lgbtq_plus

This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

magnetosphere, in Efforts to block LGBTQ+ issues in schools are finally backfiring, new report says
magnetosphere avatar

Why did they even bother publishing this article?

I was hoping for specific, concrete examples. This is just a summary of the problem which also mentions some pending, unresolved lawsuits. The closest thing to “Good News” is this sentence:

As PEN America notes, growing public opposition to educational censorship targeting issues of race and LGBTQ+ identity could ultimately make such legislation less attractive to conservative lawmakers.

Translation: things suck, but they could get less terrible. Um… yay, I guess?

millie,

Things suck but, uh… Please visit our website!

FoundTheVegan, in Republicans Introduce Bill Mandating Misgendering of Trans Federal Employees
FoundTheVegan avatar

It won't pass, but it's a reminder of what they will do when in power.

Please vote.

Kwakigra, in A nice debunk of the transphobic trope of ‘lesbian erasure’

The pointless persecution of trans women by people whose lives would be no different if they didn’t bother with their bigotry campaigns never ceases to confuse me. Why go through all the trouble just to screw over a stranger? Surely their sadism can be satisfied in some other less harmful way?

drwho,
@drwho@beehaw.org avatar

Because they enjoy it. That it screws over a stranger means much less chance of facing any blowback for it.

Don’t think police procedural villain, think school bully that never grew up and their actions make more sense.

WalrusDragonOnABike,

For some, if they admit that gender isn't fixed, they'd have to admit they waste so much of their live not transitioning. Sometimes its easier to double down when you're wrong for so long.

For some men, its probably mostly about sexism. They have so little going for them personally that they latch on to things like "being manly" (or "white pride") to compensate for their insecurities. If "men" choose to be women, then that's seen as an attack on the superiority of being a man and to maintain the exclusivity, you also can't allow "women" to become men but at least "women" wanting to be men supports the belief in superiority of men. One reason why trans women are demonized more than trans men by some transphobes.

For some women, its probably similar to how some minorities because even more prejudiced against some other minority that is seen as even "worse" than them to join with the majority. Like racism against black people by Irish when they weren't considered white or homophobia among racial minorities.

For others, its just parroting their bubble.

Some, just because they expect to be able to get away with it.

gromnar,

I may well be wrong and too naive, but I think the hate is in many cases rooted in the scary idea that they could find them attractive. And so they signal that “it could never happen to them” and that they are doing it to protect other, weaker people.

WalrusDragonOnABike,

True, that too. But that's partly an issue because they don't see them as their gender to begin with and are also homophobic. And homophobia generally also ties back into sexism.

raccoona_nongrata,
@raccoona_nongrata@beehaw.org avatar

Yes, a large part of it is about maintaining a heirarchy.

The thing about the patriarchal heirachy is, as a minority or “lesser”, you can never ascend to the peak but you can push others down beneath you.

Conservatives have been convinced that if they don’t protect the heirarchy, they’ll lose what they have. It’s the same idea that’s at play with white supremacy, you’ve got these groups of white people who’ve been convinced that allowing brown people an equal seat at the table means that they themselves will have less.

Rottcodd, in “Cis is a heterosexual slur” Tweets Elon Musk, Who Halved Twitter’s Value — Assigned
Rottcodd avatar

Well... except that "cis" is actually a shortened form of the precise, latin-rooted, technical term "cisgender," which is the opposite of the precise, latin-rooted, technical term "transgender."

And it has nothing at all to do with heterosexuality, or with sexual preference in any way, shape or form.

So he's not just wrong, but wrong in pretty much every way he could possibly have been.

Which seems to be pretty much par for the course for the world's richest middle-aged teenage edgelord.

radix,
@radix@lemm.ee avatar

A few years ago, my mother laughed at me for being impressed she knew what “cis” meant. She said she learned it from chemistry, something about molecules being flipped, where flipping it one way is cis and the other is trans. I was so prepared to have to talk her down from thinking it was a slur that it was a relief.

bermuda,

I was confused when I first heard it because I had been playing CSGO a lot at the time and in the eSports scene Central Asia is usually abbreviated to CIS.

Stormyfemme,

Yep cis-trans isomerism

PoliticalAgitator,

He also isn’t going to do anything about slurs on the platform, unless they can be used against him.

CyberEgg, in Billionaire accused of 'quietly financing' US anti-trans movement

Not surprised. Rich capitalists benefit from directing the majorities’ hate towards minorities so that we cannot build focus towards the few who are in power and want to keep it.

