Genuinely willing to discuss in good faith

[beachcitygirl]

Hello.

This is a thread for those who are uncomfortable with black and white and less than civil discourse around self id.

I welcome those with different views but I don't on this thread welcome those who only want to state their firm settled opinion without nuance or discussion that self id is absolutely wrong.

It's my view that there is no point in discussion if mind firmly made up.
I'll respect your legal right to that view but there's not much point chatting about it and pissing each other off.

There are plenty threads of gc women hoping to create more gc women and that's fine.

I'd like this to be a different space. A place for anyone with genuine questions, discussion points and where we all try to be civil and attempt to answer each other in good faith. Anyone who is unsure, let's talk:

My views are that trans women should be treated in every aspect as women and they are our natural allies against misogyny and the patriarchy and that women are more than their biology.

JanesLittleGirl

This (apart from the transwomen references) reminds me so much of The Talk that I had from DM when I was 12. The only difference is that after she had completed the list of the 'joys' of womanhood, she finished off with "and in return you get to wear pretty clothes and smell nice." TWs take the last bit without having to worry about the womanhood main part.

yup, as we all know, that's what 'living as a woman' means. And no XY chromosomed male can do that (even if they suffer appalling mutilation before puberty, they're still male). What they want is cosplay and admiration.

As for the poor young women who see it coming and try to go over to the other side to avoid it - heartrending.

If I woke up with a penis one morning but with nothing else about my personality changed, would that change my identity or would I still feel like I was a woman?

This pointless red herring thought experiment used to get posted here a lot.

It's the same realm of fantasy that young girls are treating seriously in puberty. It can't be achieved. Any one posing this question could bear that in mind as the destructive path that it is.

Do you think OP is still reading despite the flounce?

Probably not. Cognitive dissonance is very uncomfortable.

It is a sign of the lack of coherency of whatever the OP found convincing when they said:

"But around 5 years ago I was very anti self id. Thankfully I had a brilliant person take the time to talk to me non-judgmentally and patiently and eventually I realised all my questions had been answered and all I was left with was "Thats not common sense " and as an educated woman I recognised that is not good sense and so I thought hard and i recognised my misgivings came from a fear of the other."

Someone, who they think was a 'brilliant' person, convinced them it was all 'fear' based. This has been then what this OP has tried to repeat here. Their own conditioning that women's concerns are based on 'fear'.

This 'brilliant' person would have, I expect, used emotional manipulation and falsehoods to achieve this - hence the 'fear' that prompted the dehumanising and absolutely appalling equivalence of posters or one poster at the very least to 'cornered rats' and that poster or posters being 'so terrified of anyone being able to state their thoughts & talk to others who are not wedded to their views'.

It reads like projection. The immediate and heightened negative reaction when asked for a definition of 'woman' when this is a person claiming anyone can be a 'woman'. The 'good faith' discussion fell at the very first hurdle because the OP couldn't control the discussion.

Unlike the control over time of that 'brilliant' and 'non-judgemental' person who convinced them! The one who led the OP through their 'fears' to reach the blinding realisation that to disagree with any male being considered female for any purpose was 'abuse'. Because ultimately that was what OP left us with. I can only deduct that that was the final deciding factor for them.

"I can't abide the abuse towards a vulnerable minority. It's sickening."

I have read and reread the OP's posts. They really do seem to have been convinced by someone who has told them false and harmful misrepresentations about what feminists in the second wave actually believed and fought for. And what feminists who disagree that males can ever be women believe.

It is remarkable to see when people post things they think is utterly factual, only to be told they are talking complete rubbish. Particularly when that poster asserts that they believed all the 'same' things that the posters they are denigrating and shaming .

It only shows that they didn't have any depth of understanding of the current feminist position in the first place. They probably had a superficial understanding, like they have only a superficial understanding of their own position now. Hence they cannot produce a coherent argument that will stand up to scrutiny.

And so we ended up with a post stating that the women fighting to be given equal opportunity to do things and to be who they wish unrestricted by oppression by males being wildly distorted to 'women demanded that they be considered exactly the same as men'!

