Let her play golf

[Scat]

This is way off.

In one scenario the person thinks they are one way, but they are actually physically another way (your scenario)... a transgender person has medically and legally become what they believed was their original gender. .

Due to medical advancements, a person is able to change their sex to match their gender.

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.

 

[Archie Moses]

She was born with a male sex organ. That is the physical birth defect. It is how I view my body as well.

Why is it a physical birth defect? Was the body part not functional? Why isn't it a mental disorder, out of curiosity?

 

[C l u t c H 385]

Chopping off your 1 wood doesn't make you a woman. It's really that simple.

 

[KatieMCR]

Here are some relevant highlights from two separate studies.

Concern about creating an “unfair competitive advantage” on sex-separated teams is one of the most often cited reasons for resistance to the participation of transgender student athletes. This concern is cited most often in discussions about transgender women or girls competing on a women’s or girls’ team. Some advocates for gender equality in high school and college sports are concerned that allowing transgender girls or women—that is, male-to-female transgender athletes who were born male, but who identify as female—to compete on women’s teams will take away opportunities for other girls and women, or that transgender girls or women will have a competitive advantage over other non-transgender competitors.

These concerns are based on three assumptions: one, that transgender girls and women are not “real” girls or women and therefore not deserving of an equal competitive opportunity; two, that being born with a male body automatically gives a transgender girl or woman an unfair advantage when competing against non-transgender girls and women; and three, that boys or men might be tempted to pretend to be transgender in order to compete in competition with girls or women.

These assumptions are not well founded. First, the decision to transition from one gender to the other—to align one’s external gender presentation with one’s internal sense of gender identity—is a deeply significant and difficult choice that is made only after careful consideration and for the most compelling of reasons. Gender identity is a core aspect of a person’s identity, and it is just as deep seated, authentic, and real for a transgender person as for others. Male-to-female transgender women fully identify and live their lives as women, and female-to-male transgender men fully identify and live their lives as men. For many transgender people, gender transition is a psychological and social necessity. It is essential that educators in and out of athletics understand this.

Second, while some people fear that transgender women will have an unfair advantage over nontransgender women, it is important to place that fear in context. When examined carefully, the realities underlying this issue are more complex than they may seem at first blush. The basis of this concern is that transgender girls or women who have gone through male puberty may have an unfair advantage due to the growth in long bones, muscle mass, and strength that is triggered by testosterone. However, a growing number of transgender youth are undergoing medically guided hormonal treatment prior to puberty, thus effectively neutralizing this concern. Increasingly, doctors who specialize in treating transgender people are prescribing hormone blockers to protect children who clearly identify as the other gender from the trauma of undergoing puberty in the wrong gender and acquiring unwanted secondary sex characteristics. When the youth is old enough to make an informed decision, he or she can make the choice of whether to begin crossgender hormones. Transgender girls who transition in this way do not go through a male puberty, and therefore their participation in athletics as girls does not raise the same equity concerns that might otherwise be present.

In addition, even transgender girls who do not access hormone blockers or cross-gender hormones display a great deal of physical variation, just as there is a great deal of natural variation in physical size and ability among non-transgender girls and boys. Many people may have a stereotype that all transgender girls and women are unusually tall and have large bones and muscles. But that is not true. A male-to-female transgender girl may be small and slight, even if she is not on hormone blockers or taking estrogen. It is important not to over generalize. The assumption that all male-bodied people are taller, stronger, and more highly skilled in a sport than all female-bodied people is not accurate. This assumption is especially inaccurate when applied to youth who are still developing physically and who therefore display a significantly broader range of variation in size, strength, and skill than older youth and adults.

It is also important to know that any athletic advantages a transgender girl or woman arguably may have as a result of her prior testosterone levels dissipate after about one year of estrogen therapy. According to medical experts on this issue, the assumption that a transgender girl or woman competing on a women’s team would have a competitive advantage outside the range of performance and competitive advantage or disadvantage that already exists among female athletes is not supported by evidence. As one survey of the existing research concludes, “the data available does not appear to suggest that transitioned athletes would compete at an advantage or disadvantage as compared with physically born men and women.”

