Explaining why I consider something transphobic isn't playing any card, is explaining it.exactly! and we can clearly see this tactic at work in this thread.
Explaining why I consider something transphobic isn't playing any card, is explaining it.exactly! and we can clearly see this tactic at work in this thread.
Excellent argument. You killed it.My opinion that you're transphobic? I don't have any studies, sorry.
So we are now accepting that there is an inherent advantage? Because otherwise, why would you need this line of thought?
Someone who thinks teenage girls should be excluded from amateur school sports because they are transgender doesn't deserve my time.Excellent argument. You killed it.
Explaining why I consider something transphobic isn't playing any card, is explaining it.
You know that, and I know that…Of course there is an advantage and everyone involved knows it, which is why there are pushbacks on the very simple solution that already exists in many sports. An open competition and a female competition, everyone is welcome in the open competition and female athletes are protected in a separate competition.
Sorry missed it.sorry, i was being sarcastic... it's a bit insane to claim that this is used to shut down debate when there's a massive debate happening with 1 against 5 or something.
It is transphobic. Even if it were true that transwomen have an unsporting advantage, it would still be transphobic to exclude them - women - from competing within their gender. If you are dividing sports across gender lines, any exclusion of a person belonging to one gender from competing in their gender on the basis of a physical condition they have no control over is discriminatory. And if said condition is being born in a male body then that makes it transphobia(which is unfortunately being extended to intersex athletes, too). Where I do agree is that there needs to be limits and benchmarks to respect, to keep competition fair, which would depend on each sport on an individual basis(combat sports for example would require much tighter limitations than, say, shooting). A form of which already exists btw, in the form of anti-doping measures
When that teenage girl can seriously hurt other (maybe mine) girl, i have zero doubts about it.Someone who thinks teenage girls should be excluded from amateur school sports because they are transgender doesn't deserve my time.
Of course they won't say, but their proposals always end up in practical exclusion. How that can be seen as anything but transphobic is beyond me.
I think I'll take it now. Excluding an entire subset of kids from school sports because something that happens all the time might happen is a great mindset to have.When that teenage girl can seriously hurt other (maybe mine) girl, i have zero doubts about it.
Watch/read a little how it looks when they meet in contact sports and then take that moral high ground.
Not transphobic?how would you call yourself then? since you don't seem to care at all for the women that are actually prevented from being competitive by racing or fighting against someone who carries such an obvious advantage over them.
Not transphobic?
If an answer to an issue is to exclude people I am against it.
You lost me.you aren't though.
You are doing it by the book. First ad hominem stuff and now strawman.I think I'll take it now. Excluding an entire subset of kids from school sports because something that happens all the time might happen is a great mindset to have.
You want to exclude transgender kids from something all other kids can do and everyone consider important and healthy for kids' development. That's the definition of transphobia. I'm not calling you anything for the sake of it, it's literally what you're advocating for.You are doing it by the book. First ad hominem stuff and now strawman.
I clearly said many (valid) reasons and latter is just one of them.
But yeah, keep going. Giving the fact that you have zero valid arguments then there are a lot of more logical fallacies which you can use.
You lost me.
I think competing at a possible disadvantage is better than sitting at home. It's not ideal but until a realistic alternative exists for transgender athletes, transgender women should be able to compete with women.you have no issue at all with "practical exclusion" as you call it, in cases when women are being "practically excluded" from being competitive that way.
Then would you support what @JPRouve suggests here?I think competing at a possible disadvantage is better than sitting at home. It's not ideal but until a realistic alternative exists for transgender athletes, transgender women should be able to compete with women.
An open competition and a female competition, everyone is welcome in the open competition
If there are enough athletes to actually have competitions, sure, let's give it a go. I want everyone competing.Then would you support what @JPRouve suggests here?
If there are enough athletes to actually have competitions, sure, let's give it a go. I want everyone competing. From what I've heard from some transgender athletes though, in many cases this means they have no one to compete against and it's just a way to make them quit. In many cases it's designed that way by transphobes. If it can be done in an honest way, where people are actually interested in the athletes and the competition, and not just political bs, then I would love to see it happen and funds dedicated to it.
The Open category would be for males + all trans athletes, so I don’t see how it wouldn’t have numbers
They wouldn't be excluded thoughI think I'll take it now. Excluding an entire subset of kids from school sports because something that happens all the time might happen is a great mindset to have
In practical terms they would.They wouldn't be excluded though
Not sure, but it would mean your concerns about exclusion are nullified.I'm not in the mind on any athlete, but I would want to compete against other men, not women. Has this been tried in any major competition?
Quite the opposite actually.In practical terms they would.
Until I see it working in practice I'll maintain my concerns.Not sure, but it would mean your concerns about exclusion are nullified.
Explain that one to me.Quite the opposite actually.
Until I see it working in practice I'll maintain my concerns.
Some time ago there was a transgender cyclist (the indoor type) on cnn talking about some trials with open competitions and in half of them she competed by herself. Men didn't want to compete against a woman and there weren't enough transgender cyclists.What are those concerns?
If you’re asking if there’s been male vs female competition in things before, then that’s a yes. I may have misunderstood you.Until I see it working in practice I'll maintain my concerns.
See the previous post.What are these concerns? And an example is Chess, you have open tournaments and female tournaments but no male tournaments. Now women generally don't compete in open tournaments at the highest level.
I meant an open competition where a number of transgender women had a real competition.If you’re asking if there’s been male vs female competition in things before, then that’s a yes. I may have misunderstood you.
For example, the PGA is “Open”. Annika Sorenstam, Lexi Thompson, Michelle Wie, etc. have played in PGA Tour events.
I’m not sure what you mean. How would an open category not be real competition?I meant an open competition where a number of transgender women had a real competition.
No logic either.There is nuance obviously, but I disagree with the "it's unfair to cis-women" argument - because we don't actually know whether that's the case or not. But to claim that (trans)women should not be allowed to compete against other women - while competition is divided across gender lines(this is a whole other argument btw) - on the basis of their birth is inherently transphobic, yeah. There is no nuance in that.
The open tournament and female tournament really doesn't address the fundamental issue here. Trans women want to be recognized as women, and they would be explicitly excluded from a category based on their sex at birth.
How is it different from just saying trans women can compete with the men?
Wasn’t that situation one in which there were 3 options instead of 2?Some time ago there was a transgender cyclist (the indoor type) on cnn talking about some trials with open competitions and in half of them she competed by herself. Men didn't want to compete against a woman and there weren't enough transgender cyclists.
What if there is no alternative male competition and male athletes must compete in an open competition with transwomen?Some time ago there was a transgender cyclist (the indoor type) on cnn talking about some trials with open competitions and in half of them she competed by herself. Men didn't want to compete against a woman and there weren't enough transgender cyclists.
I am concerned this will happen and these open events will just be a way for people to pat themselves on the back but in reality there is no real competition for these women.
I'm open to the possibility this may work in the future, but until it does, I prefer not excluding anyone in the present.
I'm not talking about hypotheticals. Has this happened? Has there been an open competition where a decent number of transgender women have participated?I’m not sure what you mean. How would an open category not be real competition?