Like fuck that is what feminists fought for. That is straight from a deliberately distorted interpretation of reality that males have used to say they can be women too. Because isn't that what women wanted, they say? Full 'equality'? To be treated like a man?

Fuck that. I was on a recent thread where a poster blatantly went full MRA and used those exact phrases too. There is a reason the MRA movement and the extreme side of the trans movement want to use that falsehood. For misogynistic reasons.

And last night we had a poster determined to spread that falsehood, that distortion, because I expect that the someone 'brilliant' talked them through their 'fears' and used this complete distortion as an underlying principle. Highly likely, along with how feminists who believe that sex matters, are either 'sex essentialists' or believe in 'sex determinism'.

No. Thank you.

I am not 'terrified' of debate. I fucking welcome it. Because if one person can present a coherent, cognisant and consistent discussion that is fully backed by proven science and does not rely on theories of 'a person is what they believe they are' like some pomo disciple then I will take on board what they say and evaluate it and adapt my thinking around that. OP didn't even get close. It was regurgitated trope.

I am not 'afraid' that some male will be given the opportunities all female's should have access to. I am 'livid'.

How fucking dare a person who has not experienced the discrimination from birth that even girl's today experience take a place that was meant to encourage that girl to achieve her goals! Why on earth does OP and those who support their claims think those opportunities even exist?

That is not 'fear'. This is from a woman who has experienced negative sexist discrimination all my life who thought that things had gotten better, until I talked to the current girls and realised it has not progressed and with these changes, has started to reverse direction.

And if I am angry, why the fuck isn't OP?

Because I believe that someone 'brilliant' sold this OP a kindness tale and the OP was susceptible to being sold that 'tale of kindness'.

It probably went along the lines of mentioning some of the following:

-such small numbers that it will have little effect on women's lives, no one will notice;
-that there are some bad people in all groups, no group should be held back -from their simple human rights because of some bad people in their group;
-it is so cruel to deny these people their identity;
-these male people are so vulnerable, this change takes so much courage / pain / trauma (suicide would no doubt be mentioned) ;
-those who don't believe weaponise old science and don't understand, are fearful of, the new science which explains everything - brains, Fausto-Sterling just at a guess;
-medical science can make bodies into the other sex enough that they really become the opposite sex;
-women just don't try hard enough with sport / women haven't developed their techniques with sport over generations like the men have yet - with better competition they will show everyone that they can compete evenly with male people;
-feminism is about fighting against all oppression and supporting all oppressed groups;
-males who identify as women and girls experience 'exactly' the same sexist discrimination, misogyny and abuse as women and girls, it is what also adds to makes them women and girls;
-feminists who disagree are obsessed with genitals / are sex essentialists / simply hateful and bigoted.

I reckon they are still lurking, finger on the Report button, bravely eager to eradicate both cake recipes and thoughtful take-downs alike.

If OP is still reading: so you didn't want to define what a woman is but you did state that a man identifying as a Woman is a woman.

Well that makes as much sense as me identifying as cake gender (and before you press report, Google it. It's a thing). My new name is Cherry Madeira. My pronouns are butter/cream/frosting.

Me actually being a cake is about as likely to be true as a man ever being a woman.

No matter how much i wish it was true when i get the munchies late at night.

@Helleofabore
Fucking hell, that was one magnificent post. Clarity plus utter fury.

She's amazing at saying what most of us think but can't be arsed to articulate!

spooky

The OP was the very first poster to do the 'demoralising'. They have been very clear on this and other threads that their intention is to shame people who disagree with them, because they jump straight to using denigrating language.

Why would anyone who genuinely wanted discussion do that?

As for this :

"I think it’s also really worth actually researching what exactly are the advantages and disadvantages between the sexes, and how are they affected by different levels of transition (instead of just taking it as a foregone conclusion that men are superior to women at sports). Also how are they affected by other variables - height, weight, body type, fat content, training… and are these differences still as stark at the extreme ends, not just the averages. Is there any overlap and what does that mean?"

For this Spooky, I am very happy to paste the links of a series of studies on males with reduced testosterone that you can read to understand that this has been considered by the very best sport's minds in the world. This is not unknown.

Do you know why sports are structured with protected categories such as age, impairment, and sex?

