The Gender Non-binary debate.
Discussion
Clockwork Cupcake said:
True, but unfortunately the prefixes can, and do, develop a negative connotation.
Take TERF for example. It started out as a simple acronym for "Trans-Excluding Radical Feminist" - a simple descriptive acronym to refer to feminists who exclude trans women and deny that trans women are women. However, it has become a pejorative term to some.
I don't believe that cis- is pejorative but I can kind of see why some might view it as such.
TERF isn't a prefix, and it's not a scientific descriptor.Take TERF for example. It started out as a simple acronym for "Trans-Excluding Radical Feminist" - a simple descriptive acronym to refer to feminists who exclude trans women and deny that trans women are women. However, it has become a pejorative term to some.
I don't believe that cis- is pejorative but I can kind of see why some might view it as such.
It's a made up name, like the KKK is. It's as perjorative as a term as the KKK is.
andy_s said:
I'd imagine anyone from any persuasion, self-identified gender or birth-gender would feel the same way about their particular 'label', and I'd certainly respect that, quid pro quo?
Surely you recognise that you have created two prefixes for cis and transgender people to explain why cis and transgender aren’t required as differentiators in the context of this conversation. Doesn’t that somewhat undermine your argument? Rivenink said:
TERF isn't a prefix, and it's not a scientific descriptor.
It's a made up name, like the KKK is. It's as perjorative as a term as the KKK is.
Yes, I know. But it was an example of how a simple descriptor can mutate into a (potentially) pejorative term. It's a made up name, like the KKK is. It's as perjorative as a term as the KKK is.
As I said, I don't believe that "cis" is pejorative but I can understand how some might perceive it as such, and/or how it might become so.
I'm just trying to be balanced here and acknowledge both sides of the debate.
George Smiley said:
Unfair muscle and bone density issues, just wait for the next olympics for a transgender woman to win all the medals leaving the natural women thinking wtf
That is a matter for the sports governing bodies, not for us. It always has been thus. Let's not get side-tracked by that again.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
George Smiley said:
Unfair muscle and bone density issues, just wait for the next olympics for a transgender woman to win all the medals leaving the natural women thinking wtf
That is a matter for the sports governing bodies, not for us. It always has been thus. Let's not get side-tracked by that again.
Of course they cannot be banned and eventually it’s going to happen (already has) and there’s nothing the genetically weaker cis woman can do about it
George Smiley said:
Are you suggesting that if the country legally recognised a trans woman as a woman but the sports governing body banned said woman from cis female races, that this wouldn’t cause problems?
Of course they cannot be banned and eventually it’s going to happen (already has) and there’s nothing the genetically weaker cis woman can do about it
It would only cause problems if it was not equitable and fair. Of course they cannot be banned and eventually it’s going to happen (already has) and there’s nothing the genetically weaker cis woman can do about it
Banning any competitor over a certain level of testosterone would be fair. Banning them because they are transgender would not.
Fair rules applied to all competitors are fair.
8.4L 154 said:
There's gender ambiguity (Semenya), and there's transition. The mens' decathlon medal was won by Caitlin Jenner. We'll see if anyone repeats her feats prospectively.Edited by jfire on Thursday 25th April 13:49
George Smiley said:
But you can’t measure on current t levels, it won’t remove the genetic advantage through puberty for muscle and bone development
I'll leave that for the sports governing bodies to work that out. I don't know enough about the subject to comment further, and I doubt you do either. Not that this has ever stopped you, mind. 
gregs656 said:
andy_s said:
I'd imagine anyone from any persuasion, self-identified gender or birth-gender would feel the same way about their particular 'label', and I'd certainly respect that, quid pro quo?
Surely you recognise that you have created two prefixes for cis and transgender people to explain why cis and transgender aren’t required as differentiators in the context of this conversation. Doesn’t that somewhat undermine your argument? Anyway - the past few posts on this have sort of increased attention to what was intended as just a marginal nudge rather than dictatorial hysteria, and I'm running out of ink
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallon_Fox
I thought it was quite disgusting that an ex male was allowed to compete in a sport that involves punching people in the face. It was ridiculously unfair.
I thought it was quite disgusting that an ex male was allowed to compete in a sport that involves punching people in the face. It was ridiculously unfair.
Algarve said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallon_Fox
I thought it was quite disgusting that an ex male was allowed to compete in a sport that involves punching people in the face. It was ridiculously unfair.
Off topic, but I think that a sport that involves punching people in the face is pretty disgusting full stop. I thought it was quite disgusting that an ex male was allowed to compete in a sport that involves punching people in the face. It was ridiculously unfair.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Off topic, but I think that a sport that involves punching people in the face is pretty disgusting full stop.
Still off topic but it's punching consenting people in the face. Whether you think it's disgusting or not it's what they wish to do. We can't stop people being themselves just because someone else thinks it's disgusting (he said, applying the point with a sledgehammer!)I love boxing but I am disgusted by violence inflicted on the innocent.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
George Smiley said:
But you can’t measure on current t levels, it won’t remove the genetic advantage through puberty for muscle and bone development
I'll leave that for the sports governing bodies to work that out. I don't know enough about the subject to comment further, and I doubt you do either. Not that this has ever stopped you, mind. Androgynous said:
It could also be because you know you can't counter his point.
But isn't. I wouldn't venture to give an opinion on something that I don't have sufficient knowledge about to have an informed opinion. But, as I said, that's never stopped other posters on this thread from doing so.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
I'll leave that for the sports governing bodies to work that out. I don't know enough about the subject to comment further, and I doubt you do either. Not that this has ever stopped you, mind.
Quite the passive aggressive little number aren’t you?You know full well you’ll be up in arms of the sports bodies ban transgender women from competing with women
Perhaps we’ll need an additional two weeks after the Paralympics for the Transalympinc
George Smiley said:
You know full well you’ll be up in arms of the sports bodies ban transgender women from competing with women
As I said, if the rules were phrased in an equitable and fair way that applied to all competitors, then I would be fine with it. If transgender women were excluded for being transgender then I would of course consider that discriminatory. But it doesn't have to be phrased that way. Deduce what it is that (allegedly) scientifically advantages trans women and write that into the rules.
Oh but that might exclude some "real" (sic) women though, eh?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff