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.

I give him credit for being willing to go through ContraPoints videos and try to identify the actual arguments to respond to. Given how unwatchable they are...

Of course male swimmers have a huge biological advantage over female swimmers! The only sports where men and women could perhaps compete fairly are things like darts, snooker and motor racing.

I think Lia Thomas proved without a shadow of a doubt the male advantage in the pool. When Lia competed as a man, their scores were mediocre. For Lia to then compete as a woman and start winning medals… well. Did Lia suddenly turn into a hugely talented swimmer overnight? No. Lia was competing in the wrong sex class, regardless of gender identity. Wrong because it was unfair.

The integrity of women’s sport should be cherished and protected. Otherwise women’s sport becomes meaningless.

Just posting again to clarify, I don't agree with the commenter I quoted - I was just commenting to try and get well.. Any information at all about views on the subject so that there was still something to discuss on this thread even if OP has decided to leave it to DM's

Some paralympic sports, an able bodied athlete might not even have an advantage? (Like if they are using a wheelchair.)

I think you should probably need to be genuinely disabled, and not just identify as disabled, regardless.

I think you should probably need to be genuinely disabled, and not just identify as disabled, regardless.

I don't think there is any 'probably' about it, genuine disability is absolute in my opinion.

Here's some 'identifying as' :

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2459172/Spanish-basketball-team-pretended-disabled-win-Paralympic-gold-guilty-fraud.html

The entire category was removed from the Paralympics after this.

Wheelchair rugby league allows non disabled participants but there are strict rules on the numbers allowed only two per team at anytime.

Male advantage in sports for people who were wondering

And some more

Interesting. Didn't know that.

As wheelchair rugby is nicknamed murder ball I don't know how long they stay non disabled!

From much earlier in this thread when people were arguing that self-id wouldn't affect the statistics on women's lower earnings or other statistics because of the tiny numbers of people who identify as trans or non-binary:

This could be true for some types of statistics, but not for other types of statistics and not for all industries for earnings power comparisons.

All areas in crime where female perpetrators are very rare currently could show a visible rise in crimes committed by women when transwomen are included in the female statistics, such as exhibitionism, voyeurism, pedophilia. Even small additional absolute numbers could alter the totals considerably if the initial base for women perpetrators is low.

Likewise, in fields of employment where women are relatively few the inclusion of transwomen in statistics could make some findings look as if lots more women are now promoted in, say, IT, than is the actual case.

But of course if we actually do re-purpose 'woman' to mean 'feminine abstract gender identity' and nothing more, then over time a largish number of female people would 'identify out' of that category. And even more statistics would change in ways which would make seeing sex-based discrimination harder (such as what percentage of young non-binary and female-identifying people seem not to get promoted would appear quite mysterious when the real reason is the hidden one of ability to fall pregnant).

I think a more interesting question, right now, than "what is a woman" is "why do we need a term 'woman' in the first place?"

If we accept the gender identity framework for that so that a woman is anyone who identifies as one (and nothing more is needed), then it's difficult to see what the point of that category to even exist would be.

Why would we need to be told, rather insistently, what type of a gendered soul a person might have, especially if we are not allowed to have a word for that person's sexed body? Why would sports, awards, spaces etc. be divided by various types of gendered souls?

Doesn't this whole thing smell very sexist and retrogressive to others, too?

This makes no sense to me. On the other hand, having a term for individuals who are of the sex which typically gives birth to the next generation does have its uses, some of them nasty ones (such as defining those who have no right to education in Afghanistan), others not so nasty and more important ones.

So, I scroll thru all the entertaining and emotional and heartfelt posts here today, and not a single one from the OP. Especially after she said she'd respond today, being too busy yesterday.

All I see from OP is tumbleweed. All I hear from the OP is crickets.

We don't even get to read the pearls of wisdom that turned her from TERF to trans ally. Too bad, I'm always up for having my opinions genuinely challenged, and substantive food for thought.

But, nada.

Finally, here's fear I have: Whatever the final outcome of this debate about, I think women's rights might be going to at most stall and probably go backwards because of it.

The far right essentialises biological sex (and sees gender roles and stereotypes linked to it), the gender identity ideology essentialises gender roles and stereotypes (but decouples them from sex). This means we are going to have gender stereotypes and roles reinforced if one of those two sides wins.

I much prefer the kind of feminism where sex matters in certain circumstances but where the full humanity of women is the central focus of the work and where gender roles and stereotypes are always carefully scrutinised.

Doesn't this whole thing smell very sexist and retrogressive to others, too?

The entire ideology is regressive and sexist. The GRA is a world class example of a sexist, misogynistic, regressive Law.

There is nothing remotely progressive, liberal or tolerant about this ideology, it is the antithesis of all that and the promoters of it have the gall to refer to those who oppose it as Nazis and fascists, they couldn't be displaying more traits of authoritarian dictatorship if they tried.

I don’t care how trans live, but leave school kids alone & leave women sports alone!!

get it. I'm angry, sometimes raging - I had a sleepless night this week after I made the mistake of watching a clip of LOJ 'explaining' to a woman why males should be accepted in women's refuges. The fury I felt listening to him left me feeling physically sick.

I don't think she was remotely convinced by his arguments judging by her subsequent posts on Twitter.

Just to clarify “ I don’t care how trans live “ means if one wants to be called he or she or they or it or dress whatever way or do whatever thing, sure, not my business and nothing else. I respect others’ lives, trans if not, doesn’t matter.

Now, I may have had a glass of wine, but there is always the possibility of a Third Way.

In which stereotypes become largely irrelevant, the value of women's input to society (including traditionally undervalued work like caring, etc) is finally appreciated, and barriers to equity are dismantled. In which everyone is respected and afforded rights on a basis of equal opportunity.

It might be unlikely, but it's certainly not impossible.

And in fact especially not in the UK. We don't have a functioning 'far right' here, most people are largely tolerant, and most people do care about fairness and human rights.

I'm not discounting misogyny: it's a massive problem. But I don't think we need be entirely disheartened.

Fabulous insight. 👏 👏 👏

Men have an advantage in darts (lower heart rate) snooker (taller) and motor racing (stronger upper body and neck).

Has there been a flounce? 🤗

Yes Nepeta.

I have been through this with that poster before. There will be instances it makes a difference and no data collection monitoring the status of female employees should be falsified in this way.