Women's Sports and Lia Thomas thread

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Transgender issues can’t be discussed on DCUM. Jeff has made that quite clear over the years. If you’re interested in the issue and women’s responses to it, check out Ovarit. This is simply not the place to have that conversation.

There are multiple transgender discussions going on right now. You are confusing discussion of transgender issues with being transphobic. The former is allowed, the latter is not.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transgender issues can’t be discussed on DCUM. Jeff has made that quite clear over the years. If you’re interested in the issue and women’s responses to it, check out Ovarit. This is simply not the place to have that conversation.

There are multiple transgender discussions going on right now. You are confusing discussion of transgender issues with being transphobic. The former is allowed, the latter is not.

Jeff, would you be willing to provide your/this site’s definition of transphobia?

[Anonymous]

Let’s try to focus on the fact that there was 25 pages of productive and civil conversation.
I used to post things here that I now understand to be transphobic. The discussions here helped me do better.
That doesn’t mean I agree with the transgender movement.
But I learned to do better.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transgender issues can’t be discussed on DCUM. Jeff has made that quite clear over the years. If you’re interested in the issue and women’s responses to it, check out Ovarit. This is simply not the place to have that conversation.

There are multiple transgender discussions going on right now. You are confusing discussion of transgender issues with being transphobic. The former is allowed, the latter is not.

Jeff, would you be willing to provide your/this site’s definition of transphobia?

I am not smart enough to give a definition that will stand up in a court of law, but I think that a refusal to recognize gender identity is transphobia. In other words, purposely calling a trans woman a "man" is transphobia. Suggesting that transgender individuals have mental illnesses is transphobia. To a certain extent, I will follow the example set by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart with regard to pornography, "I know it when I see it".

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the thoughtful post seem consistent with earlier posts? Or was it all a ploy?

I just checked and that post was her first post in the thread. However, I discovered that she had posted in other threads and she appears to be especially fixated on trans issues. That is practically the only topic about which she posts. Her issue with the trans community goes far beyond sports. She essentially rejects the entire concept. I considered linking to some of her other posts but instead I just deleted them. They were very revealing, but perhaps too revealing.

That's fascinating, because one of her posts was very affirming of trans rights, dignity, protections, etc. but seemed to "draw the line" at sports.

Now I'm wondering if any of her post was true. Maybe the whole thing was a fiction - a Black immigrant green card holder who only got to attend university through sports scholarships, who is generally supportive of trans rights but just not on this one intersectional issue.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transgender issues can’t be discussed on DCUM. Jeff has made that quite clear over the years. If you’re interested in the issue and women’s responses to it, check out Ovarit. This is simply not the place to have that conversation.

There are multiple transgender discussions going on right now. You are confusing discussion of transgender issues with being transphobic. The former is allowed, the latter is not.

Jeff, would you be willing to provide your/this site’s definition of transphobia?

I am not smart enough to give a definition that will stand up in a court of law, but I think that a refusal to recognize gender identity is transphobia. In other words, purposely calling a trans woman a "man" is transphobia. Suggesting that transgender individuals have mental illnesses is transphobia. To a certain extent, I will follow the example set by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart with regard to pornography, "I know it when I see it".

You are obviously entitled to your opinion, and can moderate the site as you wish, but I don’t think this is transphobia. It’s just an opinion that some of us hold. Doesn’t prevent me from treating transgender people (and I have several as patients) with dignity and respect.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is really unfortunate but I don’t blame you. I saw the transphobic posts too. I wish there was a way to have a discussion about trans athletes, the zero sum nature of athletics, access to universities through athletics, and the history of white feminists/progressives not caring about issues of women of color, without attracting transphobes. I don’t think this is an easy issue no matter what the progressive party line is.

I thought the black athlete poster had some very thoughtful points and I am really sorry to hear that she had transphobic posts.

Seems like we are having a tough time avoiding them here too.

I have no idea how this post could be considered transphobic. I wrote it, and I was trying to NOT be transphobic. I guess maybe you never want transwomen athletes ever discussed at all?

I guess try harder next time?

Or, you know, you just could try to not be transphobic in general.

Very often, things don't exist in a simple binary. Like with many issues, where people stand on transgender issues is a spectrum. Just because someone is not standing exactly where you are on the spectrum does not mean that they are transphobic. Transphobes prevent civil discussions about topics such as the participation of trans women in sports, but so do those who are absolutists in support of the trans community. I would submit that someone who is "trying not to be transphobic" is infinitely better than someone who is quite happy to be transphobic. Let's encourage those who we believe to be on the correct path rather than discourage and insult them.

