{"id":18186,"date":"2021-07-07T00:25:43","date_gmt":"2021-07-07T07:25:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/politicalhat.com\/?p=18186"},"modified":"2021-07-07T00:25:43","modified_gmt":"2021-07-07T07:25:43","slug":"the-florida-transgender-sports-ban","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/impeachreno.org\/politicalhat\/2021\/07\/07\/the-florida-transgender-sports-ban\/","title":{"rendered":"The Florida “Transgender Sports Ban”"},"content":{"rendered":"

     Florida has a new law<\/a> that restricts participation in sports, aside from co-ed teams, to teams designated by biological sex and not<\/em> \u201cgender identity\u201d. The law even takes into account medical conditions and allows for sex to be determined by chromosomes, physical aspects, or hormonal aspects, meaning that it is very inclusive of relevant cases, and does not prohibit a \u201ctransgender\u201d person from participating but rather just rationally sorts them to the most appropriate team.<\/p>\n

     However, there are concerns as to how well the law will hold up against a lawsuit brought against it that claims it is discriminatory<\/a> against \u201ctransgender\u201d individuals.<\/p>\n

     People forget that \u201cgender identity\u201d and \u201cbiological sex\u201d are de facto <\/em>different in the law and practically de jure<\/em> in academia and increasingly also in society. \u201cGendered language\u201d such as words like boy, woman, he, hers, &c. are recognized as being associated with \u201cgender identity\u201d and not \u201cbiological sex\u201d; that this bill is entitled the \u201cfairness in Women\u2019s Wports Act\u201d could be a problem, then.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

     The appropriation of the language and the forced \u201cevolution\u201d of the meaning of \u201cwoman\u201d, for example, to mean \u201cperson with the gender identity of \u2018woman’\u201d instead of \u201cbiological female\u201d is the greatest tool the transgender lobby has. As much as people want to say that \u201cgender = biological sex\u201d, that argument increasingly already lost.<\/p>\n

     If you really want to fix this, you exploit the fact that they say that \u201cgender identity\u201d and \u201cbiological sex\u201d are not only different things but not considered to even be related, by making it clear that the teams are not divided by \u201cgender identity\u201d but by \u201cbiological sex\u201d and eschew gendered language, as much as it may not sound natural to speak that way\u2026 and then declare that dividing teams by \u201cgender identity\u201d is discrimination necessarily caused by \u201cirrational animus\u201d.<\/p>\n

     Sadly, the problem is much more board than this particular case.<\/p>\n

     Of course, they deny that \u201cbiological sex\u201d is a \u201cbinary\u201d or that it really even measurable exists because not only it is considered a \u201cspectrum\u201d but that there are many types of sexes (e.g. chromosomal sex, hormonal sex, physical sex, brain sex, &c.), and rare medical conditions are put forth in a \u201cfalse dilemma fallacy\u201d to declare that the \u201cbinary\u201d doesn\u2019t exist at all by presenting all these \u201csexes\u201d as if they are independent of one another.<\/p>\n

     The truth of the matter is that absent a medical condition (which usually also involves infirtility), an XX chromosome pair results in a person being a female and a XY chromosome pair results in a person being a male, and that further there are physical and actual physiological differences between the sexes, but acute and statistically significant. While there are variations such that some woman may be a better soccer player, for example, than some man, they are variations centered around two different core starting points. Rather than a \u201cspectrum\u201d of masculine vs. feminine as the starting point, it is two different things each with their own variation which might overlap on some measured aspect or another. In other words, \u201cmasculine\u201d and feminine\u201d exist because people observed differences between males and females, and not because they are \u201csocial constructs\u201d that were \u201cassigned\u201d to males and females in order to create a \u201csystem of oppression\u201d against those whose \u201cassigned gender\u201d doesn\u2019t match their \u201ctrue gender identity\u201d.<\/p>\n

     But even the idea of biological sex is being questioned by laws that allow people to change their designated sex on birth certificates or drivers licenses. Soon, the natural and simple words that used to be associated with biological sex will all apply solely to \u201cgender identity\u201d which will make it not only seem normal to think that way, but that people always thought that way and serve as a tool for gaslighting. People who talk about differences in biological sex will need increasingly less common and unusual words to describe this, which will result in people talking that way appearing to be weirdoes.<\/p>\n

     Heck, we are already seeing \u201cgay\u201d and \u201clesbian\u201d no longer meaning attraction to the same sex, but to attraction to the same \u201cgender identity\u201d, and that anyone who is attracted to the same or the opposite sex are labeled \u201ctransphobic\u201d for having a \u201cweird genital fetish\u201d. This is the argument used in the case that the Supreme Court refused to take up and thus let stand where a \u201ctrans-man\u201d didn\u2019t want to use the \u201cgirls\u201d restroom: A biological female would be freaked out if a \u201cman with a vagina\u201d used the same restroom because they presented themself as a different \u201cgender identity\u201d but would be more comfortable with people of either biological sex just as long as they acted or presented themselves as the same \u201cgender identity\u201d.<\/p>\n

     The text of the bill can be read below:<\/p>\n