Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 19:52:36 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

   • M. Ní Sídach

   J.K Rowling attacks another cis female athlete implying she's Trans (via @muiren) https://sfba.social/@muiren/113559844889410473

   This may shock you, but this cis female athlete, just like the previous cis female athlete attacked this way by Rowling, Imane Khelif, is a person of color, and comes from Africa.

   Apparently for Rowling, you are only a woman until somebody thinks you're too buff and refuses to sign a form:
   https://apnews.com/article/zambia-banda-womens-world-cup-79520a0f06bf1c91a18fbeacfdd2fbec

   • Embed this notice
     Darnell Clayton :verified: (darnell@one.darnell.one)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 20:27:26 JST Darnell Clayton :verified:

     in reply to

     • M. Ní Sídach

     @rysiek @muiren A simple Google search on #Zambia 🇿🇲 by J.K. Rowling would have easily dispelled such accusations. Zambia 🇿🇲 imprisons #LGBT people, so they obviously would not allow a Transgender player to represent them on the football ⚽️ field.

     Some people are “too smart” for their own good.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 20:30:06 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • M. Ní Sídach

     @darnell @muiren it was exactly the same with Imane Khelif. She is Algerian, represented Algeria, and Algeria also is LGBT-hostile.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 20:48:43 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • M. Ní Sídach
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz not sure why you removed @darnell and @muiren from your reply.

     But please, do educate me about this controversy? What is it *really* about, in your view?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 20:48:46 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     @rysiek
     You are very misinformed on the nature of this controversy. It has nothing to do with being transgender. Please educate yourself before making harsh judgements.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 21:52:29 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz regarding the tone, I think that's only fair, I did the same with your patronizing tone after all.

     Before we jump in, I asked the other two people mentioned earlier if they want to continue being mentioned, I'll re-add them if they confirm. Should have asked first, to be fair.

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 21:52:30 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • M. Ní Sídach

     @rysiek

     I try to engage in a respectful discussion of a complex subject, so I will choose to take your request at face value, ignoring the obvious, while unwarranted, sarcastic undertone.

     The controversy is about DSDs.
     Particularly, about 5-alpha-reductase defficiency — a condition affecting male sex development in a way which leads to new-born boys being mistaken for girls, because of undeveloped extenal genitalia.

     There is no suggestion of anyone being transgender in any of these cases, so the whole discussion of countries being LGBT-hostile is entirely irrelevant.

     @darnell @muiren

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 21:54:10 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz and let's do one more thing and remove the specific person from this, as we there are going to be a lot of uncomfortable hypotheticals in this thread, I'm sure.

     So let' say there is a person called Amal. She has been assigned female at birth, and since then has participated in sports all her life, with considerable success.

     When she's twentysomething, suddenly there's a test showing the result you mention.

     What gender is she, in your opinion?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:00:41 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz right. You added the chromosome thing, we'll get back to that.

     So a person assigned female at birth, participating in sports for years upon years (meaning being close quarters in changing rooms with other women), is in your opinion now considered male.

     Should Amal be allowed to participate in sports as a woman?

     Should Amal be allowed to participate in sports as a man?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:00:42 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     @rysiek
     There are multiple conflicting definitions of “gender” — I take it here to be a synonym for “sex”, but you're free to specify a different meaning.

     If the test shows Amal is a XY person with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency, that would mean Amal is male.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:14:59 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz I also assume Amal should in your opinion start using the ladies' room now, as well, right?

     @darnell

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:15:00 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     I've only added the chromosome thing for clearer context, as, as I said, 5-alpha-reductase deficiency only affects males anyway. But sure, we can get back to that if something isn't clear here.

     No, in my opinion Amal should not be allowed to participate in sports as a woman.

     Yes, Amal should definitely be allowed to participate in sports as a man.

     I don't understand the last question. What has nobody notices until now? Amal has definitely noticed “something is off”. After being mistakenly assigned female at birth, Amal might have not noticed anything until puberty. But then, when menstruation doesn't start, and instead external male genitalia do belatedly appear, Amal definitely noticed that — understandably very embarrassing and confusing — development.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:31:37 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz but if Amal must switch from participating in female sports to participating in male sports, then it follows Amal must switch from using the ladies' room to using the mens' room?

     Is it not the case?

     @darnell

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:31:38 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     Really, you've decided to pivot to The Bathroom Issue instead of actually engaging with the actual issue we're discussing?

     Do you accept that your understanding of this controversy as of two hours ago was wrong on the level of facts, and that you've now learned important additional facts changing this understanding?

     Did this realization push you to actually make an effort to reevaluate your opinion?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:56:49 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell I think it's fine, yes. I think Amal lived her whole life as a woman. and if she considers herself a woman, she is a woman.

