Transgender

[ShanDog]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Love to see progressives tie themselves up in knots to maintain progressive bonafides.

What knots?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Pffft, stay ignorant.

Nah, you're arguing in bad faith here. In every instance, when I aim to make an argument supported by facts, I always cite the source. Always. If others ask again I'm only too happy to provide it again. It's just good conduct in any debate or argument.

 

[its free real estate]

For sex crimes? Where people have been actually HURT through the actions of others? Surely you're not THAT cold.

They are being imprisoned, that is the punishment for their crime. Why should we be so cruel to imprison transwomen alone or with men? Especially when we don't have enough evidence to be sure that they pose a danger to other women in prison.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

They are being imprisoned, that is the punishment for their crime. Why should we be so cruel to imprison transwomen alone or with men? Especially when we don't have enough evidence to be sure that they pose a danger to other women in prison.

True, but sex crimes are a different category aren't they? Even in prisoner heirarchies that they rank themselves, paedophiles occupy the lowest rung, then other sex offenders just above. Even grasses/snitches are held in higher regard.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Nah, you're arguing in bad faith here. In every instance, when I aim to make an argument supported by facts, I always cite the source. Always. If others ask again I'm only too happy to provide it again. It's just good conduct in any debate or argument.

I am not arguing anything. There is no debate to be had here.

I acknowledge the scientific data. You don't.

 

[its free real estate]

True, but sex crimes are a different category aren't they? Even in prisoner heirarchies that they rank themselves, paedophiles occupy the lowest rung, then other sex offenders just above. Even grasses/snitches are held in higher regard.

I’m not sure what prisoner hierarchies have to do with this.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I’m not sure what prisoner hierarchies have to do with this.

Zero.

 

[Gough]

Similarly you could argue that transgender people sport is only a small part of the overall issue but that's all you seem to concentrate on.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Similarly you could argue that transgender people sport is only a small part of the overall issue but that's all you seem to concentrate on.

It's one of the few aspects of the matter that I find problematic.

In the overwhelming majority of circumstances, people are free to gender role play to their hearts content as far as I am concerned.

 

[CM86]

Similarly you could argue that transgender people sport is only a small part of the overall issue but that's all you seem to concentrate on.

They seem to be feminist extremists.
Saying they want equality and support for women, while pushing the message that men will go to any length to take advantage of women.
#notallmen

 

[its free real estate]

Forcing people to deny reality in front of their faces in some kind of nebulous appeal to “human rights” is the issue.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'm for equality and social progress but not at the expense of fairness.

Then prove the pudding first.

 

[Carringbush2010]

They seem to be feminist extremists.
Saying they want equality and support for women, while pushing the message that men will go to any length to take advantage of women.
#notallmen

Nice try, but fail.

Find one post on here that is against trans people - you won't.

Find posts that have concerns about advantages / dangers in trans m to f competing in female competitions - you'll find plenty.

Find posts that have concerns about allowing gender transition for toddlers - you'll find plenty.

This is not a feminist issue and trying to conflate it and use it as a conflict of interest is naive or deliberately ignorant.

 

[CM86]

Nice try, but fail.

Find one post on here that is against trans people - you won't.

Find posts that have concerns about advantages / dangers in trans m to f competing in female competitions - you'll find plenty.

Find posts that have concerns about allowing gender transition for toddlers - you'll find plenty.

This is not a feminist issue and trying to conflate it and use it as a conflict of interest is naive or deliberately ignorant.

Must have hit a sore spot.

Comprehension fail.
Read my post again or at least question it before going off on some angry tangent.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Must have hit a sore spot.

Comprehension fail.
Read my post again or at least question it before going off on some angry tangent.

Uh no, no angry tangent and no comprehension fail. In your own words you're claiming that people putting up debate about inequities in female competitions with trans m to f athletes are also anti feminist, which is speculation at best.

Clearly you're conflating both subjects in an attempt to point out a conflict of interest. They are completely different issues.

There is nothing in my previous post that displays any phobias about trans people.

How can you possibly claim that I'm angry from that post?

You're either being naive or deliberately ignorant.

Either way that is a disingenuous tactic.

