This must be a dilemma for feminists??

132 posts / 0 new
Last post
Stone Jade's picture
It seems a little strange

It seems a little strange that we're looking at disqualifying athletes for their physical advantages. My 5'11" body is poorly suited for gymnastics, but it would be silly to say it's unfair that shorter athletes have an advantage over me. The point of competitive athletics is to find those who have the fittest, most impressive bodies and have them compete against each other. Trans women are no exception.

If the physical differences between cis and trans people are really too great for competition, perhaps we will move forward to a point of post-gender sports where leagues are divided by weight classes or height or age instead of gender. This makes a lot more sense to me than dividing by gender. Boxing separates their athletes by weight class so that no one has too large of an advantage and it seems to have worked pretty well. Also, what about trans men who may be disadvantaged by things like their body size? If we want to "protect" cis women from the alleged intense competition of trans women, wouldn't that also translate to protecting trans men from the intense competition of cis men? It all just seems a little silly to me.

Terminal Dogma's picture
You don't get how yes works

You don't get how yes works but I'm sure you can google it to become an instant expert.

I can drop my resume levels down to basically way below the average 80yo male (incidentally common in AAS users to test low) for testing and still reap a huge net gain/ bonus from a cycle.

Sushisnake 's picture
@TermDog

@TermDog

What the fuck does that^ have to do with the facts that Hannah Mouncey passed her T level testing or ciswomen who fail your height criterion already play in the AFLW? What does your personal anabolic-androgenic steroid use have to do with anything?

Ciswomen 6ft tall and over it ALREADY PLAY IN THE AFLW.

I don't know what their weight is, but I can tell you the three 6 footers I know aren't light weights. They wear size 11 shoes and they ain't no size 8-10s- they're big, strong tall women. Not fat. Not masculine. Just big and tall, with weights to go with the heights. One of them is so drop dead gorgeous she used to be a model- this is a woman so feminine she reapplies lipstick when she's camping, FFS!- but you wouldn't want your girlfriend to play contact sport against her, believe me. Accidents happen, and if K ran into your girlfriend at full tilt on the field, she'd hurt her. She'd knock her on her ass, for sure.

So the only possible reason the AFLW had for barring Mouncey is because she's transgender, isn't it? It wasn't her height, nor her weight, nor her T levels. And that's discrimination, isn't it?

Edit: additional question

Terminal Dogma's picture
What I really wanted from

What I really wanted from this thread is not lectures on hormone therapy or Sport orgs scrambling to put a framework around the issu. I was seeking views from a feminist perspective on if trans men causes them any ideological dilemmas.

I have since found my answer, some very prominent feminists are at odds with the feminist agenda applying and benefitting Trans men.

Sushisnake 's picture
@TermDog

@TermDog

Re: "What I really wanted from this thread is..."

Confirmation bias.

Re: "I have since found my answer, some very prominent feminists are at odds with the feminist agenda applying and benefitting Trans men."

So feminists and their agenda are bad unless and until it fits your confirmation bias, TermDog? Quelle surprise!

Mate, I couldn't care less what "prominent feminists" have to say about it, I'll take the science on the matter over Germaine Greer's opinion every time, thanks. That's this feminist's perspective. You can stick your "ideological dilemmas" where the sun don't shine- the real world's a bit more complicated than that.

Re: "if trans men" and "benefitting Trans men." Maaate. There's no issue with trans men in sport. A trans man was born a biological female and no one's claiming that gives him an advantage over other male athletes. I think your prejudice is showing again- your inability to accept trans women as women. You can't even bring yourself to use the word "woman": it's all "it" and "zhe" and "trans man" with you.

Flamenca's picture
The feminist agenda? Since we

The feminist agenda? Since we the women in this forum live in different continents, is it like an international conspiracy? I guess we go hand by hand with the homosexual agenda and... wait... The atheist agenda...

This has nothing to do with feminism, per se, but with Human Rights... And facts. If a person -whatever the original gender is- completes their transformation into other gender, and studies seem to reveal, due to the treatments, their features are exactly as those of the new gender, I am not going to change my opinion, just because you posted a complain (which I already knew btw, "machirulos" always use the same quote when talking about trans and sports, even in my country) by a competitor.

You're a bigot, that's all, and you have showed no respect for facts (or trans people), when they have confronted your "dogma". Considering you are an atheist, this is especially sad.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Feminism is an ideological

Feminism is an ideological position, what are you talking about the science of it for?

Sushisnake 's picture
@Terminal Dogma

@Terminal Dogma

We're not talking about feminist ideology- you are! You're the one who embraced it, the one who said "I have since found my answer, some very prominent feminists are at odds with the feminist agenda applying and benefitting Trans men." Sans citation, I might add - par for the course with you- so god only knows which "feminists" you're talking about.

One minute you're all "I have since found my answer, some very prominent feminists are at odds with the feminist agenda applying and benefitting Trans men." and the next you're all " Feminism is an ideological position, what are you talking about the science of it for?". Cognitive dissonance much, mate? One minute you're in the feminists' camp, the next you're denigrating them. Which is it? Make up your mind, you inconsistent little twerp. Or is it that you honestly don't realise you're being inconsistent? If that's the case, lay off the roids, son: the cognitive impairment side effects are well researched and documented.

