Martina Navratilova is a Hateful Bigot

[Kyle 207]

Tennis great Martina Navratilova has been criticized after claiming it is a form of "cheating" for transgender women to be allowed to compete in women's sport.

The 18-time Grand Slam winner wrote in The Sunday Times that it was "insane" that "hundreds of athletes who have changed gender by declaration and limited hormone treatment have already achieved honors as women that were beyond their capabilities as men."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/18/tennis/martina-navratilova-trans-women-comments-spt-scli-intl/index.html?utm_source=twCNN&utm_term=image&utm_content=2019-02-18T14%3A50%3A05&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2Bs4QqJoY36oELqFjh7l71sCdMDvTj6tWXr8kDGE-giodJIRhKUVxlYXE

 

Lots of insanity to unpack ... 

[RomaVicta 29968]

I think you're just hoping to stir up trouble by ironically supporting the criticism of Navratilova. 

I think the stand that most tolerant people take regarding transgenderism is that the evidence shows that the sexual spectrum is not a neat and tidy division between between black and white. This untidiness is what, in my opinion, mysteriously alarms most intolerant people.

The issue of competition in gender separated sports illuminates a place where the emergent realization of sexual complexity disrupts the belief/desire for a clear line. 

Navratilova raises a valid issue that sprang up with Rene Richards decades ago. I don't know what the answer is. Trans persons who started with a female frame wouldn't have an advantage among elite female athletes. A trans person who started as formidable male athlete would seem to be unfair on the playing field. On the other hand, you don't want to stigmatize someone who was born in the untidy part of the sexual spectrum.

I can only guess that if I, a man who when younger was a powerful football lineman with speed, were to align my identity to become a female, I would feel like I had an unfair advantage over other women in many physical contests. I wouldn't feel that way if I were 5'10 and 160 pounds.

How do you work the rules and laws to accommodate that? I have no idea.

Finally, I want to be clear that my use of untidy in no way implies dirty or wrong.

[Coors yellow belly 105]

she’s not wrong

[Guest Lobo]

This hot political issue was

covered in the motion picture, “top secret” 

[Knoxtnhorn 6065]

Cool.  One team for every sport.  No women's sports, no Title IX, no separate Olympic sports, no gender differentiation.  

I'm in.

[hornbri 1401]

It is a shame you want to take a serious issue/question/problem and use it to stir up emotion, might as well just take this to cloak room.  

Edited February 18, 2019 by hornbri

[Neonmoon 38130]

There’s a reason the IOC has no restrictions on trans men (former women) competing and have testosterone level restrictions for trans women (former men)

It’s the same reason they don’t let men fight women in MMA. Testosterone matters 

She is right. The people arguing against her are idiots 

[Gene Parmesan 4014]

20 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I think you're just hoping to stir up trouble by ironically supporting the criticism of Navratilova. 

I think the stand that most tolerant people take regarding transgenderism is that the evidence shows that the sexual spectrum is not a neat and tidy division between between black and white. This untidiness is what, in my opinion, mysteriously alarms most intolerant people.

The issue of competition in gender separated sports illuminates a place where the emergent realization of sexual complexity disrupts the belief/desire for a clear line. 

Navratilova raises a valid issue that sprang up with Rene Richards decades ago. I don't know what the answer is. Trans persons who started with a female frame wouldn't have an advantage among elite female athletes. A trans person who started as formidable male athlete would seem to be unfair on the playing field. On the other hand, you don't want to stigmatize someone who was born in the untidy part of the sexual spectrum.

I can only guess that if I, a man who when younger was a powerful football lineman with speed, were to align my identity to become a female, I would feel like I had an unfair advantage over other women in many physical contests. I wouldn't feel that way if I were 5'10 and 160 pounds.

How do you work the rules and laws to accommodate that? I have no idea.

Finally, I want to be clear that my use of untidy in no way implies dirty or wrong.

I don't think you have to go to extremes of ex football lineman before you see an unfair field.  5'10 160 pounds is a pretty typical healthy young man not exactly a female frame that you propose.

[El Diablo 4232]

Isn't she a dude?

[Beau Vine 54384]

Is this mini-baller back again?

[Firemans4Horn 18119]

Who let Kyle out of the cloak room?

[Underdog 28767]

That dude Martina would backhand the taste out of your mouth. 

[immortal13 4059]

32 minutes ago, Coors yellow belly said:

she’s not wrong

This

[RomaVicta 29968]

12 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

I don't think you have to go to extremes of ex football lineman before you see an unfair field.  5'10 160 pounds is a pretty typical healthy young man not exactly a female frame that you propose.

I agree. It's what makes the issue difficult. I was just giving the only perspective that I could be reasonably sure of.

