Fina bans trans swimmers from women's elite events

Michael_frf · 2022-06-21T23:08:07+00:00

Shouldn't there be lots of them by now?

Not really. "puberty suppressed trans" means a "transed kid" grown up. There's absolutely no path for the vast majority of MTFs to become such a creature, and "transing kids" only recently became recommended policy in the enemy's camp. We are still waiting for those to become old enough to possibly take an interest in competitive swimming.

That also leads to the biggest problem with this policy. It's a compromise that might allow some "validation" of MTFs without simply obsoleting genuine women in sport, depending on whether 12 is early enough. But it suddenly adds a big reason to trans kids. At present MTFs are upset at parents who (sanely) didn't believe them at 12 because they now can't escape male vocal cords and male body hair. This would add a further grievance, and redouble their efforts to "rescue the next generation of MTF" from it.

Michael_frf · 2022-05-08T00:09:14+00:00

I doubt hormones actually do that, since there are a lot of people who are both computer nerds and MTF. I don't have actual statistics, but it looks to me like they are actually quite over-represented among computer enthusiasts that TRAs would consider "female".

This person probably just has a fetish for transforming into a "dumb blonde" (mentally; I'm not saying anything about the literal colour of his hair), and is kidding himself that he can't act that way without hormones, but can't help it while he's on them.

Michael_frf · 2022-02-04T04:41:06+00:00

I'd think a man can be very perverted and still more friendly to GC and SS than to the trans lobby.

Even if he has gender transformation/play as one of his fetishes, if he doesn't actually want in to restricted spaces he may actually resent the TRAs more, because they've created an environment where any visibly gender-nonconforming male is assumed to be part of the TRA movement and supporting all of its more odious demands.

In a slightly saner world, "genderfuck" --- displaying strong masculine and feminine signals at the same time --- would be a way to indicate that one is just playing. But in the world we have, it would just be read as "low-effort trans", and actual low-effort transsexuals are definitely combatants in the war with GC.

Michael_frf · 2022-01-12T07:16:29+00:00

"GC considering something female"

I just noticed something. I never said "considering" -- I used the verb "recognize" for both the GC view and the TRA view. Your impression that I used friendlier language for the TRA view must be a translation mistake.

Michael_frf · 2022-01-10T11:24:28+00:00

I already answered this guy in s/GenderCriticalGuys.

Michael_frf · 2022-01-10T11:21:19+00:00

you sound like you're against GC?

Not at all. Neither I nor a gametes-based point of view disagree with GC, in practice. There's just a theoretical niggle.

My point is that if MTFs found a way to transform their bodies to the extent that they do produce ova, that would not be enough to get them recognized as "truly women" by GC feminists. Hence, GC isn't actually using gametes as a philosophical basis.

Michael_frf · 2022-01-07T05:11:34+00:00

Gametes are important. They are literally what determines and defines sex.

Only from an abstract, ivory-tower point of view. GC is at the barricades, not the ivory tower. They just feel smug that the ivory tower agrees with them and only an unlikely medical breakthrough can change that.

What actually matters is that sexual offenders are empirically really rare among the people GC recognizes as female. They are empirically not so rare among the people TRAs recognize as female. So segregation by sex means a great benefit to females, but only if the GC definition is in effect.

A naive observer might think the "not our crimes" side of GC, where really embarrassing behaviour by MTFs is held up to ridicule, is a form of teasing the other side. But it's actually closer to the meat of the argument than any teasing of MTFs about their inability to get pregnant.

Michael_frf · 2021-11-29T21:54:31+00:00

That's never been demonstrated, and is unlikely to be.

I inwardly groan whenever a friend of GC talks about "chromosomal sex", since there are legitimate intersex conditions where the subject, without any surgery, looks completely male or female opposite to what their karyotype would suggest. In some cases, they may not realize until they find they are infertile, or a screening test flags them as the other sex. (Actually, since true hermaphroditism in a mammal appears to be impossible, such people account for almost all genuine human intersex.)

However, in this case, chromosomes do matter a lot.

Getting sperm out of an XX stem cell is hopeless, because there are a couple vital genes for sperm production that are only found on the Y chromosome.

There's no equally obvious reason why, but in practice intersex people who are XY but with the critical "testis determining factor" gene absent from their Y don't produce eggs. The development of their primordial gonads into testes never happens, but somehow they don't turn into ovaries either. The result is a body that appears mostly female but won't naturally undergo puberty. (While they take hormones like an MTF, unlike an MTF they do have a womb that can be made to work, but only as a surrogate to someone else's fertilized egg.)

Also, gametes aren't really that important. It's just something GC likes to tease transsexuals about, and for the moment a simple rule to tell COINing from a legitimate intersex confusion (ie: if you produce one sex's gametes, or would if medical interventions you chose to undergo hadn't happened, then you aren't intersex enough to protest your assignment.).

