I disagree with Rowling on trans-issues *and* I think Rowling's critics are dishonest

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

It is a thing because it is part of a larger resurgence of sexism and misogyny worldwide, and people see that. And in England and Scotland, self-ID laws put rapists in women’s prisons and made it impossible for girls and women to ask to not be treated by people with penises at rape crisis centers, so the discussion is further along. Women could not even object to those common sense restrictions without being told they were bigots. The issue is that laws to support trans people have been abused by predatory men, but as part of the global resurgence in misogyny, women have been threatened, assaulted, doxxed, and screamed at if they objected to or tried to fight that rise in misogyny. It’s not the number of trans people that is driving the response. It’s the inherent and obvious systemic support for sexism that is driving the response.

When it comes to the rights and safety of women and girls, there is no practical difference between the anti-abortion right-wing activists and the extreme left-wing trans rights activists. Their goal — the complete suppression of women — is identical. And that’s why there is the response there is, because people see that.

I don’t think the issue is trans people at heart. It’s abusive men who want to destroy and control women.

I'm not sure I understand what this means. Are you saying that the laws meant to help trans people are being exploited by cisgender men and therefore trans people should be treated as whatever they transitioned from and not what they're transitioning to? You wrote a lot of text.

I can’t say it more clearly than I did, but your deliberate obtuseness is noted.

What I am saying is that there is now global awareness of this issue because women around the world have seen that when forced to choose — and make no mistake, there is a choice happening here — governments and organizations will prioritize the safety, rights, sexual needs, and well-being of men and former men over that of biological women and children. Women prisoners are forced to accept rapists in prison with them because those rapists identify as women. Sex assault and rape victims are decried as bigots if they don’t want to be seen or handled by people with penises in their most vulnerable moments. The finally-discredited Mermaids children’s trans rights organization — which got fawning support from both UK government organizations and major corporations — had a child sex abuse apologist on the board (Jacob Breslow). (You can search what he wrote. It is sickening and vile.).

Do you think we can’t see how little government organizations and leftist organizations care about the safety of women? How little they care about sexual abuse of children? Do you think we don’t see how the needs of men and former men are prioritized? Of course we see it: we are women with thousands of years of surviving male abuse. We are trained since birth to watch out for predatory men of all kinds, including those who now identify as women. And we can’t be gaslit by the left any more on this issue. We are fighting back to protect women’s safety, just like we are fighting against the horrific anti-choice Republicans.

You could be a lot clearer actually. I think a clearer way to say what it seems like you believe is "trans women are men and they're all rapists". At least that's my interpretation of what you wrote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

Good point. Trans girls should be able to play with the boys. But why are cis girls playing with boys and taking spots from natal boys? I don't understand that logic. Why is that allowed in a competitive environment?

[Anonymous]

IMHO most people don't have much, or any animus against individual trans people - especially in America, there's a general "live and let live" ethos - but there are a few levels here from a normie perspective.

10 years ago: hey guys, we're over here pretending, please don't hurt us or insult us - hey, fine, right?

5 years ago: hey guys, you're part of our game now too, and if you don't want to play pretend with us, then maybe you will get fired! or at least ostracized, hopefully, because you're bad people

0 years ago: schools will teach your kids that there's no difference between pretend reality (gender is all in your head) and actual reality (males and females are different in important and logical ways across most mammalian species including humans), and you should be grateful! they're experts! only a bigot could object

So...... what do do.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

Your friend may be a lovely person who is trans. But there is a very large, vocal, and violent contingent of transwomen who seek to overtake women’s spaces, and women are no longer allowed to speak up about it, or we’ll lose our jobs and be ostracized. A significant percentage of transwomen in prison are violent against women. How does this not concern you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

It is a thing because it is part of a larger resurgence of sexism and misogyny worldwide, and people see that. And in England and Scotland, self-ID laws put rapists in women’s prisons and made it impossible for girls and women to ask to not be treated by people with penises at rape crisis centers, so the discussion is further along. Women could not even object to those common sense restrictions without being told they were bigots. The issue is that laws to support trans people have been abused by predatory men, but as part of the global resurgence in misogyny, women have been threatened, assaulted, doxxed, and screamed at if they objected to or tried to fight that rise in misogyny. It’s not the number of trans people that is driving the response. It’s the inherent and obvious systemic support for sexism that is driving the response.

When it comes to the rights and safety of women and girls, there is no practical difference between the anti-abortion right-wing activists and the extreme left-wing trans rights activists. Their goal — the complete suppression of women — is identical. And that’s why there is the response there is, because people see that.

I don’t think the issue is trans people at heart. It’s abusive men who want to destroy and control women.

I'm not sure I understand what this means. Are you saying that the laws meant to help trans people are being exploited by cisgender men and therefore trans people should be treated as whatever they transitioned from and not what they're transitioning to? You wrote a lot of text.

I can’t say it more clearly than I did, but your deliberate obtuseness is noted.

