Gender and the law

[724Seney]

So let me just ask you one question: is it "unfair" to allow a trans woman to run in a race with other women if she is not among the top runners and does not win?

Chuck, this was yesterday's question from me, still unaddressed. Direct answers will begin with a "yes" or a "no" (or perhaps will consist of only one of those words). My answer is a clear "no."

Yours?

I believe that that this question is best framed in the context of whether or not an "open category" was offered by the race officials for the transgender and nonbinary athletes who wished to compete?
If such an option existed, and the trans runner still saw fit to compete in a race category for biological women instead of the "open" category, then I don't care what place they came in at the end. It is patently unfair.

[Chuck Naill]

So let me just ask you one question: is it "unfair" to allow a trans woman to run in a race with other women if she is not among the top runners and does not win?

Chuck, this was yesterday's question from me, still unaddressed. Direct answers will begin with a "yes" or a "no" (or perhaps will consist of only one of those words). My answer is a clear "no."

Yours?

I believe that that this question is best framed in the context of whether or not an "open category" was offered by the race officials for the transgender and nonbinary athletes who wished to compete?
If such an option existed, and the trans runner still saw fit to compete in a race category for biological women instead of the "open" category, then I don't care what place they came in at the end. It is patently unfair.

This, in fact, was the case. There was an option available, but the athlete chose to compete in the biological female race.

Common sense is not allowed to prevail out of fear of being considered ignorant, uneducated, or worse.

[TSherbs]

So let me just ask you one question: is it "unfair" to allow a trans woman to run in a race with other women if she is not among the top runners and does not win?

Chuck, this was yesterday's question from me, still unaddressed. Direct answers will begin with a "yes" or a "no" (or perhaps will consist of only one of those words). My answer is a clear "no."

Yours?

There can be no closed end responses for that question

Sure there can be. I gave you mine: It is, indeed, "fair" to allow trans athletes to participate in a sport in the gender of their choice. All one has to do is make certain stipulations about when the transition occurred and how genuine the transition has been (a sort of certification, so to speak). This is exactly what my state has done for high school athletics and trans athletes.

Odd that you think it is.

Perhaps "odd" to you. Not for the entire state of Maine, though.

If you make an exception for the athlete you describe, you then must not make it an exception at all.

It is not an "exception". This is my point. It is only an "exception" if you see gender as only a binary determined at birth. THAT is the prejudice that I am talking about. This is why I keep saying, but you do not respond to, that this entire debate is actually over how culture sees "sex" versus "gender": whether the two are identical or different, and whether a binary understanding of them (especially the latter, in this case) is accurate and just in the law.

--->So here is my next question, which is very simple and clear: do the terms "sex" and "gender" denote the same things (have identical meaning)?

[Chuck Naill]

We aren’t going to agree, Ted. It is one thing to be respectful to everyone so that they live as they choose. It is another topic which disrespects others puttting them at an unfair disadvantage so that one or two can realize what they want. Lea Thompson is always going to have an advantage. Have you ever considered the self centered nature of these trans women forcing their way into an all female sport?

Often education, diversity, and tolerance at batted about as if an enlightened position. It’s not always true and this is a good example of trying to rectify the situation with shallow solutions.

[724Seney]

So let me just ask you one question: is it "unfair" to allow a trans woman to run in a race with other women if she is not among the top runners and does not win?

Chuck, this was yesterday's question from me, still unaddressed. Direct answers will begin with a "yes" or a "no" (or perhaps will consist of only one of those words). My answer is a clear "no."

Yours?

I believe that that this question is best framed in the context of whether or not an "open category" was offered by the race officials for the transgender and nonbinary athletes who wished to compete?
If such an option existed, and the trans runner still saw fit to compete in a race category for biological women instead of the "open" category, then I don't care what place they came in at the end. It is patently unfair.

This, in fact, was the case. There was an option available, but the athlete chose to compete in the biological female race.

Common sense is not allowed to prevail out of fear of being considered ignorant, uneducated, or worse.

Thanks. Yes, I was aware of that which is exactly why I posed the question.

