LogFAQs > #929133941

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Transgender Cyclist Wins Female Cycling World Championship
pinky0926 10/23/19 10:50:41 AM #128:	Hudawgy posted... But they are not women. Thats the reality of it all. It even says it in the title. "Trans" Woman. A real woman doesn't have the title "Trans'. They are simply a woman. If this is about dignity. Then standing up for real woman should be the top priority, no? Framing this argument towards the politics of gender ethics instead of towards physiological sex advantages in sport is how we got into this mess in the first place. For example, why should standing up for "real" women (I take that to mean biological women) take precedent over standing up for trans women? That conversation is entirely political, and not one you can easily answer, and one that will honestly just upset people and divide on the basis of personal values. The entire problem with this conversation is conflating sex and gender. Two things that are not the same at all but are often argued to be the same, confusing the debate. Whereas "Does T have an effect on sports performance?" is a much simpler question to answer and shouldn't hurt anyone's pride to acknowledge the single clear answer. From there you can make the next few arguments, "if T has an effect on sports performance, does it have enough of an effect to make categorisation reasonable?", and then "Is male/female an adequate level of categorisation, should there be more/less?" and so on. --- CE's Resident Scotsman. https://imgur.com/ILz2ZbV <cite>pinky0926 posted [p:929133941] in Transgende... [t:78101732]...</cite> <quote>Hudawgy posted...</cite> <quote>But they are not women. Thats the reality of it all. It even says it in the title. "Trans" Woman. A real woman doesn't have the title "Trans'. They are simply a woman. If this is about dignity. Then standing up for real woman should be the top priority, no?</quote> Framing this argument towards the politics of gender ethics instead of towards physiological sex advantages in sport is how we got into this mess in the first place. For example, why should standing up for "real" women (I take that to mean biological women) take precedent over standing up for trans women? That conversation is entirely political, and not one you can easily answer, and one that will honestly just upset people and divide on the basis of personal values. The entire problem with this conversation is conflating sex and gender. Two things that are not the same at all but are often argued to be the same, confusing the debate. Whereas "Does T have an effect on sports performance?" is a much simpler question to answer and shouldn't hurt anyone's pride to acknowledge the single clear answer. From there you can make the next few arguments, "if T has an effect on sports performance, does it have enough of an effect to make categorisation reasonable?", and then "Is male/female an adequate level of categorisation, should there be more/less?" and so on. --- CE's Resident Scotsman. https://imgur.com/ILz2ZbV</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1