PDGA Updates Gender Policy

[lyleoross]

True, but that does not refute what I am saying: that a person who is "XX" (not XXY, just XX) is a genetically a female, and a person who is "XY" is genetically a male.

And so-called gender-changing surgery (i.e. mutilation of one's body) does not change those genetics. We don't have that technology yet. When we do, we'll have that discussion then...

I haven't read through every post, and I may have missed a reply, but nope. There's lots of ways to be XX and still present male and vice versa.

Small translocations and changes in general expression are just two.

Let's really mess your mind up, shall we? We've dumped a ton of chemicals into our ground water. Some of them act like estrogen and some act like testosterone. Consequently, we've changed the course of child development. You can see children, girls especially, coming into sexual maturity at much younger ages. And of course, hormone therapy for a trans person is treating that person with high levels of the desired hormone. It's good to know that deregulation of chemical companies is giving us all our own little hormone boost.

 

[lyleoross]

I find it interesting that the one person who has a stake, Nova P. is the least bothered by trans folks playing into her division. Unless the male posters here are afraid of a trans person playing into their division and beating them? Ouch, that would definitely hurt, I suppose. I only have to watch FPO to know that there's lots of folks who are XX who can kick my butt, and some of them are even older than I am, sigh. Thank Darwin I don't have a fragile ego.

One of the local players here, obnoxious and proud of it, had a daughter who decided to make the change. I don't even think he wrestled with it, he drove her to the surgery. He was damned proud of her for doing such a brave thing and bragged about her courage. Oops, I meant his courage.

 

[discerdoo]

Nova P appears kinda tall in her recent video. I could be totally off base but that was my impression.

I feel my rights as a normal sized male would be infringed upon by playing against a female with a genetically superior 'ape index' than me.

Absolutely not comparing you to an ape, Nova!

 

[lyleoross]

Nova P appears kinda tall in her recent video. I could be totally off base but that was my impression.

I feel my rights as a normal sized male would be infringed upon by playing against a female with a genetically superior 'ape index' than me.

Absolutely not comparing you to an ape, Nova!

So, you're supporting my new height restricted division? You have to be under, where's that tape measure... 5'7" to qualify.

 

[discerdoo]

So, you're supporting my new height restricted division? You have to be under, where's that tape measure... 5'7" to qualify.

No, 5'10".....and a half. With normal length arms and normal sized hands too.

 

[Dcinmd]

Anabolic Roids and HGH, imo, would be more of a benefit when it comes to practicing. The recovery rate aspect would allow you to throw more shots per day, play more holes and just generally help you recover from long strenuous activities.

They would play a huge roll in injury recovery as well.

 

[lyleoross]

No, 5'10".....and a half. With normal length arms and normal sized hands too.

Oh come on, everyone knows hand size doesn't relate to success in disc golf, just to a need to brag.

 

[VictorB]

So, you're supporting my new height restricted division? You have to be under, where's that tape measure... 5'7" to qualify.

Sign me up! I even have 1" to spare...

 

[Monocacy]

I am old so this discussion reminds me of Renee Richards, a professional men's tennis player (as Richard Raskind) who transitioned to female in the 1970s and who, after a lawsuit, continued to play professionally as a woman.

Renee Richards - Wikipedia

Points of interest relevant to this discussion:

As a man, Richards was a multi-sport star in high school (football, baseball, swimming, tennis), college tennis star, and (after getting a medical degree) ranked #6 of 20 in male professional tennis players over age 35.

After transitioning to female, Richards played professional tennis for 4 years. She was ranked as high as #20 and retired at the age of 47.

Interestingly, "Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying "Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion.""

So this is a complicated issue. Biology is complicated. Human capability is complicated. Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes: "For every complex human problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

-- H.L. Mencken. Who was also complicated.

 

[lyleoross]

I am old so this discussion reminds me of Renee Richards, a professional men's tennis player (as Richard Raskind) who transitioned to female in the 1970s and who, after a lawsuit, continued to play professionally as a woman.

Renee Richards - Wikipedia

Points of interest relevant to this discussion:

As a man, Richards was a multi-sport star in high school (football, baseball, swimming, tennis), college tennis star, and (after getting a medical degree) ranked #6 of 20 in male professional tennis players over age 35.

After transitioning to female, Richards played professional tennis for 4 years. She was ranked as high as #20 and retired at the age of 47.

Interestingly, "Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying "Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion.""