It totally baffles me how a teacher of high school students can actually try to deny the existence of DNA & genetics. To me, this is not a matter of free speech, it is a matter of K-12 teacher malpractice. What are you trying to do to their heads, man?? There are better ways to make them aware of the issue than to reject universally accepted science in the absence of a more evidence or data based explanation.

No matter how you look at it... or try to spin it.... or try to rationalize an inane argument..... if your sex chromosomes are 46XX you are a female and if they are 46XY you are a male. That is a pure scientific fact.
Yes, there are exceptions (rare such as 45,X (Turner syndrome); 47,XXY (Klinefelter syndrome); 47,XYY (XYY syndrome); and 47,XXX) but the management of those individuals has also been well worked out over the years to allow them to maximize their gender identities.

[Chuck Naill]

We simply must become more than what we are physically.

Being dissatisfied with our bodies is a proverb.

One question that Ted has ignored is, why would a drag person want to perform for children, besides needing a new gig?

Why would Lea Thompson want to race against biologic females? Which is like high school junior boys wanting to race 12 year old girls. Is winning a trophy that import?

[TSherbs]

We aren’t going to agree, Ted....

Chuck, I am not asking you to agree with me.

I am asking you, do the terms "sex" and "gender" have the same meaning? Your answer, in no way, has to agree with mine.

How do we know if we "agree" or not if you won't answer the basic foundational question?

[TSherbs]

Why would Lea Thompson want to race against biologic females?

The same answer for all persons who have transitioned to the other gender: because they identify as the other gender now. This is why they most often dress as the other gender, act like the other gender, and even speak at times like the other gender....BECAUSE THEY IDENTIFY AS THE OTHER GENDER NOW. Why would someone transition to another gender over years of commitment, train in a sport, but then say "I want to keep competing as the gender with which I no longer dress, name myself, and identify with in any way."

The reason that I smell prejudice in your answers, Chuck, is because you act suspicious of trans athletes and assume the worst of transpeople and ask of transpeople that they ignore their bodies and gender identity IN WAYS THAT YOU DO NOT ASK YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS AND CIS MEN AND CIS WOMEN AND HETEROSEXUALS. It's like saying that you "respect the dignity" of trans people, but then won't afford them the full dignity and respect and self-determination that you afford other cis-gendered persons. You will accept them as athletes, but only so long as they cannot compete in the gender that they now identify. That actually isn't full acceptance. It is only partial acceptance, partial self-determination, partial respect. If you keep seeing them all as cheaters out to take trophies from other more deserving persons, then your prejudice is quite plain.

It is also the mark of bigotry to keep smearing all trans athletes with some nefarious motivation from a single case of that collegiate swimmer. This is similar to the smear that you keep attemtping of drag performer motivations with the quote from *one* drag performer. You know as well as I that this one swimmer and that one drag performer does not represent their group as a whole, in the same way that you don't represent all of Alabama or all of Christianity or all of fp geekers (and it would be absurd of me to assume so or to suggest so). It's the same reason that I defended you against the outragious smears that you got for working for pharma. Prejudice, even born from pain or fear, is still prejudice.

[TSherbs]

And you know that all men do not have physical advantage over all women, and that each gender has a very wide range of sizes and physical abilities. You know that you are generalizing. But why do you do this? You know that women in the WNBA are more athletic and better basketball players than most men in the nation, despite the comparison of "median" heights and weights and muscle mass of men and women. What does the "median" matter in any way? People don't compete as "medians," they compete as individuals. What harm is caused to the athletes of the state of Maine by allowing fully transitioned females onto high school female teams? It is not whimsy, it is not cheating, it is not evil, it is not taking advantage of anything. It is in fact rare, and hardly noticeable, unless you see demons around every corner. Again, the ONLY time I hear people complain is when they think that allowing trans persons on teams of their gender identity costs some other female something that it is presumed that they deserve more. And this idea of a "real female" deserving the roster spot or trophy or whatever "more" is exactly what I would say comes from prejudice.