     I think somehow the " sports-related benefits" are only problematic in sports when it just so happens that a discussion of biological sex is involved.

     Nobody is banning Phelps from competing with people who do not happen to benefit from similar physical quirks, for example.

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 22:56:50 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     Does it follow? Maybe. It's just a different discussion. We can have that discussion at some point also, bathrooms do have practical and safety-related issues and it's a whole topic. But why do you want to pivot from the topic we're actually discussing?

     You asked me a series of questions on this sports issue, but what do you think?

     We now know, and Amal knows, that Amal enjoys full sports-related benefit of male development, because this condition doesn't affect it. Amal still wants to take part in a women's kick-boxing competition.

     Do you think it's fine?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:01:50 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell I also know there are men with XX chromosomes, and I have not seen so far anyone suggesting that if that happens to be a man participating in competitive sports, he should participate in female disciplines only.

     Do you think men that happen to have XX chromosomes should participate in female disciplines?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:24:00 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Misuse Case

     @MisuseCase I'd appreciate if we kept it civil in my mentions though. It's not a good look and does not help.

   • Embed this notice
     Misuse Case (misusecase@twit.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:24:02 JST Misuse Case

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @rysiek @darnell Cry some more, you sealioning Reply Guy.

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:24:06 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Misuse Case

     @MisuseCase

     You're misinformed (or lying). This isn't about “conformity”, and XY people with 5-alpha-reductase defficiency do not have any “female anatomy”.

     @rysiek @darnell

   • Embed this notice
     Misuse Case (misusecase@twit.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:24:07 JST Misuse Case

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rysiek @rcz @darnell This person just wants to shut people who are not gender conforming out of participation in anything, including public life.

     Having factory-original female anatomy, being raised as a woman, being socialized as a woman, and living one’s life as a woman doesn’t matter, if your invisible chromosomes don’t line up. Every tiny, even involuntary and uncontrollable non-conformity is verboten!

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:26:56 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell I think weight and age and disability categories are enough to handle any safety issues.

     And I also think in many places we used to have other categories in sports that we do not have for very good reasons – namely, racial segregation.

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:26:58 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     I've disscussed the “Phelps argument” in some length here:
     https://101010.pl/@rcz/112959498924669006

     TL;DR:
     We don't have categories for Phelps' quirks. We could have, and then we would expect Phelps to be in the category for people with these quirts and would very much exclude him from the category for people without these quirks. That's how categories work.
     But the advantage due to Phelps' quirks was actually relatively small, compared to the *huge* advantage due to sex. We don't have categories for all advantages, but there are reasons we do have categories for some advantages.

     And no, it's NOT true that ”sports-related benefits” are only problematic when sex is involved. We do also create (and police) other categories related to sports-related benefits, and do not let people with those benefits into categories without those benefits, for well-understood reasons. There are age categories, weight categories, disability categories. I wouldn't be able to get into a children boxing competition, because I do have a “problematic” sports-related benefit of not being a child.

     But let's dig a bit. Let's introduce another hypothetical person, let's call him Bob. Bob is just a plain guy. He's quite sporty and also trains kick-boxing, but he is the only male kick-boxing enthusiast in the area, so he feels left out when the women have their competition. He asks if it maybe the next competition could be organized as open-category, so that he could participate too and kick-box with the women.

     Do you think it's fine to let Bob into the ring with the women? Do you think, for example, that there are any safety reasons not to let men kick-box with women?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:27:30 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Misuse Case

     @MisuseCase I appreciate it.

   • Embed this notice
     Misuse Case (misusecase@twit.social)'s status on Thursday, 28-Nov-2024 23:27:31 JST Misuse Case

     in reply to

     @rysiek Okay. For you, not for that guy.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:12:45 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell ok, so:

     1. In case of our Amal, XY chromosomes in your opinion define a male person, and regardless of what's on her birth certificate and how she had lived her life till that point in time, she should be considered a "male", and only allowed to participate in male sports disciplines, right?

     2. But male-presenting people who identify as men but happen to have XX chromosomes should still be allowed to participate in male sports disciplines, correct?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:12:47 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     No, men with XX chromosomes who benefit from male development should not participate in female disciplines. Why should they?

     And frankly, the unjustified associations you present here are stupid and insulting.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:14:39 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell well if we are able to establish that there are such "huge" as you say differences in muscle mass and strength, and bone density, surely we are able to measure those. Are we not?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:14:41 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     I think this is very misguided (and wishful thinking). There are still huge differences between sexes in muscle mass and strength, bone density etc., leading to serious safety concerns, even after controlling for these other categories such as weight, age and disability.

