Well no, I do not actually depend on them, if work was not so heavily taxes, both mine and theirs, I could provide my own thugs, thank you, and they would have much shinier uniforms as a matter of course.
As to whether you give as good as you get, maybe, your gender as a whole does not.
Paragraph 3: Did I not concede that women sell their vaginas very well? Now, such a man cannot only Support your consumerbotish desires, he will also support other vaginas via wealth Redistribution.
Note to T_nation techies, your Website randomly capitalizes words.
Doping, with testosterone, for instance, is THE cardinal sin in the eyes of the Olympic Committee. But having been born with an endogenous supply of superdosed testosterone (compared to biological females), resulting in an overall body size difference of 15%, greater bone density, a greater total amount of muscle fibers resulting in significant differences in strength, and the resultant more resilient tendon and ligament structure necessary to support this system, among other differences that cause significant, PERMANENT changes in the body…eh, none of that matters, because they dropped their test a year before.
Insane. Just insane. Why even bother having a competition. Most of you who support this current transgender madness know just how insane it is, too.
And, being that this totally disenfranchises women if favor of an unbelievably tiny proportion of the human population, I sure as hell hope that a lot of people raise some serious hell about this.
I sure hope there are a lot more people that are as sick as I am of this shit.
I don’t think I was passive-aggressive at all. I think I was pretty direct in noting what I perceived, both on the negative side and the positive. Instead, you might want to label me “annoying.” Which I think you may already have. And I’m okay with that, because I so generally like you. But you WERE being passive-aggressive in this discussion. I guess it’s fine - better than name-calling. But your clearly-stated views on the issues at hand would have been more interesting and perhaps even persuasive to those of us in it with an open mind.
I agree with you Cortes, completely. The only thing I disagree with is lumping it in with the “current transgender madness.” Peeing and competing on the Olympic field are two very different things, with different potential resultant issues.
I work with an exceptionally bright teen with whom I’ve been discussing this debate and the points raised as I understand them.* I believe they would agree that this piece doesn’t make sense.
*I understand the trans-bathroom opposition to focus on the “Pandora’s Box” nature of the change. That it’s not so much the sharing of bathrooms, which has been happening quietly and could continue, but the changes in law, which opponents fear would lead to protection of criminality at worst and an unnecessary quagmire at best.
Edited to clarify/add: an exceptionally bright gender-fluid teen.
See, here’s the piece you never seem to get: it’s not about the vagina. In today’s world that’s easily acquired, for nearly free. You offer clear proof of that.
What happens is that when people couple, they start thinking in terms of “family,” regardless of reproductive intent. Gays, couples like Hockey and me, young couples uninterested in children - they all evidence this drive to build as nice a home as possible for the family. Men are not, as you seem to believe, uninterested but want to please the vagina-holder in order to secure continued access to the vagina - they are driven to create security and comfort for all involved, including themselves. Women are too, which you seem not to understand, somehow thinking at on average they are passive consumers of men’s efforts. I disagree. Women nest with or without men.
Hockey, presumably like you, was sort of rolling in money relative to his needs. Nicely set for retirement, has all the gadgets he wants. He rented a decent enough house on a handful of acres and was half-heartedly moved into it. Kitchen and bathroom were clean enough, rest of it was dusty. I may have mentioned the three flashlights and nothing else on the coffee table. I know at one time he had someone coming in to clean, but then let that go out of disinterest. Meanwhile his energy and his spare time went to improving 155 acres he owns and hoped to build a house on - however, he was waiting for someone with whom he could do it. Because I guess he didn’t want to live alone in a dusty house at the top of a mountain. When we celebrated our first holiday together with his daughter, we did so at my place because it was so much pleasanter.
