You are incorrect about that.
You are incorrect about that.
Have you spoken to your mom about this?
intenserunner wrote:
trollism wrote:
Oh come one, it's one big troll thread.
It's a couple of people using psuedo-intellectual arguments to say 'Wimminz is bad, men is da bestest'.
It's not like there can be any sort of discourse here.
Actually, it seems the purpose of this thread went right over your head, which is to address the problem of transwomen setting records in womens' athletics, while some transwomen are claiming that requiring them to undergo testosterone replacement is against their rights because it forces them to harm themselves in order to be in the category they belong in. It seems to me that the problem stems from the category being based on "womenhood", rather than being based on the underlying condition of born/biological "womenhood".
Your choice to disregard this thread as "trollism", to me, sounds like sexism. You don't care about issues that affect women. To me, this is an important topic because I believe that it is no more fair to force people to compete against other people with biological advantages than it is fair to force people to compete against other species with biological advantages. If we are going to force women to compete against transwomen, then we might as well just start forcing men to compete against bears,etc. It is nonesense, and it is the category of "women" in sports that creates this nonesense in a society where any individual must be accepted as their preferred or "felt" gender.
No, you said women's sports are boring and therefore shouldn't exist. What records have been set by "transwomen"?
Aztec, I think that might have been someone else who wrote that they think women's sports are boring. I just see that on page 1, and not from intenserunner.
...although, as usual, you make insightful points.
you can be invested in someones career and not watch an extremely long boring race
donairs wrote:
Aztec, I think that might have been someone else who wrote that they think women's sports are boring. I just see that on page 1, and not from intenserunner.
Ya, I certainly did not say womens' sports are boring. The primary purpose of this thread is to find a way to preserve womens' sports in the face of the growing popularity of transgenderism and the rising popularity of progressive arguments that transwomen in athletics should be able to compete without any hormone therapy whatsoever. And this is an issue close to many female athletes. Look at the case of the two transwomen in Connecticut in the 100m dash. Many high school girls were willing to make anonymous statements about their opposition and their feelings over this case for a documentary, but they were afraid to speak openly for fear of retribution from the online SJW groups, etc. I believe that a solution can be found without being unfair to transwomen and without making them feel excluded. As it stands, transwomen are allowed to compete in the female category in High School Track in many US states without any hormone therapy. In my country, there is a famous cyclist "Rachel McKinnon", who has been going to universities around the country lecturing and who believes that it is unfair to force transwomen to undergoe hormone therapy in order to compete in female categories. Those who think this is issue is not going to harm womens' sports are naive. I think if we restructure the competitive categories, this issue could simply go away.
Women are more than welcome to play on the PGA tour. Equal play, same tees, same course setups, etc. They just won’t make any money.
The LPGA is the exclusionary tour, by prohibiting men from competing. At least men that identify as men.
The lawsuits are coming. They will come from transgenders complaining that they should not be forced to take drugs. They will win. They will then come from men who will complain that they should not be asked what gender they are because it is a private medical matter. They will win. They will come from women who will complain that men are taking their scholarships. They will lose because the courts will have determined that there are no women or men.
Men rule wrote:
They will lose because the courts will have determined that there are no women or men.
The argument that concept of man/woman is a social construct does seem to lead to this conclusion. Now there is the concept of "non-binary" as being someone with a mix of both male and female traits, but given that every human on this planet probably has a mix of what different people consider feminine or masculine traits depending on the cultural stereotypes they have been introduced to, anyone could rightly fit the category of "non-binary". It is this SJW drive for uniqueness that makes so many want to break away from the identity constraint of "male" or "female". But I don't think competitive categories in athletics were created for the purpose of identity expression, so this desire for certain individuals to compete in the female category in order to help them express their identity is distracting from the original purpose of this category and undermining the original purpose of the female category. The purpose of athletics is personal development and showcasing human potential so I think our primary goal should be to create competitive classes that maximize participation among all humans, regardless of their born physical traits. I think the only way to do this without overcomplicating the categories is simply to base them on past performance, which is done quite successfully already in the world of chess competition.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
What records have been set by "transwomen"?
Terry Miller in Connecticut has been setting records in the 60m, 100m, and 200m and her transwoman friend, Andraya Yearwood has been close behind her in those races.
