Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Pickman's
Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?
- Thread starter The Flying Pig
- Start date
- Status
Fine, stick with holocaust deniers if you can't cope with ambiguity. Consider that argument stopped.
Let's start again.
"Asking questions as a rhetorical device to point out problems in an argument is a perfectly reasonable approach used by more people than just holocaust deniers, you know."
True. Some call themselves ‘truthers’ and come out with identical anti-Semitic shite and operate in the same murky ponds as neo-Nazis.
Athos
Well-Known Member
Nobody is doing that, except in your overactive imagination.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
You belittle the idea that there may be any kind of problem here, so I'll patronise you a little in an attempt to explain. You may not care about issues to do with sport, but I do.
Women are close to winning the long fight to gain acceptance in all sports that men do, showing that nothing should be off-limits, that they can thrive in women-only competitions in all of these sports, that the myths that masqueraded as science until scarily recently, such as that sport will affect women's fertility, have been put to bed.
It's a fight that's nearly been won here, in other parts of the world less so, and it's only being won very very recently. It was only in, irrc, 1972 that the FA lifted its absurd ban on women playing football at its grounds, a ban imposed as the men running the FA thought it was an inappropriate activity for women. Rugby, boxing, hammer-throwing, pole-vaulting and a host of other physical sports were considered too tough for women until much more recently.
While I agree with Steven Rose that it's a bit of a fool's errand trying to separate off biological sex from socially constructed gender, I think one or other can be emphasised at various points here. The exclusion of women from many sports was done largely for reasons of gender stereotyping - not a ladylike thing to do - which was the real motivation behind the spurious, unproven assumptions to do with the supposed damage sport could do to women. The inclusion of women has come with the creation of a space for people of female biological sex, where they could demonstrate how women can thrive in sports where they compete against other women.
The 'right' to play competitive sport against women born to the female biological sex where you have grown up as a biological man is not a given here. It cannot be a given. The idea that there is a simple way for trans women who transitioned as adults after years of sports training as biological men to integrate into women's sport, especially at the elite level, is frankly naive.
Not at all. The fact that the set of people that use a device includes a subset of people that are distasteful doesn’t tell you anything about whether an employer of that device does or does not lie within the subset.
You are falling foul of a particular logical fallacy associated with the raven paradox
*Gives Pickman's a pedant point*
(I wasn't sure if you're allowed to award them to yourself and it doesn't seem fair for you to miss out)
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
Cunt
I assume then that "peculiar" is a transphobic slur. Won't be the first time. Wont be the last. Doesn't mean I have to tolerate it.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
You know nothing.
Aren't these personal attacks on me, because of my gender identity, just a little bit childish? Aren't you tired of all this by now?
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
The raven paradox, right.
I've seen what I consider just asking questions employed on this thread. This is where you say link to some and I somehow trawl 300 pages so that I can, and there develops an infinite vortex of pedantry and defensiveness which achieves nothing. So put it down to differing interpretations of the written word and if I see any from this point on I'll be sure to mention it.
bimble
floofy
If ‘trans women are women end of’ then there can’t really be any room for these sort of discussions though can there? If a person’s testosterone levels meet the rules of whatever sporting body and they identify as a woman then that’s it.
I assumed she meant humorous. Nothing to do with transitioning.
I’m not saying link to anything. Quite the opposite. I’m saying that the rhetorical device of Socratic questioning is not, in itself, evidence of bigotry. So it wouldn’t matter if you linked to an example of it.
It can be annoying though.
trashpony
Hag
That was a personal attack but it's not because of your gender. You're entirely humourless and your gender has nothing to do with it. But you know, try and make it about you being trans. Because you are entirely beyond any kind of criticism because of that
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Oh for fuck sake.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
Attack me for years because of my gender identity and them claim I'm humourless. You know I'm not humourless, right? Just when you're about because I always my guard up when you are around.
What fucking evidence do you have for me being humourles .Yeah you can pretend it's about a personality flaw if you like, but we both know why you've been a fucking cunt to me ever since I came on these boards.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
Yeah fuck off
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Well it would matter if you linked to an example/examples of it because you'd then know what context the rhetorical device was being used in.
Except that the fact that such questioning is being used is being taken as prima facie evidence of bigotry. With no context, the questioning in and of itself is being cited as a reason not to engage with the person doing it.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
A lot of this thread just needs the don't be a dick logic to be applied, people tying themselves in academic knots trying to prove some posters aren't being total dicks.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
Ffs not all "just asking questions" is Socratic questioning. Some is shit stirring and some is evidence of bigotry. Have your ravens back because on a thread as toxic as this all apparently 'socratic' questions are suspect. This current diversion about logical fallacies and ravens is suspect. This thread was closed for a week. Just about everything here is suspect.
trashpony
Hag
I think you're humourless because I've never seen any evidence of you having an iota of humour. And I've largely ignored you, at least in the last six months, because you're so quick to cry bully and I'm not one. But whatever. I'm sure you'll do your usual emotional blackmail schtick.
This is totally true, although I suspect the names on our dick list may not be entirely congruent.
It won’t happen because with a LOT of people (I don’t mean on here), questioning just hits the mantra “transwomen are women” and a refusal to debate. Which makes me suspicious but I suspect I’m in the minority.
trashpony
Hag
Men can't be women because they 'identify' as them. Women can't be men because they identify as them either.
Facts may be uncomfortable but they're not hate speech.
I'd like to be 3 stone lighter, 20 years' younger with straight hair, green eyes and a darker skin complexion. It doesn't make it true.
Facts may be uncomfortable but they're not hate speech.
I'd like to be 3 stone lighter, 20 years' younger with straight hair, green eyes and a darker skin complexion. It doesn't make it true.
- Status
Similar threads
