It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Miss Universe and Transgendered Contestants: A Tricky Social Issue

page: 24
18
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 



There are two types of women. ciswoman and transwoman. What the poster is saying is that All women should have the same rights and protections under the law.


I disagree. If one is born a woman, has a woman's DNA, and was born with a woman's reproductive organs, then one is a woman. They can reassign sexual organs, but not reproductive organs. If what you are saying is true, then a man in drag could be a woman as well. Why not be a woman today, a man tomorrow, and a woman again on Saturday? Being a woman isn't just about appearance, nor is it about the type of sex one enjoys, it is about being born with the potential to be the female half of a reproductive pair. I know you called that some type of -ete earlier, and I agree, but that is just semantics. Female means the egg-bearing part of a reproductive pair, it does not just mean looking like a woman.




posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by crazydaysandnights
 






Agreed not all natural born women can give birth for several reasons,

Same as not all natural born men can reproduce BUT with the exceptions of a few cases they

all have the accoutrements for doing so......However,

'man made woman' has NONE of the necessary accoutrements for doing so !



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I understand your argument.
But there's more to it than just looking like a woman.. It's particularly hard for people to grasp unless you know some people.. There are some very shameful stereotypes presented in the media. Which should be disregarded.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Miraj
 


I'm not saying they shouldn't be liked, or that a man can't fall in love with them, or that they can't live their lives as women, and I do know one, and I am actually very attracted to her, even knowing what I know, but....... still not technically a woman, and should not be able to compete with women in female sports.

Unless, and I'm all for this option, let's get rid of all the classifications, and get rid of all the rules, and just let competition be competition. No gender test, no drug test, no age restriction, just let the best person win! I think we have too many rules anyway.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Furbs
 



There are two types of women. ciswoman and transwoman. What the poster is saying is that All women should have the same rights and protections under the law.


I disagree. If one is born a woman, has a woman's DNA, and was born with a woman's reproductive organs, then one is a woman. They can reassign sexual organs, but not reproductive organs. If what you are saying is true, then a man in drag could be a woman as well. Why not be a woman today, a man tomorrow, and a woman again on Saturday? Being a woman isn't just about appearance, nor is it about the type of sex one enjoys, it is about being born with the potential to be the female half of a reproductive pair. I know you called that some type of -ete earlier, and I agree, but that is just semantics. Female means the egg-bearing part of a reproductive pair, it does not just mean looking like a woman.


I don't disagree with anything you are saying from a reproductive or even sexual standpoint.

Male and Female are different. Medicine has not developed to a point where Males can reproduce without Females (although the reverse is not true). A ciswoman with all of the biologically normative attributes should be able to deliver a baby. A transwoman can not... yet. If a cismale is no longer needed to procreated, which we aren't, then what it means to be a man changes, does it not? All humans in our species are now able to play the part of the male role through genetic manipulation.

Less than a year ago, the first uterine transplant was successful.

We are getting closer and closer to completely blurring the lines altogether.

Gender, on the other hand, is completely and totally fabricated. If we were being realistic, the Miss Universe pageant isn't about how many babies this contestant is likely to shoot out, it is about perfection of a gender.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Furbs

Originally posted by _R4t_
Here's a question of the whole transgendered supporting crew.

Because science and technology also can do it if tomorrow I decide get a facial reconstruction and melanin shot when I'm done I am black as black can be and look like an African American.

Here are my questions…


Im going to tackled them one at a time.


-Do I have the right to call myself an African American?


You have the right to call yourself African American right now, if you wish. Skin color has nothing to do with whether or not you are 'African American'. I have two caucasian African American friends from Johannesburg, South Africa that emigrated to San Francisco about 15 years ago. I also have an African American friend that is from Egypt. His family looks more Persian, but had been in Africa for 4 generations before moving to the States.

I think what you are asking is if you can call yourself a Negro, or Black person. The answer would be a resounding yes, because that is what you would be.


-Can I claim the injustice done to the black people in the past as if they had been done to me too?


Indeed.


-Do I have the right to be mad or critic people that knows I was born a native american for not accepting me...


Compound question, two part answer. Firstly..

Yes.


... and refusing to completely forget what you already know to be true and learn a lie just so YOU can be happy???


Why would someone have to forget that you used to be a Native American? You would not -lose- your status as a Native American just because you colored your skin and became black. You would simply be a Black Native American.


