Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

I've just had a brief scan for now but it looks like there are some interesting concepts there worth thinking about, including some which have been mentioned on this very thread. I'll look more in depth later.

Maths is off though. It's male, female plus 72 = 74.

Nope. Male and female relate to sex, rather than gender.

 

[monkers]

Do you know how long she held the world record for?

Minutes....

A cis woman beat her.

(Of course the TERFS say nothing when TW lose )

Neither do they say anything when trans men beat cis men in sport. Funny that.

 

[winjim]

Nope. Male and female relate to sex, rather than gender.

If we're going by that article, which for the sake of this discussion we are, then male and female are genders.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Do you know how long she held the world record for?

Minutes....

A cis woman beat her.

(Of course the TERFS say nothing when TW lose )

A mediocre male cyclist will beat the best in age group female cyclists because of innate male physical advantage. No surprise there at all. If V Ivy was a really good cyclist their times would be somewhere near the other males times. They aren't. Same as Lia Thomas. National champion in the female class, not even top 100 in the male category (iirc). Male advantage will always triumph where other things (physique, age, training, diet etc) are on a par.

1500 boys and men beat Flo Jo's World Record every year. Because they have the advantage of a male body and a testosterone fueled puberty.

Also, unfair advantage isn't decided on outcome, is it? Lance Armstrong didn't win every race he cheated in; he was still cheating.

There are plenty of transwomen taking places on podiums from women, and the fact that very few transmen succeed in the male category is proof that biological males have an innate advantage.

We've done this aspect of the debate to death. The fact that you choose to defend the indefensible - like a male being able to enter Canadian women's power lifting competitions - when the unfairness is so blindingly obvious, just shows how little you value women's feelings or concerns. Blokes first for you, as always.

 

[monkers]

A mediocre male cyclist will beat the best in age group female cyclists because of innate male physical advantage. No surprise there at all. If V Ivy was a really good cyclist their times would be somewhere near the other males times. They aren't. Same as Lia Thomas. National champion in the female class, not even top 100 in the male category (iirc). Male advantage will always triumph where other things (physique, age, training, diet etc) are on a par.

1500 boys and men beat Flo Jo's World Record every year. Because they have the advantage of a male body and a testosterone fueled puberty.

Also, unfair advantage isn't decided on outcome, is it? Lance Armstrong didn't win every race he cheated in; he was still cheating.

There are plenty of transwomen taking places on podiums from women, and the fact that very few transmen succeed in the male category is proof that biological males have an innate advantage.

We've done this aspect of the debate to death. The fact that you choose to defend the indefensible - like a male being able to enter Canadian women's power lifting competitions - when the unfairness is so blindingly obvious, just shows how little you value women's feelings or concerns. Blokes first for you, as always.

Blimey are you one of Johnson's defence lawyers?

 

[AuroraSaab]

I don't need to be. The evidence of scientific studies and, let's face it, common sense, shows clearly that male advantage persists after transition, lowered testosterone or not.

Even transwoman Joanna Harper (who is partly responsible for the IOC mess on the issue) has abandoned the 'no unfair advantage' stance because the science doesn't support it, including their own research.

The only people still promoting men in women's sports are those ignoring the science and going purely on ideology.

Suggested way forward here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2023-03-opinion-world-sports-mess-trans.amp

 

[monkers]

I don't need to be. The evidence of scientific studies and, let's face it, common sense, shows clearly that male advantage persists after transition, lowered testosterone or not.

Even transwoman Joanna Harper (who is partly responsible for the IOC mess on the issue) has abandoned the 'no unfair advantage' stance because the science doesn't support it.

The only people still promoting men in women's sports are those ignoring the science and going purely on ideology.

Suggested way forward here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2023-03-opinion-world-sports-mess-trans.amp

I really can't be bother to unpick your word salad of contradictions in your previous post, which is why you got the reply that you did.

So let's just take the opening sentence (the only sentence I read) and see the horrors within it.

A mediocre male cyclist will beat the best in age group female cyclists because of innate male physical advantage.