Seraph, in Conservatives freak out & call for boycott of Listerine over Pride packaging
Seraph avatar

Do you guys think we can get hospital emergency rooms in pride packaging?

cupcakezealot, in Trans Girls Belong on Girls' Sports Teams
@cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

It’s amazing watching sporting bodies ruin their own sports for transphobes who don’t care about women’s sport.

JackGreenEarth, in Trans Girls Belong on Girls' Sports Teams

Separate male and female teams is the problem in the first place. It just reinforces the gender binary and makes life more difficult for trans, non binary and intersex people.

OceanSoap,

Let’s make a bet. We combine men and women’s sports. There will eventually be no women in sports, because, even though the top ranking women can beat some, or even most, men, they cannot beat the top men.

If this wasn’t the case, we wouldn’t see such a wide gap in points/speed/weights/whatever between top men and women in their respective sport.

There may still be trans people in said sport (though I doubt it, but maybe), but there will definitely be no women.

Let’s say this does happen. Then what do we do for women in sports, who are now, by default, completely excluded?

ondoyant,
@ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

the idea that the only solution to the gender based segregation of sports is to make a single sports category for every person is disingenuous. weight classes in wrestling exist. there are plenty of ways to organize sports that don’t collapse the diversity of the human condition into a single ranked competitive event, and there are plenty of people who currently engage in co-ed sports for recreational purposes that like it just fine. there is a small minority of athletes that compete for the highest possible performance, but the vast vast majority of people who do sports are just regular folks, and don’t need arbitrary gender barriers to have a good time.

the rules set out to make competition at the highest levels of sport possible are not by default the best way for regular human people to do sport for their own pleasure. things that could be exclusionary in a ranked competition are not so in the context of average human performance, or even below average human performance. the Paralympics is a fantastic event that showcases the physical talents of people with disabilities. the specific events are tailored to the limitations of the athletes, and it’s great! its great that even people who have more physical limitations than the average have a space to push their bodies to their personal limits, and it showcases how arbitrary those limitations actually are. the diversity of disability is vast. some of these athletes bodies look very different from their competitors, and that comes with specific physical limitations that are unique to that person. they still do sports.

i think we forget sometimes how utterly arbitrary sports are as an activity. its a game, for fun. anything, literally any set of arbitrary rules that involve physical movement can constitute a sport. and while we can insist that in our most special extra serious sports only certain kinds of people get to play, that doesn’t mean those restrictions are any less arbitrary, or that they have to be that way. and if you’re playing a fun game, and somebody who doesn’t have the same kind of body wants to play the fun game with you, saying that because the way their body works it won’t be fair is still not a proper justification for their exclusion, because we can change the rules whenever we want to.

OceanSoap,

the idea that the only solution to the gender based segregation of sports is to make a single sports category for every person is disingenuous. weight classes in wrestling exist. there are plenty of ways to organize sports that don’t collapse the diversity of the human condition into a single ranked competitive event, and there are plenty of people who currently engage in co-ed sports for recreational purposes that like it just fine. there is a small minority of athletes that compete for the highest possible performance, but the vast vast majority of people who do sports are just regular folks, and don’t need arbitrary gender barriers to have a good time.

Yes, weight classes in wrestling exsist, and we still have women’s division, because women and men in the same weight class would still have the outcome of men placing top outcomes in those weight classes.

The issue isn’t the mostly regular people just sporting around for fun, the issue is that sports plays a big role in how a person’s life might turn out. To be winning these competitions means money, scholarships, endorsements, careers. To be at that level, kids today start getting pretty serious in middle school, and definitely serious in high school, due to the scholarship/school acceptance possibilities for universities, universities scout from high schools, and pro leagues scout from universities, and careers are made there. These are big deals and big opportunities, so to say “its just fun.” Is downplaying the serious of it. That’s not even getting into the severe dangers that can happen to women physically by going against a man in team sports. Even sports like soccer can be dangerous in that way, far more than what we deal acceptable.

the rules set out to make competition at the highest levels of sport possible are not by default the best way for regular human people to do sport for their own pleasure. things that could be exclusionary in a ranked competition are not so in the context of average human performance, or even below average human performance. the Paralympics is a fantastic event that showcases the physical talents of people with disabilities. the specific events are tailored to the limitations of the athletes, and it’s great! its great that even people who have more physical limitations than the average have a space to push their bodies to their personal limits, and it showcases how arbitrary those limitations actually are. the diversity of disability is vast. some of these athletes bodies look very different from their competitors, and that comes with specific physical limitations that are unique to that person. they still do sports.

Disabilities in humans are still an outlier, which is why we have a whole seperate competitive field for them to play in. It wouldn’t be fair to match them with those without disabilities.

