[Sliver]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You know I appreciate you, but we both know you’re being kind of disingenuous when you say “we” should give “them” this one, considering you’ve been against trans women participating in women’s sport for about as long as I can recall. Doesn’t mean I think you’re one of “them,” but on this issue you already side with them, it costs you nothing to say “we” should give it up.

The thing is, it’s not “rational.” It’s not about the sanctity of sport, fairness, or any other bull#### people are going to throw around about it. It’s symbolic. And that’s exactly why you can’t just “give it to them.”

I mean 'we' as in a liberal minded person with a track record of advocating for equality, fairness, compassion, etc.

Yes, I do side with the right wing position of believing trans women shouldn't compete against cis women. I sincerely believe that's not transphobic and not unreasonable.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

There are a couple of points that make it very clearly symbolic and not rational or fact-based:

- the extremely low number of trans women competing in women’s sports to begin with and the complete inability to quantify the issue (most lawmakers and anti-trans activists struggle to come up with more than one anecdote, let alone a meaningful number)
- trans women, for all you know, have been competing in women’s sports for decades without anyone raising any issue, including other athletes or the governing bodies of those sports
- the objection is largely based on the sexist assumption that men are better at sports, as it is never about the specific advantages (which would apply to some women), specific sports (in which male biology would hold no advantage), nor about trans men. Instead, it comes back to basic, sexist nonsense like “it’s unfair for transgender women to compete with CIS women” based solely on the idea that when it comes to sport (any sport), any man > any woman.

That's not an accurate representation of my position at all. Of course I don't have a problem with transgender women competing against cis women in sports/activities where male physiology wouldn't give an advantage. That's crazy. That would be transphobic. I'm surprised you would think I would think that.

Take bowling, darts, maybe curling, idk, things like that don't give a transgender woman an advantage over cis women. Who could possibly be against that?

My only issue is believing it is unfair for trans women to compete against cis women in circumstances where the physiology of the trans athlete provides an advantage (unsurmountable at that) over the cis woman.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

So, no, nobody has to give anti-trans activists anything. Decisions around this should be rational and fact-based, like the majority already are, and not made based on the unsubstantiated and anecdotal nonsense trumpeted by anti-trans activists.

I mean, hey, someone here once suggested creating an entire prison system solely for trans women because they might be rapists. They didn’t actually care about the issue of rape in prisons, but they did care about the issue of trans women. And that’s the same here. It’s not about sport, it’s about trans women.

If you say you don’t care about sport and instead care about the LGBTQ community, your position on this is an entirely at-odds one to take.

I don't have to give anti trans advocates anything, of course. But I don't have to agree with everything said by the side I generally ally with, either.

I happen to agree on this one singular point out of the thousands I disagree with. And because of that I feel like I have a little clarity on this. I believe when trans activists - who, let me be clear, are correct on 99.9% of their takes versus the bigots being correct on 0.1% of their takes - pretend there isn't a physiological advantage in sport they do a disproportionate amount of damage to their cause.

Take statements like this:

Trans women are women. And they can compete as women.

Trans men are men. And they can compete as men.

It is obtuse to pretend this is so black and white when you know the dangerous other side will eviscerate that argument, which will distract from actually pushing trans rights and acceptance forward. It's disengenous to make such a claim - unless kel wants to qualify it somehow, it's just an untrue statement. Or maybe I just don't get what it means?

Like, how can an open minded guy like me not see your perspective? Are you really saying there is no physiological difference between trans women and cis women? What? Genuinely...can somebody help me grasp that? I don't love that I'm on the side of the people I generally loath (and keep in mind, I agree with 0.1% of their position on this), but when I hear the counters to that perspective it is totally unbelievable to me.

BTW, if I'm not being sensitive enough on this please let me know and I'm perfectly willing to just read the thread.