Amazon has whacked our affiliate account. Hosting Donations/Commitments $2063 of $1920 (Sept 13/18). In Hand $1466 (Lump sum payments minus paypal graft). Paypal Donation Link Here

LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40366
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by GreenGoo » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:05 pm

hepcat wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:54 am
I think Fireball hit the nail on the head. The question of fairness due to physiology is a logical one, but it gets buried by those who want to view it through the lens of prejudice and downplay it as ridiculous, instead of trying to address it as a serious question.
In fairness to the original question Moliere posted and ignoring the emotional examples and the questionable appeals to authority, simply agreeing that when someone claims they are a certain gender they have the right to compete as that gender can result in complications that are potentially (or increasingly) dangerous up to and including life threatening. These questions need to be addressed.

Outside of competition, it is my opinion that it costs society nothing to simply accept and support assertions of gender identity, and provides many benefits in lots of different ways to both the person in question and society in general. That doesn't hold true for competition, particularly highly physical competition.

While I don't agree that there is a clearly defined hard line separating genders in gender based competition, neither do I think it should be whichever gender a person identifies as is the gender they are allowed to compete as. Just because we want equality and want societal justice for all doesn't mean we ignore realities and pretend what we want to be true is true and condemn others who won't join the group delusion.

Max posted the IOC rules which I think are a good starting place, because presumably they are giving this reasoned and thorough thought backed by science. This is their bread and butter after all, and they've been at this a long time with much international scrutiny and pressure. I don't actually know that's true (reasoned opinion backed by science) nor do I want to put myself in a position to second guess the IOC. I withhold judgement on whether they are the final arbiter on what *should* be the guidelines, as any single organization can be monolithic and potentially narrative or politically driven. They certainly have every right to make their own rules, I'm just not willing to evaluate them based on my limited understanding of the entirety of complications that surround transgender/gender competition.

Like I said, the IOC is probably a good place to start. Whether it ends there or not, I'll take a wait and see attitude.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40366
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by GreenGoo » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:11 pm

hepcat wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:25 pm
That's a little different than a free for all of women and men doing their business at the same time.
Agreed. Plenty of places for decades have had a single washroom that is only accessible by one person, whichever gender they happen to be. That's hardly the same thing as multi-person genderless bathrooms.

GungHo
Posts: 3678
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:15 am
Location: Second star to the right

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by GungHo » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:41 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:11 pm
hepcat wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 12:25 pm
That's a little different than a free for all of women and men doing their business at the same time.
Agreed. Plenty of places for decades have had a single washroom that is only accessible by one person, whichever gender they happen to be. That's hardly the same thing as multi-person genderless bathrooms.
Yall need to stop being reasonable and think about the children.
OR
cry in a corner that the world has come to a point where you have to pay for imaginary shit.

-Hiccup

User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 42857
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am
daehawk’s avatar
Offline

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Daehawk » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:57 pm

Single person bathrooms were my lifeline in the 90s with all the shopping we did then. One year I got sick on the way to the mall and the store we entered the mall through had a single use restroom for both anyone and handicapped. Between one end and the other Im glad I was alone for it all. Then I left and headed to where my wife was only to make it half way and have to run back to the bathroom. I did that 3 times. I had to go back a couple more times after meeting her.

For some reason after that trip I had what we called panic attacks. Not full blown like you see acted out on tv. I just got sick at my stomach for the next 4 or 5 mall trips. That bathroom was very helpful to me. I still haven't forgotten that to this day. It finally stopped happening I guess because it saw I was not giving up the mall :) That was late 1994 or early 1995.

The last few years going to the movies I dreaded it because I always had to go once or twice during movies and they only have the 4 stall and some trough type restroom. Hated it. But in 2016 and 2017 somehow I could wait out the entire movie and either go before we left ...if I could....or hold it home. One trip I couldn't go with it so crowded so had to wait until home . Luckily home is just up the road.

