Transgendered Persons in Beauty Pageants?

Recently, a Facebook-friend posted a news article indicating that the Miss Universe pageant would allow transgendered persons to compete with women. I'm against this, and I urge you, dear reader, to give me a chance here and read through the logic on this. It's more nuanced than you might think.

First, let me establish that I have nothing against transgendered persons, and I fully-support the rights of the transgender community to be recognized as their newly-assigned gender under the law. Let's get that out of the way before anyone accuses me of being a discriminatory arsehat. :)

The reason I am against transgenders in a *visual* beauty pageant is because hormonally, most transgendered women developed as *men*, and their bodies are sculpted this way—from muscle mass, to muscle insertion points, body fat percentage, lipid layer distribution, facial characteristics, etc. If we're going to have a contest comparing the visual appeal of one woman to another, I think all the contestants should be women who developed as women, with female attributes for an equal contest. Women and men are simply not built the same way, and there are far more differences than genitalia and secondary-sexual characteristics alone.

Just as we don't have men in female beauty contests, I think it's out of place to allow those who developed as men and became women later in life to compete in the same visual-appeal contest. Similar reasoning is used which prohibits transgendered women from competing with naturally-developed women in sporting competitions, where there's real fame and fortune to be had and yet, the men turned women have real advantages due to developmental physiology, greater height, fast-twitch muscles, hip-to-thigh angles (running), etc. There is a reason the fastest men always outrun the fastest women, and it's entirely attributable to physiology.

Transgendered men illustrate this the other way. How well would a female-to-male transgender be able to compete with men in a contest of beauty, to keep it fair? Would the male transgender have the correct 'male' body type, not just with genitalia but the way a male body develops? This example might make things more obvious.

Legally, being male or female is as simple as genitalia and the brain-chemistry that causes one to experience gender-dysmorphia after obligatory psychological-testing and living as a transvestite to be 'sure' one is committed. Someone who is male or female from birth is sculpted by hormone-driven developmental processes from puberty. How many transsexuals have had  this operation before puberty and with proper hormonal intervention at what most would consider an age bordering on child-abuse, or before a child's sexuality is fully-developed? We humans notice these subtle developmental cues in males and females. These contests aren't just about being male or female, but being *specimens* of each gender. Every detail matters and is ostensibly being-judged. For many, having a transgender in a female beauty contest seems wrong, and it can be difficult to verbalize why.

I just don't see how allowing someone who developed as a man and became a woman later qualifies one to compete with women in beauty contests anymore than we'd allow a transgendered female to compete in Olympic sports against women. It's the same reason we don't put women and men together in Olympic contests or in a UFC cage. We could also make the argument that males, who are generally taller and with less bodyfat, hold an unfair advantage with regard to silhouette, form, clothing, etc. In the Trump-owned Miss Universe competition, elective surgery is 'discouraged', so why would they allow someone to enter the contest who had a whole gender-reassignment surgery? Wouldn't it be similar to a female who's had every elective procedure done?

The reality here is in-conflict with gender-assignment law. We acknowledge the difference in sporting competitions because there are real developmental and muscular-skeletal differences between developmentally male and female athletes and we should remain consistent with other contests—even in 'beauty'.

 I would also be ok with eliminating 'beauty' contests altogether, but that's a different blog for another day. ;)

--

Here's another poster I made. This time, it's a graphic depiction of why it's important to keep state and church separate. I got the dollar graphic from the old Interwebz. :)

The Anti-Choice Campaign Continues

I made this de-motivational poster to explain my thoughts on the mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasound used to shame women seeking abortion. A few states are considering this bill and it's already implemented in Texas. This is yet another way to prevent women from exercising reproductive choice, and it's contemptible.

My Strange Addiction, Indeed.

Watching 'My Strange Addiction'. Wow, this urine-drinking lady has bought into a variety of fallacies. She drinks urine because she has false (and wildly outdated) ideas about cancer 'cures', erroneous ideas about removing body 'toxins' and thinks she has 'special knowledge' not understood by the medical establishment.

This show is a glaring example of the effects of being ignorant, uncritical and incurious. There is real harm to those who lack critical-thinking skills, and this is just one of thousands of examples. It's one thing to be temporarily duped, but the recipe for staying duped is to lack the skills to question one's own ideas.

If nothing else, learn to be a critical-thinker, because in a real sense it's learning how to learn. Knowledge is far more than rote memory and it's not a social-exercise in compromise between opposing ideas. Critical-thinking requires the ability to question one's own ideas with rigor and being willing to follow the evidence where it leads.

If not, you could end up drinking pee and thinking it's good for you, and that's fucking stupid.

--

The Jersey Shore: Part of the Problem?

Someone on Facebook commented on a friend's page, insisting that those who watch MTV's, 'The Jersey Shore' are part of the problem after I mentioned that I found the show entertaining.

Here's the quote and my response:

Comment: 'If you TRULY want a comic relief then how about watching some REAL comedians? How about some stand up comedy? Haven't you realized that most of that stuff they say is scripted? No wonder this country is where it is. And I still not supporting these stupid moronic people in my neighborhood.'

Comedy is personal, and stand-up comedy is different than what The Jersey Shore is, clearly. Obviously, there are many ways to be entertained. Hell, even watching the Republican debates entertains me to no end, but also gives me great tidbits of insanity to use when arguing against GOP-supporters.

