Save Women's Sport - the pearl clutching begins

barbk

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,534
So you are comparing trans women on estrogen and low testosterone playing sports to child marriage. Nice.

Right -- in both cases, it is unfair.

Uh, no. The first is unfair, the second should be a criminal offense.

Marriage of anyone under 18 is legal in most US states with parental permission. The marriages often involve pressure by parents on young women for cultural, religious, or immigration-based reasons. Thus, unfair to the young women. I'm not seeing it as a criminal offense unless trafficking was involved. YMMV.

Nuances matter. I support marriage in general, but not without restrictions.
 

PRlady

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,516
Could you explain what this means?


Sure.

Gender critical feminists don't want abortion rights. Doesn't matter if they say they do.

I think you're being hysterical. You've stated that it's an emotional subject for you, so I get it, but please know that what you're saying here is just not rational by any definition. You can vent at her, but venting is all it will be.

Since JKR was brought up, I think a lot of people should really think about looking at the clear parasocial relation they have with her. She's not your "friend" because she wrote a book series about "acceptance", and she's not a "friend who backstabbed you" now that she's come out as a gender critical feminist. Nor is she a "friend" to be defended as rabidly, for that matter.
I meant that for years if not decades, many younger women refused the feminist label and Pooh-pooped the idea that abortion rights could be at risk and that they still lived in a patriarchal system. I don’t blame them, exactly, who wants to be an activist or alarmist if you feel it’s not necessary?

So we have had these incessant wars over gender the last several years and before that over pornography or whether 2nd generation feminists were white and privileged. ( We were! But for some feminists of color, including one who used to post here, that meant stop focusing on abortion and more on intersectional issues although of course abortion is as intersectional as it gets.)

We took too much for granted. And women who hated Hillary voted the other way only to find that Trump’s young Christian nationalists could dominate this court for two generations.

Never mind me, I’m an old grumpy feminist secularist. Every cause I’ve worked for other than Israel/Palestine has been trashed by this Court and that one will show up next term when the Six Saviors rule that it’s ok to outlaw BDS and it really isn’t free speech.
 

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
And those younger feminists never believed us when we said Roe could be endangered and there would be a backlash to MeToo and that girl bosses didn’t alter fundamental inequalities for women in the workplace. The most bitter I-told-you-so in history from those of us who remember “Want Ads:Female.”

What were "Want Ads: Female", if it's not too much trouble?

You were smart to realise how fragile women's gains were. In the 1980s we never imagined that secularity was this fragile. :(

Women are still hanging on though. Plus, women from conservative backgrounds were supposed to be a tool to make this government win the elections, but now that they've got a taste of public life, they don't want to go back home. :HA!:
 
Last edited:

overedge

Mayor of Carrot City
Messages
33,349
@Asli "help wanted" advertisements in most North American newspapers used to be divided into "help wanted: male" and "help wanted: female". (The "female" ads were usually for secretaries, nurses, teachers, etc.) Human rights laws put an end to that division because it discriminated on the basis of gender.
 

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
I meant that for years if not decades, many younger women refused the feminist label and Pooh-pooped the idea that abortion rights could be at risk and that they still lived in a patriarchal system. I don’t blame them, exactly, who wants to be an activist or alarmist if you feel it’s not necessary?

I was a teenage girl in the 90s, and part of the problem for my generation (very oldest millennials / youngest Gen X) is that we were actively discouraged from identifying as feminists. Obviously there were exceptions, but for average girls who didn’t come from particularly politically active families, and who consumed mainstream media and pop culture, the overwhelming message we were getting from all sides was that the feminist movement had already gone far enough (or too far). Earlier feminists had won all the battles, and if we asked for anything more, we were asking for too much.

We were the ones who spent our late teens and early 20s telling people, “I’m not a feminist, I’m a humanist.” Because we were conditioned to think being a feminist was overbearing and unnecessary.

Obviously some of us got past that. But I still don’t think women my age (in the U.S., at least) are generally particularly inclined to identify as feminists, relative to women who are either older or younger than us. And that absolutely contributed to the downfall of Roe. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a conscious part of the anti-choice strategy - lull a generation of women into thinking they have no reason to fight, and they’ll never learn to do it.
 