 

[CM86]

Uh no, no angry tangent and no comprehension fail. In your own words you're claiming that people putting up debate about inequities in female competitions with trans m to f athletes are also anti feminist, which is speculation at best.

Nope... Just read my post again.

 

[its free real estate]

Uh no, no angry tangent and no comprehension fail. In your own words you're claiming that people putting up debate about inequities in female competitions with trans m to f athletes are also anti feminist, which is speculation at best.

Clearly you're conflating both subjects in an attempt to point out a conflict of interest. They are completely different issues.

There is nothing in my previous post that displays any phobias about trans people.

How can you possibly claim that I'm angry from that post?

You're either being naive or deliberately ignorant.

Either way that is a disingenuous tactic.

CM86 isn’t very articulate. Give the poor sap a break.

 

[woota]

Nice try, but fail.

Find one post on here that is against trans people - you won't.

Find posts that have concerns about advantages / dangers in trans m to f competing in female competitions - you'll find plenty.

Find posts that have concerns about allowing gender transition for toddlers - you'll find plenty.

This is not a feminist issue and trying to conflate it and use it as a conflict of interest is naive or deliberately ignorant.

Actually it has become a priority issue for feminists. This is largely driven by the two items that pose an obvious disadvantage to women in the bathroom thing and transwomen competing in women's sport, but it goes deeper than that. If the legal definition of sex is construed to mean "gender identity", then sex-segregated spaces will effectively disappear, followed by women's rights altogether. This is because it's not possible to both enshrine "gender identity" in civil rights law and protect women and girls as a distinct legal category. So it's interesting now because you have the rights of one "victim class" (women), being transgressed and superseded by the rights of another victim class (trans people).

 

[Carringbush2010]

Actually it has become a priority issue for feminists. This is largely driven by the two items that pose an obvious disadvantage to women in the bathroom thing and transwomen competing in women's sport, but it goes deeper than that. If the legal definition of sex is construed to mean "gender identity", then sex-segregated spaces will effectively disappear, followed by women's rights altogether. This is because it's not possible to both enshrine "gender identity" in civil rights law and protect women and girls as a distinct legal category. So it's interesting now because you have the rights of one "victim class" (women), being transgressed and superseded by the rights of another victim class (trans people).

Fair enough, it's an issue for feminists in that regard so there is some relevance. However they are still different issues and I was pointing out the disingenuous tactic that CM86 was attempting to use.

i:e raise a point of view that those debating inequities in competition are also in opposition to feminists views, in other words yourself is in conflict of interest because apparently you disagree with feminist views but hypocritically are against trans m to f athletes competing in women's competitions.

That's dirty pool in my book.

 

[CM86]

Fair enough, it's an issue for feminists in that regard so there is some relevance. However they are still different issues and I was pointing out the disingenuous tactic that CM86 was attempting to use.

i:e raise a point of view that those debating inequities in competition are also in opposition to feminists views, in other words yourself is in conflict of interest because apparently you disagree with feminist views but hypocritically are against trans m to f athletes competing in women's competitions.

That's dirty pool in my book.

I know you're trolling now.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I know you're trolling now.

What makes you think that?

 

[CM86]

What makes you think that?

They seem to be feminist extremists.
Saying they want equality and support for women, while pushing the message that men will go to any length to take advantage of women.
#notallmen

How is that in opposition to feminism? As you've repeatedly claimed...
It's why I told you to just go back and read my post, but you didn't.

 

[ShanDog]

Similarly you could argue that transgender people sport is only a small part of the overall issue but that's all you seem to concentrate on.

I think that's because the issue is so plainly evident to most people that the fact that it's being pushed to become accepted means people are focussing on it. It's quite clear that there are significant fairness issues with trans women competing against "AFAB" women in sex-segregated sport. It's an emperor without clothes moment except this time it's the majority who can see it and apparently nobody cares.

 

[Snake_Baker]

 

[Carringbush2010]

How is that in opposition to feminism? As you've repeatedly claimed...
It's why I told you to just go back and read my post, but you didn't.

So you're speculating that posters who debate trans competing in female sports are in support of feminists. Got it.

I'm not a feminist or support most of their views, but I do support their concern of trans m to f athletes competing in women's sports.