Transgender MTF picked for Olympics weightlifting

[plasmahal]

So you can reply to each example and be all "well of course that's not hate!"? Nah, I have better things to do this evening. You know as well as I do that GD is not a tolerant and welcoming place for trans people.

I think most posters are OK, only a small handful of posters that may be intolerant.

 

[plasmahal]

But that's the whole point, Hubbard is male, once you buy into the idea of calling him a her, then the reasons that should prevent him from competing against women goes out the window, after all, women should be allowed to compete against other women.

There is no way of expressing the reasons why Hubbard should be competing against men without stating the obvious fact that apparently you think we are now not allowed to say because it's disrespectful.

Do you understand the differences between biological sex and gender?

Are you open to trying to understand it?

 

[Dis86]

So you can reply to each example and be all "well of course that's not hate!"? Nah, I have better things to do this evening. You know as well as I do that GD is not a tolerant and welcoming place for trans people.

Edit: Nevermind.

No, so I can point out you're lying.

 

[Lysander]

I think most posters are OK, only a small handful of posters that may be intolerant.

This is true. Honestly, it's a comparatively tiny quantity of consistent, vocal and opinionated posters here who can consistently make life hell. Just start blocking people who annoy you, even two or three, and your forum experience will improve hugely.

 

[Vulcan]

Hubbard is a woman.

Is Hubbard male?

Do you understand the significant advantages a male, even on testosterone blockers would have over females?

 

[plasmahal]

Is Hubbard male?

Do you understand the significant advantages a male, even on testosterone blockers would have over females?

If you answer my questions first please I'd be happy to reply to yours.

 

[Terminal_Boy]

I suppose the ultimate question to ask is why do we separate men and women when it comes to sport and athletic events?

Because there wouldn’t be a biological woman in the top 100 for any physical/athletic sport if they and biological men competed in the same events.

 

[MatsyLR]

You expressed very ignorant and bigoted views in earlier posts.

The fact that you posted a reply like this insinuates guilt on your part.

It has been recommended to you several time to educated yourself on transgender issues, I gave you links etc but you continue to seem to be dodging that information....

According to you.
Nothing I have said, I consider bigoted. Disagreeing with allowing this person to compete is not bigoted.
My personal view on the transgender issue, would come across as bigoted to you I assume but I have not mentioned it as far as I'm aware as its separate to allowing a biological male to compete in a biological female competition, which have been separated for very good reasons.

The whole biological thing needs to be made VERY clear.
When you say female/male its not clear nowadays what you mean by that as plenty of people still don't bow down to the gender politics going on.

When I say male or female or man or woman I mean biologically, nothing else.

Also I have no intention on "educating" myself further whatever you mean by that, people can call themselves what they want, doesn't make it true and doesn't make it so they can ignore biological differences.

 

[JohnG7]

 

[dowie]

I think this is a valid discussion to have, and find myself (someone who broadly considers himself a trans ally) coming down in the middle of the argument. I lean towards enabling them to compete overall, because I believe anyone who is prepared to transition in the public eye isn't doing it to win some medals, and anyone who believes so is the kind of cynical I don't think can ever be cured.

Arguing genetic predisposition of men to being stronger/faster in sport and athletics, as a reason to not allow trans athletes to compete in their gender category, seems kinda dumb to me because that's an arbitrary line you could move in all kinds of directions.

I'm not sure how you're coming down the middle or the argument then if you're basically saying she should compete with women? That's just straight up taking a side.

Surely the more accurate gender category would be a trans women category anyway!

It's not really arbitrary to separate based on male/female, weight classes are perhaps arbitrarily bracketed to some extent, separating men and women is based on fairly obvious differences and has little to do with gender identity but rather biological sex.

All that said, IDGAF about sport or athletics enough to be bothered either way. I just wanted to note that having the discussion shouldn't be an opportunity to be generally transphobic and pointedly mis-gender trans people. I've read through a few pages of it now, and it's pretty disappointing from what has seemed to be a reasonably mature forum.

Perhaps you're a bit blinkered/hypersensitive when it comes to this topic?

 

[coltpython3]

This is actually insulting to women... I'm sure many of them won't say it as they don't want to be vilified but I'm sure deep down they do not want to compete with him

 

[Joseph Clements]

I'm not sure how you're coming down the middle or the argument then if you're basically saying she should compete with women? That's just straight up taking a side.

Surely the more accurate gender category would be a trans women category anyway!

It's not really arbitrary to separate based on male/female, weight classes are perhaps arbitrarily bracketed to some extent, separating men and women is based on fairly obvious differences and has little to do with gender identity but rather biological sex.



Perhaps you're a bit blinkered/hypersensitive when it comes to this topic?

Yeah, sorry, in my first draft of this post I did counterpoint that I thought a couple of the arguments for including trans people in their gender category were incongruous with other inclusivity arguments, but I couldn't find the example I was thinking of (it was a twitter post that had some traction a couple of days ago, which ostensibly argued in favour of inclusivity, but was actually a very bad argument). Anyway, I couldn't remember the specifics so removed it from the post but not before I'd written that first paragraph! I think I mean logical arguments place me in the middle, but my sympathy draws me toward inclusivity.

To the point about being 'blinkered' or 'hypersensitive', yes I guess you could say that, in the sense that I've read and watched and understood a lot of trans people's stories, accounts and ideas, and so am more attuned to them. Traditionally that's called knowledge.

 

[JohnG7]

or delusion.

 

[silvagti]

Hubbard is a woman.

I like to think of myself as quite open minded and I'm willing to acknowledge that someone should be allowed to change the gender they choose to present to the world and identify as.

However that doesn't change the fact that Hubbard was born and lived many years biologically as a man and still has the genetic makeup of a male (XY chromosome, muscle density, etc). Regardless of her gender now.

To me that constitutes an entirely unfair advantage over biological females since it would likely make them uncompetitive against a trans-woman IMO.

There are very valid reasons we separate men and women in sports. Similarly we divide weight lifters based on their weight as everyone accepts that someone who weighs more is likely to be physically stronger.

In the same way I think everyone would also accept that men are physically stronger that women particularly at the same weight.

Would anyone seriously suggest that men don't have an advantage when it comes to physical events like without weight lifting, boxing, athletics, etc compared to women?

 

[Participant]

Hubbard is a woman.

Yeah nah

 

[Joseph Clements]

I like to think of myself as quite open minded and I'm willing to acknowledge that someone should be allowed to change the gender they choose to present to the world and identify as.

However that doesn't change the fact that Hubbard was born and lived many years biologically as a man and still has the genetic makeup of a male (XY chromosome, muscle density, etc).

To me that constitutes an entirely unfair advantage over biological females since it would likely make them uncompetitive against a trans-woman IMO.

To that end allowing trans-women to compete in female events is simply unfair IMO.

There are very valid reasons we separate men and women in sports. Similarly we divide weight lifters based on their weight as everyone accepts that someone who weighs more is likely to be physically stronger.

In the same way I think everyone would also accept that men are physically stronger that women particularly at the same weight.

In fact does anyone think that men don't have an advantage when it comes to physical events like without weight lifting, boxing, athletics, etc compared to women?

I think that's a valid opinion. I don't think anything you've said is inherently transphobic. Nor does any of it contradict my statement (if that was your intention).

 

[Joseph Clements]

Yeah nah

Here's an example of transphobia, in my opinion. My only real point was I've seen lots of this in the thread and it's a shame. The validity of trans people isn't a subject open to a debate, so I'll not be drawn into it.

 

[dowie]

Anyway, I couldn't remember the specifics so removed it from the post but not before I'd written that first paragraph! I think I mean logical arguments place me in the middle, but my sympathy draws me toward inclusivity.

I don't see why "inclusivity" is necessarily a good thing here, for example, the current guidelines don't require surgery AFAIK but do require testosterone suppression, not all trans-identifying people do suppress their testosterone. If you're simply pro-inclusivity then shouldn't those trans people also be allowed to compete?

If not then why not? And if so can you see that there would be an even bigger issue for women's sports if it was just down to self ID?

Currently, those trans people would have to compete in male events - surely the more inclusive option would be to have a couple of trans categories - high T and low T perhaps. There are multiple categories at the Paralympics and we're talking about a small % of the population so it would fit in nicely there.

 

[FishFluff]

No, so I can point out you're lying.

I've let this thread play out and there's already 3 posters denying that a transgender woman is/can be anything other than male. This is the part where you now claim that's not the same as them saying trans people don't exist and then we can both go about our day.

 

[MatsyLR]

I've let this thread play out and there's already 3 posters denying that a transgender woman is/can be anything other than male. This is the part where you now claim that's not the same as them saying trans people don't exist and then we can both go about our day.

Those are 2 different views though, unless I'm missing something?