Transgender Athletes
- Thread starter DeacsPop
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
WFFaithful
Well-known member
What it all boils down to is humility; because pride is the root of all sin. The martyrs are the ultimate example of humility. Americans, myself included, have a really difficult time not prioritizing their individual self. Greed, lust of power, and self-righteousness lead to much evil. This is a major problem with self-proclaimed Christians. How much better would the world have been served if she didn't complain about Transgender Visibility day and instead focused on Easter and her own sins?
CaptRenault
Well-known member
Many of you are very confused about the meaning of words such as man (an adult human male) and woman (an adult human female).
Don't feel bad-even a supposedly intelligent woman like Ketanji Brown struggled to define "woman" during her SC Justice nomination hearing (I think this fact should have disqualified her from serving on the SC).
To simplify the difference: males produce many small gametes (sperm) and females produce few large gametes (eggs). There has never been a human being (or any highly developed animal) that could produce both types of gametes; nor is there any hormonal treatment or surgical procedure that can change the type of gamete that the body produces. Furthermore, concept of "nonbinary" is as mythical as a unicorn or the Book of Genesis.
Biologist Colin Wright provides further clarification:
The transgender movement has left many intelligent Americans confused about sex. Asked to define the word “woman” during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last year, Ketanji Brown Jackson demurred, saying “I’m not a biologist.” I am a biologist, and I’m here to help.
Are sex categories in humans empirically real, immutable and binary, or are they mere “social constructs”? The question has public-policy implications related to sex-based legal protections and medicine, including whether males should be allowed in female sports, prisons and other spaces that have historically been segregated by sex for reasons of fairness and safety.
Chase Strangio of the American Civil Liberties Union frequently claims that the binary concept of sex is a recent invention “exclusively for the purposes of excluding trans people from legal protections.” Scottish politician Maggie Chapman asserted in December that her rejection of the “binary and immutable” nature of sex was her motivation for pursuing “comprehensive gender recognition for nonbinary people in Scotland.” (“Nonbinary” people are those who “identify” as neither male nor female.)
When biologists claim that sex is binary, we mean something straightforward: There are only two sexes. This is true throughout the plant and animal kingdoms. An organism’s sex is defined by the type of gamete (sperm or ova) it has the function of producing. Males have the function of producing sperm, or small gametes; females, ova, or large ones. Because there is no third gamete type, there are only two sexes. Sex is binary.
Intersex people, whose genitalia appear ambiguous or mixed, don’t undermine the sex binary. Many gender ideologues, however, falsely claim the existence of intersex conditions renders the categories “male” and “female” arbitrary and meaningless. In “Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex” (1998), the historian of science Alice Dreger writes: “Hermaphroditism causes a great deal of confusion, more than one might at first appreciate, because—as we will see again and again—the discovery of a ‘hermaphroditic’ body raises doubts not just about the particular body in question, but about all bodies. The questioned body forces us to ask what exactly it is—if anything—that makes the rest of us unquestionable.”
In reality, the existence of borderline cases no more raises questions about everyone else’s sex than the existence of dawn and dusk casts doubt on day and night. For the vast majority of people, their sex is obvious. And our society isn’t experiencing a sudden dramatic surge in people born with ambiguous genitalia. We are experiencing a surge in people who are unambiguously one sex claiming to “identify” as the opposite sex or as something other than male or female.
Gender ideology seeks to portray sex as so incomprehensibly complex and multivariable that our traditional practice of classifying people as simply either male or female is grossly outdated and should be abandoned for a revolutionary concept of “gender identity.” This entails that males wouldn’t be barred from female sports, women’s prisons or any other space previously segregated according to our supposedly antiquated notions of “biological sex,” so long as they “identify” as female.
But “intersex” and “transgender” mean entirely different things. Intersex people have rare developmental conditions that result in apparent sex ambiguity. Most transgender people aren’t sexually ambiguous at all but merely “identify” as something other than their biological sex.
Once you’re conscious of this distinction, you will begin to notice gender ideologues attempting to steer discussions away from whether men who identify as women should be allowed to compete in female sports toward prominent intersex athletes like South African runner Caster Semenya. Why? Because so long as they’ve got you on your heels making difficult judgment calls on a slew of complex intersex conditions, they’ve succeeded in drawing your attention away from easy calls on unquestionably male athletes like 2022 NCAA Division I women’s swimming and diving champion Lia Thomas. They shift the focus to intersex to distract from transgender.
Acknowledging the existence of rare difficult cases doesn’t weaken the position or arguments against allowing males in female sports, prisons, restrooms and other female-only spaces. In fact, it’s a much stronger approach because it makes a crucial distinction that the ideologues are at pains to obscure.