Nobody (except you) was talking about the science of feminism in the first place. How could we be? Feminism isn't a science, though some of it is grounded in science across many branches. We were talking about the biological science behind transgender physiological changes, not feminism - whatever the fuck "feminism" means.

And please, before you start, I'm not interested in discussing what feminism means in a thread about the rights of transgender athletes. Totally different topic. Apples and oranges. If you wanted to discuss feminist ideology perhaps you should have started a thread about that instead of this one.

Flamenca's picture
Again, nothing to do with

Again, nothing to do with feminism, but human rights. Would you consider guys who always felt men, like Buck Angel (in the picture attached) a woman, just because he once used to have the physical appearance of one? The same applies to the reverse process.

P.S. @Sushi, jinx!

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
Algebe's picture
I don't care if he's a man or

I don't care if he's a man or woman, but I'm disgusted by that cigar in his mouth. He's old enough to know better.

Aposteriori Unum's picture
Feminism is just a subset of

T dog,
Feminism is just a subset of a human rights movement. Some focus more on the issues surrounding feminine equality and those we have labeled feminists. Everyone in the western world should be a feminist if they care at all about equal rights for all people... because females are included in the category of "all people." Since some men choose to become female (and really whether they do or not) they should have those same rights. It makes no difference whether they used to be some different gender or if the happen to be attracted to the opposite gender et cetera... because guess what category they still fall under... "all people."

I don't know why you take issue with treating every person with the same respect. You probably would think it very unfair if the shoe was on the other foot.

Prejudice, like religion comes from our ignorant past and that's where it should stay.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Not so sure if prejudice

Not so sure if prejudice comes always from ignorance, I think it might also have a root in evolution, but that would be for anoth thread.

You realise that by definition of feminism it is a prejudicial ideology. Doing any positive action as a feminist logically means you are displaying prejudice, I realise it blows the minds of leftists to realise they harbour prejudice views but alas that's how it works.

@AU,.

Aposteriori Unum's picture
"You realise that by

"You realise that by definition of feminism it is a prejudicial ideology"

That's just false. Feminism is prejudicial like slavery is freedom.

"Doing any positive action as a feminist logically means you are displaying prejudice, I realise it blows the minds of leftists to realise they harbour prejudice views but alas that's how it works."

I don't know how you get that exactly backwards. I'm not a "leftist " but my mind is blown. It's not blown by your fact though... but how twisted your understanding is. And I'm giving you credit there, because there's another option besisdes misunderstanding... and that's terminological inexactitude, or a purposeful, dogmatic misrepresentation of ideas for the perpetuation of your own ideologies and bigotry.

Flamenca's picture
@Algebe. I should have chosen

@Algebe. I should have chosen other picture, you're right. Cigars are disgusting. I was just trying to make the point with a reverse change of gender and I thought that one was pretty masculine.

@TD: FYI Being a feminist and a "rightist" are not mutually exclusive. I'm not (the latter), but I've met quite a few. For instance, Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a conservative deputy in the Dutch Parliament and she's a prominent feminist and an atheist.

@Aposteriori, It sounds like the latter: a dogmatic misrepresentation of ideas to perpetuate his bigotry.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Yep, disagree with a leftist

Yep, disagree with a leftist and you are any standard stock word to virtue signal...bigot, racist, transphobic....BLAH, BLAH BLAH.

Sushisnake 's picture
@TermDog

@TermDog

Nobody called you a racist. You have been called a transphobic bigot because you've demonstrated that you are one. Nothing to do with leftists. Nothing to do with virtue signaling ( other than your own). Everything to do with your words:

‘...so brave, you go girl all 100+ kg 6ft +. Hope zhe doesn't kill some other girl’

‘I think zhe has an awesome jawline most guys would envy.’

’...this "women"’

‘The Idiot’

‘no actual female’

‘it tried...’

‘non artificially enhanced women’

Ergo you are a transphobic bigot. QED.

Aposteriori Unum's picture
What, is that a persecution

What, is that a persecution complex? You're being accused of bigotry because of the things you said in this thread. Unless, you can prove that you aren't a bigot all the evidence seems to suggest otherwise. For example, you can't bring yourself to call a transgender person by the respective pronoun. He or she. You said feminism is prejudicial which is totally false and the only people I've ever heard say such a thing are mysogynists who hate the idea that women could possibly be equal to men.

If you want to not be called such things don't act like it. For the record I never said it, but I'm not convinced that you don't have transphobic tendencies et cetera.

And, do you realize that I am neither a woman nor a "leftist"? You literally know one, maybe two things about my political stances. I value rationality and logic above any hard lines. If I were to put myself on the left-right spectrum for you, just so you know I'd fall slightly to the right in America and far right in europe. So definitely it's not that.

Terminal Dogma's picture
Feminism discriminates

Feminism discriminates therefore it is prejudicial, no value judgement on that just stating a linguistic fact.