[Guest Lobo]

A tall champion with blonde-hair, light-eyed, adams-apple adorned, athlete with prime physical characteristics from the fucking Sudetenland with cunning strategical traits who understands attack patterns and angles even in moments of fatigue against better equipped foes...has strong opinions on the moral validity of opponents with different sexual and biological dynamics.  and this is somehow news?  Pretty sure her people covered this 70 years ago.  

[Asithappens 974]

46 minutes ago, Coors yellow belly said:

she’s not wrong

This.

In fact, one can even say she's right.

Didn't some MMA group ban men who became women? Whether it is "cheating" is debatable, but it shouldn't be allowed. Make a new grouping for the transgendered athletes.

[Asithappens 974]

55 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

 A trans person who started as formidable male athlete would seem to be unfair on the playing field.

Would seem? Seem?

[Asithappens 974]

Martina also spoke sense, imo, about Serena Williams' childish and selfish rant during one of her tournaments. 

[RomaVicta 29968]

11 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

Would seem? Seem?

You seem to think you have a firm grasp of the objectivity of fairness.

[Asithappens 974]

Your (intentional) obtuseness is impressive.

Trans athletes have an unfair advantage (in the sports where once being a man matters). 

There is no "seems" about it. The men/women (transgender man-to-woman) can be, and often are, physically superior to the women/women. 

Create a separate sub-grouping for the men/women.

 

*** edit to add ***

And it's absolute bullshit, imo, to call Martina "transphobic". 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Asithappens

[Fuck Tim Beck 3834]

So is this the point we start seeing athletes we always thought were dudes chime in? 

Que up Britney Griner and Kim Mulkey. 

 

[Dahobbs 17655]

9 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I don't see how or why a transperson (male -> female variety) cannot play a female sport, ESPECIALLY if the logic is sound that people like bad_teammate spout when trying to reconcile orientation with his A, B, C, and D exercise he really enjoys diving deep into. if you identify as a woman you are a woman to society for all intents and purposes, a man, a man, etc. (as the logic goes, so I'm told. Why would this not apply in sports?)

Your logic is flawed. Ultimately, gender is a set of behaviors. And there is  evidence that gender itself (like many behaviors) has a biological/developmental link (for instance exposure to certain hormones at critical times in development) and is established early in life. While the vast majority of males (sex) are born as men (gender) and thus have the behavioral attributes of men, some do not. The a similar pattern is true of females (sex). There is no harm in recognizing that same males are born as women and that some females are born as men, nor in using that taxonomy in social settings.

Sports are a different matter due to the importance of testosterone. While gender is a social classification, sex is indisputably grounded in biology, in particular the presence and level of the sex hormones. And the male sex is equipped with an abundance of testosterone, resulting in greater physical strength.  Using sex as the primary classification for sports makes sense given that distinction. That doesn't obliterate the usefulness or necessity of using gender (as opposed to sex) in other social settings.  

 

[52-80 19229]

8 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So you are saying there needs to be a purity  testosterone test? Hypothetically, if there were a benchmark that said "X level of testosterone disqualifies from competing in women's leagues irrespective of identified gender, but if said person could get to Y level (an acceptable amount) that is okay" that would be the logical solution here using your logic?

So basically a transperson who identifies as a woman would have to deplete their body and system of as much testosterone as they can (whether through estrogen or other means) in order to qualify the same as in a weight class wherein a heavier person would have to shed weight to qualify for a lower weight competition?

That makes sense. I think we solved the problem. Next?

There is already testosterone testing with WADA

[Kyle 207]

7 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So you are saying there needs to be a purity  testosterone test? Hypothetically, if there were a benchmark that said "X level of testosterone disqualifies from competing in women's leagues irrespective of identified gender, but if said person could get to Y level (an acceptable amount) that is okay for a reasonable expectation of fairness in competition" that would be the logical solution here using your logic?

So basically a transperson who identifies as a woman would have to deplete their body and system of as much testosterone as they can (whether through estrogen or other means) in order to qualify the same as in a weight class wherein a heavier person would have to shed weight to qualify for a lower weight competition?

That makes sense. I think we solved the problem. Next?

Probably too late for an edit, but you might trigger someone by using X and Y as variables. One could interpret your identification of "X" as disqualifying and "Y" as acceptable as hostile. A good alternative is not obvious but I think almost anything might be preferred.

[Dahobbs 17655]

4 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So you are saying there needs to be a purity  testosterone test? Hypothetically, if there were a benchmark that said "X level of testosterone disqualifies from competing in women's leagues irrespective of identified gender, but if said person could get to Y level (an acceptable amount) that is okay for a reasonable expectation of fairness in competition" that would be the logical solution here using your logic?