[TSherbs]

Lastly, and I have written enough about this, our culture and laws accept all sorts of genetic and environmental advantages that some athletes have over others, sometimes enormous ones. There is no such thing as an even playing field in the world of genetics, and it is not "random" either. There are all sorts of monetary, geographical, cultural, and genetic advantages that we accept, and some people even take full advantage of. We don't expect athletes to be equal or have an equal starting point or equal opportunity (that is a myth at best, a lie at worst). Ability and opportunity are distributed unequally, and every one knows this and accepts it (there are a few critics, of course). We just haven't been tested on this from the expanding idea of "gender" before, so the challenge is difficult for the culture to wrap its head around. But here we are. The old forms don't work so well as they used to (for the older mind-set).

[724Seney]

And you know that all men do not have physical advantage over all women, and that each gender has a very wide range of sizes and physical abilities. You know that you are generalizing. But why do you do this? You know that women in the WNBA are more athletic and better basketball players than most men in the nation, despite the comparison of "median" heights and weights and muscle mass of men and women. What does the "median" matter in any way? People don't compete as "medians," they compete as individuals. What harm is caused to the athletes of the state of Maine by allowing fully transitioned females onto high school female teams? It is not whimsy, it is not cheating, it is not evil, it is not taking advantage of anything. It is in fact rare, and hardly noticeable, unless you see demons around every corner. Again, the ONLY time I hear people complain is when they think that allowing trans persons on teams of their gender identity costs some other female something that it is presumed that they deserve more. And this idea of a "real female" deserving the roster spot or trophy or whatever "more" is exactly what I would say comes from prejudice.

The logical conclusion of your warped thinking is to not have any sort of separation of participants in competitions athletic or otherwise.
No separation of males and females.
No separation of physically handicapped vs non-handicapped.
No separation of 6 year olds from 16 year olds.
On and on and on.
Title IX be damned!!
Bye, bye "# Me Too" and everyone else who fought so hard for women's rights.
Upward and onward, right Bucko??

You are so frikkin' far off the deep end it is ridiculous.
Pity the poor kids who have to try and sort out this insane drivel you poison them with..........
Oh, that's right, you don't teach anymore.
Hmmmmmmmm

[Chuck Naill]

Why would Lea Thompson want to race against biologic females?

The same answer for all persons who have transitioned to the other gender: because they identify as the other gender now. This is why they most often dress as the other gender, act like the other gender, and even speak at times like the other gender....BECAUSE THEY IDENTIFY AS THE OTHER GENDER NOW. Why would someone transition to another gender over years of commitment, train in a sport, but then say "I want to keep competing as the gender with which I no longer dress, name myself, and identify with in any way."

The reason that I smell prejudice in your answers, Chuck, is because you act suspicious of trans athletes and assume the worst of transpeople and ask of transpeople that they ignore their bodies and gender identity IN WAYS THAT YOU DO NOT ASK YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS AND CIS MEN AND CIS WOMEN AND HETEROSEXUALS. It's like saying that you "respect the dignity" of trans people, but then won't afford them the full dignity and respect and self-determination that you afford other cis-gendered persons. You will accept them as athletes, but only so long as they cannot compete in the gender that they now identify. That actually isn't full acceptance. It is only partial acceptance, partial self-determination, partial respect. If you keep seeing them all as cheaters out to take trophies from other more deserving persons, then your prejudice is quite plain.

It is also the mark of bigotry to keep smearing all trans athletes with some nefarious motivation from a single case of that collegiate swimmer. This is similar to the smear that you keep attemtping of drag performer motivations with the quote from *one* drag performer. You know as well as I that this one swimmer and that one drag performer does not represent their group as a whole, in the same way that you don't represent all of Alabama or all of Christianity or all of fp geekers (and it would be absurd of me to assume so or to suggest so). It's the same reason that I defended you against the outragious smears that you got for working for pharma. Prejudice, even born from pain or fear, is still prejudice.

Simmer down, Ted.

@dneal asked you why a drag performer would want to perform for children. I am asking why a person with such an overpowering physical advantage would want to compete and find the victory satisfying. Asking these questions is not bigotry. These are legitimate questions and have nothing to do with being disrespectful by simply asking. That you get emotional because of them says that your opinions is so untenable that you find these questions a personal afront and the only way you can respond is with a rant.

