I am focused. You quote was I'm asking you if that concern extends to any other issue involving even one woman. Are you saying this doesn't extend to other issues?
Also wouldn't a man being hired over a woman be the almost the same issue as a man bumping a woman in sports competition? In both instances a women is being bumped by a man according to the arguments presented.
All @rocketsjudoka would need to do is a 1st page Google search of former sex workers that would later go on to denounce the industry because of its exploitative practices. You'd likely find many examples of men, women and non-binary in the sex work industry that could vouch for it's harm. I mean you gotta think of the greater risk of stalking, sexual assault, physical assault, incurable STIs, not even necessarily the ones that'll kill you, but then also the one's that'll kill you, managing such health complications for the rest of your life with consideration to cost and toll on a person's body, wage theft like people stealing your paid content and then uploading to other parts of the internet subverting transactions that should be directed to the content creator or not paying after sex without anyone to report the crime to, classic cases of revenge p*rn from scorned former lovers, people caught up in the global sex trafficking industry, including those who are underage, those with pimps or exploitative management, the fact that it's harder to find work outside of the sex industry once you become a participant in the sex industry, the greater social stigma surrounded by people caught up in the sex industry even when it was against their will and despite leaving it and the list could go on. It's $150 billion dollar a year industry filled with tons of corruption and exploitation. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carmen...usiness-of-human-trafficking/?sh=5dd90fa14142
It is relevant to the topic at hand. You are trying to put forth an argument on what counts as misogyny here, and unwilling to engage when others scrutinize it via analogy to other issues that matter to women.
The woke people here might say they want Britney Griner on the Rockets but you know they don’t really want that to happen leBron in the WNBA would be hilarious though
We’ve already sanctioned gender discrimination in sports as a means to provide space for “fair competition” (by some definition of fair) among women. The question is whether that discrimination should extend to transgender women as well. There’s no objective right answer to the question. Where I land is that it comes down to the values of the women who are stakeholders in a given sports league. It’s a subjective judgment call that involves competing values of fairness. It should be up to them to decide what form of discrimination is acceptable in order to provide a sufficient level of fair competition to the participating athletes.
At this point Britney Griner might be an improvement for the Rockets. I don't think they could get any worse.
My position still remains that it should be up to the leagues to decide so yes I would agree with you that it should be the stakeholders in the given sport. I will point out again that as far as I can tell everyone here discussing this are men, yet we seem to know what all women want and what should be done to protect them. As is I don't think that all women are for or against competing trans athletes. My main point though is how much of an advantage does a trans athlete have over a biologically born women. After looking at evidence of actualy competition I don't think it is as pronounced as many are making it out to be. Also given that trans people only make up 0.5% of the population with much fewer of them trans female athletes it doesn't appear like the numbers would lead to trans athletes being the end of women's sports as many claim to be.
Again, it's a problem if you believe that being trans is more of a cultural political statement that can increase in numbers from schools making more trans people. It's absurd but it's consistent line of logic though. Again, these people believe there is a impending future where half of America's children will start identifying as trans if the "woke" ideology wins. And if you believe that you believe that this will become a systemic problem.
Homosexuality -- where one is attracted mostly only to people of the same sex -- is an orientation someone is probably born with. A willingness to experiment sexually with people of the same gender, on the other hand, and even to take some pleasure in it, can be influenced by environmental pressures. We know historically there have been cultures where same-sex relationships were more normalized. I would guess that gender identity is similar. There are a class of people who are essentially born with a non-conforming gender identity. But the phenomena of "gender fluidity" can be socially induced, and conservatives are terrified by this prospect given how so many of our social institutions take it for granted that people can be neatly boxed into one of two gender categories.
Certainly if there is greater acceptance of transgender there will be more people interested in it and considering it. I don't think that though will lead to a significant change in people actually taking serious steps, like drugs or surgery, to actually change gender. It is a very large commitment to actually change genders. This isn't just a matter of cross dressing but actually altering one's biology.
Yes, but if "gender-affirming" care becomes more accessible and even encouraged, I think there is a danger that young people or people who otherwise have psychological problems will make that jump and later on regret it.
By "encouraged" are you saying that teachers and others will actually try to make people change gender identity? I know there are probably isolated incidences of that happening, along with a lot of claims that is happening by taking quotes out of context, but I don't think making trans people more socially acceptable is the same as encouraging. As for making gender affirming care more accessible I would put the same cautions as other treatment that could have potential major affects on development. There should be counseling before taking them. Even so though if people switch and later regret that will show that gender identity isn't as fluid as some people are warning and acceptance of transgender doesn't mean that woudl lead to a large increase of transgender.
you are right, they ARE after your kids @Sweet Lou 4 2 @ROXRAN you get your trans-teen on disney plus! trans-kids!
Child abuse and clear propaganda. Children under 16 do not need to see this stuff period.let alone babies
They also don't need to not see it. The cartoon doesn't advocate changing genders. The cartoon merely shows families with trans members being accepted. It's not a bad thing at all to anyone who believes it's okay to accept and love family members. It isn't harmful for babies, teens, or adults to see that message.
It's all about conditioning children and society that perverts interacting with them is not a concern.