So why, if the trans population is exploding, don’t we have divisions specifically for all trans people? Have a trans division, have them play each other, which would allow women, men and trans people the competitive ability to place in their respective categories.

i think we forget sometimes how utterly arbitrary sports are as an activity. its a game, for fun. anything, literally any set of arbitrary rules that involve physical movement can constitute a sport. and while we can insist that in our most special extra serious sports only certain kinds of people get to play, that doesn’t mean those restrictions are any less arbitrary, or that they have to be that way. and if you’re playing a fun game, and somebody who doesn’t have the same kind of body wants to play the fun game with you, saying that because the way their body works it won’t be fair is still not a proper justification for their exclusion, because we can change the rules whenever we want to.

Anything humans do, if you break it down enought, can become arbitrary. That’s not a reason to push people out of sports, and again, sports at these levels arent for fun, for the players, its a lifelong persuit that tales a ton of effort and sacrifice. Billions of dollars, scholarships, careers.

There are ways to include trans people in sports without pushing out biological women, so why must the changes we make push towards that inevitability? Why do biological women have to be trampled on to make room for others when it very clearly doesn’t have to be like that?

ondoyant,
@ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

The issue isn’t the mostly regular people just sporting around for fun, the issue is that sports plays a big role in how a person’s life might turn out.

explicitly my argument is speaking about the way we construct sports as an activity, not sports as industry. the people for whom sports defines one’s life path are firmly the minority of people who do sports. and like, the laws we’re talking about aren’t affecting trans people’s ability to do professional sports in most cases, because those professional organizations aren’t under the jurisdiction of anti-trans state laws, they’re almost exclusively impacting children playing sports in school or for regional competitions. if you aren’t interested in engaging with the argument as it exists, and with the people who are primarily affected by laws that prevent trans children from doing sports with their peers, i’m not interested in talking further on the matter.

So why, if the trans population is exploding, don’t we have divisions specifically for all trans people? Have a trans division, have them play each other, which would allow women, men and trans people the competitive ability to place in their respective categories.

because the trans population is not “exploding”. that’s the current moral panic going around, but the visibility of trans people in media, especially right wing media, vastly overestimates how many trans people there are. there are more trans people who are out, but its still like less than 2% of the population. of that population that are athletes, even less, and there are close to no trans athletes competing at the high level you insist this conversation must primarily address. segregating trans people into their own divisions would mean trans people don’t get to play, because there aren’t enough people who are trans and doing sports to make that happen. your solution is to marginalize trans people out of the sports everybody else plays, and that sucks.

There are ways to include trans people in sports without pushing out biological women, so why must the changes we make push towards that inevitability? Why do biological women have to be trampled on to make room for others when it very clearly doesn’t have to be like that?

the only way you’ve proposed to “include” trans people in sports marginalizes them and prevents them participating with their peers, all in service of a a fear that changing the rules to be more inclusive would push out “biological women” in some hypothetical future you think is inevitable. but the reality is, there is no actual proof that allowing trans people to participate as they see fit would actually lead to the outcome you’re describing, because in many cases, they have been participating and have not been sweeping the competition.

in any case, nobody who advocates for restructuring sports away from the gender binary sees women being pushed out of sports as a desirable or even achievable outcome. the idea that we would change the rules towards a policy which does such a thing and not continue changing the rules until we arrive at a more equitable and inclusive outcome is a fantasy, almost entirely sustained by right wing reactionaries fear mongering about social change. nobody actually seriously considering the inequities of modern sports is blind to the physical differences between men and women’s bodies, and they, again, are not proposing a flattening of sporting events into a single category containing all people, just a diversity of categories representing the diversity of the human condition, and allowing people with similar bodies to compete against each other without strict delineations of gender. unless you genuinely believe that all male athletes can outperform all female athletes in all sports, which is a vast overestimation of human sexual dimorphism, there is room for co-ed competition that accommodates people according to their individual skill and strength, rather than according to whether or not they have the right genitals.

bermuda, (edited )

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • ParsnipWitch,
    @ParsnipWitch@feddit.de avatar

    Motorsport like F1 leans very heavily on strength and endurance. You also need to weigh I think at least 80 kg? That’s already rare for a woman to reach as weight.

    It’s one of the most physical demanding sports you can do.

    calavera,

    When would a woman have any chance in a marathon or anything related? This looks like a proposal from someone who never watched any sport event

    OceanSoap, (edited )

    I’m sorry, but its ridiculous and a very obvious ploy to accuse my thoughts as sexism. Its not sexist to understand biological reality. Wishing it weren’t the case doesn’t do anything, nor does simply pretending biological differences don’t exsist. You can make a statement out loud as much as you’d like, but it doesn’t make it true.

