What to call this thread?

[Shiftless2]

Figure this deserved it's own thread. I do have to say that when I saw the first meme my first thought was that it belonged in a thread focused on the demise of Roe v Wade. But the second makes it clear that it also belongs in a thread re LGBT issues.

 

[sear]

"doctors can no longer be trusted" MommaT

I'd welcome 3 examples.
To my knowledge, there's been no significant stare decisis or other shift or harm inflicting the doctor / patient privilege.

But what threatens confidentiality is non-paper medical records. With our medical records in "the cloud" we might as well forget about confidentiality.

The question then arises, if she's going to lie to her own doctor, why bother with the medical exam at all?

 

[Shiftless2]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/period-tracker-apps-data-privacy-1.6510029

But what threatens confidentiality is non-paper medical records. With our medical records in "the cloud" we might as well forget about confidentiality.

More likely text messages, cell phone locations, and internet search histories.

Deleting Your Period Tracker Won’t Protect You

Tweets telling women to do that went viral after Roe v. Wade was overturned, but experts say other digital data are more likely to reveal an illegal abortion.

www.nytimes.com

The question then arises, if she's going to lie to her own doctor, why bother with the medical exam at all?

This isn't lying to her doctor - it's simply not giving the date of her last period but stating that they are regular.

 

[sear]

S2 #3
I agree cell phone security (lack thereof) is a major security issue. But I believe the e-medical records issue is a security vulnerability as well.

s #2
"The question then arises, if she's going to lie to her own doctor, why bother with the medical exam at all?"

This isn't lying to her doctor - it's simply not giving the date of her last period but stating that they are regular.

The premise is that she lied to her MD.
Which specific details were lies is not clear to me. But if she lied about any detail, can the others be trusted? More to the point if she didn't want such personal information to be vulnerable, why would she be truthful about any of it?

 

[Shiftless2]

She didn't lie - all she said was "they're regular" and said she wasn't going to provide any more information beyond that. I'm sure that if the exact date was important the doctor would have pressed for it.

I was also concerned about the second meme - I didn't realize that people were trying to use that information to disqualify cis athletes.

 

[sear]

"She didn't lie - all she said was "they're regular" and said she wasn't going to provide any more information beyond that." S2 #5

That's one possible if less plausible explanation. But the text implication is:
Teen daughter said: "it's regular, no need for dates".
She also said:
"doctors can no longer be trusted".
If she doesn't trust the doctor, why would she disclose a truth to the doctor?

Corroborating that interpretation, she also said:
"and they should become accustomed to not knowing." That indicates what she told the doctor was disinformation, that if she doesn't trust the doctor, than the "information" she provided can't be trusted either.
What information did she provide? "It's regular". Did she trust him with that? It was truthful?
Or she distrusted him, and blocked the line of questioning with an assertion that would if honest skip the conversation to the next area of medical exam. inquiry?

This implies that the information (what little of it she provided) was disinformation, inaccurate.
With that more plausible interpretation of the words provided, the implication is she lied.

S2 #5
I don't have enough passion about it to attend the rally.
But I'm sincere in my belief that when sport is segregated by sexual gender, either surgical or bio-chemical readjustment (reassignment) should automatically disqualify the athlete. Grey area for the luge. I would not object to such reassigned to participate in sport where both sexes compete, provided any surgical or bio-chemical readjustment not also be "performance enhancing", such as that Lance Armstrong used to win the Tour d' France.

 

[Shiftless2]

Re trans athletes - if there was any validity to the concerns people express the podium would be completely dominated by trans athletes. After all, both the IOC and NCAA have allowed trans athletes to compete for years (since 2004 and 2011 respectively) and they haven't ruled their sports. So why the concerns?

And it's not just amateur sports. Women's tennis (since 1979), the LPGA, and MMA all allow trans athletes to compete and again they haven't taken over the sports.

 

[sear]

Re trans athletes - if there was any validity to the concerns people express the podium would be completely dominated by trans athletes.

- piffle -
As a mathemagician you know that's false.
It would be true if the advantage imparted were universally insuperable. BUT !! If it were a non-zero non-infinity advantage, it could change the ratio, without in all cases meaning a certitude of outcome.

I'm a disciple of psychologist Joy Browne.
Browne says while it's important to avoid impropriety, it's also important to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

Tranny's should make up their mind.
- If athletic competition in sex segregated sport is their priority, then they should complete their sport career before turning the gender selection knob.
- If gender identity is their priority, then they can compete in sport that doesn't distinguish between male & female, where both compete interchangeably.
- OR - !!

