The costs of trans visibility
Yesterday, Dylan Mulvaney broke her silence: https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/vi....
For context, this is a trans influencer who built a 10 million strong following on TikTok. She took a brand deal with budweiser to post an ad on an instagram, and the anti-trans right went absolutely ballistic, calling for a boycott, condemning the company, and to some perhaps unknowable degree it influenced that Budweiser sales dropped by a 1/4 and
. Dylan speaks more personally about the effect of the hatred on her.
What strikes me about this story is that it is just about visibility. This isn't inclusion in sports or gender-affirming care for minors, it was just that a trans person was visible. This wasn't even visibility in a TV commerical that a poor right-winger is forced to see, it was an ad on her own instagram page. We're all in our own social media algorithm influenced bubbles, but from my vantage point it really has seemed that in the last year or so things have just gotten worse for trans people and the backlash to even minor visibility is growing.
We need to do better.
It's not inconclusive - the largest advantage males have over females is in combat sports. Longer reach (this is very evident for Khelif's jab), narrower hips, wider shoulders, greater muscle mass, stronger bones, greater Vo2 max and probably a dozen other things. Untrained males hit 2.5 times harder than untrained females, and these advantages are all accrued during puberty.
This might be what you're saying WRT the eye test, but her physic
in my 5 min google scholar search i read some studies that believed it would not yield an advantage due to women with her condition are not able to efficiently use the testorone they have that wouldn't be present in an xx woman
i'm skeptical though, since the studies were so targeted it felt like activism - but i'm not going to dismiss it out of hand
ie there's a non-zero chance that an xx woman would also naturally get body and its inherent advantages it would bring to boxing - while incredibly rare and uncommon, and i think we both know what is the underlying reason for her dominance, it is possible, however remote, that she would have had those same strengths had she not been born with the swyer genetic defect
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25160863...
n many cases, androgens are non-functional or, alternatively, absent and therefore testosterone cannot be responsible for their athletic success. Genetic variation has a major role in the selection of individuals for training and success in competition; however, this variation is not grounds for determining who should compete in athletic events. There is no convincing evidence to support the view that hyperandrogenism is associated with performance advantage in female athletes.
but i think that study is probably flawed given there are similar "studies" out there with the same exact claims that trans females have no advantage over women in sports as well - which we all know is patently untrue - but i can't rule it out and speak with certainty on it
what i do know is that it really sucks for her
if she got banned for doping and the ioc let her play they would have gotten in front of that, explained why the doping ban was incorrect and why it was repealed and reassured everyone she was fighting clean - they didn't do any of that, just said "she's good to play, nothing to see here" which is just absurd - they bungled it and she is the one paying the price (but it's quite possible it's good for her overall as now she's a household name and can perhaps leverage that)
LOL, yeah, so grateful to have someone with zero knowledge of a topic banning me for speaking truthfully. He's great as long as you don't suggest the Earth revolves around the sun or anything.
You don't have to personally accept that people can actually be trans, but to continue posting in this thread, you'll have to not say that trans people are just pretending. It's unkind to the trans community and is therefore not acceptable here.
This is absurd and you should absolutely not be allowed to moderate this thread. Again, what is the point of even having a discussion if the moderator continues begging the question to penalize members participating? I also don't think I said anything close to this, but was still banned.
No, it absolutely isn't, unless you're disingenuously suggesting that trans-identifying people all agree with me that simply saying, "I am trans" is all that trans-identification entails. But that's clearly not the case since I'm forced to pretend the emperor has no clothes by the fascist mods here.
Trans-identity is a metaphysical, unfalsifiable state of mind that ideologues are using to supersede biological reality. The fact this statement will likely get me banned again is completely absurd. Maybe on Earth 2 or wherever ganstaman lives, the onus is totally on us and not him to prove this absurdity, I guess. Perhaps the burden of proof should be on the people wrecking women's safety, ruining fair sporting, and plummeting gay rights? All in the name of progression!
i can't think of a single thread on this site that has specific "this is the correct subjective viewpoint and all others will be banned"
it's absolutely absurd
you should recuse yourself and not be moderating this thread
Agreed. He needs to take a hike.
I'm not surprised nor confused, and I also won't give in and allow hateful speech. This has be explained numerous times.
The problem with internet janitors is that basically nobody normal would ever want the gig. So you unfortunately wind up with people like you who unironically believe you're standing up for something helpful or morally just. Reality is hateful? Where was my hate speech? You should not be modding this thread.
