1372
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by Five@slrpnk.net to c/lgbtq_plus@lemmy.blahaj.zone

To clarify, the pictured poster Caroline Kwan is an ally, not a TERF. The TERFs referred to in the title are the ones ‘protecting a very specific idea of what a woman is’

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

So should someone like Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps have their "own classes"? Who would they be competing against?

They too are "rare people who have a significant competitive advantages against vanillas".

This cannot be discussed rationally in the current political shitstorm unfortunately.

You misspelled "my own ideology isn't rational, so I can not discuss this rationally"

[-] aredditimmigrant@feddit.nl 4 points 3 months ago

Fyi I don't agree with the previous commenters ideology about two separate classes for women.

I however agree that we can't discuss this rationally today because social media (including lemmee) is a terrible forum for this discussion, because, unfortunately, a person who is AFAB and has a DSD, or other naturally occurring condition, which gives them more or less testosterone/lactic acid/something else than the typical woman, and thus an advantage, gets conflated with having a trans woman compete, because then the people who feel strongly about trans people on both sides come out of the wood work and start yelling....

And then everyone gets pissed and/or understandardly triggered and nothing can be argued.

By naturally occurring I mean w/o the use of drugs/doping/surgery. Which in my understanding is what's the case with the boxer.

I don't post this to argue or convince. Just clarify what I think they're trying to say.

I won't respond to the "are they female"/"what to do" debate, only that this forum is terrible to have these debates.

Thank you for coming to my Ted talk/soap box lecture

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

By naturally occurring I mean w/o the use of drugs/doping/surgery.

Without discussing the sex/gender side of this argument; I don't understand why you're not applying the same logic to freakishly dominant male athletes?

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/02/does-michael-phelps-lung-capacity-allow-him-to-take-monster-bong-hits.html

We measured lung capacity in biology class in the ninth grade, and I had the largest of the class. Six liters. Most guys were around 5.5l.

Phelps has twelve.

And there's a ton of scientific studies about Usain Bolt.

I understand your point, but would the same logic not be applicable, even if the "unnatural" (they're very natural but you get the point, that's why the quotations) physical traits for Phelps and Bolt aren't necessarily as significant as having very high testosterone levels in a women's league?

[-] aredditimmigrant@feddit.nl 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Apologies I meant the person you were originally replying to. I can see it being ambiguous.

I agree with you, this argument is dumb, sexist, and not fair.

I'm just saying this is just not a good forum to handle it.

this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
1372 points (100.0% liked)

LGBTQ+

2719 readers
207 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS