Rival weightlifter speaks out on transgender Hubbard's Olympic place

Post by beerandt » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:45 AM UTC

rantwasp wrote: post #114

woodruffw wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your snideness is noted, but this is precisely the stoic mindset: athleticism is most virtuously practiced when we only compare current selves to our best possible versions of ourselves. We can’t change anything about how others are; we can only better ourselves. Telling transwomen that they can’t perform athletic excellence on their own terms is myopic and inconsistent with our own praise for factors outside of our…

nah. if you’re working on yourself that’s fine. if you’re working a lifetime to be the best at something only to be cheated out of it, we’re talking about something else. to nail this point home: if you are training to ride a bike and you’re the best in the world at it and after that someone comes along with an electric bike and wants to “compete” with you you’re gonna have a problem. nothing wrong if everyone has an…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

tiahura wrote: post #109

rodgerd wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, it presents a huge problem for women's athletics, Trans women have been able to compete for years in Olympic level sport, and they haven't wiped the floor with cis women. I fail to see evidence of the problem - I see a lot more evidence of it being a culture war and TERF talking point. It also doesn't really line up with the fact that we fawn over genetic quirks that let Michael Phelps dominate his sport.…

It’s not a quirk that makes it unfair for them to compete in women’s sports, it’s the fact that they’re not women. If I’m a 240lb judoka, it would be unfair for me to compete in the 160lb weight class just because I feel thin on the inside.

Post by aardvarkr » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:52 AM UTC

moeris wrote: post #117

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is common to hear a transwoman claim (indeed, even occasionally here on HN) that anything other than recognizing them as equal to ciswomen is an act of violence and prejudice against them, and at worst, they utter some invective about “TERFs”. So, suggesting the recognition of a new gender is unlikely to satisfy at least those strident individuals.

Referring to trans people as "a transgender" is rude. If your other statements are as ill informed and inconsiderate, then it's no wonder your conversations with the trans community have been confrontational.

Post by beerandt » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:52 AM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #100

kazinator wrote: post #20

I think sports categories should be chromosome strings. "XX division", "XY world record". "XXY 400 m finals", "XYY long jump trials", ... Gender identity doesn't factor into it at all; the words "man", "woman" should not be used. Problem solved; you don't get to wedge yourself into competition with XX persons if you're XY.

Have you considered the effects of androgen insensitivity syndrome? Chromosomes don't always neatly map to physical traits.

Post by gd1 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:55 AM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #56

jml7c5 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At its very core, the exclusion is seen as a form of "well you're not really a woman". I could write more on the arguments both sides present, but that's the crux of it.

> At its very core, the exclusion is seen as a form of "well you're not really a woman". For the supporters of trans-women being women, is there a canonical / generally accepted list of criteria which would classify people "objectively" as a woman? If there is such a thing as a group of people that can be called "women", how would membership in that group be established? I.e., what really is a woman?