OK - interesting perspective. I guess it depends if PP is genuinely trying not to be transphobic -OR- is just trying word things differently so their posts aren't deleted? From the comments above it doesn't seem like the underlying sentiment has changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s try to focus on the fact that there was 25 pages of productive and civil conversation.
I used to post things here that I now understand to be transphobic. The discussions here helped me do better.
That doesn’t mean I agree with the transgender movement.
But I learned to do better.

Progress is good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is really unfortunate but I don’t blame you. I saw the transphobic posts too. I wish there was a way to have a discussion about trans athletes, the zero sum nature of athletics, access to universities through athletics, and the history of white feminists/progressives not caring about issues of women of color, without attracting transphobes. I don’t think this is an easy issue no matter what the progressive party line is.

I thought the black athlete poster had some very thoughtful points and I am really sorry to hear that she had transphobic posts.

Seems like we are having a tough time avoiding them here too.

I have no idea how this post could be considered transphobic. I wrote it, and I was trying to NOT be transphobic. I guess maybe you never want transwomen athletes ever discussed at all?

I guess try harder next time?

Or, you know, you just could try to not be transphobic in general.

Very often, things don't exist in a simple binary. Like with many issues, where people stand on transgender issues is a spectrum. Just because someone is not standing exactly where you are on the spectrum does not mean that they are transphobic. Transphobes prevent civil discussions about topics such as the participation of trans women in sports, but so do those who are absolutists in support of the trans community. I would submit that someone who is "trying not to be transphobic" is infinitely better than someone who is quite happy to be transphobic. Let's encourage those who we believe to be on the correct path rather than discourage and insult them.

OK - interesting perspective. I guess it depends if PP is genuinely trying not to be transphobic -OR- is just trying word things differently so their posts aren't deleted? From the comments above it doesn't seem like the underlying sentiment has changed.

DP. Still not seeing the transphobia in the first quoted post. I guess I don't know when I see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transgender issues can’t be discussed on DCUM. Jeff has made that quite clear over the years. If you’re interested in the issue and women’s responses to it, check out Ovarit. This is simply not the place to have that conversation.

There are multiple transgender discussions going on right now. You are confusing discussion of transgender issues with being transphobic. The former is allowed, the latter is not.

Jeff, would you be willing to provide your/this site’s definition of transphobia?

I am not smart enough to give a definition that will stand up in a court of law, but I think that a refusal to recognize gender identity is transphobia. In other words, purposely calling a trans woman a "man" is transphobia. Suggesting that transgender individuals have mental illnesses is transphobia. To a certain extent, I will follow the example set by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart with regard to pornography, "I know it when I see it".

You are obviously entitled to your opinion, and can moderate the site as you wish, but I don’t think this is transphobia. It’s just an opinion that some of us hold. Doesn’t prevent me from treating transgender people (and I have several as patients) with dignity and respect.

to their face

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is really unfortunate but I don’t blame you. I saw the transphobic posts too. I wish there was a way to have a discussion about trans athletes, the zero sum nature of athletics, access to universities through athletics, and the history of white feminists/progressives not caring about issues of women of color, without attracting transphobes. I don’t think this is an easy issue no matter what the progressive party line is.

I thought the black athlete poster had some very thoughtful points and I am really sorry to hear that she had transphobic posts.

Seems like we are having a tough time avoiding them here too.

I have no idea how this post could be considered transphobic. I wrote it, and I was trying to NOT be transphobic. I guess maybe you never want transwomen athletes ever discussed at all?

I guess try harder next time?

Or, you know, you just could try to not be transphobic in general.

Very often, things don't exist in a simple binary. Like with many issues, where people stand on transgender issues is a spectrum. Just because someone is not standing exactly where you are on the spectrum does not mean that they are transphobic. Transphobes prevent civil discussions about topics such as the participation of trans women in sports, but so do those who are absolutists in support of the trans community. I would submit that someone who is "trying not to be transphobic" is infinitely better than someone who is quite happy to be transphobic. Let's encourage those who we believe to be on the correct path rather than discourage and insult them.

OK - interesting perspective. I guess it depends if PP is genuinely trying not to be transphobic -OR- is just trying word things differently so their posts aren't deleted? From the comments above it doesn't seem like the underlying sentiment has changed.

DP. Still not seeing the transphobia in the first quoted post. I guess I don't know when I see it.

It's a string of GOP/anti-trans talking points.

We should be having discussions about education/athletics and the gap for women/minorities. But those aren't "transgender" issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is really unfortunate but I don’t blame you. I saw the transphobic posts too. I wish there was a way to have a discussion about trans athletes, the zero sum nature of athletics, access to universities through athletics, and the history of white feminists/progressives not caring about issues of women of color, without attracting transphobes. I don’t think this is an easy issue no matter what the progressive party line is.

