The world’s top chess federation has ruled that transgender women cannot compete in its official events for females until an assessment of gender change is made by its officials.
The world’s top chess federation has ruled that transgender women cannot compete in its official events for females until an assessment of gender change is made by its officials.
I disagree whole heartedly that that makes it go away. If that worked, bigoted nonsense would have gone away by now.
People’s ability to create arguments that influence other, neutral parties is far more powerful than the rational truth, and needs to be addressed in some way.
If that worked, bigoted nonsense would have gone away by now.
I genuinely have no idea what period in history you could be basing that on
People’s ability to create arguments that influence other, neutral parties is far more powerful
We already had that discussion and now the overwhelming majority of doctors and researchers understand trans people are people and gender affirming healthcare is good healthcare. If you’re neutral at this point you’re at best embarrassingly ignorant and most likely just a bigot.
I think that’s a little out of touch with different American sub-cultures, which do not all share the same values. They certainly do not necessarily share our faith in modern, evidence-based methods. While that may be embarrassing to you, embarrassment is a cultural phenomenon. They clearly feel no embarrassment.
We tried to shove bigotry under the rug for huge chunks of the past century, just ignoring things like neo-Nazism in the hopes they would go away. They have strengthened instead.
The fact of the matter is the cheating argument is plausible, and that makes it compelling. It’s their only one. That makes ignoring it unwise, when it could be simply dealt with.
If they don’t believe in empirical evidence and the scientific method then there is less than nothing to be gained from debating them, it will set things back for people who aren’t engaged in this issue to see them being taken seriously like there is any real debate here.
I feel pretty strongly that you’re ignoring forgetting the Nazi element of this right now with this insistence on taking their bullshit arguments seriously
The fact of the matter is that it is not plausible and you reiterating that it is doesn’t make it so.
e; I’m still giving you the benefit of the doubt that you genuinely mean well here and are just mistaken, tried to adjust the language to better reflect that
Being an asshole isn’t cheating. Plus, if we’re gonna throw out every chess player who is an asshole we’re gonna be throwing out a lot of them.
e; And there’s no practical way to go after assholes here without harming a lot of innocent non-assholes in the process.
Also, if your goal is just to avoid any controversies and arguments, wait until someone accuses their opponent of being trans to try to get them thrown out.
It’s a stupid rule that solves a non-issue while creating a lot more problems.
I couldn’t help but note that you backed off from saying cheating is not plausible. The plausibility of the argument is the problem. That’s what makes it effective in the social space.
I also don’t really see how a policy of blood testing would actually be harmful. Inconvenient and expensive, yes, but it would be done to everyone. That makes it fair. If the information was kept private, it wouldn’t be harmful either.
I don’t think I did. Forgive some paraphrasing, but this was our exchange as I understand it,
Me: This is a dumb rule.
You: It will prevent cheating.
Me: No it won’t.
You: It will prevent a specific kind of asshole behavior.
Me: That kind of asshole behavior doesn’t constitute cheating, it’s just being an asshole and trying to prevent that causes more harm than good.
And speaking of more harm than good, blood draws for everyone that wants to participate in women’s chess is inconvenient and unpleasant enough to defeat the whole point of this league in the first place. Like, “So we wanted to be more inclusive and get more women involved in chess, yahta yahta, now let me stick you with a needle and take some of your blood. Oh, no, you wouldn’t have to do this in an open tournament, just some special hassles for your tournaments is all.” is not going to go over well is all.
So, yeah, I still think this is a stupid rule that “solves” something that’s not a problem and creates a couple of new ones.
Admittedly, I’m not thinking about just chess, but the overall argument of how to classify and allow trans folks to participate in competitive events. I don’t see a big difference between trans people in chess vs swimming or basketball.
Regardless of how you want to frame the discussion, it’s this argument they put forward to justify banning trans people. You seem to want to ignore it entirely. I really think that’s unwise, and I’m looking for some kind of potential solution to actually address it.