So basically a transperson who identifies as a woman would have to deplete their body and system of as much testosterone as they can (whether through estrogen or other means) in order to qualify the same as in a weight class wherein a heavier person would have to shed weight to qualify for a lower weight competition?

That makes sense. I think we solved the problem. Next?

I would never require a female (sex) to compete with men unless there was some sort of hormone therapy involved. But I think the rest of your post seems reasonable. 

[Homercles 10206]

Oh look another Kyle thread on a divisive topic

[Dahobbs 17655]

14 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Probably too late for an edit, but you might trigger someone by using X and Y as variables. One could interpret your identification of "X" as disqualifying and "Y" as acceptable as hostile. A good alternative is not obvious but I think almost anything might be preferred.

🙄

[NWBuck 8583]

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

This hot political issue was

covered in the motion picture, “top secret” 

Also "Juwanna Mann" and "The Fish That Saved Pittsburgh" 

[Augustus 3061]

It's truly fascinating how Body Dysmorphic Disorder ceases to be a diagnosis when it involves the sex organs.

Somewhat off topic, but I'm bored and rambling.

[ChiTownDoc 21154]

Lol at anyone taking OP’s bait.  Troll gonna troll.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

41 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Oh look another Kyle thread on a divisive topic

What the hell do you want threads about the best shade of white for a ceiling ?  Why is water wet ?

[Neonmoon 38130]

17 minutes ago, Augustus said:

It's truly fascinating how Body Dysmorphic Disorder ceases to be a diagnosis when it involves the sex organs.

Somewhat off topic, but I'm bored and rambling.

Maybe because doctors use science to diagnose people and not bigotry 

[Post Oak 20256]

Well I learned that I need to put Kyle on ignore.  So not a total waste of a thread.

[El Diablo 4232]

 

[Macanudo 13009]

Your logic is flawed. Ultimately, gender is a set of behaviors. And there is  evidence that gender itself (like many behaviors) has a biological/developmental link (for instance exposure to certain hormones at critical times in development) and is established early in life. While the vast majority of males (sex) are born as men (gender) and thus have the behavioral attributes of men, some do not. The a similar pattern is true of females (sex). There is no harm in recognizing that some males are born as women and that some females are born as men, nor in using that taxonomy in social settings.

But here's the rub....   "Some" is still very, very small number.    The incredibly vast majority of men and women identify as men and women respectively.    That does not mean there is any stigma or something wrong with those that don't.   But my main issue with how prominent the trans issue has become is that BOTH sides try and use it as a wedge.   Martina's entitled to her opinion.   There is science that backs up her claim.    But there is also science that disputes it.   Right now, we're still grappling with how to handle these kinds of things as a society.    There's no need to demonize someone who says something like this unless they are being some kind of asshole.   

It's a question that we're going to have to debate and find some kind of resolution to.    But having it doesn't make one side or the other wrong.  We're not talking about fundamental rights like marriage, adoption, land ownership or voting rights for trans individuals.   We're talking about whether someone who transitions from male to female has an unfair advantage athletically because of their genetic and hormonal makeup.   This is also not about employment even though some might want to go down that road.   It's the  same situation as asking whether there should be different age groups for competition.   We wouldn't let an 18 year old compete with 12 year old middle schoolers, right?

It's not discriminatory to have the conversation.  

[Homercles 10206]

What the hell do you want threads about the best shade of white for a ceiling ?  Why is water wet ?

No I want another fitlump, pics of body plz, Ricky, TXTow, etc saga. While I wait for the next edition of ‘as the off-season turns’, I’m allowed to wryly observe that yet another divisive thread is started in the wild by a poster with dubious reputation in the CR for parroting disproved party lines, trolling and exasperating outrage in the style of Fox News or The Donald or whatever...and the same people following it around stirring the pot.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Homercles said:

 

No I want another fitlump, pics of body plz, Ricky, TXTow, etc saga. While I wait for the next edition of ‘as the off-season turns’, I’m allowed to wryly observe that yet another divisive thread is started in the wild by a poster with dubious reputation in the CR for parroting disproved party lines, trolling and exasperating outrage in the style of Fox News or The Donald or whatever...and the same people following it around stirring the pot.

 

So, they've invented these cool little things called periods.  Either you've forgotten their usage or you're on one maybe ?

[Dahobbs 17655]

13 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

 

But here's the rub....   "Some" is still very, very small number.    The incredibly vast majority of men and women identify as men and women respectively.    That does not mean there is any stigma or something wrong with those that don't.   But my main issue with how prominent the trans issue has become is that BOTH sides try and use it as a wedge.   Martina's entitled to her opinion.   There is science that backs up her claim.    But there is also science that disputes it.   Right now, we're still grappling with how to handle these kinds of things as a society.    There's no need to demonize someone who says something like this unless they are being some kind of asshole.   