While The Jersey Shore may seem to be a celebration of stupidity, drama and crazy behavior, it's not that different from fictionalized silliness (most vapid sitcoms) or fictionalized drama (soap operas). I think there's a lot more about what's wrong with the world than mere entertainment media, and there are far more stupid things on YouTube with umpteen-million views.

You've written, 'No wonder this country is where it is' as if I am part of the problem, which is a serious charge. Is that really what you think, having never met me, or perhaps you might consider that shows like The Jersey Shore are a *symptom* of the problem rather than the cause? After all, these cast members have chosen to go on this show and on occasion, make asses of themselves. Would a 'Snooki' be so easy to find in Japan?

Maybe not, but if Japan had a show like this, your argument would be moot, since the culture values education so highly. Japanese businessmen routinely get drunk and do karaoke, almost as a cultural institution. If there were a show about this and we watched it, what would your comment be then? We're part of the problem? I'm not the one getting drunk and flashing the world, but it's entertaining to watch Snooki do it.

The dumbing-down of America is not so facile as watching too many quasi-reality shows. It's due to many factors, including an overall lack of critical thinking, too much emphasis on religion which values authority and conformity over logic and skepticism, and a celebration of ignorance with a cultural celebration (almost worship) of ballers and shot-callers over scientists and engineers.

Look at the salaries of basketball players over teachers. Teachers are way more important in educating our youth and directly prepare children to allow America to compete in a global economy with countries who value education (especially math and science) more-highly.

That, my friend, is obscene. If you watch professional sports, you're part of the problem, aren't you? I promote science and skepticism and watch no professional sports aside from MotoGP racing. Sure, the Jersey Shore cast members get paid well, but nowhere near as well as America's venerated sports heroes, and ultimately, sports don't make us great....it's education and science that makes us great and truly change lives and the world for the better.

The Jersey Shore is a reflection of the dumbing-down of America, not the cause of it. I understand that and that's why I can enjoy The Jersey Shore rather than letting it upset me. There are real problems in America and I post about many of them on my FB wall, but I think focusing on quasi-reality shows misses the point and distracts focus from the real issues.

--

California's Proposition 8 Ruled Unconstitutional!

In 2008, CA voters were allowed to vote to restrict equal human rights of another 'group' in violation of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Gay couples who were once allowed to legally marry in CA were once again barred from this basic right.

Never should American rights be put to popular vote any more than we would allow a popular vote to reinstate Jim Crow laws or again restrict women from the workplace or voting booth.

A federal appeals court has struck down Prop 8 as Unconstitutional. This bodes well for freedom, equality but also as an important legal precedent against further abuses of the 14th Amendment in the future.

I do not agree with marriage for a variety of reasons featured in this blog, but I understand that all consenting adults should have the right to marry and would never want to deprive anyone of this right as long as it's legally-recognized.

--

Susan G. Komen for the Backpedaling.

Almost as soon as the Susan G. Komen For the Cure foundation withdrew support for breast screenings and funding for Planned Parenthood, there was a huge backlash in media, the Internet and social media condemning this action strongly. There is pressure on some organizations to withhold support for anything which supports reproductive choice and no matter how they spin it, the Susan G. Komen organization caved, and they did a disservice to women everywhere. They also did a disservice to all of their supporters who are really just about fighting cancer.

As we've seen, Facebook, Twitter, bloggers, YouTube and the power of instant communication and sharing on the web effectively make each individual a broadcaster who can serve as a conduit to focus on and amplify any issue important to them. As a result of this intense and widespread backlash, it seems the Susan G. Komen Foundation has thought better of punishing Planned Parenthood for being under 'investigation'. However, in the short time that the web was able to exert its grassroots power, people already withdrew support for the Susan G. Komen organization, gave directly to Planned Parenthood and made their righteous indignation known, with great effect.

The Susan G. Komen is apparently changing their policies to only withdraw funding for organizations under *criminal* investigation and has restored support for Planned Parenthood as well as breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood locations. Here's the announcement from Planned Parenthood:

--

UPDATE: February 3, 2012: The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation reversed its decision and continues to fund breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood health centers.

The outpouring of support online for Planned Parenthood and women in need of breast cancer screenings has been nothing short of astonishing, and because of it, the Planned Parenthood Breast Health Fund has received more than $3 million from thousands of people across the country in only three days.

Every dollar we received for this fund will go directly for breast exams and diagnostic services, as well as breast health outreach and education. And now that the Komen Foundation plans to continue their support, even more women will receive lifesaving breast cancer care.

We look forward to continuing our partnership with Komen partners, leaders, and volunteers, and supporters like you. Thank you so much for your voice and for standing with us.

--

I am glad they came to their senses, but all is not well. If the Susan G. Komen Organization decided to bend to pressure from the anti-choice crowd, are they really on the right side of the argument, despite what the public reversal and concession? This issue already cost the foundation their top public health official.

I suspect the damage has been done, and this will have lasting effects on donations and support for SGKftC, but at least they came around.

What's with cancer and discrimination lately, anyway? First, the American Cancer Society refuses to take atheist money, ostensibly because they don't want to be associated with atheists participants for their national events, and then the flap with the SGKftC and Planned Parenthood.

The bodies of women (or anyone) should not be battlegrounds for ideology, and cancer does not discriminate.

--