So this is a complicated issue. Biology is complicated. Human capability is complicated. Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes: "For every complex human problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

-- H.L. Mencken. Who was also complicated.

I think this is correct but it begs the question, did Renee get a sex change operation so that Renee would have an advantage in athletics? Such a notion seems very far fetched to me. Most of the Y chromosome folks I know are way more wed to their little man than to success in athletics.

I'm a whole lot less worried about athletics and success therein than most folks. Houston has crumbling infrastructure, underfunded schools, massive flooding issues and a lack of city parks, but we have three multibillion dollar sporting facilities. Katy ISD has at least two HS football stadiums that cost between 25 mm and 35mm, and similar school funding problems. Eye roll.

 

[Monocacy]

I think this is correct but it begs the question, did Renee get a sex change operation so that Renee would have an advantage in athletics? Such a notion seems very far fetched to me. Most of the Y chromosome folks I know are way more wed to their little man than to success in athletics.

No, the impetus for the Raskind/Richards change was not athletics. Anyway it is very difficult for me to imagine someone with that motivation making it through the pre-screening process for transition. And how many people would we be talking about anyway?

I'm a whole lot less worried about athletics and success therein than most folks. Houston has crumbling infrastructure, underfunded schools, massive flooding issues and a lack of city parks, but we have three multibillion dollar sporting facilities. Katy ISD has at least two HS football stadiums that cost between 25 mm and 35mm, and similar school funding problems. Eye roll.

Agreed. This is an issue which is supremely important to those who choose to transition, and of little to no impact on everyone else. Why the fuss?

 

[discerdoo]

Why the fuss?

Pseudo intellectuals with an overwhelming need to sound important and 'inclusive' on the interwebs?

 

[Skins]

If the general consensus of the entire world's scientific community isn't enough to convince him of something, we can safely assume he'll never budge his opinion on this topic.

Wait, now I'm curious. SD...do you vaccinate?

"The general consensus of the entire world's scientific community"

^^^ DOES NOT MEAN JACK SQUAT ^^^

Aldous Huxley would be very proud of this general consensus though.

 

[lyleoross]

"The general consensus of the entire world's scientific community"

^^^ DOES NOT MEAN JACK SQUAT ^^^

Aldous Huxley would be very proud of this general consensus though.

Why the fuss? And all in caps too? It turns out that if something isn't interesting most folks don't comment.

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

Aldous Huxley

 

[lyleoross]

BTW - I always find references to Huxley amusing. You don't need genetic engineering or sleep hypnosis to get folks to act like sheep, you only need the Internet and news propaganda to get there. Our culture is a study in this. And yes, Huxley would be appalled to realize that it was much easier than he thought it would be.

 

[lyleoross]

Since we are on a Brave New World track, we should understand Huxley's message. In his book, the government takes away the choice of individuals. It forces them to be what the government thinks they should. A larger group deciding what others should be. And those who don't fit the norm are forsaken, devalued, thrown out.

Being trans isn't a government choice forced on an individual. It's a person's individual choice (due to genetic pressure, IMO). When the larger body tries to tell that individual that they have no right and need to conform to the public's view of the norm, well, that is Huxley all right, but in quite the opposite way than some interpret it.

 

[Orioles_Lefty]

Pseudo intellectuals with an overwhelming need to sound important and 'inclusive' on the interwebs?

But lucky are all of us that the conservative Internet police are here to comment on the pseudo intellectuals, social justice warriors, and &$@"?! Leftists who can't just leave society alone. If it weren't for their politically correct policing of society than there wouldn't be a need for the conservative police, who would really not like to make it about them but have to because the leftists and the SJWs and the armchair intellectuals make it about themselves and such aggression will not stand, Man.

 

[Cripes]

I assume that the governing body that has a vested interest in the matter who has been working on this matter for decades knows more than a random on a forum who thinks that something "sounds unfair" and who has not put in a similar amount of effort (all alone) as have scores or hundreds or thousands of experts with a kaleidoscope of scientific degrees over prolonged periods of time.

You are not on an equal footing with them.

I think you're giving the IOC way too much credit. I read 2015 IOC consensus report that the pdga policy is based on. It is 3 pages long with the first page being only the list of members. The committee consist of about 15 medical experts and 3 attorneys. The medical experts are professors and consultants.