Man I miss my wife so much thinking of these memories. :(
https://www.gofundme.com/please-help-di ... -wife-died ....Help for me to take care of stuff . Wife died Jan 3 2019 after 31 years. My soulmate.
---------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
GroovAtroN, stop asking
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 59757
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Online

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:29 pm

WaPo
In a contentious meeting years in the making, the United States’s third-largest faith community voted to emphasize its opposition to same-sex marriage and gay clergy — a decision which was cheered by conservatives in the global church, especially in Africa, but was deeply disappointing to many Americans who were eager for change.

Many American ministers in the United Methodist Church already perform same-sex marriages and approve of the ordination of LGBT people as clergy, although the Protestant church’s rules officially forbid these marriages and ordinations. Many Methodists hoped that the church would amend those rules this week. Instead, a group of more than 800 clergy and lay leaders from around the world voted to affirm the church’s traditional view of sexuality — and to punish disobedient clergy more harshly than before.
...
But presented with several options during a four-day special session on the future of the church in St. Louis, the delegates picked the “traditional plan,” with 53 percent voting in favor. Other options would have allowed local churches to choose their stance on sexuality for themselves, or would have split the church into separate denominations.

The choice raises the question of whether churches that hoped for a different outcome will leave the denomination. The United Methodist Church is the largest mainline — meaning nonevangelical — Protestant church in the United States. Most other mainline Protestant churches do perform LGBT marriages, including the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Episcopal Church, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Each of those denominations lost some churches to more conservative faith groups when they decided to affirm same-sex marriage.
...
The end of the meeting was rushed: The Methodists needed to leave, because a monster truck rally was scheduled next in the stadium.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 37632
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat » Tue Feb 26, 2019 9:27 pm

I was raised Methodist. It always struck me as odd that they never could figure out why they had a small African American congregation. I would think the giant burning cross they use for a symbol might be a clue...
I beat a camel to death with a monkey. Can I do that?
-Mr Bismarck

You have to whack a few rabbits before you are ready to punch a camel.
-Coopasonic

User avatar
Fireball
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:43 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Fireball » Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:36 am

The UMC symbol is not a "burning" cross, it's a combination of the symbols for the Holy Spirit and for Jesus. The UMC was formed 51 years ago from three Methodist churches. In the United States, its membership is overwhelmingly progressive. Unfortunately, about a third of the church is located in Africa and other parts of the world where LGBT people are oppressed. Two thirds of the American UMC delegates at the convention this week supported LGBT inclusion, but they were outvoted by the far-right overseas congregations working in concert with the shrinking minority of anti-LGBT American members.

It's time for the progressive UMC congregations to break away from the denomination and form a proper, progressive church.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 59757
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Dallas, TX
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Online

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Isgrimnur » Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:40 am

Cross and Flame
Adopted shortly after the merger of The Methodist Church and the Evangelical United Brethren Church, it relates The United Methodist church to God through Christ (cross) and the Holy Spirit (flame). The flame is a reminder of Pentecost when witnesses were unified by the power of the Holy Spirit and saw "tongues, as of fire" (Acts 2:3).The two tongues of a single flame may also be understood to represent the union of two denominations. The two separate flames represent the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the Methodist Church coming together to form the United Methodist Church.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 45809
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by LawBeefaroni » Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:47 am

Fireball wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:36 am
The UMC symbol is not a "burning" cross, it's a combination of the symbols for the Holy Spirit and for Jesus.
I took it as a joke. I chuckled. I don't think anyone thinks it's actually a burning cross but it is a quirky symbol.

Fireball wrote:
Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:36 am
It's time for the progressive UMC congregations to break away from the denomination and form a proper, progressive church.
Oh goodie, I love schisms!
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Enough » Wed May 08, 2019 5:09 pm

hepcat wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:54 am
I think Fireball hit the nail on the head. The question of fairness due to physiology is a logical one, but it gets buried by those who want to view it through the lens of prejudice and downplay it as ridiculous, instead of trying to address it as a serious question.