PRlady

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,516
I was a teenage girl in the 90s, and part of the problem for my generation (very oldest millennials / youngest Gen X) is that we were actively discouraged from identifying as feminists. Obviously there were exceptions, but for average girls who didn’t come from particularly politically active families, and who consumed mainstream media and pop culture, the overwhelming message we were getting from all sides was that the feminist movement had already gone far enough (or too far). Earlier feminists had won all the battles, and if we asked for anything more, we were asking for too much.

We were the ones who spent our late teens and early 20s telling people, “I’m not a feminist, I’m a humanist.” Because we were conditioned to think being a feminist was overbearing and unnecessary.

Obviously some of us got past that. But I still don’t think women my age (in the U.S., at least) are generally particularly inclined to identify as feminists, relative to women who are either older or younger than us. And that absolutely contributed to the downfall of Roe. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a conscious part of the anti-choice strategy - lull a generation of women into thinking they have no reason to fight, and they’ll never learn to do it.
Can I send you a present for validating my Boomer description? Chocolate? Flowers?
 

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
Obviously some of us got past that. But I still don’t think women my age (in the U.S., at least) are generally particularly inclined to identify as feminists, relative to women who are either older or younger than us. And that absolutely contributed to the downfall of Roe. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a conscious part of the anti-choice strategy - lull a generation of women into thinking they have no reason to fight, and they’ll never learn to do it.
They'll probably learn to do it when they need to and I think they'll need it now, won't they? :mitchell:
 

her grace

standing with Mariah
Messages
4,998
I was a teenage girl in the 90s, and part of the problem for my generation (very oldest millennials / youngest Gen X) is that we were actively discouraged from identifying as feminists. Obviously there were exceptions, but for average girls who didn’t come from particularly politically active families, and who consumed mainstream media and pop culture, the overwhelming message we were getting from all sides was that the feminist movement had already gone far enough (or too far). Earlier feminists had won all the battles, and if we asked for anything more, we were asking for too much.

Agreed. Much like this generation was taught to be color-blind, girls weren't taught to notice and fight for their rights. For people of good will, there was a "Girls can do anything" mentality, which might have been inspirational, but didn't teach us to expect sexism or what to do when we faced it.
 

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
They'll probably learn to do it when they need to and I think they'll need it now, won't they? :mitchell:

I wish I was more optimistic. A lot of people in this country consider themselves apolitical and are privileged enough to not be immediately impacted by the worst consequences of whatever bad things happen. And even when things finally get bad enough that those synapses do start firing, many people also have such poor civics education and so little media literacy that they direct their outrage at all the wrong things. In particular, straight cis white people can be easily manipulated into believing that marginalized groups like racial minorities, immigrants, and LGBTQ people are somehow a threat, because fighting an “other” is more comforting than admitting that the call is coming from inside the house. White women might be harmed by the patriarchal structure of society, but they benefit a lot from white supremacy, so they’re not always going to side with feminists.

My experience has taught me that people who are pushed too far might start yelling about politics, but not always in the direction of the real problems.
 

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
White women might be harmed by the patriarchal structure of society, but they benefit a lot from white supremacy, so they’re not always going to side with feminists.

Piggy-backing on myself here, I should also add that “white feminism” is also a very real phenomenon. A lot of straight, cis white women don’t acknowledge something as a feminist issue unless it directly impacts straight, cis white women. And that did contribute directly to the fall of Roe too, because women from marginalized communities have seen their access to abortion rolling back for years, but they didn’t have the acknowledgment from a lot of mainstream (white) feminists that it was a real problem.
 

PRlady

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,516
I wish I was more optimistic. A lot of people in this country consider themselves apolitical and are privileged enough to not be immediately impacted by the worst consequences of whatever bad things happen. And even when things finally get bad enough that those synapses do start firing, many people also have such poor civics education and so little media literacy that they direct their outrage at all the wrong things. In particular, straight cis white people can be easily manipulated into believing that marginalized groups like racial minorities, immigrants, and LGBTQ people are somehow a threat, because fighting an “other” is more comforting than admitting that the call is coming from inside the house. White women might be harmed by the patriarchal structure of society, but they benefit a lot from white supremacy, so they’re not always going to side with feminists.