     (Yes, there are attributes which should not, for good reasons, be used for categorizing sport,s such as race or self-defined identity).

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:22:11 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell well, you did bring chromosomes into this before, and I said we will come back to them.

     In your opinion, is there a medical test that can be performed to clearly and unambiguously define whether any given person is "male" or "female"?

     In your opinion, do men with XX chromosomes should be consider "female"? Why/why not?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:22:12 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     No, at no point did I say XY chromosomes “define a male person”.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:24:30 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell grat. In that case, why even bother with the "male/female" thing in sports?

     If muscle mass and density, and bone strength, are the issue, and we can measure them, why not make categories based on those characteristics instead?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:24:32 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     Surely!

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:29:39 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell in your opinion, is there a set of tests that can be performed to clearly and unambiguously establish whether any given person is "male" or "female"?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:29:41 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     I did bring chromosomes into the hypothetical scenario for clearer context, yes. I did not say chromosomes define sex. They don't.

     BTW, I do also think there is a valid case for some XY people to be included in female sport category. 5-ARD is just not one of these cases.

     I don't think there is a singular test to clearly and unambiguously establish sex. Chromosome testing is a fairly good screen, but there can be more diagnostics needed in some rare cases (diagnostics which provide information which those people need anyway for health reasons).

     Men with XX chromosomes should not be considered female, because they don't follow female development path.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:35:24 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell I'm glad we agree that how invasive the tests are should be taken into account.

     You also said that in your opinion there a set of tests that can be performed to clearly and unambiguously establish whether any given person is "male" or "female".

     In that case: is it possible that some people that based on that set of tests are considered "female" would still have muscle mass and strength and bone density, higher than some people who based on that set of tests are considered "male"?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:35:26 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     What you proposing is more invasive testing which would still end up with Amal in the category with all the males. Why would you want to do that? Just to avoid the word “sex”?

     I mean, think about it: age affects a lot of sport-related things, that's why we have age categories — so you could also measure those things instead of checking a person's age.

     Sure, but why?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:40:10 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell and do I understand correctly based on our conversation so far, that in your opinion the "male" and "female" categories of sports disciplines are, first and foremost, about safety and fairness?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:40:11 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     I don't know, but let's say it is.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:45:41 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell in that case, if there are "female-testing" people who happen to have muscle mass and strength and bone density above some "male-testing" people, the "male" and "female" categories fail at that stated goal.

     If, instead, the muscle mass and strength and bone density testing was used, it would *achieve* that goal more successfully.

     Would you not agree?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:45:42 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     Yes.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:58:41 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell I don't know, I am not the one proposing invasive testing in sports in the first place.

     Gender-related testing is pretty damn invasive. Especially in very public cases like Amal's.

     And I would not be surprised if gender-related testing was more often applied to people participating in female disciplines, than male.

     Would you agree that is pretty likely to be the case, based on the fact that the stated purpose is safety and fairness, and men are assumed to have a benefit?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 00:58:43 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     Still, you're proposing highly invasive testing based on a hypothetical problem. You only proposed that there could theoretically be such people — who are these people?

     There could be 8 year old boys who have the physique of 15 year old boys — it is possible! — which would prove a safety concern in children sports based on age categories. Do we now, based on that possibility we have now identified, say that age categories have failed, and do we seriously propose replacing them with extensive invasive testing across the board?

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 01:14:11 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell and regarding the "who are these people" – I don't think it's unreasonable to assume they do exist.

     If they didn't, that would mean that every single person that is, according to the set of tests you believe exists, "female" has muscle mass and strength and bone density *strictly lower* than every single person that is, according to the same tests, "male".

     That would be an immensely surprising, remarkable thing.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 01:32:51 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell

     First of all:

     > you demand that when sex category is established, then no safety concern must ever present for any reason ever, even theoretically.

     No, I merely point out that the "sex category" is unnecessary if we're talking safety and fairness.

     You mentioned three specific things – muscle mass, muscle strength, bone density – as the basis of why men and women need to participate separately for safety reasons. So I am using these. Any others that we need to consider?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 01:32:53 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell

     What you did in your hypothetical is to point to a (theoretical and unspecified) safety concern NOT related to sex, and complain that sex category didn't remove it. You're applying an impossible standard: you demand that when sex category is established, then no safety concern must ever present for any reason ever, even theoretically.

     We don't expect that standard from any other measure.

     Yes, sex testing would mostly affect female sport, that's true.

     No, for nearly all athletes, except only for the very rare cases where more diagnostics after screening is required for health reasons anyway, it's a cheek swab. This is not invasive.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Friday, 29-Nov-2024 01:35:27 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @darnell secondly:

     > Yes, sex testing would mostly affect female sport, that's true.

