|
Post by durtpile on Dec 7, 2017 12:55:20 GMT -5
Eunuch is a derogatory word? It is a real word, describing a very real situation. You seem to want others to conclude - as you appear to have done - that facts, definitions, and reality, no longer matter. Who "learned" more than me? I know the definition of words, which is more than some can say. eu·nuch ˈyo͞onək/ noun noun: eunuch; plural noun: eunuchs a man who has been castrated If you don't like the definition, you can sue the people that make the dictionaries, eh? btw, you might want to make note of the fact that a person has to be a man/male to become a eunuch. Yes, referring to a transwoman as a eunuch is derogatory. You apparently know what the dictionary says that words mean, but not how to use them properly in social situations to not sound like an uneducated fool. A "transwoman'? Really? You mean a eunuch that is pretending to be a woman? A woman has ovaries. A eunuch does not. Even an uneducated fool knows that. Funny thing. I've known a whole lot of people with male dogs. Most have had their dog neutered. Never heard a single one of them say, "here, girl". Never heard a rancher call a steer a heifer, either. Common sense, biology, facts...........you know, the stuff even uneducated fools can figure out.......seem to have issues with your argument.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 7, 2017 13:22:06 GMT -5
Yes, referring to a transwoman as a eunuch is derogatory. You apparently know what the dictionary says that words mean, but not how to use them properly in social situations to not sound like an uneducated fool. A "transwoman'? Really? You mean a eunuch that is pretending to be a woman? A woman has ovaries. A eunuch does not. Even an uneducated fool knows that. Funny thing. I've known a whole lot of people with male dogs. Most have had their dog neutered. Never heard a single one of them say, "here, girl". Never heard a rancher call a steer a heifer, either. Common sense, biology, facts...........you know, the stuff even uneducated fools can figure out.......seem to have issues with your argument. My argument is accepted by the medical community, the legal and legislative communities, and the regulators of the sport of volleyball. Your argument is not. It is really simple, actually. Feel free to tell the IOC, USAV, FIVB, and the CAS that you know more than them because you can read a dictionary (out of content, mind you), know the simple facts of biology, and have common sense. I doubt it will have any impact on their decision-making. The world evolves, and people's antiquated ideas get left behind. Interracial marriage was considered unnatural, wrong, and morally reprehensible for a time, but we have moved past that thinking as a society. Have you? It used to be OK to enslave people. Do you think that is OK still? I mean, survival of the fittest if a basic biological fact, isn't it? Calling people with intellectual and developmental disabilities "retards" used to be OK. Do you think that is still OK? Things change, whether you like it or not. Thank goodness people who bother to educate themselves on topics like this have power to make important decisions and you don't.
|
|
|
Post by durtpile on Dec 7, 2017 13:36:36 GMT -5
A "transwoman'? Really? You mean a eunuch that is pretending to be a woman? A woman has ovaries. A eunuch does not. Even an uneducated fool knows that. Funny thing. I've known a whole lot of people with male dogs. Most have had their dog neutered. Never heard a single one of them say, "here, girl". Never heard a rancher call a steer a heifer, either. Common sense, biology, facts...........you know, the stuff even uneducated fools can figure out.......seem to have issues with your argument. My argument is accepted by the medical community, the legal and legislative communities, and the regulators of the sport of volleyball. Your argument is not. It is really simple, actually. Feel free to tell the IOC, USAV, FIVB, and the CAS that you know more than them because you can read a dictionary (out of content, mind you), know the simple facts of biology, and have common sense. I doubt it will have any impact on their decision-making. The world evolves, and people's antiquated ideas get left behind. Interracial marriage was considered unnatural, wrong, and morally reprehensible for a time, but we have moved past that thinking as a society. Have you? It used to be OK to enslave people. Do you think that is OK still? I mean, survival of the fittest if a basic biological fact, isn't it? Calling people with intellectual and developmental disabilities "retards" used to be OK. Do you think that is still OK? Things change, whether you like it or not. Thank goodness people who bother to educate themselves on topics like this have power to make important decisions and you don't. You are the first person to ever protest the usage of eunuch. I notice that you failed to address the biology of the issue. What does race have to do with this argument? I don't see any whites trying to become black, nor blacks trying to become white....... Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren, notwithstanding. Maybe because it is a genetic thing.....like a person's biological sex?