    In modern society, women have been more than welcome to compete in men’s sports. How they compete with one another is a reality check to anyone who won’t deny the truth. For example, the Chicago marathon world record holders has a max difference of a full 13 minutes between top male and female category runners. …wikipedia.org/…/List_of_winners_of_the_Chicago_M…

    Can women compete in the men’s division of running for the Chicago marathon? Absolutely. But why would they when there is absolutely zero chance of them placing? To put it into even more perspective, the top woman runner would have placed 21st had she run in the men’s division. So, Zero. Chance. of placing at all.

    You can see women slowly being pushed out by trans women athletes in real time now, in biking, again in Chicago, where trans women athletes placed silver and gold. It’s only going to take one more joining in to push biological women out of placing in the competition for good, and then women will be back to why we created women’s division in the first place.

    Females rarely take up F1 racing because of how hard it is on your body. During a race a driver is exposed to up to five times gravity pushing down on them, making it harder to breathe, pump blood around their body and move their arms and legs. Oh, and to top it all off, they are sitting in a position which means that the feet are raised up in line with the chest. So to pretend we’re all just too scared of men to join in is very disingenuous. The reality is, due to how severe the sport is on the body, women just won’t match up to men when it comes to racing. There was a recent change in effect where every team will have a female racer… of course, racing in a women’s division, because they’d be obliterated in the regular division.

    bermuda,

    I’m not fighting you. Plain and simple. There’s no ploy here. Learn to be a human being and talk about things.

    OceanSoap, (edited )

    I’m not fighting. I’ve used no personal attacks. You’ve accused my rational as coming from a sexist mindset, which is a fighting tactic, but I won’t do that back because I don’t want to fight, I want to have a discussion where we make the best arguments we can and see which ones hold up. Calling out a tactic isn’t fighting you, it’s bringing awareness to what’s happening and why. If you were offended by the word “ploy,” I apologize, but it seems a bit hypocritical since you accused me of sexism.

    Saying all that, do you have any pushback against what I’ve laid out? From where I stand, I feel like the arguments I’ve made are rational and sound.

    bitsplease,

    Exactly, switch over to leagues based on whatever benchmark makes sense for your sport and call it a day

    MrSpArkle,

    The types of benchmarking needed to measure an individual athletes potential to ensure they aren’t sandbagging would be too costly to implement at anything but the highest levels of athletics.

    It is an incredibly complex solution to a non problem.

    Let trans athletes compete with cis athletes.

    There simply aren’t enough trans athletes for this to be a problem worth considering at a systemic level. At an individual level, if someone lacks the level of self awareness to enter an event where they consistently beat cis women(like if they were an accomplished cis athlete just a few months into transition), then there can be an individual ruling on that person.

    Don’t fall for the conservative trap, their hyperbole is engineered (in part) to produce untenable “solutions” from progressives.

    OceanSoap, (edited )

    It is a problem systematically already, we’re seeing women be pushed from top ranks bit-by-bit. In Chicago, trans women won gold and silver for a biking event. This is going to continue to happen, especially if what trans people are saying is true and there are many more trans people who will be coming out and living how they want.

    Trans athletes can compete with biologically-aligned people of the opposite sex in trans-only events, which should be a thing for each sport. This is by far the easiest, most rational decision that doesn’t stomp on biological women. Trans men take testosterone, and trans women take estrogen. Let them either compete in the men’s division or against each other.

    What, exactly, is “untenable” about opening a division for them?

    acausal_masochist,

    What are biological people? Are there non-biological people?

    OceanSoap,

    You’re right, I worded that strangely. Changed it to biologically-alligned for clarity.

    BraveSirZaphod,
    BraveSirZaphod avatar

    My loose understanding is that a lot of men's divisions are actually open, while it's women's divisions that are strictly confined to women. For some sports though, there's such a strong sex gap that very few women are realistically competitive with men. Ensuring a division where competitively play is the entire purpose of having women's divisions in the first place.

    This obviously depends a lot of the individual sport though. Muscle mass and strength are a lot more pivotal in something like weightlifting or American football than in archery.

    frog,

    Agreed. Another factor is that women’s divisions exist in many cases not because men have a competitive advantage, but because the competitions are so male-dominated in terms of culture and number of competitors that women’s divisions make the competition more accessible to women. eg, chess. Men aren’t better at chess than women, and the men’s division is actually open, so the women’s division exists because chess has a male-dominated culture and women feel safer being able to compete against only other women.

    bloopernova,
    @bloopernova@programming.dev avatar

    “But think of the children!” They will cry. “Boys might touch girls!”