Are you fully comfortable of a 26 year old person competing in the under 12 year old category? If so, why?

Are you fully comfortable of a 26 year old person competing in the over 85 year old category? If so, why?

Are you fully comfortable of a fully visioned person competing in fully impaired vision category? If so, why?

Are you fully comfortable of a professional level athlete competing in novice category of that sport? If so, why?

Are you fully comfortable with a bicycle fitted with an electric motor competing in the Tour de France? If so, why? (Even if it doesn't win?)

If you want, I can post numerous studies. All of them showing the same thing consistently.

Even the IOC has stated that no male competing in female competitions are doing so fairly. They now have switched to a philosophical debate about 'inclusiveness'. Because they admit that these male athletes have advantages and it is not fair. At all.

What does it matter if there is 'overlap'? And what do you mean? Do you mean that a male whose grip strength is in the lowest 25% of all men can still compete because 10% of women have a grip strength that may be equivalent or nearing equivalent? Is that what you mean?

And, from the top of my head, that is an accurate comparison of 'overlap' of grip strength. Many sports rely on grip strength for precision. This is a male advantage. I believe the average male punch power is something like 160% above female average. What overlap do you think is acceptable?

And I asked this of OP.

Why should male who are poorly performing or mediocre performing males who deliberately limit their performance by limiting their training so their bodies take on the 'shape' they want to achieve and to deliberately then have access to female sport's events, be rewarded in any way in sport? Even in a 'fun run', why should a female ever have to accept a lesser placing (even if in your eyes 9 665th is meaningless) to make a male person feel good about themselves?

Why should a 55 year old male who is still able to compete with the 20 something female rugby team be allowed to take the place of a female player? And have you ever wondered where the 55 year old (peri or menopausal) female players were? The very fact there are 40+ year old males playing codes of football in teams where the eldest female is much younger should be telling you that these males have advantages. And not just the obvious.

There are many threads on this board covering sports advantages if you want to see the incredibly articulate posts from the many qualified or just very well read posters on this board in this field. But I am always happy to discuss this and to post you towards the studies.

If you have arrived onto this board without understanding the depth of knowledge that posters here have, then maybe you missed just how distorted and uninformed the OP's posts really were.

She's amazing at saying what most of us think but can't be arsed to articulate!

She is and that is why she is relentlessly targeted by those on the other side of the debate.

Awww... thanks. It takes me a while to process it all and then I have to post it for my own sense of clarity. Because many posters know that my trigger point is dishonest and manipulative tactics (like shaming a group who disagree with a poster) and I have to get it into posts, often not just one, to be able to then sleep at night. Otherwise I end up posting it at dawn because the dissonance was too much!

For what it is worth, I absolutely have no issues with people having other opinions. It is when it delves into dishonest tactics, denigration etc , that is the problem.

Exactly.

On the subject of transwomen being treated as women in all aspects we all know that if any woman at work behaved the way the TW work colleague described on the thread that was deleted - hair flicking/swishing and giggling - they would be viewed with contempt the reason the TW isn't is because everyone knows they are male and males are always treated differently, that is why they get away with it.

If I woke up with a penis one morning but with nothing else about my personality changed, would that change my identity or would I still feel like I was a woman?

What I felt like in such a circumstance would be immaterial (surprised?), if I woke up in a male body I'd be male. Male with life experience to give me a lot of empathy with women. As such I would be taking my male body nowhere near women's single sex spaces, sports etc.

Heh, good explainer, although his very AI voice was rather distracting. Perhaps he’s the voice you get when you renew your car tax using the automated telephone system.

Another massive fan of your words here.

On the topic of sports specifically, I had a Youtube comments exchange with a trans ally or trans person, not sure which, on a Contrapoints video where I brought up the marathon runner from the UK for displaced roughly 14000 women by winning, and this was their response;

"There are still debates on allowing trans women in women sports. Let me even tell you now ; trans women have always been in sports a long time ago , it's not like they pop them in recently.

Also there are certain sports that black women do better than even white men because of their bone density and genetic athletic abilities; in certain sports like figure skating ; women do better than men ; in sports like swimming, there's little to no difference when they're competing.