I believe he loves coming home now. He says he does, and he lights up when he comes in, as I do. It’s light and bright and clean here, with cheery things inside and flowers outside. We’re not on his mountain because it’s too far from my work, but we do go there together to cut wood and clear brush and picnic (two beers each, feet in the river) (not in the winter, though, there’s a pizza place for winter). Last week we planted 6 apple trees here at home together. Our little fixer-upper is starting to look mind-blowingly good. It’s not about a vagina - it’s about a home you make where someone loves you and wants to hear about your day. It’s about dinners together and breakfasts together in a space you created with your labor and your love. It’s about working toward shared goals and dreaming up ways to spend the money you make (dual income FTMFW). Will we build a mountain-top camp or buy land on a lake, throw up a camp, and maybe build a real house and retire there someday to watch grandchildren jump off the dock? People are driven to nest-build in family groups, or at least the ones who are whole. Two people live cheaply relative to one, so there are financial gains for all, which can be invested back into the home or saved. Of course Hockey chose someone who is also in decent shape for retirement and in possession of a secure career, which makes all of the above realistic and possible. I believe at year’s end we celebrated my shitty raise as enthusiastically as we did his shitty raise.
Her vagina and his income are important, obviously, but they’re just pieces of the whole. As are her income and his penis. Accumulating wealth, the building of a shared friend group, children, parents, neighbors, grandchildren, vacations, saving for things or for its own sake if/when you are able to do so. I know you’re capable of complex thought - this is a real blind spot for you. The world as you frame it only makes sense if a man makes the worst possible choice of mates. It would be as if I framed all men as batterers because some are and I happen to have been involved with several of them. But women are only in that position after making a series of disastrous choices.
"Concern about creating an “unfair competitive advantage” on sex-separated teams is one of the most often cited reasons for resistance to the participation of transgender student-athletes. This concern is cited most often in discussions about transgender women competing on a women’s team. Some advocates for gender equality in college sports are concerned that allowing transgender women—that is, male-to-female transgender athletes who were born male, but who identify as female—to compete on women’s teams will take away opportunities for women, or that transgender women will have a competitive advantage over other women competitors.
These concerns are based on three assumptions: one, that transgender women are not “real” women and therefore not deserving of an equal competitive opportunity; two, that being born with a male body automatically gives a transgender woman an unfair advantage when competing against non-transgender women; and three, that men might be tempted to pretend to be transgender in order to compete in competition with women.
These assumptions are not well founded. First, the decision to transition from one gender to the other—to align one’s external gender presentation with one’s internal sense of gender identity—is a deeply significant and difficult choice that is made only after careful consideration and for the most compelling of reasons. Gender identity is a core aspect of a person’s identity, and it is just as deep seated, authentic, and real for a transgender person as for others. Male-to-female transgender women fully identify and live their lives as women, and female-to-male transgender men fully identify and live their lives as men.
Second, some people fear that transgender women will have an unfair advantage over non-transgender women. It is important to place that fear in context. Transgender girls who medically transition at an early age do not go through a male puberty, and therefore their participation in athletics as girls does not raise the same equity concerns that arise when transgender women transition after puberty.
Transgender women display a great deal of physical variation, just as there is a great deal of natural variation in physical size and ability among non-transgender women and men. Many people may have a stereotype that all transgender women are unusually tall and have large bones and muscles. But that is not true. A male-to-female transgender woman may be small and slight, even if she is not on hormone blockers or taking estrogen. It is important not to overgeneralize. The assumption that all male-bodied people are taller, stronger, and more highly skilled in a sport than all female-bodied people is not accurate.
It is also important to know that any strength and endurance advantages a transgender woman arguably may have as a result of her prior testosterone levels dissipate after about one year of estrogen or testosterone-suppression therapy. According to medical experts on this issue, the assumption that a transgender woman competing on a women’s team would have a competitive advantage outside the range of performance and competitive advantage or disadvantage that already exists among female athletes is not supported by evidence.
Finally, fears that men will pretend to be female to compete on a women’s team are unwarranted given that in the entire 40 year history of “sex verification” procedures in international sport competitions, no instances of such “fraud” have been revealed. Instead, rather than identifying men who are trying to fraudulently compete as women, “sex verification” tests have been misused to humiliate and unfairly exclude women with intersex conditions. The apparent failure of such tests to serve their stated purpose of deterring fraud—and the terrible damage they have caused to individual women athletes—should be taken into account when developing policies for the inclusion of transgender athletes."
From NCAA Inclusion of Transgender Student-Athletes (available online)
tl; dr from the same source: “Transgender student-athletes fall within the spectrum of physical traits found in athletes of their transitioned gender, allowing them to compete fairly and equitably.”
(The original source provides links to research articles supporting the claims made.)