-Do I have the right to be mad at true african americans because they don't accept me as one of their own???


Yes, however, you would not be African American, unless you're from African. You would be a Black American.


-If I take DNA test am I going to be a African American?


No, however.. as previously stated.. you aren't an African American unless you come from Africa. What you mean to say is Black. And your DNA will indicate that you are you, and since you are a Black American, you will have the DNA of a Black American. Since it will be your DNA and you are black.


-Does this give me the right to represent African Americans in any contests?


Im begining to sound like a broken record here. You wouldn't be African American. However, would it give you the privilege of the opportunity to represent black people in contests? Yes.



EVEN if I find a way to mod my DNA in such way that it appears to be from an African American who am I trying to fool in reality the others or myself?


That is an answer I cannot give you, as it is a question to which only you have an answer.



Your logic makes no sense, if any white man gets turned to look like a native american then he shouldn't pay his taxes anymore? He should have the right to hunt according to the treaties YET not be of blood?



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 



If we were being realistic, the Miss Universe pageant isn't about how many babies this contestant is likely to shoot out, it is about perfection of a gender.


100% agreed. This is a pageant strictly about looks, and if the best looking female is actually a man, then he deserves the prize!! Actually, his surgeon deserves a Nobel Prize of some kind!!

My concern is with more athletic competitions, not just beauty pageants.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I think that would be better anyways..

Too much discrimination is offered based on what we are, or are not.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I could hand you the athletic competitions.

As that's generally considered a no drugs situation.. So if a man can't take more testosterone and still compete, then the argument is fairly made. I'd still argue, however that transsexuals make an effort to block testosterone. Which would create a disadvantage.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Miraj
 


Not quite the same issue, but still pertinent.

I'm sure the Estrogen and Testosterone Blockers would have a drastic effect on the male hormones, but I still think 20 years of previously being a male would have hardened the bones and tendons, and made the muscle fiber composition more dense, with more fast-twitch fiber than a woman, and a male also carries less fat embedded within the muscle fiber.

Some people may be able to take every precaution for fair play, but some would exploit the loophole intentionally.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by _R4t_
Your logic makes no sense, if any white man gets turned to look like a native american then he shouldn't pay his taxes anymore? He should have the right to hunt according to the treaties YET not be of blood?


I know plenty of caucasians, some latinos, and a handful of black people that of native american ancestry. "Looking" like a native american isn't enough to fulfill the requirements. Heck, having the BLOOD of native americans isn't enough to fulfill the requirements. You need to be registered with a tribe in order to be eligible for recognition.

You are splitting hairs that do not even matter to the conversation at hand.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
My concern is with more athletic competitions, not just beauty pageants.


Transexuals are already involved in sports. I do not know if the current ruling, but there are sports that have allowed it as far back as the 70s, and the Olympics gave a nod to it in the 90s.. or 04? Im not sure. I don't really follow sports.

EDIT: Not a nod in favor of transsexuals, a nod in the sense of acknowledgment. As far as I know, the Olympics does 'sex tests'.
edit on 6-4-2012 by Furbs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by crazydaysandnights
 




Your post is a contradiction..."Quote"

'Trans women are women' and you end your post with 'Trans women' should be allowed to

do the same things that 'straight women' do.

You yourself have pointed ou differences by using the words 'trans women' and 'straight

women'


Transgender is a term that literally means - 'trans' meaning 'crossing'or 'across' and gender is

gender ergo 'transgender' describes someone who is crossing gender boundries.


Without medical intervention the 'trans woman' could not have achieved the desired results

so the most she can ever be is 'trans woman' and never woman

OK, obviously, I made a mistake, and it's obvious what I meant to say, I had a lapse of thought. Cis-gender and trans-gender. The bottom line is, gender is more than physical. And yes, a transwoman is a woman. Hence the term transwoman. Hence transwomen being legally recognized as women. Hence transwomen being medically identified as women. What your biases tell you about these women means ZERO when it comes to reality.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Furbs
 



There are two types of women. ciswoman and transwoman. What the poster is saying is that All women should have the same rights and protections under the law.