If the trans girl started transitioning early and did not go through male puberty, I see no reason why she can't join other girls in sports. Going though male puberty though , 🤔there will need to be more research"

There were also other responses if anyone's interested to see/hear what they were? Lmk!

There are still debates on allowing trans women in women sports. Let me even tell you now ; trans women have always been in sports a long time ago , it's not like they pop them in recently.

No transwomen have not always been in sports and certainly not competing against women. I suspect this person is referring to individuals with DSD's and they are NOT trans.

Also there are certain sports that black women do better than even white men because of their bone density and genetic athletic abilities; in certain sports like figure skating ; women do better than men ; in sports like swimming, there's little to no difference when they're competing.

Citation needed for this pile of crap that black women do some sports better than white men - which ones? There is a hell of a lot of difference in swimming as Lia Thomas proved, so your commentator is lying.

If the trans girl started transitioning early and did not go through male puberty, I see no reason why she can't join other girls in sports. Going though male puberty though , 🤔there will need to be more research"

If the trans girl started transitioning early, presumably by taking puberty blockers and then using cross sex hormones they won't have a body that can compete in any sport, those drugs have a very harmful impact. Trans boys will also be excluded due to the fact that testosterone use is classed as doping. Have a read of what testosterone did to the bodies of the East German women athletes who used it.

There needs to be no further research about male puberty it has been done and it has shown just how much advantage is gained.

Cracking accurate response CherryYoga.

Little to no difference in SWIMMING?

Citation needed.

in sports like swimming, there's little to no difference when they're competing.

My cousin’s sons were both excellent swimmers in their teens, competing nationally. We’re a swimming family although most of us are very small in stature, but these kids were giants in comparison, 6’5”, and their swimmer girlfriends were also giants, 6’+, but their best times were vastly different because of their biological differences.

(instead of just taking it as a foregone conclusion that men are superior to women at sports). Also how are they affected by other variables - height, weight, body type, fat content, training… and are these differences still as stark at the extreme ends, not just the averages. Is there any overlap and what does that mean?
@SpookyFBI
Do you follow any sport at all to any degree? I'm assuming from your questions you don't and I am going to treat it as a good faith enquiry and rather than give you names of podcasts, link etc I will try a few quick answers that hopefully help clarify for you.
Men (as a class) are faster and stronger then women (as a class). This means that both the average and the extreme favour men in many sports. World records in athletics runnings events are consistently between 10 and 15% faster for men, for all distances from the indoor 60m sprint to the marathon. Women have had some victories at extreme ultra distance races but there are so few participants that the data is sketchy as to where this is a physical advantage, a statistical anomaly and another factor.
100s of men run faster than the women's Olympics record in the 800m every year.
Women (as a class) are more flexible and 'better' able to balance than men (a as class) - this is why there is no balance beam in men's gymnastics - it's all in the pelvic alignment. So it's wrong to say 'men are superior to women in sport' but it's correct to say that most sports suit male physiology better than female physiology. Even hidden advantages like the fact that (on average) men have slower heart rates and slower breathing rates than women can prove advantageous in events like shooting and archery where total stillness helps.
If you don't accept that there are physical difference between male and female bodies in sport then there are as far a I can see only two other options to explain the consistently slower times posted by top level elite male and female athletes - either women are being held back from running as quickly as men by social factors and this wouldn't be the case for an athlete who grew up with male socialisation and transitioned so it still wouldn't be fair for someone born male to race women or women are slower than men because they can't be bothered to train as hard as men. That option is frankly **ING insulting to the amazing female athletes who push themselves every day.

(instead of just taking it as a foregone conclusion that men are superior to women at sports). Also how are they affected by other variables - height, weight, body type, fat content, training… and are these differences still as stark at the extreme ends, not just the averages. Is there any overlap and what does that mean?

This sort of statement really fucks me off @SpookyFBI. Including males in female sports will devastate them, there would be no Serena Williams for example - do you know what the difference in speed and strength for male vs female tennis serves are?

Did you see the video where the TW volleyball player hit the ball so hard into the face of a female player on the opposite side of the net that it flattened her and has caused minor brain damage?

It's not a case of mere superiority it is a case of different biology.

Would you apply this thinking to paralympic sport for example? If not, why not?