While I’m open minded enough to look at the evidence, changing my mind on #2
would be a hard sell.
How many transgenders are treated with drugs before hitting puberty? I can’t imagine it’s a large number.
I’m a small female who struggles to build any muscle. Never in my life have I met a man with a smaller build than I. I can’t imagine any drugs will change inherent bone structure and baseline musculature, especially if taken after puberty. But perhaps I’m wrong? I’d love to see my T levels and bone density numbers stacked against any transgendered women.
Hmm. Thank you for writing that out. I may be willing to concede on some of this (my PA). Certainly it wasn’t my intention - my first post was pretty direct, I think, and does compliment him for not employing personal attacks. I also noted one comment I found particularly distasteful when it was directed at me, which did not come from you, and offered a specific tactic I found weak, i.e taking points to ridiculous extremes, which is a pretty straightforward accusation. Here is my original post:
I’ve backed out of this debate because I have no stomach for passive-aggression or sarcasm, nasty jabs, and particularly the one mention of spanking directed my way, but I will say for the record that I’ve found Eye Dentists’ posts enjoyable to read both for content/direction and for the complete lack of these unpleasant tactics.
Taking his points to ridiculous extremes does not make him look ridiculous or extreme except, I would imagine, to people invested in having him portrayed that way.
My second post, when questioned, defended my approval of ED:
I would sum up his main point in the last third of this thread as “time-honored traditions are not reliable gauges of right and wrong, as proven by the many broadly-approved changes made to these over time.”
I can’t think what there is to disagree with there, and to the point of vitriol no less.
Edit: ED, forgive me speaking for you, and feel free to correct me if I’m mistaken. I just feel it incumbent upon me to say something.
However, I can see that in attempting to address your post:
Chushin
LOL.
I think it’s humorous that people that claim to think it’s important to avoid rudeness, jabs, sarcasm, etc find it perfectly ok to make vague accusations that don’t directly or specifically state or address the person or post(s) they are complaining about.
I can only assume that some or all of that is directed at me, which is fine, so long as no one actually thinks that trying to play “Post Police” is going to affect what or how I post.
I move into passive-aggressive territory along with a couple of more straightforward statements:
Although yes, I believe you employ passive-aggression in your posts and yes, I believe it a weak debate tactic, I wasn’t speaking to you or anyone else because I wasn’t looking to fight about who did what. As you rightly note, there would be no point in doing so - no one is going to change. I was only posting to say that I appreciated ED’s civility and wished there was more of it.
I don’t know whether he posts regularly in PWI, perhaps he does and is used to this. Perhaps he finds satisfaction in being one of the few posters able to hold onto civility, perhaps he is conducting some sort of study of his own and is recording each “LOL” and name-calling with glee, but just in case the derisive laughter and taunting are getting to him, I thought I’d speak up and say that his message seems clear to me and lacking in the kind of shock-value that would seem to invite these vituperative responses.
It didn’t seem important to me to call people out as conflict was not my goal, particularly with people I feel handle conflict distastefully, though I also acknowledge that punches are pulled when dealing with me, presumably due to my gender. I also have no stomach for insulting my friends, which I have done, but again, it seemed important to me to acknowledge ED’s continued courteous tone and on-point posts.
My passivity here is more my desire to back away from a fight with you, honestly, which was at war with my belief that you had been fighting to fight rather than to share your thoughts. Which I would be interested in hearing, btw, on this or any other topic.
So fair enough, I concede on having exhibited passive-aggression myself. With regard to “pulling punches,” I wasn’t speaking of you, though to be honest I think this is the first time we’ve disagreed about anything, so who knows. But I do notice that with a couple of exceptions, women are spoken to less aggressively here when in debate. There is a difference.
Do you ever watch MMA? It always fascinates me to watch the lightweights - men essentially my size - fight. I could never take the hits they take. I would be out on the first one.
So yeah, I see ED’s point, but don’t think I agree. Is hormone therapy even allowed before age 18? (Maybe! I don’t know, and should be cleaning, not googling HRT info. lol)
Hi kpsnap, you are very petite woman frame-wise–your bone structure is small, even for a cis-gendered woman. In other words, so far as frame-size is concerned, you fall way to the left of the mean on the bell curve of ‘Frame Size of Women.’ For this reason, even if you competed solely against other cis-gendered women you would be at a distinct disadvantage in any sport where being large-framed carries an advantage, and competitors are not divvied up by weight (eg, you’d probably have a tough time making a first-team rugby squad).
