Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Elite female athletes have expressed support for restrictions on transgender women participation in their sports, such as the World Aquatics decision.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...ns-competition
And public support for transgender women participating in women's sport is considerably lower than support for transgender rights in other areas. 21 per cent of Canadians support transgender athletes competing in the gender they identify with rather than the sex they were assigned at birth. Meanwhile, 74 per cent say transgendered Canadians should be protected from discrimination in employment, housing, and access to businesses. For more context, 70 per cent of Canadians say same-sex couples should have the same rights to adopt children as heterosexual couples do.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/canadian...port-declining
In other words, more than two-thirds of Canadians who support the right of same-sex couples to adopt children do not approve of transgender athletes competing in the gender they identify with rather than their gender at birth. It's a big stretch to dismiss them all as ignorant bigots. Just as it's a big stretch to chalk up the decisions made by bodies like the World Athletics, Cycling, and Aquatics associations to ignorance and bigotry, considering the extensive research and consultation that went into those decisions.
https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sp...es-2023-03-23/ |
Cliff went to a lot of effort to post what is essentially one giant ad populum fallacy.
EDIT: My bad, there's also a really weak appeal to authority in there.
Quote:
And 'it only affects a tiny number of people' argument cuts both ways. A ban on transgender women participating as women in athletics affects only a tiny number of people (including a tiny fraction of trans women), so why waste energy worrying about it? That's not a sound basis for contesting conflicting rights.
This issue is a lot more difficult and nuanced that some folks around here want to believe.
|
If the concept we're talking about is discrimination and bigotry, no, it doesn't cut both ways and now you've engaged in a false equivalence.
Terrible post all around, Cliff. 1-star.