"The 100 wasn’t a race. It was a blowout. The 200 was closer, still a record that spanned to 1997 fell. "
gametimect.com/jeff-jacobs-as-records-fall-at-girls-state-open-track-debate-rages-over-transgender-issueBut this is just the start of things to come. The popularity of transgenderism among the next generation of teens is growing fast.
intenserunner wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
What records have been set by "transwomen"?
Terry Miller in Connecticut has been setting records in the 60m, 100m, and 200m and her transwoman friend, Andraya Yearwood has been close behind her in those races.
"The 100 wasn’t a race. It was a blowout. The 200 was closer, still a record that spanned to 1997 fell. "
gametimect.com/jeff-jacobs-as-records-fall-at-girls-state-open-track-debate-rages-over-transgender-issueBut this is just the start of things to come. The popularity of transgenderism among the next generation of teens is growing fast.
Connecticut is not California and these TGFs are not taking hormone treatments. They will not be receiving scholarships and will probably drop off the radar after HS.
What evidence do you have to support the popularity of transgenderism among teens? It seems likely to me that being transgender in HS would be a miserable experience and most would wait until after graduation.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Connecticut is not California and these TGFs are not taking hormone treatments. They will not be receiving scholarships and will probably drop off the radar after HS.
What evidence do you have to support the popularity of transgenderism among teens? It seems likely to me that being transgender in HS would be a miserable experience and most would wait until after graduation.
I'm not basing it on any studies or polls, but on the cultural trends. Transgenderism is becoming trendy among many growing social circles. I could be wrong, but it is completely plausible that it could grow to a significant popularity. You seem to take the position that we should just ignore the issue of transwomen in sports until it becomes more widespread. Meanwhile, women are already being affected and for the few transwomen who switched from male sports to female, the female records have swiftly fell.
Case in point: Rachel McKinnon
"The Canadian, 37, set a world best time in qualifying in defence of her sprint title at the Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Manchester."
bbc.com/sport/cycling/50097423"The world record has just been beaten today by somebody born male, who now identifies as female, and the gap between them and the next born female competitor was quite a lot.
The world record was two tenths of a second. I know that doesn't sound like a lot but it is.
The gap between them and the next female competitor was four tenths, which to put into perspective in a sprint event like this, that would be 15m of the track, when sprint events are usually won by centimetres."
Rachel McKinnon broke this record with testosterone levels reduced. She currently argues that she should not be required to do hormone replacement therapy. Of course there wasn't any way should could compete at an elite level when she identified as male, but as a female she gets to break the world record even after she has gone through hormone replacement therapy for a year.
She says:
"I’m sometimes misquoted as saying the performance advantage is irrelevant. It’s not, per se, that the advantage question is irrelevant. Its that the way that we think about human rights, in that legal and ethical standards of when it’s OK to override a person’s human right, is that the performance advantages aren’t high enough."
She thinks that competing the female category (with natural testosterone levels) is a human right and human rights are more important than fairness in sport.
I look at these arguments and I think "These categories were not made to make certain humans feel more womenly, yet transwomen seem to think that is what these categories are for."
intenserunner wrote:
I look at these arguments and I think "These categories were not made to make certain humans feel more womenly, yet transwomen seem to think that is what these categories are for."
In addition to just totally removing this perception that in order to "compete as a woman" one must be in the "women's" category, having performance based categories will also solve the other issues that McKinnon likes to talk about:
RM: "If you look at elite athletics, every single elite athlete has some kind of genetic mutation that makes them amazing at their sport. Michael Phelps, his joint structure and body proportion, make him a like a fish, which is awesome. But we shouldn’t say that he has an unfair competitive advantage. The question is not whether there is a competitive advantage, the question is whether there is an unfair advantage. Sports is about competitive advantages."
RM: "... Is being trans just another natural physical characteristic that, if — and this is a gigantic “if” — it provides an advantage, should we treat it like just being tall? We do not regulate height. In many sports height provides a massive competitive advantage."
As you can tell, she's very skeptical of the idea that being trans provides any competitive advantage at all...
As I've mentioned before, if we just have performance based categories, then physical advantages of any kind become irrelevant.
I know it is hard to get used to for a public that has been so conditioned to the ideal of male and female categories, but it works for chess... nobody complains, and it could really increase the participation rates in athletics like Track & Field.
One category for naturally born females and one for everyone else. Two categories. Those that are non-binary or trans race in the men's division. It's that easy.