The report purports to represents a scientific consensus but there are NO citations. Additionally one of the members, prof. Arnie Ljungqvist had the following to say after the meeting:

"It has become much more of a social issue than in the past. We had to review and look into this from a new angle. We needed to adapt to the modern legislation around the world. We felt we cannot impose a surgery if that is no longer a legal requirement. Those cases are very few, but we had to answer the question. It is an adaptation to a human rights issue. This is an important matter. ItÂ's a trend of being more flexible and more liberal.Â"

So, an admission that political pressure influenced the report, and no citations to support how they arrived at this consensus. I think people have every right to be skeptical.

(Emphasis added by me.) The sentence which I have bolded is a logical fallacy, the argument from ignorance: your inability to find this information does not mean that others do not possess it or know it, so you cannot operate on the assumption that your unfounded hypothesis is the preferred one by default.

The fundamental flaw in your approach is that you're attempting to create doubt in the expertise of the, well, experts, and to substitute your less-informed supposition in its place, and to use this less-informed supposition to inform policy. A policy which conveniently targets a despised minority population whose motivations are unfairly considered to be shady or suspect.

I honestly don't believe good data on the performance of transgender athletes in skill sports exist yet. If it did the IOC report would be a good place to find it, but again no citations. I disagree wholeheartedly that transgender persons are despised and that it has any relevance on their athletic ability.

If you know more than the army of experts, either dazzle us here with your findings -- studies, data, things that require work and study, not just supposition and things that "sound unfair" to you, or step back.

Where is the army of expert?. This policy was created by 15 professors and 3 lawyers. Speaking of lawyers, I believe the burden of proof here is on the transgender supporters. I have the results of every study and athletic competition ever recorded to prove that men are superior athletes to biological women. Where is the proof that 2 years of testonerone blockers 100% wipes that advantage in skill sports.

This would be an interesting study. Give the LA Lakers testosterone blockers until they reach 4.9 nm per liter and have them play the LA Sparks, who wins?

You probably don't realize it, but you're using the vocabulary of a group of people who are extremely hostile to transgender people. For example, you repeatedly refer to transgender people as "transgenders," which is considered dehumanizing, as it reduces them to an adjective. You repeatedly make a distinction between transgender women and "biological women," which is a dog-whistle term used by TERFs*, and then you state that you're "not hurting anyone by saying men can't play with women." That rather explicitly-- and I will be charitable once and assume also clumsily--implies that you consider transgender women to be not a sort of woman, but simply men.

I did not realize that, I have tried to be respectful. You used the term transgerder person, I thought transgenders was an appropriate shorthand on an already lengthy message board post. I don't know what TERFs are but there is a distinction between biological women and transgender women which is why I made it.

Transgender women are regarded as women in every other aspect of their daily lives. It is discordant and distressing to then pull back on the leash and collar and say "no, not so fast, in this instance you're still a man" when it comes to one particular female space. This is inherently hurtful, demeaning, and denies their legitimacy as women.

Cis people are denied the ability to do things for many reasons all the time. Granting transgender persons everything they ask for is not compassionate it's coddling.


----------
(*: Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists, and no, we definitely don't have the time to discuss them here.)[/QUOTE]

 

[lyleoross]

^^^^
Look, I'm just starting, but the very first hit I got on gender equality in a search of IOC docs gave me a thirty-six page glossy summary with citations. That isn't even the base of the work. It seems they spent more time at this than your post suggests?

Now, I'm not a fan of the IOC, and while I love the Olympics, as I wrote above, I find our obsession with sport to be over done. But that doesn't mean that sport, if the proper lever is applied, doesn't sometimes do the right thing. That's how we got equity in the funding of women's athletics at the college level. Public pressure. Public pressure can be good or bad, but it shouldn't be poo pooed simply cause it exists.

 

[Nova P]

I did not realize that, I have tried to be respectful. You used the term transgerder person, I thought transgenders was an appropriate shorthand on an already lengthy message board post. I don't know what TERFs are but there is a distinction between biological women and transgender women which is why I made it.

Okay here's the thing, and I suspect it'll be hard to accept: if you're not familiar with the Dunning-Kruger Effect, I really think you need to go read the Wiki article on it. It seems to me that you don't even see the holes in your knowledge.

You're positioning yourself as a greater expert in transgender athleticism than the people who make the policies for athletic competition on the global elite level, and you're stumbling over basic vocabulary, and you were not even aware of the existence of TERFs, or what that acronym might stand for. People who think seriously about transgender people know these things. It's transgender 101 material.

You are coming across here like a yokel barging into an NAACP conference on advancing African-American athletics, and talking (with great sincerity and no malice) about "coloreds" and "darkies." You're out of your depth, and you don't seem to realize it.