There is nothing hateful about remaining tethered to objective reality. There is nothing helpful about adhering to an ideology that removes safeguarding for women and children to add further harm to those with mental health disorders. Banning me for these views, calling them hateful speech, is absolutely insane. Sorry, I guess I'm talking crazy when I have an issue with sterilizing gay autistic children or forcing women with sexual trauma to pretend dude's with dicks are women they need to share a nude spa with!
How in the hell is this a fair stance for a mod to have?
I'm not asking you to accept that trans people are really trans, but I will infract and ban for you saying otherwise.
lmao, I'm not asking you to accept this completely nonsensical view that's antithetical to reality, but if you don't, I will BAN YOU FOR IT. You're literally ****ing telling me I HAVE TO accept it, you fool. Embarrassing for 2+2 having this clown at the helm. I didn't even break that rule, either. I accept that people call themselves trans, I just don't agree that there's anything beyond that BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR SUCH A THING. You don't even need gender dysphoria to be "trans" and not everyone with GD/GID identifies as "trans."
But I'm a pretty smart and reasonable person, so if you have any evidence to suggest such a thing, I'm all ears. Unfortunately, after like 3+ years of reading pretty astutely on this topic, I've seen nothing to corroborate such a thing. You obviously know that, too, which is why banning dissenting opinions is the only strategy in your playbook.
I can't wait until this virulent ideology is gone and defeated. It'd be a nice change of pace for the persistently dysphoric youth to receive ACTUAL MEDICAL CARE in the form of mental health treatment, not mutilation that renders them lifelong medical patients.
Khalif is a male with a DSD. He absolutely doesn't have Swyer syndrome as people with Swyer aren't virilized. He's clearly went through male puberty.
what's more unbelievable is this is probably the dozenth time something like this has happened and yet you always appear surprised or confused by it
i can't think of a single thread on this site that has specific "this is the correct subjective viewpoint and all others will be banned"
can you imagine if the israel/palestine thread had victor setting the rules for what one could or couldn't say?
it's absolutely absurd
you should recuse yourself
[url=https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/55/about-forums/request-recuse-ganstaman-trans-identity-discussion-1840303/#post58674942]Request to Recuse ganstaman from Trans-Identity Discussion
[/url]
@elrazor I wrote mental health not health.
This was in 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/upsho...
In retrospect that chart explains also why COVID management was a horror show.
As for teachers, this was in 2019
btw i disagree with the attack against ganstaman the way you guys are doing it (trying to kick him out of modding here), that doesn't mean i agree with his style but 1) at least he answered my questions with arguments 2) the probability that whomever is going to substitute him would be worse for us is really high
I disagree that requesting a non-fascist moderator to facilitate this discussion is "an attack" on anything. What about the way I've went about this do you disagree with? I made a respectful post in the appropriate forum, appealing to admins to step in. You have a bigger issue with that than the mod in question banning me for wrongthink? Lol, okay brah.
Maybe we don't actually need a mod to delete ANY posts in here because we're all adults who can disagree with one another w/o using actual hatred? Is that not an option? There's not much else for me to do when my posts get deleted and my account is banned. Perhaps a mod who can answer questions is too low a bar for us to set? Maybe that should be the bare minimum for someone with access to the ban hammer? Maybe you should become vocal with me about how we'd like this place to be modded so we don't get someone worse than him. It's not like hosting a BB board is difficult, folks.
If you disagree with his style of modding, which you seem to, maybe you should speak up with me in how you'd prefer someone mod discussion? Maybe we shouldn't acquiesce to this kind of censorship because it actually IS a huge deal for society? I was banned from Wikipedia because suggesting that there are only males and females in our species is a "fringe theory" only supported by a few lone British scientists. Like maybe it's easier to just laugh at something like that, but platforms like reddit and Wikipedia drive so much information to children and help shape society. It's a huge issue that ideological capture is destroying our ability to communicate.
If we can't even get a message board for a logical game like poker to adhere to basic logic in discussion, that's a bad sign, IMO. I'm sure ganstaman is a nice person who means well, but I remain firm that his modding style is a cancer that shouldn't be allowed room to grow.
I disagree that asking for his removal will help us, you might not be familiar with say, crossnerd style.
Ok, so given that you acknowledge our current mods are terrible, maybe now suggest something that WILL help us? My contention is that this plan is better than your plan. There's even a thread created for this exact kind of thing already. Would you like to join the discussion and put forth your ideas to help foster better discourse?
I also don't need him "removed" or whatever. I want there to be a clear demarcation line between removing serious hateful speech and trolling/flaming and what he's doing. It should be outlined and I feel like admins can/should/might make a definitive ruling. You know, like, "We agree that he shouldn't be banning people because they don't subscribe to his religion" or something. Is that not worth pursuing? The mods shouldn't be injecting their personal stance into discussions as indelible fact, banning anyone who dares disagree. How can anyone disagree with that?