    They always seem to be thinking about children…

    OceanSoap,

    I hate this new ridiculous argument, trying to tie in worrying about children’s experiences to pedophilia, as if even thinking about them and how best to support/safeguard them is pedophilic in nature. 🙄 it’s very easy to see through.

    PR_freak,

    What are you talking about?

    Separate teams are the only thing that lets biological women have any possibility to compete

    Biological men are stronger faster and more resistant, this is a fact

    Now downvote me to hell and then ask an admin delete my comment for being transphobic

    A_Very_Big_Fan,

    Now downvote me to hell and then ask an admin delete my comment for being transphobic

    Cringe

    And they didn’t say we shouldn’t have any teams, they said teams not be divided by sex.

    FoundTheVegan, (edited )
    FoundTheVegan avatar

    Hey I've seen this line of thinking before!

    biological white men are stronger smarter faster, civilized and more resistant ethical, this is a fact

    Now downvote me to hell and then ask an admin delete my comment for being transphobic racist

    Just so you understand what logic you are using. Would you tell a commenter like this they need to challenge their beliefs?

    Your stance relies on your gut feeling and bias, not historical or biological understanding. I won't spend my time linking studies you won't read, seems like a lot of others have done that already. But the reason you keep getting told you are wrong is because you are literally ignorant of the facts. Not because everyone else is virtue signaling or being more PC like a white nationalist would say.

    You should think more critically about your beliefs.

    PR_freak,

    What facts am I ignoring? Link em and I will read them

    I think your comment applies to yourself better than to me so here are the links I suggest you to visit:

    Marathon world records

    200m dash world records

    Powerlifting world records

    What you will notice if you pay attention is that across history there has never been a moment in which the female record was better than the male one, that is a fact you can very easily verify yourself

    This is what my stance relies on, not gut feeling or bias

    FoundTheVegan, (edited )
    FoundTheVegan avatar

    Those links are missing the point of this thread. We aren't talking about men's world records, we are talking about trans women playing sports.

    I'm just gonna link to the last time I talked about this issue.

    TL:DR No one is saying testosterone doesn't have an effect. When trans women have been on hormones for two years there is no statistical difference between trans and cis women. Trans women suppress testosterone via medication, which leads to lower levels than the average cis woman.

    calavera,

    You are missing the point.

    Here is the point he was arguing:

    Separate male and female teams is the problem in the first place.

    BraveSirZaphod,
    BraveSirZaphod avatar

    Well, you can look at objective metrics across different racial categories (to the extent that those are even meaningful to begin with, which is incredibly debatable), and you'll some minor trends and statistical noise but nothing super meaningful. And even within those trends, there'll still be so much variation that the predictive power will be very weak.

    Whereas males having significantly more muscle mass than females, largely mediated through sex hormones, isn't really something that can be denied if you value objective data at all. If you choose one random cis man and one random cis woman, the man will have more muscular mass and strength than the woman the vast majority of cases, and this has meaningful effects on performance in some sports. You can't really say similar things across racial categories (which, again, do not really have meaningful biological definitions to begin with).

    DessertStorms, (edited )
    DessertStorms avatar

    Separate teams are the only thing that lets biological women have any possibility to compete

    no, they mostly exist to protect cis male egos from the "devastation" of not only competing against, but very possibly being beaten by, women (feel free to look up some of the endless list of examples where a women beat a man/some men, not even in anything physical, so even stuff like chess, so the men proceeded to change the rules, to make sure they could never be hurt like that again, the poor snowflakes)

    Biological men are stronger faster and more resistant, this is a fact

    no it isn't fact, it's a circumstance that has arisen from the discrimination and segregation of women from sports, not some natural or biological fact. Also there are millions and millions of women out there that could easily wipe the floor with any man at literally any sport you test them at, they're just never given a chance, because see aforementioned reason.

    Now downvote me to hell and then ask an admin delete my comment for being transphobic

    So you know you're a wilfully ignorant transphobe, you just can't help yourself but declare it to the world because you simply can't keep all that hate pent up inside your turd of a brain..

    Won't see me complaining about the trash taking itself out.. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

    MrSpArkle,

    This is a such a terrible take that you are either unhinged from reality or a right-wing troll.

    NoiseColor,

    Lol?

    We have the whole human history of sports which is very well documented, going against what you are saying.