You say that gender is just stuff in people's heads. You say that sex is biological reality.

Yet here you are saying the male physical advantage is just in people's heads, which is your exact objection to Multitool.

You do understand that is why gender is innate and sex is physiological don't you? This isn't pedantry by the way. You are one of those who criticize the vocabulary and language used by anyone who supports any aspect of trans lives, but nobody in this thread mangles the English language like you. You speak in utter riddles the whole time. Once I read that opening sentence I felt no need to read the rest of your guff because it was clear that everything you'd say would be based on that false premise.

 

[multitool]

A mediocre male cyclist will beat the best in age group female cyclists because of innate male physical advantage. No surprise there at all. If V Ivy was a really good cyclist their times would be somewhere near the other males times. They aren't. Same as Lia Thomas. National champion in the female class, not even top 100 in the male category (iirc). Male advantage will always triumph where other things (physique, age, training, diet etc) are on a par.

1500 boys and men beat Flo Jo's World Record every year. Because they have the advantage of a male body and a testosterone fueled puberty.

Also, unfair advantage isn't decided on outcome, is it? Lance Armstrong didn't win every race he cheated in; he was still cheating.

There are plenty of transwomen taking places on podiums from women, and the fact that very few transmen succeed in the male category is proof that biological males have an innate advantage.

We've done this aspect of the debate to death. The fact that you choose to defend the indefensible - like a male being able to enter Canadian women's power lifting competitions - when the unfairness is so blindingly obvious, just shows how little you value women's feelings or concerns. Blokes first for you, as always.

Im not even going to read your answer because it'll just be the usual bloviated bullshît with an accusation of misogyny thrown in.

You fell headfirst into that trap, didn't you.

That is the problem with zealots with zero peripheral vision.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Yet here you are saying the male physical advantage is just in people's heads..

I haven't said that at all. The retained male advantage that transwomen have is borne out in scientific research. Even the most prominent advocate for transwomen being included in the female sports category, Joanna Harper, has backtracked and is now trying the 'meaningful competition' angle.

You do understand that is why gender is innate and sex is physiological don't you? This isn't pedantry by the way. You are one of those who criticize the vocabulary and language used by anyone who supports any aspect of trans lives, but nobody in this thread mangles the English language like you. You speak in utter riddles the whole time. Once I read that opening sentence I felt no need to read the rest of your guff because it was clear that everything you'd say would be based on that false premise.

'Gender is innate' is an opinion. There's no objective scientific basis for saying that gender identity even exists, other than some people feel they have a gender identity. Some people sincerely believe they have an innate religious soul or that they are typical Taureans. I don't believe that either.

Sex is innate and the sporting advantage of a male sexed body doesn't change, regardless of your subjective feelings about your body.

As usual, you fall back on personal abuse to defend your flat earth like nonsense.

 

[monkers]

I haven't said that at all. The retained male advantage that transwomen have is borne out in scientific research. Even the most prominent advocate for transwomen being included in the female sports category, Joanna Harper, has backtracked and is now trying the 'meaningful competition' angle.



'Gender is innate' is an opinion. There's no objective scientific basis for saying that gender identity even exists, other than some people feel they have a gender identity. Some people sincerely believe they have an innate religious soul or that they are typical Taureans. I don't believe that either.

Sex is innate and the sporting advantage of a male sexed body doesn't change, regardless of your subjective feelings about your body.

As usual, you fall back on personal abuse to defend your flat earth like nonsense.

I didn't ask whether other people say whether other parts of their identity are innate or not. I'm asking if you even know what 'innate' means?

You can not say that gender is not innate, but that sex is - it's utter nonsense. Innate tends to thoughts, feelings, or otherwise talent under some control of the mind. Sex is none of those things. This is despite your claim that you've thought long and hard. It seems to me that you have worked long and hard to catalogue a load of bullshit to offload at any given opportunity to reinforce a prejudice. Maybe you have no innate gender but you have innate prejudice? Sum that with an obvious lack of knowledge of what science is and what it is not, a perfect recipe for the blend of prejudice that you write and insist is the only perspective that can be correct.