I've added an addendum to the thread in question based on your observations. Thanks.
btw i disagree with the attack against ganstaman the way you guys are doing it (trying to kick him out of modding here), that doesn't mean i agree with his style but 1) at least he answered my questions with arguments 2) the probability that whomever is going to substitute him would be worse for us is really high
I dont believe he answered your questions and I especially do not believe he provided an argument. In fact, the only thing he ever posts is WHO agrees, blah, blah, blah. I’m a psychiatrist who treats trans blah blah blah. You even posting that is suspicious that you are one of his alts.
You cannot remove a bad mod simply out of fear the replacement could be worse. That’s like idiots voting Trump in 2020 because Biden could be worse (thank god Biden was far better, fixed a lot of the problems Trump caused). If the replacement is worse, you get rid of him or her as well. Gangsterman does create an environment in which people are allowed to disagree. He merely is trying to promote an echo chamber where the pro trans crowd pays each others on the backs for being superior to people who have strongly held beliefs contrary to theirs, beliefs often based on disprovable scientific facts.
And regarding his screen name, he clearly was trying to copy me when he chose it. There can only be one OG. Me!
I dont believe he answered your questions and I especially do not believe he provided an argument. In fact, the only thing he ever posts is WHO agrees, blah, blah, blah. I’m a psychiatrist who treats trans blah blah blah. You even posting that is suspicious that you are one of his alts.
You cannot remove a bad mod simply out of fear the replacement could be worse. That’s like idiots voting Trump in 2020 because Biden could be worse (thank g
I asked him in the mod thread
I think the only thing mods should be doing is filtering out obvious trolling and getting rid of personal attacks toward other posters. But that’s not happening here. Gangster has an agenda and will lay his vengeance upon thee if you disagree.
I think the only thing mods should be doing is filtering out obvious trolling and getting rid of personal attacks toward other posters. But that’s not happening here. Gangster has an agenda and will lay his vengeance upon thee if you disagree.
this is fan fiction. Many many people say things ganstaman disagrees with and have been here and posting for years. You’ve completely wiffed on this one buddy.
So back to actual news: both biological men boxers who were allowed to compete in the olympic games against women, won their gold medal.
Yea small sample size but what are the odds given how exceptional rare that condition is, that the condition doesn't provide any advantage whatsoever, now that the only 2 people with that condition won all their matches (and no match was even remotely close btw) at the highest level of competition?
My belief that the typical trans-identity is largely nothing more than self-perception issues is indefensible hatred that deserves infractions and silencing. It's worse than "flaming", of course. Your post is, of course, conducive to meaningful discourse and totally fine. This makes no sense.
I am fine with your post, by the way, so I don't want mods to think I'm advocating you being silenced. But it's in direct conflict with the rationale behind the censorship on my stance. Why isn't it harmful for me to be laughed at and called pathetic? Maybe I have self-esteem issues or something, too?
This is an attempt to have actual discussion/debate with the trans activist/gender ideology crowd about the issue. This also relates to how the discussion and thread should be moderated
”they ARE non-binary”.
YouÂ’ve been told this repeatedly. Why are you still struggling with basic conjugations?
What exactly is non binary?
Is there a definition or is this another category with totally vague description?
Serious question
I see basic and obvious questions are being avoided by team gender ideology. Anyone? I guess language policing has captured your attention
You have access to Google. Is there something you're confused about? If there's a point you'd like to make, you can make the point without playing games by first asking for definitions that are easy to look up.
Given your behaviour over the “what is a woman?” debacle where no matter what someone explained to you you would put your head in the sand and pretend not only that you didn’t understand it but also that they never told you, I don’t think people are going to be all that eager to explain the basic terms to you.
Once again, we have people that subscribe to gender ideology and moderate the thread as if it's fact make it like pulling teeth to get a basic and obvious question answered. Step 2 will pretending like I didn't ask what a woman is over and over and over pointing out it was never answered before getting the lol "definition.
This is the first google result. Is this your definition of non binary?
What does non-binary mean?
In really simple terms, a non-binary person is someone who does not identify as exclusively a man or a woman. Someone who is non-binary might feel like a mix of genders, or like they have no gender at all.
Personally, I identify outside of the gender binary entirely. I am not a boy or girl at all. Some other non-binary people might identify partially with one or more of the binary genders – for example, a gender-fluid person (someone whose gender changes over time) who identifies as a girl sometimes and genderless other times. There are so many different ways to be non-binary, and we're all still valid and real!
