UPenn transgender swimmer continues dominant season with more record-breaking wins

[We Never Know]

What makes you think that trans persons do not participate in said male sports? Who is "we" in "we don't see"? A bunch of Helen Kellers?

This is a single instance Googling you can find many more: Schuyler Bailar - Wikipedia

We is people in general. When I say "we" it means people in general.

 

[We Never Know]

I don't follow sports, don't really care for them and there's hardly any trans men competing in men's sports or sports that I know of at all. I'd never heard of that trans man swimmer that Lain just mentioned above. It's also possible they may choose to keep their trans-ness private. Not everyone waves it around like a flag.

"Not everyone waves it around like a flag"

That's true same as its true the flag is waved way more by males going to female.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

"Not everyone waves it around like a flag"

That's true same as its true the flag is waved way more by males going to female.

Well there are more trans females who are out than trans males from what I've heard.

Also, while flags may get waved by trans females within their own trans groups, I don't see it so much outside... all I see is men being just as vocal, as well as trans activists who aren't even transgender causing trouble trying to "defend" trans females who didn't ask for it. I find cis women and trans women pretty quiet outside of their own groups, as often in the larger world, I feel they aren't given proper chance to speak.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well, they are.

No, there are even in the US limits on opinions. How you draw the limit on speak is off course relative to different laws in different cultures, but I know of no culture that allows all speak.
Further as long as you accept individual property rights, you don't have the right to speak any opinion you like, because I can ask you to leave.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't think that man would be welcome at the women's shelter in the first place. Lol.

No, I have a universal right to be everywhere and demand to be considered as relevant for everything.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

How would you separate 2 swimmers (one trans,
& one cis) capable of different significantly different
times in a race? (The trans is faster.)

I'm not a swimmer and this is just a suggestion so I am certainly not claiming to have all the answers, but I'd suggest where appropriate, separating swimmers by average of swim times and perhaps other metrics that show skill levels.

Next question...
What if 2 swimmers have nearly identical performance,
but the trans female swimmer wins repeatedly?

Then the swimmer winning repeatedly is the superior swimmer. When you compete, someone loses. I imagine athletes don't just compete to win, though, but to improve their own performance and for the spirit of the sport.

Do you think cis women would be satisfied with
their accomplishments under your system?

I think it depends on the athlete. Some people compete due to their love of the sport. Some for pushing themselves into better performance. Some are driven by competition.

Finally, why not have totally separate events
for cis & trans women (as others have suggested)?

I am sure this would likely occur anyway, since division by gender has been the thing for a while. Even with professional competitions divided by skill levels, I can see there being other leagues that focus on other things like gender.

But why not focus on skills rather than gender? After all, if we are competing to define skill, why not offer competition that allows for genders to compete together?

This may also show the potential of females to be able to compete with men. If there are physical differences that training cannot compensate for, the skill levels will show this anway. If training can compensate for the given sport, then men will have to deal with women beating them sometimes.

 

[SomeRandom]

"Not everyone waves it around like a flag"

That's true same as its true the flag is waved way more by males going to female.

Could that speak to misogyny? Like a man being very insecure about transitioning due to cultural views on femininity?
Something that is discussed ad nauseam even now in the third wave of feminism extensively?

(please note I am not trying to demean anyone transitioning. More power to you.
It’s just a hypothetical I posited.)

 

[Revoltingest]

I've figured out a solution.
No one will like it.
Really.
It'll never happen.
But it's perfect.
So it'll be hated.
Scorned.

Spoiler: Warning: You won't like it.

The solution is just like a marathon, with all genders competing together.
Separate but equal results:
Trans women compete alongside cis women in all events & venues.
Results are separately tallied.
Example...
In a race there'd be 2 winners:
- One cis
- One trans.

 

[Kooky]

Clearly, this swimmer is too successful for a female athlete who are, after all, defined as being inferior to male athletes in all areas.

I disagree. Unless an example of, lets say a trans man finishing as top dog in a professional men's league can be provided.

Therefore, a trans woman should not be allowed to compete in a women's competition, as she would be too successful for a woman. Correct?

 

[Kooky]

We is people in general. When I say "we" it means people in general.

One reason I dislike the inflationary usage of the first person plural here on RF is that it is commonly employed in order claim to speak for people the speaker has not even bothered consulting for their opinion, let alone whether they even agree with them.

I can never help but judge this as the speaker assuming an air of authority and status as a representative of entire communities they simply do not have,and which I therefore consider wholly unearned.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, there are even in the US limits on opinions. How you draw the limit on speak is off course relative to different laws in different cultures, but I know of no culture that allows all speak.
Further as long as you accept individual property rights, you don't have the right to speak any opinion you like, because I can ask you to leave.

 

[We Never Know]

One reason I dislike the inflationary usage of the first person plural here on RF is that it is commonly employed in order claim to speak for people the speaker has not even bothered consulting for their opinion, let alone whether they even agree with them.

I can never help but judge this as the speaker assuming an air of authority and status as a representative of entire communities they simply do not have,and which I therefore consider wholly unearned.

So if someone says "we live on earth" you dislike that?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So if someone says "we live on earth" you dislike that?

No, but even that has a limit. We all don't need to survive and reproduce for some to survive and reproduce. Ain't biology grant!

 

[We Never Know]

No, but even that has a limit. We all don't need to survive and reproduce for some to survive and reproduce. Ain't biology grant!

While I was growing up words like "we, us, him, her, them, etc" were used frequently, weren't a problem and didn't offend anyone

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

While I was growing up words like "we, us, him, her, them, etc" were used frequently, weren't a problem and didn't offend anyone

Yeah, but evolution is still ongoing even in culture.

 

[Kooky]

So if someone says "we live on earth" you dislike that?

You are taking a deliberately absurd example in order to make my position look ridiculous.

So in light of your response - do you actually believe it is ridiculous to not want a speaker to assume unearned authority and act as representatives of people they have neither met nor consulted about their opinions?

EDIT: Or, to take your absurd example and turn it on its head - would you think it reasonable if I was to assume that my opinions and ideological positions were representative of every single person on Earth?

 

[We Never Know]

You are taking a deliberately absurd example in order to make my position look ridiculous.

So in light of your response - do you actually believe it is ridiculous to not want a speaker to assume unearned authority and act as representatives of people they have neither met nor consulted about their opinions?

EDIT: Or, to take your absurd example and turn it on its head - would you think it reasonable if I was to assume that my opinions and ideological positions were representative of every single person on Earth?

See post #94

 

[Kooky]

See post #94

If you don't care about addressing my points then at least make the base level effort of telling me about it.

 

[We Never Know]

If you don't care about addressing my points then at least make the base level effort of telling me about it.

They are your points and your are the one that has problems with these words... "we, us, him, her, them". I don't have a problem with anyone using them.
You will never see me try to correct anyone by saying "who is we". In my opinion its petty.

 

[We Never Know]

If you don't care about addressing my points then at least make the base level effort of telling me about it.

I now wonder if my name "we" never know" bothers you lol