While happily knocking the idea that there are more than two genders, you also say you don't have a gender identity. If gender identity is nonsense, then so is our shared identity of 'woman' a nonsense too. While you will happily say 'that is why we exclude people' you are happy to denude women like me of their gender identity in pursuit of a prejudice against trans women. Only you don't see this as a problem, which is why I say that you have more in common with Posie Parker than you are prepared to admit. Like her, you are prepared to 'annihilate' women like me who get in your way. You are not just 'not prepared to be kind' but prepared to be unkind, and I think possibly cruel.

 

[multitool]

"Let women speak"

...but only the Terfy GC ones who are full of hate

 

[classic33]

You do realise that Florence Griffith Joyner's record was set at a time in sport that many considered the dirtiest period of athletics, between East and West. Victory at any cost.

And that today's cleaner athletics mean, for many, that records set in the 1980's may never be broken.

Florence Joyner died from an epileptic seizure, SUDEP. Maybe her treatment gave her an "advantage".
Or you could subscribe to the theory that she was involved in the race to win at all costs.

Jon Pikes, Dr. of philosophy

Maybe try reading
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
If you think that there is a male and female brain.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You can not say that gender is not innate, but that sex is - it's utter nonsense. Innate tends to thoughts, feelings, or otherwise talent under some control of the mind. Sex is none of those things.

There's not a single person alive who has changed their biological sex. It's in every cell of your body. There seem to be plenty who say they have changed their gender identity. So which of those 2 is innate and immutable and which is a subjective, changeable feeling....

While happily knocking the idea that there are more than two genders, you also say you don't have a gender identity. If gender identity is nonsense, then so is our shared identity of 'woman' a nonsense too.

There's no shared identity of 'woman'. It's just being born female that makes you a woman. Unfortunately, being born female leads to being subject to certain treatment so we have single sex services, facilities, and yes sports, in order to address that.

While you will happily say 'that is why we exclude people' you are happy to denude women like me of their gender identity in pursuit of a prejudice against trans women. Only you don't see this as a problem, which is why I say that you have more in common with Posie Parker than you are prepared to admit. Like her, you are prepared to 'annihilate' women like me who get in your way. You are not just 'not prepared to be kind' but prepared to be unkind, and I think possibly cruel.

You are welcome to any gender identity you care to have, whether you think it's innate or fluid. What is wrong is for this nebulous and subjective concept of personal identity to be allowed to overule the material reality of how people are treated because of their actual sex.

Which is what you are pushing for, whether it's single sex services, prisons, or sport. Men in women's sports is unkind, men in women's prisons is unkind, men in women's refuges is unkind. Seeking to maintain these facilities for women is not unkind.

 

[newfhouse]

Is sexuality innate or no more than a feeling in your head? Does it matter more or less depending on your answer?

 

[AuroraSaab]

You do realise that Florence Griffith Joyner's record was set at a time in sport that many considered the dirtiest period of athletics, between East and West. Victory at any cost. And that today's cleaner athletics mean, for many, that records set in the 1980's may never be broken. Florence Joyner died from an epileptic seizure, SUDEP. Maybe her treatment gave her an "advantage".
Or you could subscribe to the theory that she was involved in the race to win at all costs.

The fact that she has been accused of being doped whilst setting her records and still has her record beaten by 1,500 males a year just reinforces the reality of male advantage. Good, but not elite standard men and boys can beat elite, doped women athletes because of innate male biological advantage.

Jon Pikes, Dr. of philosophy

Uni lecturer in ethics of sport too. It's not like he isn't clued up on this topic. Read his Twitter. Or Science of Sport Ross Tucker.

Maybe try reading
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
If you think that there is a male and female brain.

There isn't a male and female brain. I've never said there is. I think you'll find it's some folk on your side who think that.

That article is an opinion piece. It's debunked at length here.


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/wet_hen/status/1213130009814036485