I think at age 16, if you are seriously thinking of dismembering a sexual and reproductive body part, you can start reading about the Pros and Cons and yes, tell your parents about your plans at age 16. No secrets with teacher or a Coach Walz type. This can take up to 12-24 months to begin the process and in the open. No quick way to do this and should be handled with care and caution. Too many parents on here are ok with this and it blows my mind. To each his own but my God people, let's not do something to a young child. Let that child become an adult for God's sake. By the way, my rule would be the biological male is 100% forbidden to play against biological females. Once the penis is removed, then discussion can take place about play against the females. Case by case. How many of these men trying to compete have already cut it off?
5 biological men roster wins Australian women's soccer league title & also undefeated this season
- Thread starter Veritas
- Start date
I can understand your position on some of the terms being used, but how would you handle the issue of MTF in women's sports?
I'm a black belt in karate and jujitsu so yes. Agree it's also not fun. I happen to agree with you in this case, rather than watfly (though I respect his reasoning). As I said, I think the more fundamental objection to allowing high t xxs to play in the same category as other women without suppressants is that it really does just render sports to an accident of birth and it undermines the prohibition against PEDs. On the other hand, I think watfly does illustrate the dilemma with women's sports as a lesser category. I think both of you are well reasoned on this point.
I think you've also answered the reason why we don't want women just dumped into the men's category (which watfly refused to answer). But I point out you have the same issue with the mtf ftm and intersex against the men;. The only rationale then for keeping them with the men is "I just don't care about them".
Did Aztec Central have books back in the day or were you dragging the stone tablets back and forth, uphill both ways, living off campus?
Leave him alone... his sanity pills appear to be kicking in and we don't want to disrupt the progress.
I guess I missed that question. What would that be?
Just FYI. if biological women want to compete against biological men, I say more power to them, unless it is unnecessarily unsafe or makes a mockery of the sport, although that is effectively self governed. I can't think of any sports offhand where woman have an inherent biological advantage.
If the test is they just need a place to play, why isn't it acceptable to just have 1 division where both men and women play a la Starship Troopers? What's the rationale for separate male and female divisions? Why do we do it? We are, after all, all human.
Well that's not my position, nor my test...you're making a strawman argument. Nevertheless I will repeat my answer. It's because it's the most obvious and common distinction in terms of performance capability. So its easy to divide men and women along competitive lines, regardless how hard certain people try to blur the line with subjective nonsense. Like I said, its not perfect, but its far more objective and reasonable than any other standard by a long shot. FYI, I have no idea who Starship Troopers are if that's even relevant to your question.
If your rationale is “clarity”, then it’s not a very good argument because the easiest clarity to say is that we should just have 1 division and be done with all the nonsense. This proposition is easier than by chromosome because you don’t have complications like testosterone imbalances or errant chromosomes or transgenders going back and forth. Why is gender separation better than just everyone plays together? Why doesn’t everyone plays together work? Its simple, easy and obvious because we are all human. Why do you dance around the answer? You admit after all your solution is not perfect, so why isn’t mine?
Asked and answered. There are clear physical performance ability differences between men and women. And dividing along X and Y chromosomes is an easy binary choice. It's as clear and easy as putting everyone in a co-ed competition category. If you can't thread that needle because of philosophy, then so be it. I will stick to reality.
Will there be biological anomalies, of course, but if you'll go into vapor lock trying to accommodate rare exceptions then nothing will be accomplished, or what is accomplished will have so many permutations as to render "the solution" arbitrary, unworkable and make a farce of the competition.
Well, you finally said it. "There are clear physical performance ability differences between men and women". There are also clear performance ability differences between MTF on suppressants or post surgery (no testosterone), FTM (no male puberty), and intersexed in comparison to xy males. The reality is they cannot compete either with an xy male on active testosterone, testosterone being a performance enhancing drug. So why do xx women get special treatment from you but not anyone else? Why do xx women get the benefit of this luxury, all the while you (and allies) are complaining that it is also unfair for xx women to compete with a MTF who has gone through puberty?
