Let her play golf

[Darkwing Duck]

Mr. Duck, your argument about chromosomes is ignoring the fact that there are more than two possibilities in humans. Take a look at the combinations on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersexuality.

Mutational differences, and a completely different can of worms. Sex can absolutely be undetermined from fetal craziness. The difference here is that the phenotype is easily seen and can be documented in the genotype. Since sex is indeterminable, the individual's gender is indeterminable, at least in this society. And because gender is a social construct, one can't really look at the genotype for differences since a person in a two gender society that rejects his/her gender based on sex may not have such issues in a society with more than two genders.

 

[KatieMCR]

How do you differ from King Norton? If you can provide a viable answer I'll convert to your side.

First I have no need to try to convert you to any side. Second I'm not familiar with King Norton, and don't feel like reading about him tonight. If I decide to read about him later, I may or may not come back to this.

The fact remains that I know who I am. Nobody else knows what goes on inside me. I am going to live my life as authentically as possible. I don't need to defend my identity to anyone.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Which societies have more than 2 genders?

No I mean it's a perfectly viable thing to say, "I'll be the mother and you'll be the father", and just go with it. But to have these "rights" debates time after time when rights are so subjective, it's absurd.

Zuni is the example I'll always give. I gave a link above.

One of my professors did some field work with the Zuni tribe, and when gender and gender roles came up in class, the Zuni was the example she gave. I really can't give you any other examples since I haven't really heard of others, nor have I researched them, and she gave no more examples since it really wasn't that big a deal. Some societies have more than two. Next topic.

EDIT: For the last bit, you could say "you be the mom, and I'll be the dad." Those are cultural terms. I don't have an answer for you on that. I think I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think that will be that much of an issue in our culture.

 

[The-Joker]

First I have no need to try to convert you to any side. Second I'm not familiar with King Norton, and don't feel like reading about him tonight. If I decide to read about him later, I may or may not come back to this.

I like to use ignorance as a crutch too.

golly we should just take your word for it, that would make things so damn simple. Just like we should all take Joseph Smith, Mohammed, and The Buddha's word for it.
This will please Emperor Norton greatly.

 

[KatieMCR]

I like to use ignorance as a crutch too.

golly we should just take your word for it, that would make things so damn simple. Just like we should all take Joseph Smith, Mohammed, and The Buddha's word for it.
This will please Emperor Norton greatly.

I already said I have no need to convert you on anything. Go ahead and have your opinions, but nobody else is going to define my identity.

I'm done with this. I'm not debating my identity on this thread anymore.

 

[The-Joker]

Zuni is the example I'll always give. I gave a link above.

One of my professors did some field work with the Zuni tribe, and when gender and gender roles came up in class, the Zuni was the example she gave. I really can't give you any other examples since I haven't really heard of others, nor have I researched them, and she gave no more examples since it really wasn't that big a deal. Some societies have more than two. Next topic.

EDIT: For the last bit, you could say "you be the mom, and I'll be the dad." Those are cultural terms. I don't have an answer for you on that. I think I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think that will be that much of an issue in our culture.

No I'm absolutely all for alternative parenting and gender rolls, that's why I said it was viable. It's the endless rights debates that I have an issue with, this being an especially annoying issue, because there isn't a right answer and there can't be one because there are two completely opposite determining factors. If you advocate one, you're in ignorance of science, and if you advocate the other you're in ignorance of "a person's ability to make decisions".

 

[Darkwing Duck]

The fact remains that I know who I am. Nobody else knows what goes on inside me. I am going to live my life as authentically as possible. I don't need to defend my identity to anyone.

Here's what you have to understand. The society you live in doesn't have a built in place that you can easily fit into. It's an unfortunate fact of life. Because of this, people will not, do not, and cannot understand you the way you'd prefer them to. Trying to forcefully wedge yourself in will only result in resistance. You can't just force your beliefs, value system, and paradigm onto people and expect them to immediately ingratiate themselves with you. It'll ALWAYS be a work in progress. I don't envy your position, but saying "This person should be able to play on the LPGA tour because I said so and you're wrong if you think otherwise" doesn't really help your cause.

I also know what gender and gender roles are. It's a major part of the discipline I have my degree in. I probably don't understand them as well as NOASage, but I understand them well enough. I'm going to assume you haven't had the instruction I've had on gender, so I'm sure I can quote your line from my side. "It sure is nice to know there are so many "experts" on this board that know more about gender identity than I do myself."