The important thing is that long before any transsexual actually gets near to crossing the gamete hurdle (such as if we invent brain transplants), GC will write new rules.

Michael_frf · 2021-09-19T08:31:00+00:00

There probably are lots of people are male and involuntarily celibate but friendly to feminism. That just means they are pining for something they fear they will never get, but agree they aren't entitled to steal it or demand the state redistribute it.

But those wouldn't be "incels", which is not merely a contraction but also implies subscribing to "the Incel movement"'s politics. Those obviously conflict with feminism.

There's a similar divergence in meaning between "voluntary celibate" and "volcel". The latter is an insult used between incels. It implies that the target is only having romantic troubles due to his own laziness or other fault, and doesn't deserve the empathy of "true" incels who (supposedly) are already doing the best they can at their end.

Michael_frf · 2021-09-10T00:23:28+00:00

Homology isn't everything. A lemon is quite obviously "just" a distorted orange. Yet due to superficial differences in the acid and sugar content of the juice, eating a lemon as if it were an orange or grapefruit is something you'd only do on a dare.

Michael_frf · 2021-09-04T08:43:40+00:00

"Transmaxxing" is when incels decide to go MTF not out of direct dysphoria, but because they actually think they have a better chance finding love as a pseudo girl. The above would be an analog at the selfish gene level, and the main reason it didn't evolve long ago is that M-preg for a mammal is a puzzle evolution can't solve. Evolution could solve the problem of making such an MTF "sexy", but pseudo women who can pleasure men but not conceive are evolutionary dead ends, so it won't.

So, I meant that if our genes could accomplish this, we'd have a world where everyone is a functioning hermaphrodite by birth, whose bodies would enter puberty in a male pose, but feminize after a lack of success at the invest-little-in-many-girlfriends strategy. Even if the mind would prefer to remain in a male body as a childfree asexual.

I don't think that would be a remotely fun world to live in. There would no longer really be "men" and "women", but people who want to force others to incubate children would be empowered, and everyone, not just an unlucky 50%, would be at risk.

Note that if M-preg just appeared today, our society might actually manage to put the brakes to further evolution of that sort, since the benefit to the genes would be mostly eliminated by child support, birth control, and monogamy enforcement. But I'm imagining it happening in a parallel timeline that diverged long before apes got so smart.

Michael_frf · 2021-08-22T04:21:54+00:00

That's silly. Humans are so sexually creative that if there was one obscure technique that resulted in "M-preg", some guy would have been unpleasantly surprised by it by now.

Also, the reason our selfish genes are so unhelpful to MTFs is because born-male pregnancy is out of their reach. So many engineering shortcuts were taken by evolution in moving from the original spawning system (where both sexes ejaculate and they cross the streams to breed; some such fish can change sex) to the placental-mammal standard, that it is impossible without crossing a void of intermediate states with no selective advantage. And without the ability to use MTF to escape a lack of access to other humans' wombs, our genes simply have no interest.

But if born-male pregnancy was something that could be easily flipped on, our selfish genes would be using it to salvage their position when they find their male survival-machine out-competed. People would evolve to always be born "male", but spontaneously "transmaxx" themselves if celibate too long, even if the mind is revolted by the idea and the celibacy was a deliberate effort to avoid responsibility for kids.

Michael_frf · 2021-04-14T08:08:39+00:00

while pressuring us to be open to them

That's what I covered in my second paragraph. My point was that hypothetically, a person could be trans and accept the small dating pool it implies in a non-superphobic world. They wouldn't be pressuring other people to be open, and thus would be innocent of the hypocrisy.

How many such people exist (relative to the total trans population) is a question of fact I'm not sure of. It would be surprising and depressing if the answer was 0%.

In contrast, a cis person who denounces supersexuality as "hate", is not asexual, has not given any sort of exclusivity promise to a cis lover, and yet has never pleased a trans person would be more suspect than a boundary-respecting trans. I'd imagine there are a lot of those; the hostile response to super would otherwise be much smaller.

The "hypocrisy of straightness" would simply be that every straight person has a characteristic that utterly disqualifies them from being an acceptable date to themselves. Yet they hope their crush will like that characteristic. It's not really hypocrisy by itself --- it only becomes so if they question others' right to be homosexual or asexual.

Michael_frf · 2021-04-13T23:14:20+00:00

Hypocrisy abounds, but it's not wanting someone who is not trans while being trans that is the problem. If it was, it would also be hypocritical for anyone to be straight (even if not super).

The problem only comes when such people publicly denounce supersexuality while effectively practising it themselves. And it's quite possible for a cis person to engage in the same wrong.

Michael_frf