Just lol, I'm bigot unless I can prove I am not - that's bottom tier sophistry.

So do you still beat down your old lady, same trick.

Flamenca's picture
Who are discriminated by

Who are discriminated by Feminism, when precisely it's the pursue of equality among genders?

You've proven yourself you're a bigot with your remarks, which are pretty obvious. Now it would be your turn to explain why you're not, instead of all these mindless and non-sensical answers you're giving.

Aposteriori Unum's picture
"Feminism discriminates

"Feminism discriminates therefore it is prejudicial, no value judgement on that just stating a linguistic fact."

Where's the prejudice in feminism? Against who? Who is the discrimination against? It's not feminine supremacy. It's about equality.

"Just lol, I'm bigot unless I can prove I am not - that's bottom tier sophistry."

That's because all the evidence points towards it. I'm saying you could turn that around with new evidence that says you're not.

Tell us what you really think.

Flamenca's picture
Oops, @AU, we overstepped...

Oops, @AU, we overstepped...

Terminal Dogma's picture
It appears you think the word

It appears you think the word discrimination only has negative connotations, distinguishing between two like things is your ability to discriminate, feminism clearly discriminates by gender. I don't even get why that isn't obvious. Discrimination can be good, bad or neither good or bad. My Dog can discriminatete over 50 different scents and can discriminate different people all saturated with the same cologne. He wins competitions. That's what discrimination means FFS.

Prejudicial aspects of feminism would be job quotas for women at the expense of male candidates.

Tedious trying to have a decent argument when you have to explain the most basic shit to your opponent.

Aposteriori Unum's picture
"It appears you think the

"It appears you think the word discrimination only has negative connotations, distinguishing between two like things is your ability to discriminate, feminism clearly discriminates by gender."

Equivocation fallacy. The fallacy of equivocation occurs when a key term or phrase in an argument is used in an ambiguous way, with one meaning in one portion of the argument and then another meaning in another portion of the argument.

First you use discrimination as a word to mean to tell the difference between things and then you use it to mean a prejudice when you talk about feminism. And then again you use it to mean telling the difference between things.

Not only do you say outright false things, but you make fallacious arguments. Fallacious=invalid.

"Tedious trying to have a decent argument when you have to explain the most basic shit to your opponent."

I know right. You don't seem to understand basic words in English or concepts like equality or feminism. It's really getting frustrating. You are supposed to be a rational thinker... just because you're an atheist and you happen to get the answer to one question right doesn't mean you get the answers to other things right. Obviously you don't understand what you're talking about. Feminism is a subset of humanism. It pushes for equality. Not superiority. The fact that you fight it seems to indicate that you'd rather subjugate women than be equal to them. Either that or you have no idea what you're talking about and you listen to people like Alex Jones and eat up every word.

Try making a valid argument why women shouldn't be equal to men or why feminism is discriminatory. Bring to the table some evidence that supports your position. Or you could change your goddamn mind and realize that every single human deserves the same amount of respect and rights. Change your language and be respectful to those that are different than you. If they want to be called ' she ' call them' she .' Fuck your feelings and your political indoctrination and use your brain. People are people and they deserve every right that you or I have regardless of gender, sexual orientation, sex changes or race. If you retract now I guarantee no one will ridicule you... they will only celebrate and congratulate you.

You are wrong. But you can be right. It's easy to be right. but it's impossible when you don't admit it to yourself that you once were wrong.

I believe you are a good person. I just think you ate a little misguided on a few things. I think you are smart and I'm sure you can understand what these women, and I, are saying.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ AU

@ AU

Yes! ^ ^ ^ ^ ^. I am so glad you are back in the forum...

Aposteriori Unum's picture
@old man shouts...

@old man shouts...

It's great to be back!
And yous need a logic enforcement officer! Haha
No, but seriously... AR is like favebook to me.

arakish's picture
@AU

@AU

You are right. Our logic enforcement forces need you back from that vacation. ;-P

rmfr

CyberLN's picture
TD, you wrote, “Prejudicial

TD, you wrote, “Prejudicial aspects of feminism would be job quotas for women at the expense of male candidates.”

Are you intimating that quotas are always inappropriate?

Terminal Dogma's picture
You would have to look at

You would have to look at specific cases to answer @Cber.

CyberLN's picture
Do you think the demographics

Do you think the demographics of a community should be reflected in the civil servants of the community? Example: a city has 22% adult Hispanic females. Should the police department reflect that? If it does not, should the hiring criteria be adjusted so that it can reflect the demographics of the community it serves?

Terminal Dogma's picture
@Cyber I can only answer as a

@Cyber I can only answer as a civilian not an expert in LEO.

I would expect the grounds for recruitment would be to have the most effective police force hence the best candidates should get the job.

I would not approach it as an exercise in social engineering to score PC points. People's lives are at risk so leftist ideology should be irrelevant.

I would not want gender, religion, color, age etc to be a factor as that would be an act of prejudice.

Curious why you chose publicly funded job in the scenario?

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.