 

[The-Joker]

I already said I have no need to convert you on anything. Go ahead and have your opinions, but nobody else is going to define my identity.

I'm done with this. I'm not debating my identity on this thread anymore.

you have the "absolute" right to define you identity as female. I will not argue that you're not allowed to be what you are.

It's the rights talk I have a problem with, like I've said all along. The facts and emotions go both ways, so legitimate rights can't be established, the golfer may have the right to play on the LPGA, but it isn't a legitimate right because FACTS and EMOTIONS go both ways on the argument. The only way she'll play LPGA is if she hops on the back of the legal system, but that doesn't make it legitimate.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

No I'm absolutely all for alternative parenting and gender rolls, that's why I said it was viable. It's the endless rights debates that I have an issue with, this being an especially annoying issue, because there isn't a right answer and there can't be one because there are two completely opposite determining factors. If you advocate one, you're in ignorance of science, and if you advocate the other you're in ignorance of "a person's ability to make decisions".

And that's fine. I didn't quote your first post on what you're talking about with rights because, don't take offense to it, I didn't really care about it, or maybe better put, I wasn't interested in it. I don't really have a response to it. My main objective here, I guess, is to try to get people to at least make a conclusion on more proper information. Your post on rights doesn't really affect that.

 

[KatieMCR]

Here's what you have to understand. The society you live in doesn't have a built in place that you can easily fit into. It's an unfortunate fact of life. Because of this, people will not, do not, and cannot understand you the way you'd prefer them to. Trying to forcefully wedge yourself in will only result in resistance. You can't just force your beliefs, value system, and paradigm onto people and expect them to immediately ingratiate themselves with you. It'll ALWAYS be a work in progress. I don't envy your position, but saying "This person should be able to play on the LPGA tour because I said so and you're wrong if you think otherwise" doesn't really help your cause.

I also know what gender and gender roles are. It's a major part of the discipline I have my degree in. I probably don't understand them as well as NOASage, but I understand them well enough. I'm going to assume you haven't had the instruction I've had on gender, so I'm sure I can quote your line from my side. "It sure is nice to know there are so many "experts" on this board that know more about gender identity than I do myself."

I can respect that.

Look I know I'm opening myself up to a lot of the crap that is said against me. I knew that was part of what would happen when I made the decision to be completely open about who I am. My hope is that more transgender people will be open about who they are, and that people will see that we aren't just the freaks Jerry Springer has tried to make us out to be. I think progress is being made, but it is slow.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I can respect that.

Look I know I'm opening myself up to a lot of the crap that is said against me. I knew that was part of what would happen when I made the decision to be completely open about who I am. My hope is that more transgender people will be open about who they are, and that people will see that we aren't just the freaks Jerry Springer has tried to make us out to be. I think progress is being made, but it is slow.

And that's fine. It's a hard position you're in. What I hope I would do in your position is chalk up the derision to cultural ignorance and malformed opinions and not judge individuals based on their initial reaction. Or put more simply, be the better man.










*Yes, that was intended as a joke. Please take it that way.

 

[sirkickyass]

Sure there is.

Only if you're completely unable to see one side of the issue.

It's obvious that no matter which solution you choose it's imperfect.

If you deny her the right to play you've effectively mandated that male to female transexuals can never compete in any sport because their hormone treatments will put them at effectively the same disadvantage as a person born female when competing against men. In effect, you're creating a de facto "transexuals are not welcome in general sporting competition" rule. That's unfair because you're eliminating an entire class of people based upon an accident of birth.

On the other hand, there is a logical argument that the male to female transexual probably has an innate advantage. Katie, I understand that hasn't been "proven" but the sample sizes are (obviously) super small and there's a few notable examples of intersex women being improbably dominant in their respective sports that I think the logical presumption is fair. That's unfair to all the other female athletes to be placed against someone with a probable physiology advantage.

No matter what decision you make someone's getting screwed. There's no clean way to draw the line that is fair and equitable for everybody and that's why all rules that sports organizations have relating to this issue are essentially arbitrary lines in the sand.

Pretending the issue is cut and dry does harm to both sides credibility.

 

[C l u t c H 385]

If you're a dude you can't play chicks sports. That line is fair and equitable for everybody, Kicky. No matter what you chop off or sew on.