    FoundTheVegan,
    FoundTheVegan avatar

    Did you actual read the studies? Because that is patently false and ignores hormonal effects on the human body. Please actually read and educate yourself on the science. Endocrinology is not something taught in high school biology.

    PR_freak, (edited )

    there are millions and millions of women out there that could easily wipe the floor with any man at literally any sport

    Wut

    Can you name one from all these millions?

    I am not even going to reply to the rest of your comment since it doesn’t really say anything worth debating

    tokyo,

    Sexual dimorphism is a real thing and the reason they are split in the first place.

    ondoyant,
    @ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

    i mean, no, that’s ahistorical. historically, the reason they are “split” is because men didn’t let women do sports for a really long time, and when women began pushing for their own sports, men didn’t want them to be the same thing. it wasn’t some dispassionate analysis of sexual dimorphism, it was rooted in the culture of misogyny of the time, and backed by deeply held pseudo-scientific beliefs about the fragility of women. they thought that sport, like higher education, literally caused infertility, and used that as a justification to restrict women from those pursuits.

    Tavarin,
    @Tavarin@lemmy.ca avatar

    The US women’s soccer team, the best female soccer team in the world, has played exhibition games against high school boys and lost badly. The Canadian women’s hockey team, the best women’s ice hockey team in the world, practices against high school boys, and loses.

    There is no rule against women joining the NBA, or NHL, or MLS, women just aren’t capable of competing with men at the top levels of sport.

    ondoyant,
    @ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

    The US women’s soccer team, the best female soccer team in the world, has played exhibition games against high school boys and lost badly.

    oop! maybe look up the context for that one. in short, it was a scrimmage, and as part of a structured practice routine that the US national women’s soccer team participates in as part of a youth soccer training program. not exactly representative of a competitive game, same for the women’s hockey team.

    that being said, its basically a non sequitur. i’m not denying that physical differences exist, they absolutely do, but the idea that these physical differences are the primary reason our sports are structured the way they are isn’t historically accurate. there were potent social forces at work, including social forces which prevented women from participating in sports at all.

    in any case, the fact that in some sports, some professional women athletes lost to some high school boy athletes in games that explicitly do not count for competition does not, to me, have some larger implications on the field of women’s sports more generally. the unquestioning acceptance of reports on these practice games for fun with children as some kind of proof that female athletes just can’t perform as well as men reveals, to me, a tendency towards confirmation bias. tell me, do you know if any prominent men’s soccer teams have ever lost to children during a practice match? i certainly don’t. exhibition matches aren’t newsworthy events. the fact that these ones were has much more to do with validating the ancient belief that men are just better than it does with genuine interest in a demonstration of friendly sport for high school kids.

    Tavarin,
    @Tavarin@lemmy.ca avatar

    So they lost on purpose? My goodness, they would not do that, the ridicule is too huge.

    And the segregation of sports is the only reason we have paid professional female athletes today. Get rid of sports segregation and only have open leagues (which the “men’s” leagues are already), and you will have basically zero professional female athletes left.

    And if you don’t care about women’s teams losing to teenagers, how about the time a low ranked male tennis player destroyed Venus and Serena Williams back to back, because they confidently stated they could beat any man ranked outside the top 200? And losing that was a blow to their reputations, they did not lose on purpose, they truly tried to win.

    ondoyant,
    @ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

    if you can’t conceive of the difference between a practice game and a game for competition, especially in the context of an explicitly educational goal, you can have fun with that. the idea that the segregation of sports is the only reason we have professional women athletes is a hilarious misunderstanding of why people like sports, and why women’s sports have been growing in popularity for decades. the idea that single games in single sports indicate anything substantive about “women’s sports” as a concept is silly.

    you can live in your bubble of ignorance all you like, and insist that centuries old appeals to the superiority of the male body mean much at all to a modern context. the reality is, these stories about women losing matches? they aren’t relevant. i could not give a single shit. ranking people on numbered lists is not the only appeal of sports for audiences or athletes. Serena Williams is still a popular and well liked athlete, and you didn’t even give that dude’s name, so whatever reputational damage seems to have both not affected her rise to prominence, and not boosted her opponents reputation, so like, who fucking cares?

    why do you know so much about this? what relevance does being able to tell people all the times women lost matches in sporting events have to your daily life? to what end are you telling people these things? the reality is, you don’t value women’s sports, so you’ve scoured the internet for justifications for that belief. but people who do find value in these things don’t look at things the same way. weird ass comparisons trying to judge the objective winner by category mean fuckall to me, i like watching cool people do cool shit with their cool bodies, and the fact that you can’t conceive of people being interested in the physical skill of people that don’t look like you is firmly a you problem.