The reason you’re able to excel in PLing is because it is a sport that does take frame-size into account (indirectly, via weight classes). Thus, if you were to compete against a MTF TG, she would be as small as you, and her test levels would be within what is considered the normal range for cis-gendered women. Would she have an advantage in that her bones might be denser? I honestly don’t know. But consider: To the extent her bones are heavier, that leaves less room in her total bodyweight to be devoted to muscle tissue. So it might be that you are at the advantage when competing against a TG woman in your weight class. (I freely admit this is speculation on my part.)
Well, the amount of testosterone present certainly has a dramatic effect on post-pubertal muscle mass. If it didn’t, a whole lot of TNers are injecting themselves for naught.
Individual feds will have to work out their rules in this regard.
What about cis-gendered female powerlifters who have elected to use heavy doses of testosterone–should they be allowed to compete in the female division?
Generally speaking, which athlete has a more legitimate claim to compete in the female division–a cis-gendered female competitor who has had male levels of test for many years, or a trans-gendered female competitor who has had female levels of test for many years?
Re: Sex segregated athletics. As just one measure, a male infant age 0-5 months has T levels of 75-400, where a female of the same age has T levels of 20-80. If you look at the high end, 10-year-old boys already have 3 times as much T as their female counterpart. Wouldn’t that have long term effects on his body, even if you later decided to remove his testes and administer female hormones?
The differences in athleticism are evident well before puberty. You can look at the records of the fastest 10-year-old swimmers. The male records are faster. When we’re taking about competition among the best, even pre-puberty males are advantaged. That’s one reason AYSO soccer starts splitting the sexes in 5-year-olds.
Looking at the overlap between the sexes is missing the point. Yes, there will be some girls who are faster than some boys, or some boys who aren’t as strong as some women. A very rare woman can meet the standards to become an Army Ranger.
The MTF TG kid at your school, may not be as athletic as some of the female athletes in the same weight class. BUT when you’re looking at the very best athletes and comparing them, the males have an advantage in every sport I can think of. I can see why the current case of the Alaskan MTF TG track athlete is pretty controversial.
It isn’t meaningful to compare female athletes who are on T with other females who have natural T levels. That’s why natural lifters can choose to compete in tested federations, and it’s why the Olympics test.
BTW, I just had my T levels run out of curiosity. Wait for it… 25.
In terms of public policy, unless elite female sports start to be dominated by MTF TG individuals, I predict that there will be zero response to this kind of thing, other than a few parents complaining about their daughter getting edged out at the State Track Meet, and maybe loosing out on an athletic scholarship. Mostly that won’t even be reported because it just sounds like you’re being insensitive.
We are very used to this kind of thing, with regards to both race and gender. The playing field isn’t always level. Attempts to level it often penalize someone.
"The complaint against Harvard last year cited third-party academic research on the SAT exam showing that Asian-Americans have to score on average about 140 points higher than white students, 270 points higher than Hispanic students and 450 points higher than African-American students to equal their chances of gaining admission to Harvard. The exam is scored on a 2400-point scale.
“It’s tougher for Asians to be successful because they’re competing against a pool that’s quite saturated,” said Mr. Smitobol.
He suggested some Asian-American students may benefit by not checking the box on the application acknowledging they are Asian, stressing extracurricular activities that aren’t typical for Asian-American students or applying to schools or majors that don’t attract a lot of Asian-American students."
I was wondering that when I asked, “Wouldn’t that have long term effects on his body, even if you later decided to remove his testes and administer female hormones?” My guess would be “yes.” [quote=“EyeDentist, post:1878, topic:210559”]
As I alluded to above, what about the comparison between cis-female athletes on T to trans-female athletes with ‘female’ T levels?
[/quote]
I would think that all the years of T on a male would still give that person an advantage. That’s my guess, looking at what assisted female PLers can lift. I can’t imagine them competing against Kroc, even in the same weight class. I guess we’ll be able to see if he does decide to long term go off the roids and continues to lift, even if he isn’t competing, we’d know what he would be able to lift. Sample size 1.