 

[C l u t c H 385]

It's really not.

I'm done with the attacks against me. I will no longer reply to them.

It really is. Who's attacking you? Friggin whiner.

 

[bigb]

Go ahead and throw around asinine stereotypes, even though there are scientific studies that disprove them.

"to date, there is no available research or other reliable scientific evidence to either support or refute the position that transitioned athletes compete at an advantage or disadvantage compared with physically born men and women athletes."

So apparently there are scientific studies, but they're not reliable. Not a good way to help your argument, Katie.

 

[Surely]

No matter what decision you make someone's getting screwed.

So does the question become, do you want to screw one person or the entire field of LPGA golfers?

 

[One Brow]

The main reason I'm posting this here, is because the topic of transgender athletes has been touched upon previously on this board. I have no personal interest in golf, but I really hope she wins this lawsuit. Why should she be denied the right to play? Where do they expect her to play? It's not like the men would allow her to play with them. She is recognized by the law as a woman, and should be allowed to play golf with the LPGA. I'll be keeping an eye on this story.

I disagree with your position.

Having read the parts of the paragraphs you presented, the point seems to be that, while there is an acknowledged advantage in most sports to having gone through puberty/adolesence as a male under typical hormone levels, there are so few that decide to become female, and so few that are in the athletically gifted group, that it is unlikely there will be many athletes competing in womens sports who gain that advantage. I find this position unpersuasive. If a teenage female was injected with massive doses of testosterone throughout her puberty, adolesence, etc., in order to bulk up, we would normally consider that cheating. Even though it would not be an injection in this case of a transsexual, it is still an unfair advantage.

What also have not seen from you is a proposed alternative rule. Are you saying that any person who wishes to play in the LPGA should be allowed to do so? Or, if there arfe to be restrictions, what do you suggest they should be?

 

[Scat]

The point to all of this is that Katie feels she and anyone else like her should be treated like a normal person.

I hate to break it to you but you are not like everyone else. You are different and with that difference come some liabilities. While some accommodations to your plight are relatively benign or cause little disruption I see no need to turn society on it's head to satisfy your every attempt at normalcy. Accepting who you are sometimes means realizing that you are different and understanding that this carries some limitations. Honestly, I don't think you have completely accepted who you are as you claim. You are still trying to change the world to accommodate your every desire. With acceptance comes realization that this is just not possible.

 

[Scat]

If a person were born with a perfectly formed physical body yet declared that mentally they were really a robot and then tried replacing body parts with mechanical arms, legs, etc... do you think that person would be diagnosed with a physical birth defect? I tend to think "physical abnormality" is not the term that would be used.

Yes, they can physically change their body to fit their mental perception but can you imagine a respectable physician actually cutting off a perfectly good arm to replace it with a mechanical version because the patient's mind felt otherwise?!? I'm sure someone out there would decide this is a legit "physical defect" so as to make a few bucks legitimately.

Just for the record I use the name "Katie" with great reluctance. It's only because people have the option of hiding behind whatever name they choose on the internet that I honor this.

To the person that -1 me for my quoted post, tell me how I am wrong? Katie said it was offensive but it's true. She just didn't like hearing it.

Oh, and sack up and sign your neg rep.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

Kaite, for the most part I've stayed out of the threads you're involved in because quite frankly, they're usually long and drawn out and I'm probably not smart to to get involved to begin with. With that being said, this thread makes it so I have to ask: What and the hell is wrong with you? You create a thread that you damn well know is going to draw opposing views and then when people start to disagree with you, you try and label them as insulting and intolerant. Perhaps it's time to take your "I'm a transgender" grand standing and move along to a forum with like-minded individuals so you will meet little to no resistance when voicing your opinions.

This is a place where opinions will vary and that doesn not mean that just because somebody completely disagrees with you, that they are in some way intolerant or insulting.

The girl should not be allowed to play golf on the LPGA. Period. As has already been addressed in this thread, she was born with the muscle and skeletal structure of a man, which is scientifically proven to give men an advantage when competing. That's why men and women ususally don't compete against each other in almost anything sports related. You can argue the hormone therapy angle all you want, it's still not enough to completely level the playing field. In short, while this golfer may feel like she's a woman, she was still born a man. Call it a birth defect or whatever you like, it doesn't change the scientific FACTS.