What I am saying is that there is now global awareness of this issue because women around the world have seen that when forced to choose — and make no mistake, there is a choice happening here — governments and organizations will prioritize the safety, rights, sexual needs, and well-being of men and former men over that of biological women and children. Women prisoners are forced to accept rapists in prison with them because those rapists identify as women. Sex assault and rape victims are decried as bigots if they don’t want to be seen or handled by people with penises in their most vulnerable moments. The finally-discredited Mermaids children’s trans rights organization — which got fawning support from both UK government organizations and major corporations — had a child sex abuse apologist on the board (Jacob Breslow). (You can search what he wrote. It is sickening and vile.).

Do you think we can’t see how little government organizations and leftist organizations care about the safety of women? How little they care about sexual abuse of children? Do you think we don’t see how the needs of men and former men are prioritized? Of course we see it: we are women with thousands of years of surviving male abuse. We are trained since birth to watch out for predatory men of all kinds, including those who now identify as women. And we can’t be gaslit by the left any more on this issue. We are fighting back to protect women’s safety, just like we are fighting against the horrific anti-choice Republicans.

You could be a lot clearer actually. I think a clearer way to say what it seems like you believe is "trans women are men and they're all rapists". At least that's my interpretation of what you wrote.

Your deliberate obfuscation is noted.

In any event, you don’t have to say you don’t care about the safety of women and children. We already know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

Your friend may be a lovely person who is trans. But there is a very large, vocal, and violent contingent of transwomen who seek to overtake women’s spaces, and women are no longer allowed to speak up about it, or we’ll lose our jobs and be ostracized. A significant percentage of transwomen in prison are violent against women. How does this not concern you?

It doesn’t concern that PP because that PP is one of the people who wants women to be violated and subjugated. The violence against women is what the PP wants. It’s the goal, not an unfortunate side effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

That’s a good point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

Good point. Trans girls should be able to play with the boys. But why are cis girls playing with boys and taking spots from natal boys? I don't understand that logic. Why is that allowed in a competitive environment?

I’m fine with saying natal girls can’t take competitive spots from natal boys too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:J.K. Rowling has said some stuff I disagree with about trans issues. She seems to think that the danger to women biologically born that way from trans-women entering women's spaces is greater than I think the reality actually is. I'm not a woman, trans or otherwise, so my opinion on that issue doesn't necessarily carry any weight. But I know that a lot of biological women are on the side of trans-women and don't really care if, say, they come into women's bathrooms.

So, anyway, I think Rowling has it wrong on trans issues. On the other hand, I routinely see characterizations of Rowling's positions from trans-advocates that just aren't supported by Rowling's actual statements. For example, a tweet from someone with 90k followers came across my feed saying, "Rowling literally tweeted that all trans women should legally be presumed to be rapists." (https://twitter.com/BrynnTannehill/status/1626209112630628352) That's a pretty concrete declaration. The author is not speaking figuratively and says that this is something that has been tweeted by Rowling. When asked for a screenshot or link to this specific statement ... the response that it was not a tweet and that the actual quote was, "it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence." Which is ... a little bit different.

I mean, I guess I don't worry too much about Rowling -- she can cry herself to sleep on big old bales of money. But overheated rhetoric about a more nuanced line of conversation, in my opinion, undermines trans-advocacy.

A lot of colleges have co Ed bathrooms and it is fine. This bathroom thing is a non issue. Go use the facility and go about your business. Male, female, trans, etc. Has nothing to do with it. This entire issue will die out with all oth older folks that are wound up about it for some reason.

Maybe? I see a lot more man-phobia expressed here and elsewhere by younger women. I don’t see this much among my peers and older women. At least some of this will spill onto trans-women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

Good point. Trans girls should be able to play with the boys. But why are cis girls playing with boys and taking spots from natal boys? I don't understand that logic. Why is that allowed in a competitive environment?

I’m fine with saying natal girls can’t take competitive spots from natal boys too.

I wonder if the rationale is that if you don’t have a boys’ teams and a girls’ team for a sport, then the one team you have is considered coed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

It is a thing because it is part of a larger resurgence of sexism and misogyny worldwide, and people see that. And in England and Scotland, self-ID laws put rapists in women’s prisons and made it impossible for girls and women to ask to not be treated by people with penises at rape crisis centers, so the discussion is further along. Women could not even object to those common sense restrictions without being told they were bigots. The issue is that laws to support trans people have been abused by predatory men, but as part of the global resurgence in misogyny, women have been threatened, assaulted, doxxed, and screamed at if they objected to or tried to fight that rise in misogyny. It’s not the number of trans people that is driving the response. It’s the inherent and obvious systemic support for sexism that is driving the response.

When it comes to the rights and safety of women and girls, there is no practical difference between the anti-abortion right-wing activists and the extreme left-wing trans rights activists. Their goal — the complete suppression of women — is identical. And that’s why there is the response there is, because people see that.

I don’t think the issue is trans people at heart. It’s abusive men who want to destroy and control women.