     That strikes me as odd. That means that there could be people who based on your set of tests would be considered "female" that might be participating in male disciplines.

     Is it not unfair and unsafe for them to do so?

     If you believe we should be testing anyone, why not test everyone?

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br) (lxo@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 14:00:42 JST Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     in reply to
     the conversation didn't start well, it got very informative, but it got tiring to watch you unrelentingly trying to staple some contradiction onto radek. ISTM you're projecting prejudice. it doesn't look good. I wish the conversation would go back to respectful and informative, it would be more in line with what I've learned to expect from you, and why I've often enjoyed reading what you share.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 15:30:52 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rysiek @rcz @darnell @lxo the reason this is interpreted as prejudice is the assertion that someone raised as a woman, who identifies as a woman, and who has always been treated as a woman is actually not a woman, but a "man with underdeveloped external genitalia". Accepting that argument means accepting that trans women aren't women, which is obviously transphobic. Th nuance isn't complicated.

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br) (lxo@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 16:43:11 JST Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     in reply to

     • Matthew Garrett
     I don't see that as the issue in the (part of the) conversation (that I have read), though I can imagine it may have carried over from elsewhere, which is why I take it as projection of prejudices
     
     paralympics have tons of different categories for similar sports, depending on characteristics of the individuals, and that's fine. the bug IMHO is trying to fit people into rigid binary standards. nature, and humans in particular, don't fit these rigid standards, and that's ok. but imposing such rigidity is harmful to victims of transphobes and of those who misread the understanding of the nonbinary nature of gender as transphobia
     
     when I was in kindergarden, we had judo and ballet. judo for boys, ballet for girls. (that was the 1970's in Brazil, don't get me started). I have been fat most of my life. when there were judo competitions, that means I was always assigned to play against kids that were much older, stronger, and more experienced than I was, just because I was in the same weight range. that wasn't fair. the categories weren't well designed for kids.
     
     why, instead of rigid binary-gendered categories, shouldn't there be more categories that made room for all richness of human diversity to be able to compete fairly with their equals?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 16:46:55 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo it carries over from the original response that started this subthread

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 16:49:55 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo specifically https://101010.pl/@rcz/113560457817969487

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:10:34 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Matthew Garrett

     @mjg59

     “This argument cannot be made because it leads to a conclusion I don't accept” is literally the definition of prejudice.

     @rysiek @darnell @lxo

   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:14:34 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @lxo
     Sex vs gender is like free software vs open source. One is a clearly defined term, the other has ambiguous meaning. The concern of men in women sports arises from the binary nature of sex, not a denial of nonbinary nature of gender, whatever gender means to each person.
     @mjg59
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) and Flick ?? like this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:17:56 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @rysiek @darnell @lxo You can make this argument, it's just you can't simultaneously make this argument and believe that trans women are women. And if you don't believe the latter, you're transphobic.

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:19:40 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @lxo No fuck off

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:19:43 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Matthew Garrett

     @mjg59

     You're certainly entitled to that prejudice.

     @rysiek @darnell @lxo

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:23:30 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @lxo I'm sorry, that was an unnecessarily brusque response. To be more elaborate: your assertion is based on you not understanding the details of the issue you're discussing, and as a result you have presented a simple and wrong claim that has no basis in reality. There is no clear definition of "sex" that accurately describes every human on the planet, and anyone willing to accept the intricacies of what software freedom means in different contexts should be able to understand that

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:25:04 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @rysiek @darnell @lxo Do you believe that trans women are women?

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:39:13 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Matthew Garrett

     @mjg59

     I'm not interested in pivoting to that discussion, certainly in this form. I've had enough contact with priests in my life to recognize it for what it is.

     What you're doing here is assuming that everyone either shares your metaphysical beliefs or is immoral. This is an extreme form of prejudice, bigotry.

     It's certainly fine to attach moral judgement to sharing moral beliefs, e.g. “everyone deserves dignity” — if you don't believe that, people will rightly judge you.

     But it becomes bigotry when moral judgement is attached to sharing metaphysical beliefs, like “people have souls”. Even if you believe there's a moral value connected to that metaphysical belief, like if you think: “if people don't believe they have souls, they'll have no reason not to kill one another!” — you *are* bigoted if you assume that people who don't believe in souls are immoral.

     This distinction is important. People are entitled to have different metaphysical beliefs than you are they aren't immoral for it. If you start judging them for that, that's just your bigotry.

     What you're presenting is clearly a metaphysical belief, not a moral one — there's no inherent moral value to being a man or a woman. You might connect some moral value to that metaphysical belief in your worldview, but that's on you.

     So what you're presenting is bigotry, by virtue of saying: either everyone shares my metaphysical belief, or they are immoral.