Crafting policy to exclude males who identify as women, or “trans women,” from female sports, prisons and other female-only spaces isn’t complicated. Trans women are unambiguously male, so the chances that a doctor incorrectly recorded their sex at birth is zero. Any “transgender policy” designed to protect female spaces need only specify that participants must have been recorded (or “assigned,” in the current jargon) female at birth.
Crafting effective intersex policies is more complicated, but the problem of intersex athletes in female sports is less pressing than that of males in female sports, and there seem to be no current concerns arising from intersex people using female spaces. It should be up to individual organizations to decide which criteria or cut-offs should be used to keep female spaces safe and, in the context of sports, safe and fair. It is imperative, however, that such policies be rooted in properties of bodies, not “identity.” Identity alone is irrelevant to issues of fairness and safety.
Ideologues are wrong to insist that the biology of sex is so complex as to defy all categorization. They’re also wrong to represent the sex binary in an overly simplistic way. The biology of sex isn’t quite as simple as common sense, but common sense will get you a long way in understanding it.
Mr. Wright, an evolutionary biologist, is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
Don't feel bad-even a supposedly intelligent woman like Ketanji Brown struggled to define "woman" during her SC Justice nomination hearing (I think this fact should have disqualified her from serving on the SC).
To simplify the difference: males produce many small gametes (sperm) and females produce few large gametes (eggs). There has never been a human being (or any highly developed animal) that could produce both types of gametes; nor is there any hormonal treatment or surgical procedure that can change the type of gamete that the body produces. Furthermore, concept of "nonbinary" is as mythical as a unicorn or the Book of Genesis.
Biologist Colin Wright provides further clarification:
The transgender movement has left many intelligent Americans confused about sex. Asked to define the word “woman” during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last year, Ketanji Brown Jackson demurred, saying “I’m not a biologist.” I am a biologist, and I’m here to help.
Are sex categories in humans empirically real, immutable and binary, or are they mere “social constructs”? The question has public-policy implications related to sex-based legal protections and medicine, including whether males should be allowed in female sports, prisons and other spaces that have historically been segregated by sex for reasons of fairness and safety.
Chase Strangio of the American Civil Liberties Union frequently claims that the binary concept of sex is a recent invention “exclusively for the purposes of excluding trans people from legal protections.” Scottish politician Maggie Chapman asserted in December that her rejection of the “binary and immutable” nature of sex was her motivation for pursuing “comprehensive gender recognition for nonbinary people in Scotland.” (“Nonbinary” people are those who “identify” as neither male nor female.)
When biologists claim that sex is binary, we mean something straightforward: There are only two sexes. This is true throughout the plant and animal kingdoms. An organism’s sex is defined by the type of gamete (sperm or ova) it has the function of producing. Males have the function of producing sperm, or small gametes; females, ova, or large ones. Because there is no third gamete type, there are only two sexes. Sex is binary.
Intersex people, whose genitalia appear ambiguous or mixed, don’t undermine the sex binary. Many gender ideologues, however, falsely claim the existence of intersex conditions renders the categories “male” and “female” arbitrary and meaningless. In “Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex” (1998), the historian of science Alice Dreger writes: “Hermaphroditism causes a great deal of confusion, more than one might at first appreciate, because—as we will see again and again—the discovery of a ‘hermaphroditic’ body raises doubts not just about the particular body in question, but about all bodies. The questioned body forces us to ask what exactly it is—if anything—that makes the rest of us unquestionable.”
In reality, the existence of borderline cases no more raises questions about everyone else’s sex than the existence of dawn and dusk casts doubt on day and night. For the vast majority of people, their sex is obvious. And our society isn’t experiencing a sudden dramatic surge in people born with ambiguous genitalia. We are experiencing a surge in people who are unambiguously one sex claiming to “identify” as the opposite sex or as something other than male or female.
Gender ideology seeks to portray sex as so incomprehensibly complex and multivariable that our traditional practice of classifying people as simply either male or female is grossly outdated and should be abandoned for a revolutionary concept of “gender identity.” This entails that males wouldn’t be barred from female sports, women’s prisons or any other space previously segregated according to our supposedly antiquated notions of “biological sex,” so long as they “identify” as female.
But “intersex” and “transgender” mean entirely different things. Intersex people have rare developmental conditions that result in apparent sex ambiguity. Most transgender people aren’t sexually ambiguous at all but merely “identify” as something other than their biological sex.
Once you’re conscious of this distinction, you will begin to notice gender ideologues attempting to steer discussions away from whether men who identify as women should be allowed to compete in female sports toward prominent intersex athletes like South African runner Caster Semenya. Why? Because so long as they’ve got you on your heels making difficult judgment calls on a slew of complex intersex conditions, they’ve succeeded in drawing your attention away from easy calls on unquestionably male athletes like 2022 NCAA Division I women’s swimming and diving champion Lia Thomas. They shift the focus to intersex to distract from transgender.