I disagree. If one is born a woman, has a woman's DNA, and was born with a woman's reproductive organs, then one is a woman. They can reassign sexual organs, but not reproductive organs. If what you are saying is true, then a man in drag could be a woman as well. Why not be a woman today, a man tomorrow, and a woman again on Saturday? Being a woman isn't just about appearance, nor is it about the type of sex one enjoys, it is about being born with the potential to be the female half of a reproductive pair. I know you called that some type of -ete earlier, and I agree, but that is just semantics. Female means the egg-bearing part of a reproductive pair, it does not just mean looking like a woman.
Transwomen are women. It isn't up for debate. That's just what it is. Sure, you can consider it a different classification in comparison to cis-women, but women are women at the end of the day.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by crazydaysandnights
 



Hence transwomen being legally recognized as women. Hence transwomen being medically identified as women. What your biases tell you about these women means ZERO when it comes to reality.


Medically identified as women?

Do they need breast exams? Pap smears?

When it comes to primarily male heart disease, and cholesterol do their Doctors treat their risk factors as women, or as men?

If a female transitions to a male, do they suddenly develop a risk of testicular cancer?

Women are women, men are men, and all the surgical changes are cosmetic, they don't change someone's actual sex.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by crazydaysandnights
 


Wrong, all woman can potentially give birth, barring any physical defects or injuries. There are ZERO trans-woman that can give birth, so it is a valid comparison.

As for allowing a trans-woman to do anything a regular woman can do.... a trans-woman was born a man. She will be bigger, stronger, and have denser muscle tissue than other women. If we allow trans-women to compete in competitive sports such as soccer and basketball and weight-lifting, then pretty soon the sport will be dominated by all trans-women, and we will have to create a new league for "natural" women.

Plus, professional sports have a significant monetary reward for being better than the other competitors. So, a very athletic man, that competes well in college, but doesn't quite make the cut for the pros, could easily dedicate a few years of his life to transitioning to a woman, and then dominate the female sports, and this would obviously be an unfair advantage!

No, it is never simple.
I said that not all women are able to give birth, which is true, so I don't know why you would say "wrong". That isn't wrong. As for the point you raise about trans-women in sports, you're making a VERY big assumption that a transwoman will automatically be better at the respective sport they enter over cis-women. Very big assumption, and one you actually cannot prove. Ultimately, women are women and there are leagues for women to play. It's that simple.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by crazydaysandnights
 


It was wrong because all women can potentially give birth, and you were using the exceptions of health defects or illnesses, which really have no bearing on the overall argument.

And, my assumption that being a male is an automatic advantage in a physical sport are not assumptions at all. Biologically men have stronger, denser muscle, denser bones, stronger tendons, and less fat mass. Those things are a direct correlation to a physical advantage. Men are also larger than women on average, which is another advantage.

Compare the WNBA to the NBA and tell me there is not an obvious difference in skills and abilities.

Now, a male on hormone therapy to become female would have less of an advantage than a full-fledged male, but in professional athletic competitions with lucrative paydays and endorsements on the line, there is a huge incentive to cheat! So, if we allow them to all be considered women, some will successfully exploit it. This is not an assumption at all, it is just an historical fact. Wherever there is a loophole, it will be exploited for profit!



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   
wiki.answers.com...

According to this it would be possible in our lifetime to see MtF finally have a real vagina and a uterus. Its a very interesting time to be alive in the bio sciences. I think then the argument would shift to another problem or mayby even non modified versus modified. Woudnt it be cool to finally see a pregnant MtF?
Oh and did you hear Donald trump has given his OK to let her compete.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


That's not quite necessarily true either these days..

As transwomen are being able to transition earlier now that they have been more legally recognized.. And if one is on puberty blockers, and never even began male puberty? I doubt you'd find that bone density along with other muscular differences in them.

Obviously there would have to be a set of criteria, and I do see your point. I'd bet hardcore women athletes would probably still beat a trans-woman in a competition.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Miraj
 


Well, personally, there is no way the surgery should be done pre-puberty unless it is necessary for those rare cases where someone is born of both sexes. But, I agree with your point, if it were done pre-puberty, there would probably be very little difference.

As far as a hardcore female athlete beating a transitioned male athlete..... no way. I could go to any small college campus in the US, find a very good male basketball player that is tall, strong, can dunk easily, but has no chance of turning pro, and we could transition him to female, and make him a dominant WNBA player, complete with huge contract endorsements! There is a lot of money to be made in this endeavor if one really took it seriously.

South African Track Star must prove she is a woman. I think there was even a previous ATS thread on the subject.




top topics



 
18
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join