    Tavarin,
    @Tavarin@lemmy.ca avatar

    Serena Williams is still a popular and well liked athlete

    Only because a women’s division exists where she can shine. In the open division she would not be good enough to gain any fame, and be just as forgotten as Karsten Braasch.

    why do you know so much about this?

    Because people like you keep arguing that women can compete in the open leagues, and we only have women’s leagues to segregate them from the men. This is not true, women are perfectly free to join the NBA and compete against them men, but at that level of competition they would just lose.

    the reality is, you don’t value women’s sports

    I value women’s sports far more than you do, because I understand their need to exist. Without them female athletes would not win in the majority of sports.

    ondoyant,
    @ondoyant@beehaw.org avatar

    Only because a women’s division exists where she can shine. In the open division she would not be good enough to gain any fame, and be just as forgotten as Karsten Braasch.

    hypothetically, because we don’t live in a world where women’s sports don’t exist.

    Because people like you keep arguing that women can compete in the open leagues, and we only have women’s leagues to segregate them from the men. This is not true, women are perfectly free to join the NBA and compete against them men, but at that level of competition they would just lose.

    i’m not arguing that women can compete in open leagues, im disputing the assertion that women’s leagues only exist to segregate them from men. no. there are quite a few reasons women’s sports exist in the form they do today, and a pretty big reason was sexism. ignoring the long history of female exclusion from sports leaves you blind to the modern realities of sexism and misogyny in sports.

    I value women’s sports far more than you do, because I understand their need to exist. Without them female athletes would not win in the majority of sports.

    hypothetically, because we don’t live in a world where women’s sports don’t exist.

    you can confidently assert that women wouldn’t have a place in sports if we did things differently all you want, but… uh, we don’t do things differently, have never done things differently, and if it were up to you will never do things differently. women’s sports and men’s sports are segregated, and have been since women started to do sports. there was never a time when women and men did sports together, and it was later decided that women just couldn’t compete. the assumption was that they couldn’t, even before women started to have professional sports, and honestly before we even had a solid scientific understanding of human sexual dimorphism. the idea that women’s sports came out some rational notion of fairness is wrong. its simply not what the historical arguments against having women in sports ever were.

    Tavarin,
    @Tavarin@lemmy.ca avatar

    Once again, women are allowed in the “men’s” leagues. You can damn well bet if any woman was competitive they would be drafted into those leagues. They are not, because the difference between men and women in sports is the equivalent of several years worth of high dose steroids.

    Women’s sports exist to give them a professional platform where they can be competitive and entertaining, because in the open leagues they would just get crushed in most sports.

    uriel238, in Virginia students walk-out protesting trans Outing policy
    @uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    They should see if they can organize a mass outing. If they can manage dozens of students announcing I’m a they! in the quad and telling their teachers

    The Sparticus strategem

    jerome, in Virginia students walk-out protesting trans Outing policy
    jerome avatar

    All bigots: "oh don't mind them they'll do anything to get out of class."

    krimsonbun,
    @krimsonbun@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    I’m not going to a class that violates human rights🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️

    skymtf, in Virginia students walk-out protesting trans Outing policy

    Every once in a while I get sad when I see a bunch of 14 year old boys stanning andrew tate and screaming “women :coffecup” on every single video. but stuff like this gives me hope.

    PerogiBoi,
    @PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

    Can you explain to an ancient and out of touch 30something what “women:coffee cup” means or implies?

    TerryTPlatypus,

    It kind of means women shouldn’t be taken seriously, because they’re just “silly little airheads” who just cook and clean.

    PerogiBoi,
    @PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

    Ew that’s dumb af. Thanks for the explanation.

    raccoona_nongrata,
    @raccoona_nongrata@beehaw.org avatar

    It’s not a particularly complicated meme, it’s essentially a way of showing casual dismissal of women and their concerns as unserious. Usually it’s formatted as the word “women” with a coffee cup emoji.

    It originated from a video of two video game characters simply saying “Heh, women” and then laughing together in kind of a derisive way and sipping coffee. It’s a really stupid meme and is just a way to be lowkey misogynist.

    PerogiBoi,
    @PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

    Blech. Thanks for the explanation.

    Whey_Isolate,
    @Whey_Isolate@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    The whole thing especially pisses me off because the original video was meant to criticize misogyny

    Kyoyeou, in City council removes plus sign from LGBTQ+ Pride proclamation after deciding it promotes BDSM

    “We accept you for who you are after we have judged you”

    Swiggles, in City council removes plus sign from LGBTQ+ Pride proclamation after deciding it promotes BDSM

    So what? If BDSM folks feel represented by LGBTQ+ they have every right to be part of it. What’s wrong with BDSM anyway?