I'm not sure I understand what this means. Are you saying that the laws meant to help trans people are being exploited by cisgender men and therefore trans people should be treated as whatever they transitioned from and not what they're transitioning to? You wrote a lot of text.

I can’t say it more clearly than I did, but your deliberate obtuseness is noted.

What I am saying is that there is now global awareness of this issue because women around the world have seen that when forced to choose — and make no mistake, there is a choice happening here — governments and organizations will prioritize the safety, rights, sexual needs, and well-being of men and former men over that of biological women and children. Women prisoners are forced to accept rapists in prison with them because those rapists identify as women. Sex assault and rape victims are decried as bigots if they don’t want to be seen or handled by people with penises in their most vulnerable moments. The finally-discredited Mermaids children’s trans rights organization — which got fawning support from both UK government organizations and major corporations — had a child sex abuse apologist on the board (Jacob Breslow). (You can search what he wrote. It is sickening and vile.).

Do you think we can’t see how little government organizations and leftist organizations care about the safety of women? How little they care about sexual abuse of children? Do you think we don’t see how the needs of men and former men are prioritized? Of course we see it: we are women with thousands of years of surviving male abuse. We are trained since birth to watch out for predatory men of all kinds, including those who now identify as women. And we can’t be gaslit by the left any more on this issue. We are fighting back to protect women’s safety, just like we are fighting against the horrific anti-choice Republicans.

You could be a lot clearer actually. I think a clearer way to say what it seems like you believe is "trans women are men and they're all rapists". At least that's my interpretation of what you wrote.

NP. Then you either have a reading comprehension problem or you’re being deliberately disingenuous. More likely the latter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:J.K. Rowling has said some stuff I disagree with about trans issues. She seems to think that the danger to women biologically born that way from trans-women entering women's spaces is greater than I think the reality actually is. I'm not a woman, trans or otherwise, so my opinion on that issue doesn't necessarily carry any weight. But I know that a lot of biological women are on the side of trans-women and don't really care if, say, they come into women's bathrooms.

So, anyway, I think Rowling has it wrong on trans issues. On the other hand, I routinely see characterizations of Rowling's positions from trans-advocates that just aren't supported by Rowling's actual statements. For example, a tweet from someone with 90k followers came across my feed saying, "Rowling literally tweeted that all trans women should legally be presumed to be rapists." (https://twitter.com/BrynnTannehill/status/1626209112630628352) That's a pretty concrete declaration. The author is not speaking figuratively and says that this is something that has been tweeted by Rowling. When asked for a screenshot or link to this specific statement ... the response that it was not a tweet and that the actual quote was, "it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence." Which is ... a little bit different.

I mean, I guess I don't worry too much about Rowling -- she can cry herself to sleep on big old bales of money. But overheated rhetoric about a more nuanced line of conversation, in my opinion, undermines trans-advocacy.

A lot of colleges have co Ed bathrooms and it is fine. This bathroom thing is a non issue. Go use the facility and go about your business. Male, female, trans, etc. Has nothing to do with it. This entire issue will die out with all oth older folks that are wound up about it for some reason.

Maybe? I see a lot more man-phobia expressed here and elsewhere by younger women. I don’t see this much among my peers and older women. At least some of this will spill onto trans-women.

The younger generation of girls and women has fortunately learned that they don’t need to tolerate abuse and sexual assault the way that the older generation of women has done and still do. The younger women and girls are speaking up. #metoo has had an impact and the world is better for it.

I was sexually assaulted when I was 13 and I didn’t even have words to describe what happened. I am so glad girls are finding their voices on sexual abuse and assault now!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

Good point. Trans girls should be able to play with the boys. But why are cis girls playing with boys and taking spots from natal boys? I don't understand that logic. Why is that allowed in a competitive environment?

I’m fine with saying natal girls can’t take competitive spots from natal boys too.

I wonder if the rationale is that if you don’t have a boys’ teams and a girls’ team for a sport, then the one team you have is considered coed?

That is fine too, and a trans girl would be welcome to try out for that team. But if the spot is competitive and there are boys and girls teams, it is unjust and wrong for a trans girl after about age 10 or so to take the place of a natal girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

Why is it that whenever anyone says it not fair for trans girls to compete in girls’ athletics, people act as though the only alternative is for trans girls to be excluded from athletics altogether? Has there been any movement to prevent trans girls from competing in boys’ athletics? Cis girls have joined boys’ wrestling and football teams when there was no girls’ equivalent.

Good point. Trans girls should be able to play with the boys. But why are cis girls playing with boys and taking spots from natal boys? I don't understand that logic. Why is that allowed in a competitive environment?

Testosterone is basically a natural performance enhancing drug that cis women do not have access to, at least not in the same quantities. Cis women are playing at a natural disadvantage when they play in men's leagues. People respect that.

Trans women, on the other hand, have or had a testosterone advantage that cis women do not have access to. Many people consider that unfair as women's leagues were created to level the playing field for cis women.