     You're being bigoted.

     Stop that.

     @rysiek @darnell @lxo

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:43:22 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz @rysiek @darnell @lxo There's no inherent moral value to being a man or a woman, but nor is there an accurate biological definition of what one is based on our current understanding of science. Suggesting that someone is not a woman because of your understanding of their (undisclosed) biology is not a position that's backed by science - but it is a position that enables bigotry and prejudice against trans women. Pretending that you're the victim here is disgusting.

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 18:46:14 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo Anyway https://101010.pl/@rcz/113571236878761566 is what you've ended up defending here, a complete refusal to agree that trans women are women and an accusation that even asking that question implies bigotry. Maybe apologise to @rysiek ?

   • Embed this notice
     Eleanor Saitta (dymaxion@infosec.exchange)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 19:08:56 JST Eleanor Saitta

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz
     Christ what an asshole
     @mjg59 @rysiek @darnell @lxo

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Saturday, 30-Nov-2024 22:42:54 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo I appreciate you saying that.

     However, I will make my own decisions on how to conduct myself in a conversation with a person I've known for about 2 decades on a topic I care about, as long as Radek is also willing to continue the conversation.

     I am using Quiet public visibility setting, and that's so that nobody who doesn't want to follow it, doesn't have to. Fedi software also has affordances for muting a thread.

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 04:57:00 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz I have not accused you, personally, of anything. In this particular case I asked a question about misogyny, which I feel is a valid one, as in many other cases where women are forced to jump through hoops men are not, it is seen (correctly) as misogyny.

     I appreciate you responding to that question, and the other two.

     Should men who tested "female" in these tests be allowed to continue participating in mens' disciplines?

     Should they be allowed to participate in womens'?

     @darnell

   • Embed this notice
     Radek Czajka (rcz@101010.pl)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 04:57:02 JST Radek Czajka

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:

     @rysiek @darnell
     I'm not against sex testing in male sport. The reason I predict it would mostly affect female sport is I assume the main objective for tests is to catch cheaters (people who know they would fail such a test, but enter the competition if there is no test), and obviously there isn't as much motivation for females to cheat their way into male sport as it is for males to cheat their way into female sport.

     We see that in the trans issue: there is a lot of discussion about how awful it would be for transwomen having to compete in male category, while transmen seem relatively comfortable competing in female category.

     Even in your example, the female enters the male category just to be treated unfairly. Why would she do that to herself, if she can enter the female category?

     But this assumption might be wrong, if we think that people just genuinely don't know. Then testing everyone in both categories would be correct, yes.

     Also, I think these tests should be done early, when people start competing on low level — to avoid unnecessary public exposure and painful breakdowns of sport careers in which people already put huge parts of their lives. And also for people with DSDs it's just useful information in itself to be diagnosed as early as possible, if they already hadn't until that point.

     (Side note: I very much try to steer clear of accusing you of things like misogyny, bigotry etc., while you venture into such accusations repeatedly. I'd really like you to stop that, it's not constructive.)

   • Embed this notice
     Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦 (rysiek@mstdn.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Dec-2024 05:11:14 JST Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦

     in reply to

     • Darnell Clayton :verified:
     • Radek Czajka

     @rcz also, over this whole thread you took exception to many things you perceived me as saying or implying, so allow me to take exception with a thing I perceived you as implying – which is that you seem to have labeled Trans sportspeople as "cheaters".

     After insisting previously this has nothing to do with Trans issues.

     I don't want to dwell on that at this point, just marking it up and letting you know I took note of that.

     @darnell

   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:01:40 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @mjg59
     Human sex is clearly defined by gamete size.
     @lxo
     mittimithai likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:02:28 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @lxo no, it's not

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:48:53 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @lxo trivial counter-example: people who don't produce gametes

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:51:47 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @quasi @lxo Yes, sex is clearly defined for everyone by gametes and chromosomes, it is not constructed. A person with Downs Syndrome isn’t a new species. Linguistic sleight of hand and subjectivity doesn’t change objective reality. We are all well informed here and we know where your activist nonscience came from and the transhumanist agenda that funds it. Intersex/DSD people don’t want to be lumped in with gender people and used for their sociopolitical ends to queer biology. Biology exists, is observable, and not subject to brainwashing and No Debating into five sexes. There is not a third gamete, everyone exists because a male and female fucked. We aren’t clownfish and although exposure to hormones in wastewater is doing weird shit to freshwater fish reproduction, all it’s doing to humans is causing sterility, anorgasmia and organ failure.
     