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 7, 2017 13:41:49 GMT -5
My argument is accepted by the medical community, the legal and legislative communities, and the regulators of the sport of volleyball. Your argument is not. It is really simple, actually. Feel free to tell the IOC, USAV, FIVB, and the CAS that you know more than them because you can read a dictionary (out of content, mind you), know the simple facts of biology, and have common sense. I doubt it will have any impact on their decision-making. The world evolves, and people's antiquated ideas get left behind. Interracial marriage was considered unnatural, wrong, and morally reprehensible for a time, but we have moved past that thinking as a society. Have you? It used to be OK to enslave people. Do you think that is OK still? I mean, survival of the fittest if a basic biological fact, isn't it? Calling people with intellectual and developmental disabilities "retards" used to be OK. Do you think that is still OK? Things change, whether you like it or not. Thank goodness people who bother to educate themselves on topics like this have power to make important decisions and you don't. You are the first person to ever protest the usage of eunuch. I notice that you failed to address the biology of the issue. What does race have to do with this argument? I don't see any whites trying to become black, nor blacks trying to become white....... Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren, notwithstanding. Maybe because it is a genetic thing.....like a person's biological sex? If you fail to see why I made mention of race in this instance, your reading comprehensive and critical thinking skills are severely limited. You can act like you used the word eunuch in a value-free manner, but you did not. You used it to insult the player whose experience has inspired this thread. Furthermore, no one with any in-depth knowledge of race considers it to be biological. While there are phenotypic expression of an individual's genotype, race itself is a notion of characterological traits associated with skin color, facial features, hair texture and other factors.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 7, 2017 13:45:28 GMT -5
What traits? Look, if it's not height, jump touch, reflex speed, strength, etc. then what is it? Exactly which secondary sexual traits are you referring to? Why define the traits further, when all you have to do is look at athletes through every sport. Because, as I said, that simply resolves to some mystical trait of "maleness". If you simplify the spectrum of traits that affect sports performance down into a binary distinction of "male" and "female", then of course it makes your argument trivial. At that point you are just left with "is she male or female?" Well, by rule she's now female, so by your own oversimplification she's legit to play.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 7, 2017 13:51:45 GMT -5
And there's no "mystical" aspect to the secondary sex traits that males gain over puberty and put them on a different level athletically. What traits? Look, if it's not height, jump touch, reflex speed, strength, etc. then what is it? Exactly which secondary sexual traits are you referring to? Going through puberty as a male with normal testosterone makes you larger (height, frame, hands even), plus the legacy of other athleticism-boosting secondary sex characteristics (musculature/bone structure).
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 7, 2017 13:52:20 GMT -5
Yes, referring to a transwoman as a eunuch is derogatory. You apparently know what the dictionary says that words mean, but not how to use them properly in social situations to not sound like an uneducated fool. A "transwoman'? Really? You mean a eunuch that is pretending to be a woman? A woman has ovaries. A eunuch does not. Even an uneducated fool knows that. Funny thing. I've known a whole lot of people with male dogs. Most have had their dog neutered. Never heard a single one of them say, "here, girl". Never heard a rancher call a steer a heifer, either. Common sense, biology, facts...........you know, the stuff even uneducated fools can figure out.......seem to have issues with your argument. This is just rude and not helpful. Stop...
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 7, 2017 14:04:17 GMT -5
What traits? Look, if it's not height, jump touch, reflex speed, strength, etc. then what is it? Exactly which secondary sexual traits are you referring to? Going through puberty as a male with normal testosterone makes you larger (height, frame, hands even), plus the legacy of other athleticism-boosting secondary sex characteristics (musculature/bone structure). HRT does not alter height or frame, but it does reduce musculature and bone density. To me, less muscle mass makes moving that frame around harder. This is confirmed by some first hand testimonial of a trans vball player, which I posted in the other thread.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 7, 2017 14:11:50 GMT -5
Going through puberty as a male with normal testosterone makes you larger (height, frame, hands even), plus the legacy of other athleticism-boosting secondary sex characteristics (musculature/bone structure). HRT does not alter height or frame, but it does reduce musculature and bone density. To me, less muscle mass makes moving that frame around harder. This is confirmed by some first hand testimonial of a trans vball player, which I posted in the other thread. It may make moving that frame around harder compared to previously and I'm not denying these transwomen's own accounts, but the baseline should not be their performance as a man but the comparison to ciswomen. Post-transition players are better/more competitive relative to women than they were to men prior to transition - that is abundantly clear in Tiffany's case and is also what I've observed playing alongside transwomen who have transitioned.