Acknowledging the existence of rare difficult cases doesn’t weaken the position or arguments against allowing males in female sports, prisons, restrooms and other female-only spaces. In fact, it’s a much stronger approach because it makes a crucial distinction that the ideologues are at pains to obscure.
Crafting policy to exclude males who identify as women, or “trans women,” from female sports, prisons and other female-only spaces isn’t complicated. Trans women are unambiguously male, so the chances that a doctor incorrectly recorded their sex at birth is zero. Any “transgender policy” designed to protect female spaces need only specify that participants must have been recorded (or “assigned,” in the current jargon) female at birth.
Crafting effective intersex policies is more complicated, but the problem of intersex athletes in female sports is less pressing than that of males in female sports, and there seem to be no current concerns arising from intersex people using female spaces. It should be up to individual organizations to decide which criteria or cut-offs should be used to keep female spaces safe and, in the context of sports, safe and fair. It is imperative, however, that such policies be rooted in properties of bodies, not “identity.” Identity alone is irrelevant to issues of fairness and safety.
Ideologues are wrong to insist that the biology of sex is so complex as to defy all categorization. They’re also wrong to represent the sex binary in an overly simplistic way. The biology of sex isn’t quite as simple as common sense, but common sense will get you a long way in understanding it.
Mr. Wright, an evolutionary biologist, is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
bym051d
I AM VERY IMPORTANT
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 39,410
- Reaction score
- 5,211
It's like a platypus.
Deacfreak07
Ain't played nobody, PAWL!
So our concern in the locker room is about gametes now?
myDeaconmyhand
First man to get a team of horses up Bear Mountain
Well if anything worthwhile came from this thread, it definitely enlightened me of a few more posters to put on ignore. Jesus.
BarcaDeac
Well-known member
you know, for people who love to tell the government to stay out of their lives and not tell them what to do, conservatives really do love to closely scrutinize the genitalia of every single person entering a bathroom or locker room
Louis Gossett Jr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2012
- Messages
- 12,905
- Reaction score
- 6,805
lol dumb fuck got absolutely destroyed last time he posted about how there was no animal that changed genders so comes back with a narrower definition. If we are defining highly developed animal the Capt is not.
wakephan09
fuck duke
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,287
- Reaction score
- 3,506
what this esteemed biologist at the Manhattan Institute (a conservative think tank, by the way, and not an academic institution) seems to be railing against here is based on his confusing of transex and transgender. He's using what he describes as biological empiricism about bodies to refute how people's brains perceive ("identify", in his scare quotes) their bodies.
Deacfreak07
Ain't played nobody, PAWL!
Not genitalia, bodily fluids. It’s about the gametes after all!
If this esteemed biologist had a Doctorate, the by line would say “Dr. Wright” not “Mr. Wright.”
Also, in addition to conflating gender and sex his also conflating gametes and sex. The guy is very confused.
BarcaDeac
Well-known member
Lol I was wondering about that but then didn’t want to seem like a rube when someone replies that a lot of biologists aren’t doctors.
wakephan09
fuck duke
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,287
- Reaction score
- 3,506
apparently, they have a phd from UC Santa Barbara. But that certainly does not preclude him from being a moron
The "mr" could be a style guide thing, like at the New York Times
Last edited:
wakephan09
fuck duke
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,287
- Reaction score
- 3,506
Ok so I got interested. He started the phd at Pitt and transferred for his last two years to UC Santa Barbara. Finished in 2018, two-year postdoc at Penn State, then claims he grew frustrated with woke academia and left.
I was looking through all the lab websites at UCSB but ultimately learned that his supervisor, Jonathan Pruitt, left UCSB and is being investigated for publishing on anomalous data.
https://dailynexus.com/2020-02-06/f...ractions-suspicions-regarding-anomalous-data/
I was looking through all the lab websites at UCSB but ultimately learned that his supervisor, Jonathan Pruitt, left UCSB and is being investigated for publishing on anomalous data.
https://dailynexus.com/2020-02-06/f...ractions-suspicions-regarding-anomalous-data/
wakephan09
fuck duke
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,287
- Reaction score
- 3,506
Oh shit, that article was old. He's since had his doctoral dissertation withdrawn and most of his papers retracted. He resigned from his job at McMaster in shame in 2022.
He's got a whole Wikipedia
(Reminder, this is the guy that supervised the research and signed off on the qualifications of Colin Wright, the Manhattan Institute flunky confusing sex and gender in a wall street journal op-ed)
He's got a whole Wikipedia
(Reminder, this is the guy that supervised the research and signed off on the qualifications of Colin Wright, the Manhattan Institute flunky confusing sex and gender in a wall street journal op-ed)
wakephan09
fuck duke
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 29,287
- Reaction score
- 3,506
Now he's a high school science teacher in....you guessed it, Florida!
And last year published a fantasy novel
And last year published a fantasy novel