El Barto

Nah, not true. Your characterization of me is incorrect, and your insistence on it makes you dense and surprisingly narrow-minded. I’ll keep responding as long as you continue, but I’m done with this conversation. Have a nice life.

then yeah, I’d still call you out for this, because “what if…” is still empowering bigots who want to exclude us, based on made up scenarios.

I disagree with you on this. I have no problem answering “what if” questions regarding misinformation about my own circumstances.

“Trans people have no track record of consistently out performing cis people in any sport at any level. Literally every example you can think of is a misrepresentation by a media more interested in controversy than fact. Those are your facts”

Cool beans. I missed that. Thanks.

You are telling me that your opinion, and the opinion of others on whether we should have the same basic rights to inclusion as everyone else, is dependent on how politely I raise my points with you?

No, because I would have reacted the same way if you said the same things politely. “Excuse me, my young lemming, but with the utmost respect I’m afraid to tell you that you are nothing but an exclusionist, and I hope you accept my declaration that everything points out towards your person never being capable of changing your position.” I would have preferred you to say “hey you stupid misinformed bozo, are you ready for some schooling can of whoop-ass?”

Why must I concede that? At the community sports level, inclusion is more important.

You don’t accept hypothetical scenarios in a discussion, and I do. We will never align. And that’s okay. I’m done with this discussion. Continue being a happy, dense mod and yes, feel free to keep thinking whatever you want to think about me. Peace and happiness to you.

And yet here you are, still arguing for our exclusion…

Oh my god. Please stop saying this, because it’s not true.

Do I want to exclude trans people you from a women’s sports? NO! Let’s start from there. Yes? Let’s just say that I am (or was) misinformed. And let’s say that I really want to learn (which I’ve already said several times.) Now, if I say “now, what if…” and then you’re like “Oh you’re still a bigot! Exclusionist!” then how can we have a healthy exchange of ideas? It’s not like I’m some religious fundamentalist, covid denier, or flat Earther, claiming that I’m demanding equal attention to some absurd idea. I’m telling you “hey, I want to learn” and you’re like “no, you’re not, and you won’t change!” Is that your idea of a healthy debate?

This is an example of what I’m talking about. “I want to exclude the super vulnerable people from sports, so that the more privileged, and less vulnerable folk don’t feel uncomfortable”.

Weak argument, sorry. That’s like saying “oh beating a trans person for being trans is worse than beating a cis woman for being a cis woman, because cis women are less vulnerable!” My position before knowing better was (and again, was), all trans women are stronger than cis women because they benefited from having inherently more muscle mass before transitioning. And you must concede in this hypothetical scenario, again, hypothetical, that that’s NOT fair to cis women.

And you instead of saying “bro, no, wait, here’s what you need to know,” you say “BIGOT!! EXCLUSIONIST! YOU WILL NEVER LEARN!” (per your last sentence), and that’s, frankly, bullshit and I’m glad that you don’t speak for everyone, because this conversation is becoming insufferable and you don’t help with gaining support from others who are really on the fence.

Inferior hardware doesn’t mean inferior performance. Phones do much more than calculators, and calculators just calculate.

Pacemaker hardware is a million times less powerful than mobile phone hardware. But I trust it more to keep the heart going.

The Egg White house.

I disagree with you when you say you didn’t imply that I was worse than a bigot. Because if bigots hurt on purpose, and I hurt more than bigots, then what does that make me? “I’m not saying you’re a killer, I’m just saying that your actions murder people.” Semantics.

What should I acknowledge? That I am arguing for the exclusion of trans people? Did I say “hey, trans folks must be banned because of this or that”? I stated my views and I said I’m open to being schooled. But you’re acting like when Trump says “that was a nasty question” to reporters who ask questions, instead of freaking answering the question. Or what did I miss?

And hopefully you’ll hear out my reasons when I say this, but yes my support for trans folks is conditional, just like with the support I give to everyone else. Here is why: I support the inclusion of gay people. But some gay people think that trans people are not part of the community (TERFs, they are called?) So my support ends there. If someone says “I can’t believe your support for gay rights is conditional” I’ll just tell them to pound sand - because I won’t tolerate anybody who tells me that trans people should not exist, not even gay people.

So you have my full support. But that supports ends where the right of others to peacefully co-exist is threatened. If you don’t think this is okay, that’s your problem.

Your inclusion ends where others are excluded. I think cis women may be excluded from a sport if some trans folks participate in it. Where are their rights? That’s the argument. Let’s discuss. Is that bigotry? Absolutely not. Is it ignorance? Possibly! Am I wrong? Tell me so without berating me! Others have done the same and provided me with study materials in this very thread, and I’ve been reading.

Of course they did. But the misinformation campaign has been relentless since day 1.

Girl, you’re just too angry to see beyond what you want to see. I’m a good listener, and I know I’m not perfect. Being “hurt” and telling me to “show your support up yours” because we’re not 100% aligned just tells me that you and I could not be friends in real life - not that you care. But that’s okay. Plenty of other friends more open to educate me out there, and I’ll gladly stand corrected before them without being called “worse than a bigot” without knowing my full story (the irony.)

Indeed. I didn’t want to suggest that that scenario was real - just a thought experiment. But of course you have a point. Thanks for the insight.

Anything you say followed by “but”

Jesus. What a weak, generalizing argument.

You’re going to make me go full godwin. Imagine saying “I support my Jewish friends and what happened to them at the Holocaust was heinous. But what Israel is doing to Gazans is inexcusable” then someone telling you “anything after the ‘but’ is meaningless, and all the Jewish community here will avoid you like the plague.”

I just hope you’re a troll.

L

It is indeed a complicated subject.

Thank you for your insight.

I’m sorry. I don’t think this is a good analogy. (And I didn’t downvote you.)

For your analogy to work, it has to be the other way around: Abled-body athletes wanting to participate in paralympics competitions and therefore they would “disable” themselves to do so.

Then, some of those athletes would say “you know what, perhaps I could still use one leg against these guys who have no legs from the waist down.”

Thanks. Good to know.

Thanks. Today I learned.

But then, what’s the solution? If an athlete says “hm, I’ll stop taking this hormone to have a competitive advantage over everyone else,” how’s that different from doing the opposite? (e.g. taking hormones.)

I really don’t have answers to these questions. It’s an important topic, though.

Thank you. I’ve corrected my question, and yes, I meant “who.”

Man, the right sucks.

That’s a good point, but for the sake of the argument, can trans women compete in women’s Olympic sports? As in, are they really allowed? Given your previous comment, I’m going to say yes, but I’d like to be sure…

How many trans women compete in olympic sports in women’s categories? Genuine question.

How Who are we talking about?

Edit: autocorrect