There are only a handful of possible rationales. It's not clarity because clarity is best served by everyone competing in the same category...you are still saying xx women are entitled to special treatment through a league of their own. One possibility is we don't care about them. Another possibility is they aren't worthy of respect. A third possibility is they did it to themselves so they deserve it. Otherwise, I'm struggling to see why one group of people deserves special treatment, but another does not. (Fair warning I do see a fourth possibility, but it's a dangerous one because it opens the door to acknowledging women's sport as "lesser" and therefore things like equal access to scholarships goes out the window).
As to why we should care, it's easy, because we are all individuals, granted by God with individual rights, entitled to equal treatment before the law. Just because it's a hard case doesn't mean we get to ignore it. Our liberty is made up of the hard cases.
NCAA has at least one completely coed sport --
TCU wins 2024 NC rifle championships
TCU wins the 2024 NC rifle championship. See the two-day championship recap and final results.
www.ncaa.com
At this point, I'm going to tap out because your effectively debating yourself since your mischaracterizing and ignoring my words to suit your own purposes.
Plus I don't do philosophy, its just opinions by self important people that aren't subject to the ramifications of the implementation of their own theories.
K. You were a worthy adversary. I tip my krillak to you, nanu nanu.
Philosophy consists of the principles by which we arrive at solutions to moral issues and conflicting rights, which this is. If anything I hope I’ve illustrated that: it’s not as easy as saying things are black or white and sometimes there are just no good answers. You can’t answer this question without doing philosophy (and a little science). You may think you aren’t but you are, and doing pretty good at it
Still doesn't ring a bell.
Mork and Mindy?
It depends. For 99% of the world, you take a peek down your shorts, and that’s what you are. This is how normal people think.
Grace wants to lawyer the hell out of everything. So she redefines basic words to make them unusable, or brings up obscure intersex conditions to muddy the conversation.
My defense against this lawyerly garbage is to offer a definition she cannot redefine. It helps keep the conversation on track.
Until she decides that Wittgenstein can shed some light on the topic.
Karlton Athletic
SILVER
I appreciate your attempts to show nuance and empathy on a complex subject. I'm trying hard to understand the issues and don't know what's the right or wrong answer. All I do know though is that virulently anti-trans public figures are always wrong about the other things I do understand, so I take their bold proclamations of "fact" with the pinch of salt they deserve.
Snort. Leave it to a mathematician to admire Wittgenstein. For those not on the inside joke Wittgenstein was a 20th century Austrian philosopher who had a strong admiration for mathematics and talked about the limits of language. Was also accused of extreme physical brutality towards his math students. He had an early phase, which is generally thought to be more empirical in the way language is limited and can affect our philosophical outcomes. He had a latter phase, where he generally attacked all philosophies and philosophy in general. He's the philosopher that in the latter 20th century everyone who wanted to seem smart would nod and call one of the very important masters, but who has increasingly become irrelevant in light of the rise of postmodernism on the left and law and economics on the right. In any case, generally omitted from most ethics and jurisprudence courses as his positioning is not particularly helpful in coming towards an answer to complex moral problems. Used more in the philosophy qua philosophy classes where they engage in the navel gazing about the meaning of philosophy and it's role. But in any case, not particularly useful, at least normatively, here.
As to definitions, I LOVE LOVE LOVE when you define things. It keeps you honest from moving the goalposts.
I kinda say the same thing with the virulent post modernists types. As I wrote, sometimes there are no good answers, which is why I appreciate watfly's position...it's a least thoughtful and honest.
Admire Wittgenstein? I'm mocking you for bringing up philosophers instead of talking normally.
If you can talk normally, then answer the question: if we have women's leagues, then who should be eligible to participate in them?
No four paragraph word salads. Just tell us where you would put the line.
Watfly managed it in about four words: "Y = mens league.". Do you have a better definition, or would you rather discuss Heidegger?