human, other than murder.

From "Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization," a 2014 policy document issued by OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and WHO:

Sterilization without full, free and informed consent has been variously described by international, regional and national human rights bodies as a violation of fundamental human rights, including the right to health, the right to information, the right to privacy, the right to decide on the number and spacing of children, the right to found a family and the right to be free from discrimination... Human rights bodies have also recognized that forced sterilization is a violation of the right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Coercive and involuntary sterilization with the aim of improving the genetic constitution of the human species became an instrument of population and public health control during the heyday of eugenics, between 1870 and 1945. In the early 20th century, laws permitting and encouraging coercive sterilization were passed in many countries, including Germany, Japan and the United States of America. Many hundreds of thousands of people, particularly those with disabilities or from ethnic, religious and other minorities, were sterilized without their consent.

In the years after the Second World War, most countries reformed their laws and practices, abandoning eugenic sterilization and strengthening the requirements for informed consent. However, in some countries it took longer to move away from eugenic sterilization.

During the period from the 1960s to the 1990s, coercive sterilization has been used in some countries (including in Asia, Europe and Latin America) as an instrument of population control, without regard for the rights of individuals. A range of incentives or coercive pressures have been employed to secure agreement to sterilization, including offers of food, money, land and housing, or threats, fines or punishments, together with misleading information.

People living in poverty, indigenous peoples and ethnic minorities have been particularly targeted by such programmes. In many countries, information is not made available in accessible formats and local languages, and informed consent is not obtained before these procedures are carried out.

Some groups, such as transgender and intersex persons, also have a long history of discrimination and abuse related to sterilization, which continues to this day.