Finally, fears that boys or men will pretend to be female to compete on a girls’ or women’s team are unwarranted given that in the entire 40 year history of “sex verification” procedures in international sport competitions, no instances of such “fraud” have been revealed.15 Instead, rather than identifying men who are trying to fraudulently compete as women, “sex verification” tests have been misused to humiliate and unfairly exclude women with intersex conditions.16 The apparent failure of such tests to serve their stated purpose of deterring fraud—and the terrible damage they have caused to individual women athletes—should be taken into account when developing policies for the inclusion of transgender athletes.

Rather than repeating the mistakes of the past, educators in high school and collegiate athletics programs must develop thoughtful and informed policies that provide opportunities for all students, including transgender students, to participate in sports. These policies must be based on sound medical science, which shows that male-to-female transgender athletes do not have any automatic advantage over other women and girls. These policies must also be based on the educational values of sport and the reasons why sport is included as a vital component of the educational environment: promoting the physical and psychological well-being of all students, and teaching students the values of equality, participation, inclusion, teamwork, discipline, and respect for diversity.

Note on first section in bold: I am a good example of this. I am under 5'7", and have always had a slender build. I have been told by many different people that my physical traits are more feminine than masculine. I have yet to start hormone therapy.

Now regarding the second section in bold, which was previously pointed out. It is part of a separate study which was linked in the footnotes. It was part of the key findings for that study. I feel it is important to see it in its original context with the other key findings. These other key findings also support the claim that transsexuals have no advantage over those who are cisgender.

In summary, key findings and conclusions from the reviews of the social science literature and biological scientific literature include:

1. Sex verification testing of athletes should be considered a human rights violation and eliminated from all levels of sport.

2. Doping control procedures make it virtually impossible for physically born male or female athletes competing at the national level or international level to intentionally cheat by masquerading as the opposite sex.

3. There is no evidence or convincing logic that athletes would transition in order to gain competitive advantages.

4. While generally there are numerous anatomical and physiological differences between men and women, there also is a vast range of anatomical and physiological variation within each sex. The implication is to ask whether transitioned athletes, in fact, fit in the broad variance that already exists within their new sex.

5. Both testosterone and estrogen can influence performance, and therefore transitioning and transitioned athletes participating in competitive sport should try to consistently have sex hormone levels within the normal range for their new sex.

6. Physically born women and transitioned women have similar concentrations of both testosterone and estrogen. Estrogen supplementation to transitioned women resulted in haemoglobin levels similar to those found in physically born women, and similar muscle mass at the upper range of development. Subcutaneous fat content remained lower while total body weight was higher in transitioned women.

7. Transitioned men can have higher estrogen and testosterone concentrations compared with physically born men but the difference in testosterone levels can be eliminated by using a new long-lasting testosterone dosing regime. However, for all approved dosing regimes, testosterone supplementation to transitioned men resulted in haemoglobin levels similar to those in physically born men, and similar muscle mass at the upper range of development even when concentrations were higher. The only difference that continued following one year of supplementation was a higher amount of subcutaneous fat in transitioned men which could diminish performance in competitions with physically born men.

8. 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. In view of the lack of available research and the methodology requirements for credible new research, the answer to that question may never be known with certainty given the low prevalence of transitioned individuals in the population.

9. The IOC and World Anti-Doping Agency play influential leadership roles in how the sport community views sex and gender issues, and how the sport community sets policies establishing related eligibility and participation criteria.

10. The eligibility requirements in the IOC‘s Stockholm Consensus on sex reassignment in sports should be reviewed considering that few metabolic changes were found beyond one year of cross-sex hormone supplementation. The conditions that are imposed should not be vague or onerous to the point of being barriers. Eligibility requirements also need to address the full range of choices possible for transitioning and transitioned athletes. This includes the choice to have hormone supplementation but not sex reassignment surgery which has additional considerations outside the scope of the literature reviews.

11. The World Anti-Doping Code does not include mandatory standards that address the use of hormone supplementation for transition purposes. This could result in discretionary decisions that might be inconsistent from one case to the next.

Link

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I will speak on this from my own perspective. I identify my gender as 100% female. How many woman do you know that would be happy if they had been born with the pats of a man? To me that is a birth defect. The sex doesn't match the gender. A person's gender is hard wired in their brain, and cannot be change. Due to medical advancements, a person is able to change their sex to match their gender. Seriously, people just don't seem to understand how hard it is to feel like you were born in the wrong body. It isn't made any easier with all the discrimination we face on a daily basis.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Female is not a gender. It is a sex. Sex is defined not by organs per se. It is defined at its core by the sex chromosome (I forget which number it is). If it's XX, you're female. If it's XY, you're male. This won't ever change. Forensic anthropologists find you 2000 years from now, they'll label you male. No way you can get around it.