Originally Posted by hole in wan
4. I've repeatedly asked for someone to explain what "gender" adds or changes from categories we already know and understand. We have sex, personality, and sexuality. If you can't or refuse to explain the difference combined with your definition (or lack of) of a woman, it's very premature to enforce gender ideology on everyone as the standard
Lol at the guy having to google "non-binary". Honestly, this entire schtick from you is getting rather old. We get it, you reject notions of gender. So obviously this is going to have the follow on consequence of you rejecting notions of women that include gender or non-binary, etc. You don't have to play the same game every time. It isn't deep. It isn't clever. It isn't funny.
Isn't that lovely. Nothing from Gangstaman yet.
The same game all over again. I ask a basic question to those subscribing to gender ideology. They avoid it. Then I point out that they are repeatedly avoiding a basic and obvious question. Sometimes I get an actual answer and that answer is always lol
These are basic and obvious questions if you are both going to be an activist for the trans movement but also moderate a thread under the assumption that trans ideology is factually correct and not up for debate
Some basic and obvious question
1. What is a man or women. After an effort a sharks dentist would be proud of, we get this
Our species is sexually dimorphic, and we associate a range of social, cultural, behavioural and psychological characteristics along with that sexual dimorphism that we loosely call "gender". BUT THEN a minority of humans seem to rather genuinely identify with a gender that doesn't match their sex and I'm perfectly happy extending the labelling of such people to be men/women as well, because why the **** not?
2. What is non binary? All i got was snark. This is the first google result and the activists didn't reject it
What does non-binary mean?
In really simple terms, a non-binary person is someone who does not identify as exclusively a man or a woman. Someone who is non-binary might feel like a mix of genders, or like they have no gender at all.
Personally, I identify outside of the gender binary entirely. I am not a boy or girl at all. Some other non-binary people might identify partially with one or more of the binary genders – for example, a gender-fluid person (someone whose gender changes over time) who identifies as a girl sometimes and genderless other times. There are so many different ways to be non-binary, and we're all still valid and real!
3. I have repeatedly asked and never got an answer about how they used the term gender. I have repeatedly pointed out they are ducking the question. Again, we have sex, we have sexuality, and we have personality. How does "gender" (within gender ideology) add or change anything from those 3 existing categories?
Add this all up and it paints a pretty clear picture of absolutely made up nonsense. It certainly doesn't pave the way to have the thread moderated as if gender ideology is correct and disagreeing with it is "hateful"
Here are some of the real world consequences of gender ideology that have been documented in this thread
-An explosion of trans identifying youth. "Gender affirming care" to medically transition youth without parental involvement after a 15 minute dr visit
-womens sports being destroyed
-adults with penises using change rooms etc with little girls
-serial rapists with penises being sent to a womens prison (and of course raping them)
Perhaps all of this gender ideology stuff is still up for debate. Not subscribing to their new and made up definitions of things within gender ideology should not be made against the rules. Like I have an actual definition of a woman that actual experts in biology have no debate about. Scroll up to see your definition. If someone is beating up women etc I don't need to be told how I'm "misgendering" someone with small gametes and xy chromosomes and im about to get banned.
Agreed. It's really unfortunate seeing the LGB crowd anchored to the TQ+ lunacy that is dragging their support down. They have COMPLETELY different demographics, needs, and problems they face. While I think T should be separate for the same reasons, it sucks that the normal transsexuals are having their support diminished by the same group, too.
hole in wan,
Yep. Good look with al that. Gender isn't a real thing so you'll never get an answer. They'll just run in circles insulting you and get you banned from discussion groups. Reality hangs on by a thread, unfortunately.
I could provide lots more anecdotal evidence. I also think Jonathan Heidt has a study on this and found ~10% of Social Science departments are Marxixts, but I couldn't locate it quickly. I agree there is a small minority of Marxists who make a lot of noise, but they are still a minority.
Just going off memory but I'm fairly certain the number of self identifying marxists are about 1 in 5. I think it's 1 in 4 in sociology. Definitely higher than 10%
[url=https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/55/about-forums/request-recuse-ganstaman-trans-identity-discussion-1840303/#post58674942]Request to Recuse ganstaman from Trans-Identity Discussion
[/url]
Be careful what you wish for
The mod prior to ganstaman would snap delete anything questioning gender ideology or trans activism. Corssnerd would ban the discussion of social contagion or rapid onset gender dysphoria while actual experts in the field are confident that's whats happening (posted)
I already wrote a couple times about gangstaman moderating as if gender ideology is fact and not complying with it being categorized as hate. But like the odds of them finding someone better aren't great