<hopefully I'm paraphrasing Fireball correctly. If not, please let me know>

As for the restroom subject, personally, I'm not a fan of same sex bathrooms. I'm too old and too indoctrinated by my generation's view on modesty to feel comfortable with it. As long as they maintain a men's room though, I'm perfectly fine with the existence of any other types.
Deadspin has a good article on transgender athletes up today,
For an athlete, who depends on and knows their body in a unique way, transitioning can be pretty fraught. The hormone therapies involved for transgender women slow them down, reduce their muscle mass, and make it more difficult to recover from workouts. Training, coaching, and nutrition can counteract some of these effects to a point, but transgender athletes are suddenly working with entirely new equipment. “It’s a massive change that happens really quickly,” McKinnon said. “It’s definitely a disadvantage.”

The very fact that transgender women have not somehow dominated all of women’s sport already throws water all over the USAPL’s claim that women powerlifters must be “protected” from them. “The line that we must protect sport for women from other women is inherently discriminatory,” McKinnon said.
USA Powerlifting’s response to transgender athletes is head-spinning. The thing about all this talk equating hormone replacement therapy to doping, and the threat to “biological females,” and the “unfair advantages” of “male puberty”, is that it’s based entirely on social perceptions of gender.

“There’s absolutely no scientific evidence at all that supports their position,” said Rachel McKinnon, an an expert on athletes’ rights and a professor of philosophy at the College of Charleston, and a world champion track cyclist to boot.

When we shove the concept of athletic ability—strength, for instance—into the same black-and-white binary that we try to put gender into, we’re wrong. There is no stark line separating what men can do athletically and what women can. Some women, in fact, are bigger, faster, and stronger than some men. A large data set analyzed for a 2018 study looked at the body composition and endocrine profiles of 689 elite cisgender athletes in various sports. When it came to physical attributes there was complete overlap between the men and women analyzed, McKinnon pointed out. For instance, the shortest person in the data set was male, not female. The lightest male weighed the same as the lightest female. There were men athletes and women athletes who had testosterone levels that hit the top of the chart and the bottom. Simply put, the range of any physical characteristic within a sex, (like, for instance, the six feet of difference between the shortest man in the world and the tallest man) is far greater than the average difference in height between the average man and the average woman (five inches). And elite athletes tend to live at the far ends of these spectra anyway.

When USA Powerlifting claims that transgender women are going to have an unfair advantage over “biological females,” they are making two very inaccurate assumptions, said McKinnon. “They are saying trans women are the same physiologically as cisgender men, which is not missing a few steps, that’s missing a whole staircase,” she said. Furthermore, “society assumes that all men are stronger than all women, which is absolutely false.”

What actually makes a man or a woman achieve what they can achieve athletically is still pretty much scientifically unquantifiable. The Caster Semenya case and even the IOC’s recommendations lean heavily on testosterone levels, but this is flawed. All the current research on testosterone shows that unlike what you have probably been told your whole life, it’s not just a “male” hormone—everyone has some naturally-occurring testosterone—and levels of naturally occurring testosterone have no correlation with athletic ability. Even the data the IAAF is leaning on to require Semenya alter her hormonal makeup is being vigorously contested in the scientific community as inconclusive at best and faulty at worst.

While more studies are expected on transgender athletes in the near future, at least one small study has shown that transgender women long-distance runners, after going through hormone replacement therapy end up running at about the same level for their gender —that is, they finish about the same spot in the field—after transition as they had before.
Considering trans women athletes as women only if they are weak and small and not competitive just furthers the societal narrative that women are only weak and small and not competitive. It is unclear at this point how USA Powerlifting’s board meeting will play out on Thursday and whether they will continue to try to implement a clearly discriminatory practice in the name of “protecting” women’s sport. But if some women are instead being “protected” against, then what is the point of competition at all?
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell

Post Reply