    Not like LGBTQ+ promotes anything at all besides that it is okay to be who you are.

    WalrusDragonOnABike,

    I feel like the vast majority of LGBTQIA2S people would be upset by zoophiles and pedophiles* feeling included by LGBTQ+. Personally I don't care if they're included or not. They're definitely GSRMs imo, so I don't think they need to be included in LGBTQ+. But a lot of them have the same issues of realizing their sexual attraction is not like their peers at some point and dealing with the fear of ostracization and violence if people found out what thoughts they have.

    *Not to be confused with people who practice bestiality or child molestation.

    Swiggles,

    How did we get here? What a bad take. Consent is obviously required, it’s that simple.

    Neither children nor animals can consent therefore they are not welcome in any shape or form. This also excludes rape and other forms of abuse from any LGBTQ+ space/group/community.

    WalrusDragonOnABike,

    Which is why I explicitly excluded those who engage in sexual acts with children or animals?

    Swiggles,

    You did not, you said that you do not mind or care. No one wants them there except the pedophiles themselves.

    The people have problems, but they need other help than acceptance. It does not work, it is abuse and the LGBTQ+ community always clearly distanced themselves from them.

    Implying any connection at all is dishonest and a huge disservice to all people under the LGBTQ+ umbrella. Hence it is a terrible take.

    WalrusDragonOnABike,

    To quote myself:

    *Not to be confused with people who practice bestiality or child molestation.

    I don't care if people eventually include them or not. I'm not backtracking on that. The two statements aren't contradictory. I'm also not saying I want that (I don't). Its simply not something I care about. Ultimately, language is whatever people want it to do be, so caring about changes is a waste. Even if it makes the language less useful or more confusing.

    But sexual or romantic attraction to a specific group of people certainly has more to do with other categories of sexual or romanic attraction to specific groups of people than preference for BDSM. And even attraction to a non-human group of beings is a more similar. I'm not implying a connection though. My point is that they are separate and there's even less reason to make kink a letter in the LGBTQ+.

    No one wants them there except the pedophiles themselves.

    I think most of them consider themselves separate as well. Its just homophobes who want to group them together.

    Taleya,

    Bad take. No one thinks these people are part of the comm in any way shape or form outside someone terminally online who has never seen grass

    WalrusDragonOnABike,

    That's my point though. We already exclude some sexual and romantic orientations. I'm not suggesting we change that or suggesting anyone (except homophobes) are doing that.

    My point is LGBTQ+ isn't just a catchall for everything. I don't see why sex-act preference (or non-sexual BDSM/kink preference) would be included. Just like it doesn't include people simply for being jewish, neurodivergent, or every other marginalized group.

    Still, even if LGBTQ+ did include the kink community, that still does not justify removing city-sponsored LGBTQ+ pride support. If anything, they should more explicitly state their support for kink community.

    sludge, in City council removes plus sign from LGBTQ+ Pride proclamation after deciding it promotes BDSM
    @sludge@beehaw.org avatar

    “Until the age of 18, I believe you belong to your parents,” this is a disgusting view.

    Sharkwellington,

    People who hold this view: “Why don’t my children talk to me anymore?”

    dumples,
    dumples avatar

    This is the start of the idea that a man owns this wife and the rest of his family. This is just the start of the domination and control for hierarchial power. Keep this in mind for all the talk about school choice

    megopie,

    More like a reactionary return to than the the start of.

    jarfil, (edited )

    In a world where every man is a rapist, and every woman is incapable of fending for herself… “protection”, control, hierarchical power, are just pieces that fall into place by themselves.

    Once inequality gets entrenched as a fact, nothing good can come out of it.

    chuso,
    @chuso@fosstodon.org avatar
    Thelsim, in City council removes plus sign from LGBTQ+ Pride proclamation after deciding it promotes BDSM

    had to be removed due to his personal discomfort…

    Waiting for the next politician to feel personal discomfort with one of the other letters. Is the bar really that low?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • lgbtq_plus@beehaw.org
  • rhentai
  • tacticalgear
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • ethstaker
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • everett
  • osvaldo12
  • kavyap
  • InstantRegret
  • thenastyranch
  • DreamBathrooms
  • cisconetworking
  • lostlight
  • normalnudes
  • mdbf
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • modclub
  • khanakhh
  • Durango
  • HellsKitchen
  • relationshipadvice
  • Leos
  • cubers
  • bokunoheroacademia
  • sketchdaily
  • All magazines