They can compete against one another.

Think it through.
If Oscar Pistorias got prostheses that were 12 meters long, in a few paces he could win a 100 yard dash.
As it is, with the springs he competed on before he murdered his lover, he had an unfair, unnatural advantage against non-prosthetized athletes.

Is my position extreme? Perhaps. I hope so. I'm rarely a purist. But I suspect most professional athletes, including Olympic competitors would agree with me.

And it's not just amateur sports. Women's tennis (since 1979), the LPGA

Testosterone may provide less of an advantage in golf than in tennis. Perhaps you're trying to further confuse the issue with dissimilar examples. But I consider it a slippery slope. Make an exception for skeet or corn-hole, and Katie bar the door.

Try purity for a change S2. Might not be as bad as you seem to think.

 

[Shiftless2]

So tell us how many transathletes have medaled in the Olympics. Or even won.

Since the IOC allowed transathletes to compete there have been something like 71,000 Olympians. To the best of my knowledge only two of them were trans and they both crashed and burned.

That aside, reality is every world class athlete is somehow "abnormal'. No matter how hard they train the average person isn't going to win an Olympic medal, a world championship, or even a national championship. And that's going to hold true even if they resort to the use of PED's.

Think about somebody whose arms are too long for his body. Whose feet are abnormally large and whose joints are overly flexible. Add to that the fact that his body produces half the lactic acid an "normal" person does. Basically a genetic freak. Should he be allowed to compete against normal people? BTW, if you didn't recognize the athlete in question I just described Michael Phelps.

And what are you going to do about the cisgendered female whose natural testosterone levels are off the charts even by male standards. [As an observation, the upper end of the normal range for females is above the T levels of a number of world class male athletes - and that includes men competing in "strength sports".]

To digress for a moment the IOC stopped sex testing athletes some years back because they couldn't make up their mind what a woman was - in the early days the test was simple (drop your pants) but they've since realized that it's a lot more complicated than that. [And the "DNA argument" doesn't work because there are XX men and XY women.]

 

[sear]

S2 #9
You're flailing conspicuously, & failing lamentably.
There are several plausible explanations. Among those I consider most likely, you're allowing your emotion to over-rule your reason.

Not sure you know it. I'm w/ you on 99% of this civil rights issue. I certainly wouldn't deny how extraordinary these natural exceptions like Phelps are. But their exceptionality is natural.

"Basically a genetic freak. Should he be allowed to compete against normal people?" S2 #9

You have it precisely backward, deliberately perhaps.
The correct question is: should "normal people" compete against these miraculous natural variations. The answer is no, they should not, it's not fair to them.
Ordinarily I'd consider this too obvious to state, but given #9:
Olympic competition is a form of international competition, competition among nations, represented by each nation's best champions. The notion of sending in "normal people" to compete against them would be conspicuously cruel to "normal people". They should be spared the humiliation.
The problem with the slippery slope you advocate, exceeding natural standards, and allowing artificial augmentation, problem: the sky's the limit. You might agree 100 horsepower propellers on Olympic swimmer's prosthetic legs might seem an unfair advantage. BUT !! With you embracing the non-natural standard, would the 100 horsepower propellers be OK if not prosthetic, but bionic?

"Out of those 71,000 Olympians a total of 2 have been trans women & one came dead last the other cam 37th out of 42" Miller30

That's a charming anecdote dressed up as a statistic. The problem is Stare Decisis. Accept such "trans", and even if it isn't unfair in every case, it may be in others.

S2,
Remember President Carter (D-GA)?
During his single 4 year term Carter prevented the U.S. Olympic team from competing, Carter's way of middle-fingering the Soviets.
Our athletic competitors pleaded w/ Carter. They told the president this competition was a once in a lifetime opportunity, that many of them had been preparing for it for over a decade of their lives. And Carter threatened to pull the rug out from under their life's ambition. Reading about this helped me to understand Olympic competition from the competitor's POV. I still do.

"Out of those 71,000 Olympians a total of 2 have been trans women & one came dead last the other cam 37th out of 42" Miller30

Don't you think we should at least ask the 71,000 think about it? I would at least be interested to know if they have much passion about it one way or the other.

In any case, know what's funny about your position here S2? You're using "conclusion first" reasoning, a thought form you despise in religious believers. Their premise is god exists, and then they modify their perceptions to form a world that verifies their god exists. It's unmistakable in them with that, and in you with this. That means something else is going on here. Not sure you're leveraging it to maximum benefit. Anything I can do?