My experience has taught me that people who are pushed too far might start yelling about politics, but not always in the direction of the real problems.
I have four white male capitalist friends, all of whom have done very well professionally. The pseudo-libertarian crap on the pandemic shocked me, I thought public health and protecting vulnerable people in a pandemic was, uh, UNcontroversial.

None of the guys know each other, they’re from different backgrounds and “liberal” on social issues. But when the rubber hit the road and their lifestyles were threatened, oh boy.
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
49,929
Feminists aren't the ones who have started re-defining what a woman is, according to gender rather than sex. :)
Of course, they were. I've been fighting against societal expectations of women all my life and it's exactly why I am a feminist.
None of the guys know each other, they’re from different backgrounds and “liberal” on social issues. But when the rubber hit the road and their lifestyles were threatened, oh boy.
And this is why we see many so-called liberal white people starting to back more conservative, law-and-order type candidates whenever crime in their own neighborhoods starts to rise.
 

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
In particular, straight cis white people can be easily manipulated into believing that marginalized groups like racial minorities, immigrants, and LGBTQ people are somehow a threat, because fighting an “other” is more comforting than admitting that the call is coming from inside the house. White women might be harmed by the patriarchal structure of society, but they benefit a lot from white supremacy, so they’re not always going to side with feminists.

My experience has taught me that people who are pushed too far might start yelling about politics, but not always in the direction of the real problems.

It's more or less the same everywhere. The governments usually choose one external enemy (China or Russia or Iraq) and one internal enemy (immigrants) to channel the blame and anger. I've never heard of LGBT people being successfully used as a scapegoat for the economic situation or falling life standards though.

Maybe the political system in the USA lacks a bir of dynamism what with the two-party system and the electoral college system that is frankly incomprehensible for a foreigner ;) but you are surely not so different from other countries. Young Americans have reacted to the Vietnam war, women have reacted to Trump. From the outside it looks like the left-wing is getting stronger. The demographics seem to be changing. So maybe things will be shaken up.

I just hope young people don't spend too much of their time and energy deciding where they are in the gender spectrum because that looks exhausting. :shuffle:
 
Last edited:

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
I have four white male capitalist friends, all of whom have done very well professionally. The pseudo-libertarian crap on the pandemic shocked me, I thought public health and protecting vulnerable people in a pandemic was, uh, UNcontroversial.

None of the guys know each other, they’re from different backgrounds and “liberal” on social issues. But when the rubber hit the road and their lifestyles were threatened, oh boy.
In France it's the lower socio-economic class that reacted most to compulsory masks and vaccine incentives and Marine Le Pen's party benefited from it. :rolleyes:

The French, like Americans, don't like being told what to do.
 

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
It's more or less the same everywhere. The governments usually choose one external enemy (China or Russia or Iraq) and one internal enemy (immigrants) to channel the blame and anger. I've never heard of LGBT people being successfully used as a scapegoat for the economic situation or falling life standards though.

One of the popular excuses for why Democrats lose elections is “identity politics.” Basically, any marginalized group that dares ask for fundamental human rights is accused of tanking the party’s chances by alienating so-called moderate voters. Unfortunately a lot of that finger-pointing comes from within the party, but that’s commonly where LGBTQ people are targeted. We lose the vote of Joe from Ohio who’s a real nice liberal guy except he doesn’t like gay people, and people in the party blame gay people instead of blaming Joe.

Maybe the political system in the USA lacks a bir of dynamism what with the two-party system and the electoral college system that is frankly incomprehensible for a foreigner ;) but you are surely not so different from other countries. Young Americans have reacted to the Vietnam war, women have reacted to Trump. From the outside it looks like the left-wing is getting stronger. The demographics seem to be changing. So maybe things will be shaken up.