     @mjg59
     It’s too many categories that not enough people will fill and everything requires sponsorship. It would degrade the integrity of sports to spread it around so everyone can feel like an athlete. School sports in general is already suffering lack of funding. A genderpeopled sports league would be interesting but there is no straightforward definition of trans that doesn’t depend on sex role stereotypes, so a guy who said he felt like a woman last night when he beat off to sissy porn could barge in and crush the estrogen-impaired TIMs. Weight fluctuates so it would be odd to have Obese Youth Judo not to mention it would encourage obesity, as allowing trans ID males in women’s sports encourages substandard male including CAIS athletes to self ID as women Sports is not for everyone and that’s okay!
     AnungIkwe likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:53:43 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi sorry, you're being unscientific so I'm ignoring everything you're saying

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:56:50 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi No u
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:57:36 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi it's cool, Cambridge gave me a PhD in genetics so I think my credentials there are established

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 14:58:27 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi Sure you did
   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:03:03 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi We know where you activist science came from. I’m sorry you wasted all that money at Cambridge, which is ideologically captured. You went to the PoMo woo woo woke version of a university that teaches Creationism as a real thing.
     Yisheng Qingwa Jiu Bao likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:03:09 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @mjg59
     "Some people only have one leg, therefore humans are not bipedal."
     @lxo
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:04:32 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi wasted what money?

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:06:30 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @lxo so how do you determine the sex of someone who doesn't produce gametes?

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:13:44 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi Money, time, brain space on ridiculous indoctrination. You’re boring and I have a job to wake up for, so we’re done. Good luck deprogramming in the future and with your useless degree.
     
     Challenge yourself https://www.amazon.com.mx/Binary-Debunking-Spectrum-Myth-English-ebook/dp/B0CG463K7V
     Colin Wright debating Alice Dreger on Heterodorx is a good debate, too.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:17:30 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi good work on not presenting any science

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:19:42 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi Every DSD is sex specific. The end.
   • Embed this notice
     LostInCalifornia (lostincalifornia@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:20:37 JST LostInCalifornia

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett

     @lxo @mjg59 Funny how once women finally get a sports category of their own after being excluded for 1000's of years, men decide that it's all about bigotry, isn't it?

     Not like male entitlement is part of it, or payoffs to sports scouts who venture into parts of the worlds where DSDs are common. No, there is "no" corruption involved at all (that you're helping to cover up for).

     Childfree and PG like this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:23:24 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi and how is that sex identified

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:23:30 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     it is.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:25:30 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi nope

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:28:23 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     Do you honestly believe there aren't very natural interpretations to these categories that evolutionary biologists just didn't think of individuals who don't produce gametes for one reason or another?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:29:50 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi I believe it's a definition driven by convenience rather than inherent truth

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:33:11 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     .....so evolutionary biologists enjoy ignoring "inherent truth" (whatever the bloody hell that is) just so they can go toddle off to go make remarkable inferences on how life has evolved over hundreds of millions of years across numerous scales including at the levels of cells and molecules?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:34:36 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi all biologists engage in fairly arbitrary classification because humans are bad at dealing with continuums. Just because scientists do it doesn't tell you anything about reality.

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:37:43 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     Ah so biological classification are arbitrary. Carbon, hydrogen, cells, proteins, lipids....teeth, hair, gorillas, ants, it's all just a big old fuzzy continuum and these categories don't tell you anything about reality. Got it.
   • Embed this notice
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) (taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:40:30 JST Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @quasi @lxo
     
     This is about sports, right? And the question of whether it's fair to let transwomen (males) compete in women's sports.
     
     I agree that sex is clearly (enough) defined and determined to answer that question. (The answer is: No, it's unfair to women to let males compete against them.)
     
     You're saying that not every single human being can be clearly determined to be female or male, and presenting this as a counter argument, is that correct?
     
     If so, then I think this is an example of the continuum fallacy or decision-point fallacy.
     
     Just because there may be people whose sex is difficult to determine and opens up philosophical debates on where to draw the line, doesn't mean that there is no line or that we can never tell which side of the line someone falls.
     
     In the case of the vast majority of human beings, their sex is unambiguous. This includes most trans people. There is really no question about the sex of, say, Lia Thomas or Laurel Hubbard. They are very obviously male and very obviously benefitted from this. Their abilities were unremarkable while performing against men; but once they began competing against women, they were suddenly snatching gold medals, breaking national records, going to the Olympics, and so on.
     
     Note that there is also scientific evidence that transwomen retain advantage for many years even if they suppress their T levels. See recent studies conducted by Hilton et al. on this topic.
     
     That's also why it was unfair to let Imane Khelif compete in women's boxing. Their former coach admitted that Khelif had to start taking T suppressants to be eligible. (This is only required of genetically male athletes competing in women's sports.)
     