I think, overall, and regardless of how popular it is, this method of ignoring opposition arguments is very detrimental. 90% of the country’s land area has never seen a trans person in real life, so the arguments they read about are all they have.
I disagree whole heartedly that that makes it go away. If that worked, bigoted nonsense would have gone away by now.
People’s ability to create arguments that influence other, neutral parties is far more powerful than the rational truth, and needs to be addressed in some way.
I genuinely have no idea what period in history you could be basing that on
We already had that discussion and now the overwhelming majority of doctors and researchers understand trans people are people and gender affirming healthcare is good healthcare. If you’re neutral at this point you’re at best embarrassingly ignorant and most likely just a bigot.
I think that’s a little out of touch with different American sub-cultures, which do not all share the same values. They certainly do not necessarily share our faith in modern, evidence-based methods. While that may be embarrassing to you, embarrassment is a cultural phenomenon. They clearly feel no embarrassment.
We tried to shove bigotry under the rug for huge chunks of the past century, just ignoring things like neo-Nazism in the hopes they would go away. They have strengthened instead.
The fact of the matter is the cheating argument is plausible, and that makes it compelling. It’s their only one. That makes ignoring it unwise, when it could be simply dealt with.
If they don’t believe in empirical evidence and the scientific method then there is less than nothing to be gained from debating them, it will set things back for people who aren’t engaged in this issue to see them being taken seriously like there is any real debate here.
I feel pretty strongly that you’re
ignoringforgetting the Nazi element of this right now with this insistence on taking their bullshit arguments seriouslyThe fact of the matter is that it is not plausible and
youreiterating that it is doesn’t make it so.e; I’m still giving you the benefit of the doubt that you genuinely mean well here and are just mistaken, tried to adjust the language to better reflect that
So, you’re saying it is not plausible for someone to claim to be trans when they suffer no dysphoria, simply to be an asshole?
In what way is it prevented?
Being an asshole isn’t cheating. Plus, if we’re gonna throw out every chess player who is an asshole we’re gonna be throwing out a lot of them.
e; And there’s no practical way to go after assholes here without harming a lot of innocent non-assholes in the process.
Also, if your goal is just to avoid any controversies and arguments, wait until someone accuses their opponent of being trans to try to get them thrown out.
It’s a stupid rule that solves a non-issue while creating a lot more problems.
I couldn’t help but note that you backed off from saying cheating is not plausible. The plausibility of the argument is the problem. That’s what makes it effective in the social space.
I also don’t really see how a policy of blood testing would actually be harmful. Inconvenient and expensive, yes, but it would be done to everyone. That makes it fair. If the information was kept private, it wouldn’t be harmful either.
I don’t think I did. Forgive some paraphrasing, but this was our exchange as I understand it,
Me: This is a dumb rule.
You: It will prevent cheating.
Me: No it won’t.
You: It will prevent a specific kind of asshole behavior.
Me: That kind of asshole behavior doesn’t constitute cheating, it’s just being an asshole and trying to prevent that causes more harm than good.
And speaking of more harm than good, blood draws for everyone that wants to participate in women’s chess is inconvenient and unpleasant enough to defeat the whole point of this league in the first place. Like, “So we wanted to be more inclusive and get more women involved in chess, yahta yahta, now let me stick you with a needle and take some of your blood. Oh, no, you wouldn’t have to do this in an open tournament, just some special hassles for your tournaments is all.” is not going to go over well is all.
So, yeah, I still think this is a stupid rule that “solves” something that’s not a problem and creates a couple of new ones.
Admittedly, I’m not thinking about just chess, but the overall argument of how to classify and allow trans folks to participate in competitive events. I don’t see a big difference between trans people in chess vs swimming or basketball.
Regardless of how you want to frame the discussion, it’s this argument they put forward to justify banning trans people. You seem to want to ignore it entirely. I really think that’s unwise, and I’m looking for some kind of potential solution to actually address it.
I think, overall, and regardless of how popular it is, this method of ignoring opposition arguments is very detrimental. 90% of the country’s land area has never seen a trans person in real life, so the arguments they read about are all they have.