I can’t remember his name or the title, but there’s a political scientist who recently published a book arguing that the U.S. didn’t have a true two-party system until the last few decades. Historically there have always been only two major parties because that’s all the Electoral College system will allow (and yeah, that’s a whole thing). But in the past, the parties functioned more like coalitions with room for significant differences in ideology. Within the last few decades, largely because of changes in the media and the way money flows, the parties are much less open to candidates with substantive disagreements. Money comes from the top down, so even at a local level, candidates are pressured to adopt virtually all of the national party’s platform in order to have access to those funds. And the nature of the media these days is pushing parties to adopt increasingly extreme platforms.

It’s an argument that I find depressingly convincing - we don’t know how bad a two-party system can get because we’ve never really had anything like this before. The best solutions I can see are abolishing the Electoral College and major campaign finance reform, neither of which are happening because it’s in the interest of people in power to prevent them.

I just hope young people don't spend too much of their time and energy deciding where they are in the gender spectrum because that looks exhausting. :shuffle:

Trans and non-binary people are reliably left-wing, consistently allied with cis feminists, and tend to have above-average political engagement because they’re trying not to die. We’re lucky to have them on our side.
 

PRlady

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,516
Of course, they were. I've been fighting against societal expectations of women all my life and it's exactly why I am a feminist.

And this is why we see many so-called liberal white people starting to back more conservative, law-and-order type candidates whenever crime in their own neighborhoods starts to rise.
True. I’ll take that as a personal shot but have no problem acknowledging it (my candidate didn’t win for city council). But there’s “law and order” candidates and there are those who don’t want to do the same old things that aren’t working. And since the people most victimized by rising crime are poor people of color, wanting to reverse the crime wave is certainly not just to benefit whites people who can move or buy alarm systems etc.
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
49,929
And since the people most victimized by rising crime are poor people of color,
So what do they want? Even more over-policing? Seems doubtful.

The whole "defund the police" movement has mostly been talk. Very few police departments got their budgets cut -- at most a handful. And very few progressive prosecutors were elected and the ones that did get in didn't get a lot of change done because it hasn't been that long. But apparently, that's why our crime is rising so we need to "do something different" which seems to be electing the kind of people we elected in the 90s. IOW, not that different after all.

And when crime rates go down a few years after the pandemic is over as seems inevitable looking at past pandemics, those "same old, same old" methods will be given credit even though crime will go down all over the world including in places with very different approaches to crime.

But I digress.
 
Last edited:

MsZem

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,598
The relationship between cis feminists and trans women has always been complicated, and I’m going to say that realistically, there’s a generation gap at play. Not 100%, and of course there are common battles for all feminists of all ages and a lot we’ve never won. But broadly: earlier generations of feminists probably didn’t spend as much time discussing what a woman was, but fought really hard to establish what a woman was worth. And by necessity the approach had to be, “These are things we’re claiming rightfully for ourselves, and we’re not going to let anyone else swoop in and take them.”

On the flip side, a lot of younger cis women have grown up in an era when women don’t have to fight as hard in many contexts for certain basic rights, but are constantly being sent harmful messages simply about what a woman is. The feminist battle a lot of younger cis women know is: I don’t have to be thin, I don’t have to be pretty, I can be athletic, I can be into STEM, etc. It’s constantly fighting back against what feels like an attempt to define the boundaries of acceptable womanhood, so it’s a much more natural step for many of those cis women to view embracing trans women as another middle finger to the patriarchal idea that there’s a “right” or “wrong” way to be a woman.
That's really interesting, and I'm trying to figure out where exactly I fall - too young to have been part of the earlier struggles, but not as young as women who grew up fully in the latter era. FWIW, I've always defined myself as a feminist, but have had a harder time pinning down what feminism means to me.

To get back on topic, an opinion piece that says Roe v Wade was activist but so is Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
How is that on topic for a thread about trans women in sports?
 

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
One of the popular excuses for why Democrats lose elections is “identity politics.” Basically, any marginalized group that dares ask for fundamental human rights is accused of tanking the party’s chances by alienating so-called moderate voters. Unfortunately a lot of that finger-pointing comes from within the party, but that’s commonly where LGBTQ people are targeted. We lose the vote of Joe from Ohio who’s a real nice liberal guy except he doesn’t like gay people, and people in the party blame gay people instead of blaming Joe.

