I realize I'm old (at least to most of you here) but I don't think I am ignorant. And little about this issue is actually established fact - there are a lot of opinions and a lot of feelings. I am not transphobic - I don't hate them or fear them. I feel sorry for the anguish they must be going through.
I don't understand your point here - what natural and social science are you referring to? I don't see race as the same as gender at all. Gender is pretty definitive to me, and that is where my problem lies. Gender is pretty basic from a biological standpoint. Behaviors and feelings and psychology are not, I get it, but biological gender is what it is. It is the biological facet of gender that causes males to have a significant advantage in most athletic activities.
I apologize if I'm being a dick. I really do appreciate this post and your willingness to learn. The first distinction that is important is between biological sex and social gender. Biological sex is usually pretty basic, but it gets complicated in the case of intersex people. Here is a definition that I like from a textbook that I have used:
Sex refers to the different biological and physiological characteristics of males and females, such as reproductive organs, chromosomes, and hormones. Gender refers to the socially constructed characteristics of women and men – such as norms, roles, and relationships among and between groups of women and men.11
I think one of the reasons why people have trouble wrapping their heads around transgender issues is because we too often conflate biological sex and social gender. In any event, the conversation is a long one and I don't want to further ruin folks' CT experience, so if you want to PM me your email address, then I would be happy to send you the full chapter. It has a lot of really great insights. The case that it leads with is about Caster Semenya, an Olympic runner whose experience I always talk about whenever I lecture on sex and gender. It's directly relevant to this conversation because the IOC and other track and field regulators are obsessed with proving that she is not a woman despite the fact that she is biologically female.
Can you tell me more about this third gender in non-european cultures. I am willing to learn, see? Is that biologically a third gender or psychologically? Or what?
'
This is more the domain of anthropology (thankfully not my field), but this is
a really beautiful map that outlines the various conceptions of third gender around the world. Since gender is social (and sex to a lesser extent, though that's a really controversial proposition), these are categories that are culturally ingrained in their respective societies. The closest to home is probably the example in the intro text is the nádleehí gender in the Navajo nation. There are a lot, though, and they represent really important cases through which we can understand the distinction between gender and sexuality. For instance, some transgender people consider themselves to be straight insofar as they desire partners of the opposite sex. Other transgender people consider themselves to be queer in some capacity. Without the concept of third gender, it's hard to understand the genealogy of non-binary gender identities because "Western" culture has effectively whitewashed them.
This is also not something that worries me greatly - as the numbers and the impact is small, for sure. But it is just an example to me of how the world is a little bit turned on its head these days. I can't get my head around the logic of wanting a trans woman weightlifter to be able to compete against cis-females - how is that OK? I really don't think it is being trans-phobic to question that situation.
I'm hardly "woke" when it comes to these conversations, but transitioning involves a lot of different procedures from hormone therapies to reconstructive surgeries. From what I can tell, most of the athletes that are at the center of these controversies have at least undergone significant hormone therapies. In this case, the outrage appears to be based on Laurel Hubbard winning some competition. From a
NY Post article:
IOC guidelines issued in 2015 said any transgender athlete could compete as a woman provided their testosterone levels are below 10 nanomoles per liter for at least 12 months prior to their first competition.
That has been criticized by some scientists, who say it does little to mitigate natural biological advantages enjoyed by male-born athletes, including bone and muscle density.
Researchers at the Dunedin-based University of Otago said in a peer-reviewed study published earlier this month that the IOC guidelines were “poorly drawn” and the mandated testosterone level was still “significantly higher” than that of women.
The study advocated that the IOC ditch its “binary” approach to competition and consider introducing a transgender category or find another solution that balances the desire for inclusion with the need for a level playing field.
The research was dismissed by transgender advocates and athletes.
“The opinions of scientists although valid, are just that, opinions,” said New Zealand mountain biker Kate Weatherly, who transitioned as a teenager and has become a national champion competing against women.
“I’m not winning by crazy margins and the anecdotal evidence does point to me having little to no advantage.”
So, the boundaries around the gender binary are really porous when we start to think about biological sex. Once we start getting into hormonal levels, then the phrase "gender is a social construct" really starts to take hold.
Again, I'm old and pretty traditional but I would appreciate less name-calling and more understanding around here. I don't share a lot of opinions here because personal attacks are so prevalent. I guess our society has gone that direction and it is too bad - you don't have to agree with people to understand that they are just folks trying to figure out complicated questions like you are.
So, I think my issue upon reflection is that I don't see folks holding these views trying to figure out complicated questions. I see them applying a largely untested knowledge base to help them understand cases. When pushed, it's interpreted as "dickish," but part of the issue is that the person doesn't have the understanding that they thought they did. I stand by the fact by my interpretation that this rhetoric on OGB has been really transphobic, but I was wrong to single you out, I am sorry, and I hope that you will continue to engage with me on this topic elsewhere on the board and over PM. I'll try to set aside my recent dickishness (from arguing with the "meh" and troll contingents) and try to engage more generously in the future.