Gender, of course, is a different, though related, beast. In cultures with more than two genders, one such as yourself could find a place/gender without believing you were born in the wrong body.

An example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lhamana

Transgender is purely a cultural construct. It really is only seen in societies where gender roles are so tied heavily into one's sex, which is a major portion of human society.

Leading back to the golf. Kicky is spot on. Both sides have arguments. Compelling and persuasive arguments. If it were I that had to make the decision, I'd say the organizations that are exclusive for what they call woman or ladies should be determined by one's sex, and not gender, disqualifying the golfer in question. I don't think I'd be fully happy with that decision, but I believe it's the darkest and easiest line to make.

 

[The-Joker]

I believe Katie is using the word defect as it is defined as the root word of deficiency-- the lack there of. It's a stupid thing to say, but it's technically correct.

That being said, this is all stupid.it's all a damn movement based on manipulating people and built on political correctness.. It's not a mental or a physical problem it's a PC problem. It's the same problem that the entire American Government has, in that there is so much complexity and chutes and ladders and exceptions and proofs and falsehoods, that it's impossible to look at individual facets and identify a problem, because the whole damn thing just doesn't work. Like the American government, it will not be fixed with one ammendment or change in law or "court precedent." it will be fixed when a couple of brave people decide there is a problem, and have the balls (pun intended) to burn this bitch to the ground and build it back up the right way.
I apologize to Katie/Jack, but transsexuality just doesn't work in any logical sense, as explained above it has managed to thrive in complexity and work in a "legal" sense. However, when I can't read a goddamn wikipedia article (Kicky's posted above) and have a goddamn clue what the hell it's talking about, because I'm hung up on PRONOUNS, THERE IS A PROBLEM.
You might hear an advocate say," respect my rights"... well rights don't exist. It is said there are the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but god's not gonna stop me from sticking a gun to anyone's head and pulling the trigger, so inherently rights don't exist, they are created. Rights, when created there are a general consensus about them-- property owners are citizens, blacks are citizens, women are citizens-- this consensus exists because there is little tangible evidence left to refute that those rights shouldn't be given, and an evolution of law occurs.

However no such tangibility exists in this transsexual world, because a paradox ensues when you try to define gender and when transsexuals try to explain it. You define something based on what it is, based on tangible evidence. It's the scientific method for god's sake! If it has a ***** it's a man, and so forth. This transsexual basis is reminiscent of Descartes, "I think therefore I am," and it's rubbish because the confirmation of such a thought leads to the complete and total dismantling of society. If I think I'm a professional basketball player, it doesn't mean that I am one, if it did it would mean that the NBA is obligated to give me the league minimum and all the perks of being a member of the players association.

Is it politically correct to say Katie is a male, no. Is it anatomically correct to say Katie is a female, also no. But based on what I know, anatomy has gotten us through 4 billion years, we're lucky if politics gets us through 4 more years (after 2012 of course). SO I'm gonna stick to my guns on this one. I know what a male (or man) is, and I know what the meaning of the word "is" is, and that's really all I need to get by.

But I close my argument with a link and a statment that I support the rights of all people to do whatever they want, whenever they want, with whoever they want, except in the cases of harm, manipulation, and counter-productivity to the ascending plight of man.

And the link for the win
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton

 

[KatieMCR]

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.

That was highly offensive. I'm just going to leave it at that, and place you on ignore.

Why is it a physical birth defect? Was the body part not functional? Why isn't it a mental disorder, out of curiosity?

I consider it a birth defect, because the physical sex does not match the gender identity I was born with. The defect is in that mismatch. It has nothing to do with how the body part functions.

Chopping off your 1 wood doesn't make you a woman. It's really that simple.

It's really not.

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

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I know what a man is, and I know what the meaning of the word "is" is, and that's really all I need to get by.

Nothing negative about what you typed, but this part should be changed. Should change "man" with "male." Related, but different. Not all males are men, and man has so much more meaning than male.

 

[The-Joker]

Nothing negative about what you typed, but this part should be changed. Should change "man" with "male." Related, but different. Not all males are men, and man has so much more meaning than male.

agreed. Leads to a whole new discussion, though.
"You may have become a male, but have you become a man?"
"You may have become a female, but have you become a lady?'