I thought the black athlete poster had some very thoughtful points and I am really sorry to hear that she had transphobic posts.

Seems like we are having a tough time avoiding them here too.

I have no idea how this post could be considered transphobic. I wrote it, and I was trying to NOT be transphobic. I guess maybe you never want transwomen athletes ever discussed at all?

I guess try harder next time?

Or, you know, you just could try to not be transphobic in general.

Very often, things don't exist in a simple binary. Like with many issues, where people stand on transgender issues is a spectrum. Just because someone is not standing exactly where you are on the spectrum does not mean that they are transphobic. Transphobes prevent civil discussions about topics such as the participation of trans women in sports, but so do those who are absolutists in support of the trans community. I would submit that someone who is "trying not to be transphobic" is infinitely better than someone who is quite happy to be transphobic. Let's encourage those who we believe to be on the correct path rather than discourage and insult them.

OK - interesting perspective. I guess it depends if PP is genuinely trying not to be transphobic -OR- is just trying word things differently so their posts aren't deleted? From the comments above it doesn't seem like the underlying sentiment has changed.

DP. Still not seeing the transphobia in the first quoted post. I guess I don't know when I see it.

It's a string of GOP/anti-trans talking points.

We should be having discussions about education/athletics and the gap for women/minorities. But those aren't "transgender" issues.

Yes, we should. On a thread in the Sports Forum about Lia Thomas and swimming, and Isac Henig and the NCAA and rules changes, though, that thread would be about transgender athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That is really unfortunate but I don’t blame you. I saw the transphobic posts too. I wish there was a way to have a discussion about trans athletes, the zero sum nature of athletics, access to universities through athletics, and the history of white feminists/progressives not caring about issues of women of color, without attracting transphobes. I don’t think this is an easy issue no matter what the progressive party line is.

I thought the black athlete poster had some very thoughtful points and I am really sorry to hear that she had transphobic posts.

Seems like we are having a tough time avoiding them here too.

I have no idea how this post could be considered transphobic. I wrote it, and I was trying to NOT be transphobic. I guess maybe you never want transwomen athletes ever discussed at all?

I guess try harder next time?

Or, you know, you just could try to not be transphobic in general.

Very often, things don't exist in a simple binary. Like with many issues, where people stand on transgender issues is a spectrum. Just because someone is not standing exactly where you are on the spectrum does not mean that they are transphobic. Transphobes prevent civil discussions about topics such as the participation of trans women in sports, but so do those who are absolutists in support of the trans community. I would submit that someone who is "trying not to be transphobic" is infinitely better than someone who is quite happy to be transphobic. Let's encourage those who we believe to be on the correct path rather than discourage and insult them.

OK - interesting perspective. I guess it depends if PP is genuinely trying not to be transphobic -OR- is just trying word things differently so their posts aren't deleted? From the comments above it doesn't seem like the underlying sentiment has changed.

DP. Still not seeing the transphobia in the first quoted post. I guess I don't know when I see it.

It's a string of GOP/anti-trans talking points.

We should be having discussions about education/athletics and the gap for women/minorities. But those aren't "transgender" issues.

DP. These were the exact same accusations in the deleted menstruation threads, that it was just a bunch of anti-vax talking points. Thing is, sometimes real peoples’ experiences bear resemblance to “talking points” through no fault of their own.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:It's a string of GOP/anti-trans talking points.

We should be having discussions about education/athletics and the gap for women/minorities. But those aren't "transgender" issues.

The current GOP talking point, as demonstrated just today by Senator Rick Scott with his new NRSC platform, is:

"Humans are born male and female, there are two genders, and to deny that is to deny science."

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017f-1cf5-d281-a7ff-3ffd5f4a0000

The suggestion that transgender women may be taking podium spots from biological women is far too nuanced for today's GOP. Whether you regard such a concern as legitimate or illegitimate, I think simply labeling it as "transphobic" is counter productive.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a string of GOP/anti-trans talking points.

We should be having discussions about education/athletics and the gap for women/minorities. But those aren't "transgender" issues.

The current GOP talking point, as demonstrated just today by Senator Rick Scott with his new NRSC platform, is:

"Humans are born male and female, there are two genders, and to deny that is to deny science."

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017f-1cf5-d281-a7ff-3ffd5f4a0000

The suggestion that transgender women may be taking podium spots from biological women is far too nuanced for today's GOP. Whether you regard such a concern as legitimate or illegitimate, I think simply labeling it as "transphobic" is counter productive.

It has been an GOP campaign tactic for years.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/us/politics/kentucky-transgender-school-sports.html

Does the GOP actually GAF about transgender people one way or another? Dunno. But they are fully willing to throw them under the bus to push this as wedge issue. I'd consider that anti-trans.