|
|
|
Post by Fight On! on Dec 7, 2017 15:22:43 GMT -5
HRT does not alter height or frame, but it does reduce musculature and bone density. To me, less muscle mass makes moving that frame around harder. This is confirmed by some first hand testimonial of a trans vball player, which I posted in the other thread. It may make moving that frame around harder compared to previously and I'm not denying these transwomen's own accounts, but the baseline should not be their performance as a man but the comparison to ciswomen. Post-transition players are better/more competitive relative to women than they were to men prior to transition - that is abundantly clear in Tiffany's case and is also what I've observed playing alongside transwomen who have transitioned. Yes, I have played with many transwomen too, but I am not sure if your point is actually relevant to this case. If she competes at a reasonable level against women, what is the issue? If the powers that be use taking HRT or T-levels as the determining factor and she meets the criteria, then she is considered to be fair competition. She has potentially replaced one other woman in the league, who likely would have replaced anyway by another player if the coach was looking for a better player.
|
|
|
Post by Seahawks 1972 on Dec 7, 2017 15:23:55 GMT -5
Fulfillingness First Finale
|
|
|
Post by durtpile on Dec 7, 2017 15:30:12 GMT -5
You are the first person to ever protest the usage of eunuch. I notice that you failed to address the biology of the issue. What does race have to do with this argument? I don't see any whites trying to become black, nor blacks trying to become white....... Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren, notwithstanding. Maybe because it is a genetic thing.....like a person's biological sex? If you fail to see why I made mention of race in this instance, your reading comprehensive and critical thinking skills are severely limited. You can act like you used the word eunuch in a value-free manner, but you did not. You used it to insult the player whose experience has inspired this thread. Furthermore, no one with any in-depth knowledge of race considers it to be biological. While there are phenotypic expression of an individual's genotype, race itself is a notion of characterological traits associated with skin color, facial features, hair texture and other factors. I notice you once again failed to address the biology of the eunuch pretending to be a woman. Does the eunuch have the male xy chromosomes, or the female xx chromosomes? Please use your vaunted critical thinking skills to frame another evasive response.
|
|
|
Post by Vacation on Dec 7, 2017 15:34:33 GMT -5
If we take the strict biology approach to its logical conclusion and exclude all biologically modified individuals, wouldn't that exclude athletes with surgically repaired muscles, ligaments, tendons, etc. Biologically, they're screwed once they tear or rupture major ligaments and such. Just because advanced healthcare allows for surgical repair or surgical gender reassignment, the biology remains unchanged, right?
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Dec 7, 2017 15:38:54 GMT -5
If we take the strict biology approach to its logical conclusion and exclude all biologically modified individuals, wouldn't that exclude athletes with surgically repaired muscles, ligaments, tendons, etc. Biologically, they're screwed once they tear or rupture major ligaments and such. Just because advanced healthcare allows for surgical repair or surgical gender reassignment, the biology remains unchanged, right? So you argument is that transgender male to female should have to continue to play in the men’s divisions? I think that would be fair. Having an ACL repaired does not automatically switch you to a different division.
|
|
|
Post by Vacation on Dec 7, 2017 15:40:49 GMT -5
If we take the strict biology approach to its logical conclusion and exclude all biologically modified individuals, wouldn't that exclude athletes with surgically repaired muscles, ligaments, tendons, etc. Biologically, they're screwed once they tear or rupture major ligaments and such. Just because advanced healthcare allows for surgical repair or surgical gender reassignment, the biology remains unchanged, right? So you argument is that transgender male to female should have to continue to play in the men’s divisions? I think that would be fair. That's not an argument you quoted. That's an extrapolation.
|
|