 

[Shiftless2]

You have it precisely backward, deliberately perhaps.
The correct question is: should "normal people" compete against these miraculous natural variations. The answer is no, they should not, it's not fair to them.

In other words, tall people shouldn't be allowed to play basketball? Or volley ball?

Don't know if you're aware of it but it's not that long ago that (white) female athletes were up in arms about black women competing. Seems that they had an unfair advantage.

 

[Shiftless2]

The headline should read "Republican attempts to harm an already marginalized minority blocked"

Details here

Virginia Democrats kill six proposed anti-trans bills

The proposals would have banned gender-affirming health care for minors in Virginia, and kept transgender student athletes off school sports teams...

www.lgbtqnation.com

 

[sear]

In other words, tall people shouldn't be allowed to play basketball? Or volley ball?

You can't have it both ways S2. Your categorization which I'm exposing is "normal people". "Normal" means within a few sigma of the median of the bell curve. Right?
But "tall" people? That distinction, your distinction seems to set them apart. Which are they? "Normal"? Or "tall"? Can't be both.

Apart from that you're dodging.

The problem with the slippery slope you advocate, exceeding natural standards, and allowing artificial augmentation, problem: the sky's the limit.

What's wrong with applying the same natural standard that applied at the first Olympic game? After all, I thought one of the appeals of the Olympics was reviving the historic tradition. In that case, resurrect the tradition, but not the traditions? You're grinding an axe S2.

 

[titan]

That distinction, your distinction seems to set them apart. Which are they? "Normal"? Or "tall"? Can't be both.

You may be arguing the wrong element. Your point was, it's not whether they are "normal" or not, but whether they are natural, not re-engineered. For purpose of fairness that's a useful standard. But whatever standard is eventually chosen it should be universally applied.

 

[Shiftless2]

... it's not whether they are "normal" or not, but whether they are natural, not re-engineered. For purpose of fairness that's a useful standard. But whatever standard is eventually chosen it should be universally applied.

That's not as clear cut as it sounds.

They banned cisgender female athletes because their naturally occurring testosterone levels are "too high". And they really don't know what to do about someone like Caster Semenya. Fact is, the IOC can't even figure out how to define a woman - the original "drop your pants test" doesn't work. And, as noted, hormone levels don't work (fact is, some cisgender female athletes have higher testosterone levels than many cismale athletes (and that includes men that compete in the strength sports). DNA doesn't work either (there are XX men and XY women).

And transwomen are subject to much tighter controls on their testosterone levels than ciswomen.

 

[Shiftless2]

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM​

Daily Wire Host Says He Wasn’t Calling for ‘Genocide’ of Trans People – Claims They’re Not ‘Real’​

Daily Wire Host Says He Wasn’t Calling for ‘Genocide’ of Trans People – Claims They’re Not ‘Real’

Embattled far-right wing Daily Wire host Michael Knowles insists when he called for a complete ban on America’s 1.6 million transgender people he was not calling for genocide – and says it would be impossible to do so because transgender people aren’t “real.” “I got in trouble for this issue...

www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com

‘Radical Gender Ideology’: Mike Pence Goes to Iowa to Attack Transgender Children in the Name of God (Video)​

'Radical Gender Ideology': Mike Pence Goes to Iowa to Attack Transgender Children in the Name of God (Video)

Less than one month after the January 6 insurrection Mike Pence made one of his first moves as a former vice president: he joined Young America’s Foundation as a Ronald Reagan Presidential Scholar. YAF, a decades-old youth outreach group designed to influence high school and college-aged...

www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com

 

[Shiftless2]

Florida lawmakers have proposed a bill that would expand the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” law to older children, as well as ban the use of pronouns for trans and non-binary students and teachers.

Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill (Don’t Say Gay) was signed in March 2022, restricting the discussion of LGBTQ+ identities in classrooms until third grade.

The new proposed legislation would broaden this law to cover children in the eighth grade (aged 13 and 14). The bill would also ban public school employees from using a student’s name and pronouns if they do not correspond to what they were assigned at birth, forcing teachers to misgender trans and non-binary students.

Teachers and employees would be banned from telling students their own preferred name or pronouns if they do not correspond to those assigned at birth.

The legislation, filed on Tuesday (28 February) by Republican representative Adam Anderson, states: “It shall be the policy of every public K-12 educational institution that is provided or authorised by the constitution and laws of Florida, that a person’s sex is an immutable biological trait, and that it is false to ascribe to a person a pronoun that does not correspond to such person’s sex.”