     Khelif may have been assumed female at birth due to an intersex condition (most likely 5ARD) and it must have been truly tragic to learn that this was probably the main reason they were performing so well against women. It's really saddening. But it is what it is. It would be unfair to let someone like Khelif continue competing against women when Khelif has benefitted from years of physical development and training under the effects of high T produced by internal testes; something a woman could only match by taking steroids for years.
     Yuchen Pei likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:44:37 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi I mean in most cases yeah? We could define fish teeth as different to mammalian teeth based on them being attached to the palate rather than the jaw and that would be just as legitimate as calling them the same thing. We're imposing human preconceptions of order on a universe that simply doesn't care.

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:48:06 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @taylan @lxo @quasi no, it's about whether a woman is a woman or not

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:49:47 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     Oh so you don't use these categories in your reasoning and communicating with others and for decisions on matters involving safety etc.? Hot stove, precancerous lump, man with gun, round ball...we're just imposing human preconceptions of order on a universe that simply doesn't care?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 15:53:33 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi saying a definition is useful is different to saying it's an accurate description of a biological distinction

   • Embed this notice
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) (taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:00:25 JST Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi
     
     All right. Glad to discuss it from that perspective.
     
     What defines someone as being a woman, in your view?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:01:40 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @taylan @lxo @quasi I do not have a good definition based on observable biology that covers all cases so I trust what people say about themself

   • Embed this notice
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) (taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:09:42 JST Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi
     
     Surely that can't be good grounds for written policy? Especially if it's about eligibility to partaking in competitions with large amounts of money and fame attached?
     
     People even ruin their health with steroids to win competitions. What's to prevent a man from just claiming to be a woman to win prizes?
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:10:19 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @mjg59
     In other words, "a woman is a person who identifies as a woman", which is a circular statement and not a real definition, which makes any statement from you using the word "woman" meaningless, including "transwomen are women" that you repeatedly claimed that people should accept on or else ("transphobe").
     @taylan @lxo
     mittimithai likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:11:04 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     I think I am loosing your point. Looking over your responses, perhaps this might clarify things:
     
     Are there any "inherently true" definitions or "accurate descriptions" or "biological distinctions"? If so, what are some?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:12:27 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @taylan @lxo @quasi competitions should set rules based on measurable characteristics rather than perceived proxies for them

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:14:20 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @taylan @lxo I suspect there is some broader underlying biological trait that is yet unidentified, and until it is it's better to trust people rather than assert that they're wrong

   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:16:08 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi "Carries this DNA sequence" is unambiguous, for example

   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:18:47 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @mjg59
     "Because I don't have a good definition of sex, I trust men including those who have fathered children or raped women that they are women when they say so, and I call anyone who doesn't a transphobe"
     @taylan @lxo
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:22:41 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Yuchen Pei

     @quasi @taylan @lxo Yes? Rape is awful and I agree that nobody should be forced to have rapists in their environment without clear understanding and consent, but that has nothing to do with biological sex

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:25:06 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     I am now confused, you have introduced a notion of "ambiguity" which I did not. I specifically brought up your use of "inherent truth", "accurate descriptions" or "biological distinctions".
     
     Aren't we imposing human preconceptions of order on a universe that simply doesn't care when we use a term like "DNA"?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:26:23 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi DNA is a term that unambiguously defines something that actually exists, biological sex is (based on current knowledge) not

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:34:52 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     So "DNA" exists, but "sex" does not....?
     
     Huh, how do you know you are not merely suffering from the problems associated with being "bad at dealing with continuums"? I mean, "DNA" isn't unambiguous at all...there are many many known closely related molecules that we could propose with simple chemical drawings that could match a DNA sequence. Isotopes, protonation states, oxidative damage etc....
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:36:27 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi there are things rsimilar to DNA that are not DNA. That's an easy distinction to make. There are no confusing corner cases. Sex, on the other hand, has no clear definition that avoids ambiguity.

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:46:31 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     What is DNA then?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 16:51:17 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi that's not an definition that fits in my character limit. What ambiguities are you worried about?

   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 17:08:03 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     What makes you think that "male" and "female" are vulnerable to a philosophical argument involving ideas from some of categories/ambiguity/vagueness/truth while "DNA" is not?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 17:13:12 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • mittimithai
     • Yuchen Pei

     @mittimithai @lxo @quasi male and female are human derived terms with no inherent association with a specific biological factor, DNA describes a molecule with specific characteristics