It's a question that we're going to have to debate and find some kind of resolution to.    But having it doesn't make one side or the other wrong.  We're not talking about fundamental rights like marriage, adoption, land ownership or voting rights for trans individuals.   We're talking about whether someone who transitions from male to female has an unfair advantage athletically because of their genetic and hormonal makeup.   This is also not about employment even though some might want to go down that road.   It's the  same situation as asking whether there should be different age groups for competition.   We wouldn't let an 18 year old compete with 12 year old middle schoolers, right?

It's not discriminatory to have the conversation.  

I absolutely believe it is discriminatory to deny one the right to self-identify one's gender. But, as the rest of my post indicated, we can treat gender and sex separately. Some societal rules should be based around gender. Others, like sports, should be based around sex. I dont think recognizing that distinction or discussing how to apply it is discriminatory. I think this is a long way to say I agree with you, but with a caveat. 

[Beau Vine 54384]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

There is already testosterone testing with WADA

You trust an organization led by a guy named Dick Pound?

[Homercles 10206]

So, they've invented these cool little things called periods.  Either you've forgotten their usage or you're on one maybe ?

You didn’t need that space before punctuation.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Homercles said:

 

You didn’t need that space before punctuation.

 

God dammit, I'm a double space punctuation guy  !

[futureman 22532]

4 hours ago, Knoxtnhorn said:

Cool.  One team for every sport.  No women's sports, no Title IX, no separate Olympic sports, no gender differentiation.  

I'm in.

the only logical solution.

[futureman 22532]

3 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

You seem to think you have a firm grasp of the objectivity of fairness.

come on, roma.  you’re better than this.  if you have or have ever had a dong you should never be beating poor girls in sports.  

fair would be playing against men. 

[AggieFactFinder 31]

Someone complained about a thread being divisive? On Surly?

[Mole 4333]

It takes a certain kind of poisonous self righteousness to declare disagreement on a pretty complicated and issue as bigotry. It’s the end of a conversation rather than an open door. When does she smugly tell them that they are confusing sex and gender?

[Parliament 14286]

[Augustus 3061]

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Maybe because doctors use science to diagnose people and not bigotry 

This makes no sense.

[Kyle 207]

1 hour ago, Homercles said:

No I want another fitlump, pics of body plz, Ricky, TXTow, etc saga. While I wait for the next edition of ‘as the off-season turns’, I’m allowed to wryly observe that yet another divisive thread is started in the wild by a poster with dubious reputation in the CR for parroting disproved party lines, trolling and exasperating outrage in the style of Fox News or The Donald or whatever...and the same people following it around stirring the pot.

 

While I think the ad homs are boring and predictable, I do appreciate the compliment. I would much rather challenge party lines than parrot them daily. If a poster can only generate enough capacity for a silly ad hom, I recommend her sticking to all the Lulz threads making fun of poor brown people.

This actually is an interesting question. The emotional hyperbole is just an entertaining side show.

[OrangEngr 1035]

7 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I think you're just hoping to stir up trouble by ironically supporting the criticism of Navratilova. 

I think the stand that most tolerant people take regarding transgenderism is that the evidence shows that the sexual spectrum is not a neat and tidy division between between black and white. This untidiness is what, in my opinion, mysteriously alarms most intolerant people.

The issue of competition in gender separated sports illuminates a place where the emergent realization of sexual complexity disrupts the belief/desire for a clear line. 

Navratilova raises a valid issue that sprang up with Rene Richards decades ago. I don't know what the answer is. Trans persons who started with a female frame wouldn't have an advantage among elite female athletes. A trans person who started as formidable male athlete would seem to be unfair on the playing field. On the other hand, you don't want to stigmatize someone who was born in the untidy part of the sexual spectrum.

I can only guess that if I, a man who when younger was a powerful football lineman with speed, were to align my identity to become a female, I would feel like I had an unfair advantage over other women in many physical contests. I wouldn't feel that way if I were 5'10 and 160 pounds.

How do you work the rules and laws to accommodate that? I have no idea.

Finally, I want to be clear that my use of untidy in no way implies dirty or wrong.

Racism in a transgender thread. Impressive.

[RomaVicta 29968]

2 hours ago, futureman said:

come on, roma.  you’re better than this.  if you have or have ever had a dong you should never be beating poor girls in sports.  

fair would be playing against men. 

I don't enough to make such an absolute statement. I also don't deny it absolutely. I remain, as first stated, without a notion of how to handle this. Martina makes a valid point. I don't recall the debate over Rene Richards, but it died down because she was never a top player. 

Why the rush to judgment?