Anderson told The Hill: “This bill promotes parental rights, transparency and state standards in Florida schools. It requires that lessons for Florida’s students are age-appropriate, focused on education and free from sexualisation and indoctrination.”

However, LGBTQ+ political advocacy group Equality Florida has branded the bill a form of “moral panic” that will only “demonise LGBTQ[+] people”.

“Don’t Say LGBTQ+ policies have already resulted in sweeping censorship, book banning… and LGBTQ[+] families preparing to leave the state altogether,” the group stated. New research has found that Don’t Say Gay’s impact has been so harmful that the majority of LGBTQ+ parents have considered leaving Florida, whose hard-line Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, has been accused of waging war on sections of the queer community.

Research from the UCLA School of Law found that 56 per cent of 113 parents surveyed said they considered moving away after the law was passed, with nine out of 10 admitting they were “concerned” about the effect of the legislation on their families.

The author of the study, Professor Abbie E Goldberg, said: “Legislation can have a negative impact on LGBTQ+ parent families by cultivating a climate of fear and insecurity.” “For LGBTQ+ parents without the means to move or send their children to private schools, the stress that this legislation creates will be significant.” Should Anderson’s bill pass, it would take effect July 1.

https://thehill.com/changing-americ...om-ban-on-sexual-orientation-gender-identity/

https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/03/02/florida-dont-say-gay-pronouns-bill/

https://www.wjtv.com/news/regional-...nt-say-gay-law-in-coming-legislative-session/

urvey : https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/02/02/dont-say-gay-law-florida-lgbtq-parents-study/

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/impact-dont-say-gay-parents/

 

[sear]

the IOC can't even figure out how to define a woman

I'm not trying to trample t #14, but it seems to me not being able to resolve all issues is not a legitimate excuse to not resolve the ones we can.
Think of it this way:
We ALREADY segregate competition so men compete against men, and women compete against women (Bobby Riggs aside).
If additional categories wish to join the competition that's fine. BUT !!
Attempting to shoe-horn them into one these two legacy categories may or may not be fair to the majority of the natural gendered competitors.

Several ways to approach it:
- case by case (not my first choice option)
- something else

I don't know enough about it to offer more detailed perspective. But I'm OK with applying a "reasonable person" standard, provided the resulting criterion is acceptable to, and fair to the naturally gendered competitors.

Florida?
I'm w/ Bugs on it.

 

[sear]

PS

... these two legacy categories ... natural gendered competitors ...

I thought I'd save you some time. I hadn't intended to suggest there have for ever been exclusively two, and never any more than two categories.
To my knowledge the following 3 words, among others, have been in the lexicon since long before my birth year, 1954:
- androgynous
- epicene
- hermaphrodite

I hadn't intended to suggest otherwise. BUT !!
I don't recall ever having witnessed any athletic competition other than "men's" (male), "women's" (female), and both.
I don't know any reason (but am open-minded about recognizing it / them) why competitors that don't completely fit either "men's" or "women's" categories should not compete in the "both" category, though I would be receptive to opposing arguments by the other competitors.

 

[sear]

PPS
I hadn't sought this example. But as I glanced the headlines I encountered this:

Girls high school basketball team forfeits tournament rather than play against transgender player​

By Sara Smart and Jennifer Henderson, CNN / Published 7:11 AM EST, Wed March 1, 2023
CNN —
A Vermont girls high school basketball team forfeited an out of state tournament after refusing to play against a team that had a transgender player.

Girls high school basketball team forfeits tournament rather than play against transgender player | CNN

A Vermont girls high school basketball team forfeited an out of state tournament after refusing to play against a team that had a transgender player.

www.cnn.com

Please bear in mind:
- I'm not the one with the objection. I merely anticipated that as the tradition of men / women segregation in sport is very long tenured, that sentiment supporting it might also lead to this.

Without picking sides, I'm not sure spreading 99% dissatisfaction to please the <1% makes utilitarian sense.

Doesn't mean we have to burn all queers at the stake before breakfast.
But I don't think it's unreasonable for athletic competitors, particularly high school athletics, where the competitors are mostly if not entirely minors, pre-adults, to feel comfortable about matters germane to the competition.
This surely does NOT mean a mostly White team should refuse to compete against an opposing team that has a Native American, or a Jew, or a Black. Those latter 3 categories are not typically considered a significant athletic advantage, the way for counter example one boy on an otherwise girl's team could be.