 

[Darkwing Duck]

agreed. Leads to a whole new discussion, though.
"You may have become a male, but have you become a man?"
"You may have become a female, but have you become a lady?'

But like I said earlier, male and female are based off the chromosomes. I can't say in any way that a person with the XY chromosome, despite hormonal treatment, can ever be called female. Based on how this culture defines its gender roles, it'd be improper to call that person a woman, but if you're willing to look past just the sex part, and focus on the gender role itself, I have no problem regarding a male as a woman and vice versa.

 

[Archie Moses]

I consider it a birth defect, because the physical sex does not match the gender identity I was born with. The defect is in that mismatch. It has nothing to do with how the body part functions.

So it sounds more like a mental defect than physical, or no? Since when have functioning body parts been defective? To me, it seems like a mental and not physical thing, but I'm no expert.

 

[The-Joker]

But like I said earlier, male and female are based off the chromosomes. I can't say in any way that a person with the XY chromosome, despite hormonal treatment, can ever be called female. Based on how this culture defines its gender roles, it'd be improper to call that person a woman, but if you're willing to look past just the sex part, and focus on the gender role itself, I have no problem regarding a male as a woman and vice versa.

Granted.
Where does reproduction play into that? The sustaining part of the gender roll is the ability to produce. Most transsexuals can't reproduce as their stated gender (some male-> females have snuck their way into snatching a baby... I don't know how I feel about that). I don't know I could call a person who was previously a man my mother.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

So it sounds more like a mental defect than physical, or no? Also, if it has nothing to do with how body parts function, how can one say it's defective to be born a male? To me, it seems like a mental and not physical thing, but I'm no expert.

I'd call it more of a mental and physical incongruity. The mind refuses to accept the gender role that society has deemed that sex should be, and that person more closely identifies with the opposite gender. Can't really call it a defect, mental or physical, since it's a societal matter.

 

[The-Joker]

So it sounds more like a mental defect than physical, or no? Also, if it has nothing to do with how body parts function, how can one say it's defective to be born a male? To me, it seems like a mental and not physical thing, but I'm no expert.

wrong definition guy.

Defect can either be used in the context of "problem" or "something's missing", defect is a root word of "deficiency". Saying one has a birth defect is technically correct, because they have a perceived deficiency.

 

[Archie Moses]

Saying one has a birth defect is technically correct, because they have a perceived deficiency.

So deficiencies can come from perceptions as well? Who's perceptions should be allowed to define deficiencies in society?

 

[KatieMCR]

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.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Granted.
Where does reproduction play into that? The sustaining part of the gender roll is the ability to produce. Most transsexuals can't reproduce as their stated gender (some male-> females have snuck their way into snatching a baby... I don't know how I feel about that). I don't know I could call a person who was previously a man my mother.

Well, gender roles generally are more concerned with raising of children than who has sex with whom. Age grades tie in with gender roles to determine when an acceptable age for intercourse is. Lineage (patrilineal or matrilineal) determines the family. Societal systems like class and castes determine who can have sex with whom. In societies with more than two genders, I don't believe there are restrictions on who can have sex with whom.

As for your last sentence, I'll get technical again and say that mother is a biological term, female parent. Since a man can't be female, that wouldn't ever happen. Technological advances in the future, however, may lead to an individual having, say, two fathers and no mother, or more likely two mothers and no fathers (what would a person with the YY chromosome look like? Would that even by viable?).

 

[KatieMCR]

It sure is nice to know there are so many "experts" on this board that know more about my identity than I do myself. What would I ever do without you? /sarcasm

 

[The-Joker]

It sure is nice to know there are so many "experts" on this board that know more about my identity than I do myself. What would I ever do without you? /sarcasm

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

 

[The-Joker]

Well, gender roles generally are more concerned with raising of children than who has sex with whom. Age grades tie in with gender roles to determine when an acceptable age for intercourse is. Lineage (patrilineal or matrilineal) determines the family. Societal systems like class and castes determine who can have sex with whom. In societies with more than two genders, I don't believe there are restrictions on who can have sex with whom.

As for your last sentence, I'll get technical again and say that mother is a biological term, female parent. Since a man can't be female, that wouldn't ever happen. Technological advances in the future, however, may lead to an individual having, say, two fathers and no mother, or more likely two mothers and no fathers (what would a person with the YY chromosome look like? Would that even by viable?).

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.