What you have done in these discussions demonstrate that you do not care about:
1. the welfare of children
2. biological females
3. unborn humans

All of them must be subordinate to whom ever want to exercise their rights.

[TSherbs]

I'll repeat for the third time: Do you believe that "sex" and "gender" mean the same thing?

[TSherbs]

What you have done in these discussions demonstrate that you do not care about:

2. biological females

What do you mean by "biological females"? Do you mean their "sex" or their "gender"? Or are these terms the same for you?

[Chuck Naill]

What is a biological female bear? How would you define such? Would it be one with the physical characteristics of a female bear or would it be a bear who considers themselves a female bear?

This is also a good opportunity to distinguish the will or soul from the physical.

As you know, gender identity can be fluid, especially in children. Whether one is or thinks one is, the physical remains the same until a permanent solution is sought.

[TSherbs]

So, fourth time: do "sex" and "gender" denote the same thing?

[TSherbs]

What you have done in these discussions demonstrate that you do not care about:
1. the welfare of children
2. biological females
3. unborn humans

This is bullshit, and you know it. Don't ask me to "simmer down" and then write this.

How about if you stop dodging and playing rope-a-dope with your answers. I spend hours looking stuff up and reading and then writing paragraph after paragraph fully explaining my position and the reason that I state things, and you write this? That I don't "care" about women, children, and the unborn?

This thread is about gender and the law. It says "gender." If you won't actually explain what you mean by "gender," then how do you expect to have a responsible disagreement about "gender and the law"?

Some law is based on human "sex."

Some law is based on human "gender."

to mention bears was just silly, Chuck

The law does, from time to time, treat these as separate, but I suspect that you actually do not. But rather than go entirely on assumptions, I asked you to clarify as an effort to be helpful to the conversation. It's like you won't answer because you sense a trap. It's not a trap, Chuck, unless you know that you are somehow "wrong," and want to persist in your opinion despite your error. Or you just don't want to know what "gender" means.

Honestly, if you just want to say, "Men and women are born in either one of the two sexes and then that is set for their lives according to God" (or something like this), then just go ahead and say it. We're too old to play this beat-around-the-bush game. If you don't recognize "gender identity" as anything valid, then just say so. Getting you through a conversation on topic and with elaboration is a mighty struggle. You keep showing up here, yet you keep refusing to make your position on the crux of the matter plain.

[724Seney]

First of all, if you consider yourself qualified to recognize "bullshit" when you see it than why aren't you having a field day with your own posts?

That said, I get that "sex" and "gender identity" are not one and the same for some people. And, in fact, the terms are quite different.

But, what I think you are missing (by a mile) is that for most people the type of athletic competitions we are discussing are based upon sex and not gender identity.

Anyone who creates a men's and a women's category for a race, etc. usually intends to sort the participants by sex and not gender identity. Same thing with the placement of a bathroom or changing area. And when accommodations are made to provide an all gender bathroom or race, you demonize it.

Unfortunately, unhappy, angry people like you have seen fit to create a huge kurffule over this issue and, I believe, in doing so you actually have hurt the involved people more than you have helped them or their cause.

[Chuck Naill]

Yes, Ted’s posts can be quite toxic. However, in this case, I’m getting too close to the truth for comfort. When you take sides, there are unintended consequences. He’s sided with drag performers over children, women’s issues rights over the unborn, and trans females over females. On all three he’s not willing to give an inch.

[TSherbs]

Yes, Ted’s posts can be quite toxic. However, in this case, I’m getting too close to the truth for comfort. When you take sides, there are unintended consequences. He’s sided with drag performers over children, women’s issues rights over the unborn, and trans females over females. On all three he’s not willing to give an inch.

It's quite like a troll, Chuck, to type something meant to provoke and then say, "Don't be provoked." Very trollish.

You're just now (or maybe all along) playing a silly game, underpinned now with faux Christian righteousness. I am through with it.