"Having the majority of all female world records being held by trans women would certainly demonstrate in action, what you strive to express in words. "
Again, my suspicion is that this really wouldn't be the case.
Trans women and elite athletes are both tiny categories. Their overlap is miniscule. It'll be a long time before trans women …
"Having the majority of all female world records being held by trans women would certainly demonstrate in action, what you strive to express in words. "
Again, my suspicion is that this really wouldn't be the case.
Trans women and elite athletes are both tiny categories. Their overlap is miniscule. It'll be a long time before trans women hold a majority of records. But in the mean time, lots of female athletes will lose medals or places in finals. Girls will lose scholarships or just confidence. The damage is insidious.
Plus, self ID (I'm a woman because I say I'm a woman) is already the standard in Olympic guidelines. How do you undo that? Who, pardon the pun, will have the balls to say, "Actually, trans women *aren't* exactly women are they?" after 10 years of normalisation have gone by?
I hope I'm wrong, but what I think we're seeing is a legitimate breakdown in people's ability to admit what a woman is. Younger generations will grow up not understanding they're even missing anything. If we don't stop this while there are enough of us who still know what a woman *is*, I think it's going to be a very long time before anything changes.
QJ, dont feel the need to respond... I just could not help but to respond:
WILL TRANS WOMEN WIN MANY SPORTS??
As I understand it, there are 1000+ biological-men who can run faster than the fastest biological-woman, so was imagining a future where it becomes normal for a tiny fraction (0.1% to 1%) of non-trans elite athletes to adjust their self determination specifically to BECOME a world champion. It would not take many folks to decided they had a bit of room in their life for a bit of ambiguity. The stakes would be high... millions in advertising etc. and the gold medal title. And just 0.1% would be enough.... dont know what will happen.
ON THE MEANING OF WOMEN
I think both this generation and next generation know what a biological-women and self-declared-women are. The difference will be which of these definitions is given primacy when one simply uses the generic term "woman."
I think the next generation will not be troubled. I think they will have SWITCHED the default meaning to the latter, but since they all collectively understand that "woman" now means "a person who self-ascribes a collection of stereotypical behaviors" there will be no issue. They will simply have a separate term like "biologically female" or such to refer to the physical state of a person. I think this is a fine situation, and no one will be upset that the definitions are "wrong". (those upset people will be dead)
But I also predict no one will try to connecting physiologically-female attributes to "women" any longer since it will then be understood that woman no longer means biologically female. So elite sport designations won't be tied in this way, also maternity related, and health related issues will not be tied to the term "woman" but instead will be tied to the more cumbersome biologically-female term... or maybe they will invent a distinct term for the bio case. whatever, I bet it will work out.
We are just in this weird present state where we have rules tied to the generic term "woman" which need to be tied to the "biologically female" category instead. I predict reality will eventually force this to happen.
"Having the majority of all female world records being held by trans women would certainly demonstrate in action, what you strive to express in words. "
Again, my suspicion is that this really wouldn't be the case.
Trans women and elite athletes are both tiny categories. Their overlap is miniscule. It'll be a long time before trans women hold a majority of records. But in the mean time, lots of female athletes will lose medals or places in finals. Girls will lose scholarships or just confidence. The damage is insidious.
Plus, self ID (I'm a woman because I say I'm a woman) is already the standard in Olympic guidelines. How do you undo that? Who, pardon the pun, will have the balls to say, "Actually, trans women *aren't* exactly women are they?" after 10 years of normalisation have gone by?
I hope I'm wrong, but what I think we're seeing is a legitimate breakdown in people's ability to admit what a woman is. Younger generations will grow up not understanding they're even missing anything. If we don't stop this while there are enough of us who still know what a woman *is*, I think it's going to be a very long time before anything changes.
QJ, dont feel the need to respond... I just could not help but to respond:
WILL TRANS WOMEN WIN MANY SPORTS??
As I understand it, there are 1000+ biological-men who can run faster than the fastest biological-woman, so was imagining a future where it becomes normal for a tiny fraction (0.1% to 1%) of non-trans elite athletes to adjust their self determination specifically to BECOME a world champion. It would not take many folks to decided they had a bit of room in their life for a bit of ambiguity. The stakes would be high... millions in advertising etc. and the gold medal title. And just 0.1% would be enough.... dont know what will happen.
ON THE MEANING OF WOMEN
I think both this generation and next generation know what a biological-women and self-declared-women are. The difference will be which of these definitions is given primacy when one simply uses the generic term "woman."
I think the next generation will not be troubled. I think they will have SWITCHED the default meaning to the latter, but since they all collectively understand that "woman" now means "a person who self-ascribes a collection of stereotypical behaviors" there will be no issue. They will simply have a separate term like "biologically female" or such to refer to the physical state of a person. I think this is a fine situation, and no one will be upset that the definitions are "wrong". (those upset people will be dead)
But I also predict no one will try to connecting physiologically-female attributes to "women" any longer since it will then be understood that woman no longer means biologically female. So elite sport designations won't be tied in this way, also maternity related, and health related issues will not be tied to the term "woman" but instead will be tied to the more cumbersome biologically-female term... or maybe they will invent a distinct term for the bio case. whatever, I bet it will work out.
We are just in this weird present state where we have rules tied to the generic term "woman" which need to be tied to the "biologically female" category instead. I predict reality will eventually force this to happen.