TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Sports have always had a variety of various weight and qualification classes. I fail to see this as a serious issue worthy of broad social prescription to fix.
Some sports. Most actually don't. There's no such thing in tennis, for example. And even then it doesn't work. A man in the same weight category as a woman in a boxing match, is not a fair match up.
Nobody is asking you to pretend people other than those able to become pregnant can become pregnant.
Then why are we supposed to talk about "pregnant person" instead of "pregnant woman"?
You don't think the fact that this person was trans may have come out, at the absolutely, very latest during sex? You don't think that maybe, just maybe, trans people are open and honest about this stuff?
I'm sure some will and others won't. I don't really see how it matters to the point made in the hypothetical though.
Maybe the key to this is developing a society where, for many men, it would NOT feel like a deal-breaker? For instance, if they saw trans women as just as much a woman as anyone else, there wouldn't be an issue.
I don't think that's a possibility.
The turn-off here is not a sociological thing. It's a biological thing.
Then stop feeling like that, because it's not. We've understood gender as a social category for decades.
I'm not talking about gender. I'm talking about biology. Male / female. Man / woman.
I'm fine with the "gender" transwoman. Why must we redefine terms?
No, it's a woman.
I disagree. So do the biological facts.
If 200 years of now, the bones of this "woman" are dug up and tested, the conclusion will be "this was a man".
Okay. Let's say I always use the term "black person", and when someone asks me why I can never just call a black person a "person", I respond "What's wrong with calling them a black person? Why should I call them a person? I'm not going to pretend they're a person like everyone else, so I use the term 'black person'"."
That's a false equivalence imo.
For this analogy to work, you would have to demand that a black person is called a white person instead.
When talking about specific things that are unique to black people (and I can't really think of anything in particular btw), why would you not specify "black"?
Michael Jackson didn't magically become caucasian either eventhough his pigmentation changed.
Would you maybe think I had some form of prejudice underlying the way in which I was categorising black people, there?
Depends on context. But without further specifics, I'ld say no.
Disagree.It's not pretending.
I have never once met a trans person who insists on being treated - medically - as BIOLOGICALLY their preferred gender. That's absurd. It doesn't happen.
So where do you draw the line?
We have to pretend in one area but not another?
Is it? I disagree.Then get over it. The problem is clearly you.