And enough with the chess. Good grief! Chess is a mental game.
intenserunner wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Connecticut is not California and these TGFs are not taking hormone treatments. They will not be receiving scholarships and will probably drop off the radar after HS.
What evidence do you have to support the popularity of transgenderism among teens? It seems likely to me that being transgender in HS would be a miserable experience and most would wait until after graduation.
I'm not basing it on any studies or polls, but on the cultural trends. Transgenderism is becoming trendy among many growing social circles. I could be wrong, but it is completely plausible that it could grow to a significant popularity. You seem to take the position that we should just ignore the issue of transwomen in sports until it becomes more widespread. Meanwhile, women are already being affected and for the few transwomen who switched from male sports to female, the female records have swiftly fell.
Case in point: Rachel McKinnon
"The Canadian, 37, set a world best time in qualifying in defence of her sprint title at the Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Manchester."
bbc.com/sport/cycling/50097423"The world record has just been beaten today by somebody born male, who now identifies as female, and the gap between them and the next born female competitor was quite a lot.
The world record was two tenths of a second. I know that doesn't sound like a lot but it is.
The gap between them and the next female competitor was four tenths, which to put into perspective in a sprint event like this, that would be 15m of the track, when sprint events are usually won by centimetres."
Rachel McKinnon broke this record with testosterone levels reduced. She currently argues that she should not be required to do hormone replacement therapy. Of course there wasn't any way should could compete at an elite level when she identified as male, but as a female she gets to break the world record even after she has gone through hormone replacement therapy for a year.
She says:
"I’m sometimes misquoted as saying the performance advantage is irrelevant. It’s not, per se, that the advantage question is irrelevant. Its that the way that we think about human rights, in that legal and ethical standards of when it’s OK to override a person’s human right, is that the performance advantages aren’t high enough."
She thinks that competing the female category (with natural testosterone levels) is a human right and human rights are more important than fairness in sport.
I look at these arguments and I think "These categories were not made to make certain humans feel more womenly, yet transwomen seem to think that is what these categories are for."
I really don't believe its becoming trendy or popular. Based on some articles I've read and posts I've seen on LR, I would guess that transgendered people are hated by about 50% of the population. No one is going to transgender because it's popular. It's similar to believing people choose to be gay. My daughter told me that at her 2,000 student HS there isn't a single transgender female.
The WR you're referring to is a masters record and that cyclist has no chance of making an Olympic team. Do you really care about masters cycling in another country?
California has the same rules regarding transgendered athletes, but out of a population on 40M, I'm not aware of even one TGF competing in T&F. As far as I know nationally there isn't even one TGF distance runner in HS, just one in NCAA whose graduating this year and no pro runners. You want to make a preemptive strike against women's sports because of a Canadian cyclist, two untreated sprinters and a 60th place finisher in an NCAA regional XC meet?
That you want to take sports away from women is bizarre. It makes no sense and there must be something in your personal experiences that makes you dislike women.
Noone wants to take away sports from women. One category for all humans means everyone, including women can compete against each other and rewarded fairly for their results. Women are not excluded from this but for the first time will be valued as a gender equal to men.
You do choose to be gay just as I choose to be heterosexual. You can choose not to act on your feelings and urges. You can kill people in video games without becoming a real killer.
trollism wrote:
HRE wrote:
Okay, it's one big troll thread but you still haven't explained how you decided I was upset which I suppose underscores your point about the troll's thread.
Maybe you weren't upset, but given your point was essentially to contradict one of the only common sense comments so far, it's not a stretch for me to think you were part of the 'Girls are slow and stupid, lol' brigade.
Just because it's not a stretch for you doesn't mean it's not a stretch. If you have a son on his high school's basketball team and you go to his games you do not get to or have to watch the girls' team play. If you have a daughter who plays high school basketball and go to watch her games you do not get to or have to watch the boys play. If your son or daughter is in the school's track team and you go to meets you will watch both the boys and girls compete. This is unlike most other sports. I have not mentioned any sort of preference about this so you are indeed stretching if you are assigning a preference to me.
itsallaboutbelief wrote:
Noone wants to take away sports from women. One category for all humans means everyone, including women can compete against each other and rewarded fairly for their results. Women are not excluded from this but for the first time will be valued as a gender equal to men.
Bullsh*t.