Adventures in Gender Activism at FFRF

[Tim]

This was Andrew’s original claim:

@misterme987

What the research shows is that trans people consistently view themselves as being the opposite gender than they were assigned at birth, and that preventing them from presenting as that gender can be extremely (mentally) harmful.

@misterme987

I don’t know if I’ve researched it as much as Coyne. But here are a handful of studies that show how discrimination adversely affects trans people’s mental health.

Lin et al. 2021
Hughto et al. 2016
Wilson et al. 2017

This would seem to be a narrow subset of your original claim. I would also note that Coyne does not appear to be advocating for discrimination against Trans people, but rather balancing the potential for harm to them against the potential for harm to others affected by some policies.

I would further note that China, the topic of the first study cited, is notoriously repressive and conformist. I would not be surprised if every minority within China is suffering mental health issues. Recent reports of ‘revenge against society’ mass-killings suggest that even members of the majority are suffering.

@misterme987

And here are a handful more that point to the impact of state policy, including policies about sports, on trans people’s wellbeing.

Truszczynski et al. 2022
Barbee et al. 2021
Jones et al. 2017

The first paper again deals with discrimination (specifically anti-discrimination policies). The second’s discussion on sport relies solely on the third. The third’s conclusion:

Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore, competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.

… appears to be directly contradicted by the findings of a paper I have already posted here:

Transgender women in the female category of sport: perspectives on testosterone suppression and performance advantage

@misterme987

I think it’s pretty obvious that discrimination hurts people and that discriminatory policies both hurt people and contribute to individual discrimination. But I anticipate that you won’t think this research is enough, or that it’s not as good as Coyne’s research, etc.

No Andrew.

First I would like to <sarcasm> thank you for putting words in my mouth.</sarcasm>

Secondly, I would like to point out that your claim was not the far more limited claim that:

What the research shows is that trans people are subject to harmful discrimination.

@misterme987

@Tim

Does it? Or has research that suggests that things may be more nuanced and/or conflicted been ‘shouted down’ and/or self-censored?

Really? This is the same defense that ID advocates use to explain why ID isn’t mainstream. How is this defense any more valid when applied to this issue?

Andrew, I have presented evidence (The Economist piece) that WPATH may have been manipulating and censoring research. @dsterncardinale, whatever you may think of the merits of the Cass Review, the heat of the reaction to it would appear to be evidence that contrary voices are being “shouted down.”

Andrew, as I have substantiated my above claim, I would request that you RETRACT your false, perjorative and UNPEACEFUL comparison.

@misterme987

Which is why I went on to say “if and when it becomes [an issue], it should be decided on a case-by-case basis, not by eliminating all trans people from sports.”

1. This purported rebuttal fails to address my first point (“The effect that it would have is a function of both the number of trans athletes and their (increased) probability of winning.”)

2. It fails to address my point that this may already have ‘become an issue’ in cycling.

3. It ignores the inertia that such policies create – the longer that these policies are in place, the more people who have invested in their sporting careers on the basis of them, the more difficult it is to change course. I see nothing wrong with sporting bodies being forward-looking in setting their policies.

@misterme987

What? Your entire concern was about safety (“harm to their fellow prisoners”), and I pointed out that trans women in male prisons are at a hugely increased risk of sexual violence.

No Andrew. You are focusing ONLY on the harm to trans prisoners, and thus ignoring my point about the potential for harm to fellow prisoners.

It may well be that there is no good answer to this – but ignoring one side of the question is not the way to get to a least-bad answer.

Andrew previous accused me of making “faulty conclusions”, when I had as yet made none. So here now is my conclusion.

Conclusion

This topic appears to generate far more heat than light on both sides.

It has certainly led me to increased distrust of both Andrew’s, and Coyne’s, view on the topic. But it has led me no closer to finding any voice I feel I can trust to be objective.

This leads me, as a mere would-be-informed observer, who has neither a deep professional nor policy-making need to be informed on the topic, to feel that given the emotional heat and lack of enlightenment that engagement in this topic generates, I’d be best advised to leave it well alone.

I do not think that this conclusion is consistent with this forum’s stated goals, nor with creating a well-informed public on this issue. But that is not my problem.

Mercutio’s dying line would appear to be the most appropriate conclusion.

[misterme987 (Andrew P.)]

Can we at least agree, more or less, on @Mercer’s seven points?

@Mercer

1. Coyne should never have used those lousy UK prison statistics.
2. No one should have called Coyne a bigot for doing #1.
3. FFRF should not have taken anything down.
4. One’s personal experience is not necessarily applicable to those of a large number of other people.
5. Gender is not binary.
6. Sex is not binary either, just much closer to being binary than gender.
7. One’s right to fair competition in sports is not as important as one’s basic right to life.

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@dsterncardinale

@Rumraket

islamic extremists

Not example of a a group seeking the same rights as everyone else.

I don’t see why that matters. The fact is that their extreme positions and behavior hurts the cause of those that do.

Actually when I think about it I think that just supports my position even more. The fact that muslims more broadly can geninely argue that they do not seek the same rights and future as the extremists do, should just make it all the more difficult for the extremists to hurt their cause. And it probably does make it more difficult for the extremists to hurt the cause of moderate muslims, that moderate muslims can genuinely argue that they are unlike the extremists in their goals. And nevertheless, the extremists are succeeding in hurting the goals of moderate muslims. Their actions make people afraid of even moderate muslims.

@dsterncardinale

@Rumraket

In fact I think extremists have probably hurt the vegan and climate change causes. A lot.