   • Embed this notice
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) (taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 20:59:46 JST Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi Genetic sex and testosterone levels are measurable, and the measurements made on Imane Khelif revealed them to be genetically male and their T levels correspondingly in the male range. Same situation for transwomen. And like I said, studies show that suppressing T doesn't diminish all advantage. Certain things are irreversible anyway, like the size/shape to which some body parts grow/change (lung capacity, Q angle, etc.) so the study results were to be expected.
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Monday, 02-Dec-2024 21:08:58 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged)
     • Matthew Garrett
     @taylan
     FTR the thread started very much about sports:
     
     https://mstdn.social/@rysiek/113560200741662882
     @lxo @mjg59
     Taylan (Now 18% More Deranged) likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     mittimithai (mittimithai@neenster.org)'s status on Tuesday, 03-Dec-2024 02:10:31 JST mittimithai

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     I can see all sorts of vagueness in your language (e.g., "biological factor"). The reason you seem to be hesitant to write out a definition of DNA I think is because you know that it is, in general, quite difficult to specify the precise perimeters of categories that we usually implicitly assume. It's quite hard even for things as simple as "water". It's really the same thing with male and female and all sort of other categories of macroscopic things.
     
     Males and females have "specific characteristics" as you use here, they don't seem like particularly special categories and have some of the same issues as "DNA", "water", "tail" etc.
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br) (lxo@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Tuesday, 03-Dec-2024 08:02:37 JST Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     in reply to

     • Matthew Garrett
     all I get from the link you posted is "Por uzi la retan aplikaĵon de Mastodon, bonvolu ebligi JavaScript. Alimaniere, provu unu el la operaciumaj aplikaĵoj por Mastodon por via platformo."
     
     that's Mastodon's way of saying, in Esperanto, that I'm not welcome to read that unless I allow it to run arbitrary code under its control (i.e., nonfree for me) on my own computer, which I refuse to do.
     
     GNU social doesn't impose that oppressive requirement, that's the main reason why I prefer it over others. that means I can't generally see posts that haven't made to the server I use, besides my not being able to even read everything that does
     
     I don't feel that I owe rysiek an apology, BTW. I stand by my assessment that trying to drive someone into some sort of contradiction is neither kind nor cool, even if the goal is to expose a transphobe.
     
     indeed, reinforcing the notion that someone's preferred bathroom bears any relationship with someone's genitalia, genome, or sports category sounds offensive to me. a person's gender identity and expression are whatever the person chooses them to be.
     
     a lot of hatred (and, as a response, rigidity) arises out of reinforcing such disparate overlaps.
     
     as long as people aren't hurting anyone else, I say let them be what they wish. and if anyone feels hurt by someone else's gender expression, I say it's the people who feel that hurt are hurting themselves, and blaming it on others.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Tuesday, 03-Dec-2024 08:10:19 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/4085838#notice-7984894 so looks like it made it to you

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br) (lxo@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Dec-2024 08:57:24 JST Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     in reply to

     • Matthew Garrett
     thanks. yes, it did make it. it might even have been there when I first skimmed over the conversation and expressed my disgust.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Dec-2024 10:39:38 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo but you felt it more important to express your disgust at the manner someone was expressing disagreement than at the claim that womanhood is defined by simple genetics?

     Look, I *know* you have no intent to be transphobic. I believe that you accept gender self identity as a fundamental human right. But you're unfamiliar with the way transphobes couch their arguments in fake respectability, and in this case you chose to target the person criticising the transphobe instead of the transphobe.

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br) (lxo@gnusocial.jp)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Dec-2024 11:45:47 JST Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     in reply to

     • Matthew Garrett
     you assume too much wrong again
     
     I'm not at all unfamiliar with that strategy
     
     I've come across many kinds of hatemongers
     
     both participants in that disgusting conversation were harming trans people
     
     I chose to express my disgust to the one person that I thought might listen to me
     
     I don't believe that hate and violence change people's opinions. it was love that made you a better person. hate and violence bring about more hate and violence, and that's not what I'm after. how about you?
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Dec-2024 11:53:18 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)

     @lxo you expressed disgust to the person criticising the transphobe because you thought you might be heard, and ignored the transphobe because you thought you wouldn't be? How do you think that looks to trans people who want to feel safe within our community? Speaking out isn't just about changing minds, it's also about setting boundaries and making it clear what we're willing to accept.

   • Embed this notice
     KratomSkull (skullhoney@spinster.xyz)'s status on Monday, 09-Dec-2024 00:16:17 JST KratomSkull

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • Matthew Garrett
     • Yuchen Pei
     @mjg59 @lxo @quasi
     AnungIkwe, Caffosaurus☕?:mayo: and Flick ?? and 4 others like this.
   • Embed this notice
     Matthew Garrett (mjg59@nondeterministic.computer)'s status on Monday, 09-Dec-2024 00:22:10 JST Matthew Garrett

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva (moving to @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)
     • KratomSkull
     • Yuchen Pei

     @skullhoney @lxo @quasi well that doesn't answer my question