RebKell's Junkie Boards

[norwester]

OK, I've gone back and read it (the thread) with a different perspective (thanks, Glenn and Frozen).

It all comes down to what you mean by "self-identify". The NCAA had defined that for competition, but your question, Glenn, has to do with if they hadn't defined it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Then in your scenario, "self-identify" could mean nothing more than saying they're a different gender, and if a bunch of men just "said" that they were women and nothing else (pretending that that is what it meant by "self-identify") and they filled the roster of one school's women's basketball team would they be compliant with Title IX?

The question is offensive. That's not what's meant by self-identify. So the answer is no. But if transgendered individuals were fake, and it was all made up...well, then the letter you originally reference wouldn't exist, because there wouldn't be a need for it, because it wouldn't be "a thing".

_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?

[GlennMacGrady]

Simply to focus the Title IX discussion, I began the topic with the hypothetical scenario of a school with only one men's team and one's women's team, with the women's team being entirely composed of biological males all of whom psychologically self-identify as female. But the same issue would be raised under Title IX if only one player on the women's team had gender dysphoria (to use the current psychiatric term).

However, the issue under Title IX is not hypothetical; it is very real because of the litigation threat in the May 2016 DOE/DOJ letter.

The NCAA may have policies about transgender students participating on sports teams or in bathrooms. The DOE/DOJ letter, however, will trump whatever those policies are. That letter defines transgender students under the most expansive standard of purely psychological self-identification (gender dysphoria) -- no surgery or hormone therapy needed -- and says that schools "must" allow such transgender students to participate in activities (like sports) and have access to facilities (like bath and locker rooms) based on their self-identified gender.

The DOE/DOJ letter is stating a litigation position. It is saying to schools that we, the government, may sue you for discrimination if you don't follow the rules about gender identity in the letter. It is a governmental threat, based on no specific regulatory authority.

I'm trying to point out that the "transgender bathroom issue", under Title IX, is not just about bath or locker rooms; it will logically extend to all sorts of other things than bathrooms, such as sports.

If you agree that gender dysphoric persons should be allowed to choose men's or women's bathrooms based solely on their psychological gender self-identification, then logically you should favor allowing them to choose sports teams on the same basis.

On the other hand, if you disagree that gender dysphoric persons should be allowed to choose men's or women's sports teams based solely on their psychological gender self-identification, then logically you should oppose their choosing bathrooms on the same basis.

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/MagicBusBasketball

[FrozenLVFan]

Several comments...

I don't think the bathroom issue is the same as the basketball issue for the simple reason that bathroom stalls are generally, or at least potentially, in more than adequate supply. There are a finite, currently fifteen, spots available to "women" on a women's basketball team. Giving a spot to a gender-dysphoric transgender player, based partly on the advantages of their greater height/strength/speed, means taking a spot away from a biologic female. This is contrary to the intent of Title IX.

As a more practical matter, is a coach voluntarily going to recruit a gender-dysphoric high school player because of their physical advantages? How is the DOE/DOJ going to force a coach to recruit such players otherwise? The coach can always say their shooting mechanics, passing skills, or footwork weren't satisfactory or they didn't fit into the team's style of play. Will there be quotas or limits on the number of transgender players?

The only way any of this is going to be resolved is with a Supreme Court decision.

[norwester]

And I'm saying that you are willfully misinterpreting the phrase "gender identity" and not acknowledging how it plays out in reality in order to make a specious argument, which is the only argument that has allowed this so-called "bathroom" issue to even play out.

The DOJ/DOE will have no cause to prosecute/sue/sanction any school who allows a MTF transgendered student to play on the women's basketball team as long as she is currently "living as a woman", which includes hormones (research shows that the biological advantages disappear in about a year).

This is a step further than bathrooms, where Frozen makes the point about stalls, and indeed most people who listen to reason and have actually educated themselves about the lives of transgendered individuals realize there is no "issue", and those who say there is are just using it as a thin (the thinnest!) of veils to mask their ignorance (at best) and transphobia, in the hopes that they can codify discrimination and their disgust and misunderstanding into the law.

Frozen may not like it. Other women or women's basketball fans might not "like" it. But I believe much of that stems from not understanding how testosterone (and its suppression) affects human bodies, and misunderstandings about the lives of transgendered student-athletes.

As was apparent when I first posted (though afterwards I took a moment to make sure I hadn't missed your point), this isn't an honest intellectual exercise, because it disregards data, facts and ultimately reality. You're trying to define a psychological process and its biological realities in terms of "what do I want to eat for lunch today", then convince us that the government (DOJ/DOE) will sue if they don't like the answer. It's intellectually dishonest for social and political reasons, couched in a "good ol' legal thought experiment where we parse words".

_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?

[norwester]

[FrozenLVFan]

And there are multiple lawsuits threatened over how transgender issues are treated under Title IX. Until one of those works its way through the legal system and to the Court, this issue is going to continue to be debated and interpreted differently in various jurisdictions.

[PlayBally'all]

[ClayK]

So males are generally, it is said, about 15% bigger and 15% stronger than females.

Presumably, a male-to-female transgender stays the same height, and I would guess retains a substantial portion of the weight differential (though correct me if I'm wrong).

But as with steroids, which allows users to retain about 20% of the strength they gain even after they get off the drug, do male-to-female transgenders retain some of the strength and explosiveness advantage that males have?

And if so, how much?

_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā

[Howee]

[tfan]

[GlennMacGrady]

The Trump administration today rescinded the Obama DOE/DOJ letters concerning the meaning of "sex" under Title IX as it may relate to gender identity. The Trump DOE/DOJ letter is very short and readable.

This really doesn't change anything because last summer a federal judge issued a nationwide injunction against the Obama letter as being an illegal federal overreach. (There has been such a such an avalanche of litigation over so many Obama executive orders that I never noticed this particular injunction until today's news, or I would have mentioned it earlier in the thread.)

The Trump letter is consistent with the political philosophy of federalism and states rights -- meaning, that states or local school districts will decide school policies such as access to bathrooms.

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/MagicBusBasketball

[Ex-Ref]

[GlennMacGrady]

[KatValeska]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/25/ioc-rules-transgender-athletes-can-take-part-in-olympics-without-surgery

If only these dupes had access to some of the brilliant minds that chimed in here. I think some of y'all vastly underestimate the quality of world-class genetic female athletes. And I would not hold my breath for these imaginary high-quality genetic male athletes to undergo hormone replacement therapy/GRS, etc. just to get a competitive edge competing as a woman. See Rene Richards and how she just dominated women's tennis ...

Biology is far from immutable. It's also a very low form of evolution compared to intellect. Gender is between our ears, not our legs. Sex is something I enjoy very much.

[Howee]

[KatValeska]

[tfan]

Renee Richards was 43 years old when she began playing professional women's tennis and made it to #20 ranking in 1979 at age 45. That is an age not only well past peak, but past retirement age for the vast majority of players. That to me demonstrates a tremendous advantage a transexual has.

[KatValeska]