I have quibbles (like how there’s a decades-long bajillion dollar propaganda effort against climate change action), but again, “vegans” and “climate change activists” are not demographic groups seeking access to certain rights.

Vegans can certainly be argued to be seeking animal rights to life (and freedoms from confinement, etc.)
And whether we think climate change activism is a fight for certain rights, it is certainly a group of people championing a political, social, and cultural cause, and it covers a diversity of viewpoints from how to both combat climate change and even in some cases effectuate various forms of social justice (against economic inequality, for example). And in both cases I think there are people championing both the vegan and climate change causes that end up hurting those causes with their words and actions.

@dsterncardinale

I again need to emphasize that this is a fake, made-up, not-real problem

I need to just disagree, then.

@dsterncardinale

This is a made-up problem designed to scare the parents of suburban high-school-aged girls into voting for Republicans

And it’s working. Trump won. Polling has showed their scaremongering about trans people affected public opinion (ofc it was just one among numerous other contributing causes of his victory). And they absolutely did harp on statements by gender extremists in this scaremongering. Hence the extremists are succeeding in hurting the cause of trans-activists.

Period.

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@dsterncardinale

@Rumraket

@dsterncardinale

Has that ever been correct in retrospect, ever? (No.)

Yes. Here in this instance, right now.

C’mon man, you’re smarter than this. Emphasis on “in retrospect”.

Okay. I think extremists have generally hurt the causes of moderates. I think their behavior has worked contrary to the goals of moderates more broadly, even in cases where the movements eventually succeeded in effecting societal and cultural change. And I think they do this by providing the opposition with ammunition with which to scare the general population.

I think you’re basically conceding the entire point by declaring it a fake issue. The fact that it IS an issue people take to the ballot box proves the scaremongering works. And it only works if the positions they use to scare us with are extreme enough to be considered scary by those receptive to it. I think in a way you’re trying to have your cake and eat it too. On the one hand you want to say there’s nothing to be scared about because the problem isn’t real, yet thereby conceding it’s actually scared a lot of people.

[Tim]

@misterme987

Can we at least agree …

Andrew, after you have falsely accused me of employing ID creationist tactics, falsely accused me of making “faulty conclusions” (when I had made no conclusions at all), and falsely accused me of being willing to dismiss evidence of discrimination out of hand, what makes you think I’m in the mood to agree with you on anything?

On John’s point #1, I would offer no direct opinion. Was Coyne’s data ideal? Most probably not. Does better data exist? I don’t know. Is the issue, that he was attempting to employ this imperfect data to inform, a valid one? I would suggest probably yes, per @Puck_Mendelssohn’s comment above. I would also note that it is all-too-common for the victimised to themselves become victimisers.

On his point #6, my views are similar to @Rumraket’s above.

Beyond that, I would probably agree – but it is unclear to me how these points of agreement offer much basis for a more healthy discussion.

[misterme987 (Andrew P.)]

I don’t think I’ve falsely accused you of anything, except making faulty conclusions, since as you say you hadn’t stated any conclusion at that point. I’m just trying to find common ground because this is devolving into polemics. And I’m glad to see that we mostly agree on John’s points.

[RonSewell (RonS)]

@dsterncardinale

This is a made-up problem designed to scare the parents of suburban high-school-aged girls into voting for Republicans

Real or otherwise, it seems to have worked. It is going to be a long four years.

[dsterncardinale]

@Tim

but rather balancing the potential for harm to them against the potential for harm to others affected by some policies.

Can someone please articulate what this potential harm actually is? So far we’ve got sports (which is not a real issue, see above, the numbers are what they are) and prisons (where trans people are many times more likely to be victims). Is there something I’m missing? Is there some real, actual way in which trans people using the bathroom of their choice/participating in sports/existing in the world in the same way as everyone else materially harms cis people? (Keeping in mind, by the way, that most of the time, trans people already do all of those things like use the bathrooms and locker rooms of their choice, and they’re being targeted to be prevented from doing so. So now trans people and their allies are saying “trans people should have legal protection against these discriminatory laws”. Do we have decades of rampant trans-on-cis violence in public bathrooms? No? So again I ask: What is the specific material harm we’re talking about here?

@Tim

whatever you may think of the merits of the Cass Review, the heat of the reaction to it would appear to be evidence that contrary voices are being “shouted down.”

A long, thorough, scientific critique can hardly be considered “shouting down”, can it? My goodness, honestly, the parallels to creationism seem pretty apt…

@Rumraket

I don’t see why that matters.

You don’t see why having access to existing rights is different from imposing rules that deprive rights? You don’t see how having access to existing rights is different from expanding human rights to non-humans? Really? You don’t see how those things are different? Ooooookay…

[dsterncardinale]

@RonSewell

@dsterncardinale

This is a made-up problem designed to scare the parents of suburban high-school-aged girls into voting for Republicans

Real or otherwise, it seems to have worked. It is going to be a long four years.

I want to make this very clear, because it’s very important: It has worked in part because of people like Coyne who legitimize a right-wing witch hunt even though they should know better!

Am I the crazy one here? I make it a habit to study the political history of the right in the US. And this is exactly the same as countless other smear campaigns over the years. It’s the same as “black people are going to rape your wife/daughter”. It’s the same as “black people/immigrants are going to take your job”. It’s the same as “gay people are going to turn your kids gay”. It’s. The. Same.

And every time there have been people who have said “sure they’re being hyperbolic, but look at the extremists on the other side, and anyway, they go overboard but there is a valid point underneath the ugly rhetoric.”

No there isn’t! There never is! Ever! It’s always opportunistic othering and scapegating! Can’t you all see that?