At home, identity politics are very important but they're about ethnicity or religion.

I don't think that in the year 2022 anyone against LGBT rights can be called a "moderate voter". If Joe from Ohio doesn't like gay people, than he is bigoted.

There's a very good example that shows how even one of the most supposedly religious conservative groups has surpassed that stage, but I don't dare elaborate, what with the new social media law to be voted next week. But know that I have it. ;)


I can’t remember his name or the title, but there’s a political scientist who recently published a book arguing that the U.S. didn’t have a true two-party system until the last few decades.

Lee Drutman, "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop"?

Have never read anything on the subject but just happened to talk on WhatsApp with a friend who lives near DC. So I'm showing off. :rofl:


The best solutions I can see are abolishing the Electoral College and major campaign finance reform, neither of which are happening because it’s in the interest of people in power to prevent them.

Over here people have formed the European Union and are now trying to destroy it. The Soviet Union has been formed and destroyed. Everyone else is around their fifth major system change, so please keep up! ;)

ETA: Not intended to insult the USA obviously. :saint:
 
Last edited:

Sylvia

Rooting for underdogs!
Messages
72,701
@MacMadame created this thread in PI earlier this month if people would like to continue there and leave this one for sports:

ETA link to this San Diego Union-Tribune column Banning transgender women from competing in women’s sports is ‘unnecessary’ and ‘restrictive’ (June 26):
While the FINA policy was informed by the work of specialist groups in athletics, science and medicine, and legal and human rights, there is another argument around the kind of science that should be considered in these kinds of policies. Joanna Harper is a medical physicist and visiting fellow for transgender athletic performance at Loughborough University in England, where she’s part of a program researching the physiology of transgender athletes. She took some time to talk about looking at the science around the performance of transgender athletes versus the science that looks at the differences between male and female athletes; her desire to begin researching this topic after beginning her own transition in 2004 and noticing the changes in her performance as a serious distance runner; and what she typically considers when advising other governing bodies, including the International Olympic Committee, on drafting similar policies. (This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)
 
Last edited:

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
Congratulations to everyone trying to “save” women’s sport on getting cisgender women barred from actually participating in sport.


Thanks for sharing. I’m going to add this ESPN article, which also covers Caster Semenya’s history.

[Editing out the link because it keeps erroring - good ESPN article if anyone wants to google, I guess]

I’m so glad we’re “empowering women” by excluding anyone who doesn’t fit within the narrow confines of what our patriarchal society has deemed acceptable. Go feminism.
 

MacMadame

Doing all the things
Messages
49,929
Thanks for sharing. I’m going to add this ESPN article, which also covers Caster Semenya’s history.

[Editing out the link because it keeps erroring - good ESPN article if anyone wants to google, I guess]
Is it the one with this title?

Olympic champion Caster Semenya says she offered to show track officials her body to prove she was female​

 

allezfred

Lipinski Stole My Catchphrase
Staff member
Messages
63,138
Isn't it odd the lack of outrage about cisgender women being totally excluded from competing in their gender category at an elite level, but we have pages and pages of debate about the miniscule amount of transgender women at lower levels?
 
Last edited:

Trillian

Well-Known Member
Messages
612
Is it the one with this title?

Olympic champion Caster Semenya says she offered to show track officials her body to prove she was female​


No, this title:

Zambia FA critical of 'stringent' Barbra Banda hormone tests​


Although now that I’ve looked, the quotes from Semenya in the newer article were drawn from the same interview.
 

Asli

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,866
Isn't it odd the lack of outrage about cisgender women being totally excluded from competing in their gender category at an elite level, but we have pages and pages of debate about the miniscule amount of transgender women at lower levels?

I want to show outrage but don't understand what happened. :( The article says the eligibility rules were put in place back in 2011, so what changed for Banda since the Olympics?

Did her testosterone level go up? Or are the eligibility criteria different for the IOC and professional football?

It doesn't say in the article why she's ineligible now when she could compete at the Olympics.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information