The Instigator
MasturDbtor
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
ejbailey
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Instead of letting transgender students use what ever sports team or bathroom they want we should...

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
MasturDbtor
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/16/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,599 times Debate No: 36741
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

MasturDbtor

Pro

...rename the sports teams and bathrooms with labels that only apply to one's "physical form" and do not refer to one's "gender identity"

Rules:

1. All I have to do is prove that this way of segregating sports teams and bathrooms is better than doing it based on "gender" (as defined in this debate based upon gender identity rather than "physical form")

2. The debate assumes the educational sessions I will describe below* will take place.

3. Con will argue that basing segregation on "gender" (as in gender identity) is better than segregation on "physical form". Con must also be arguing from the position that we should let transgender students use which ever sports team or bathroom that they want.

What labels to use to refer to physical form? Doesn't really matter. We could make new ones out of thin air if we wanted to. For the purposes of this debate I'll just use these terms:

"Physical Form" referring to either of the two terms I'm about to introduce below.

"Kronkers" referring to anyone who has the physical body typically associated with being male.

And

"Nonkers" referring to anyone who has the physical body typically associated with being female.

*And as part of the children's education they will be introduced to the reality that sometimes Kronkers are girls, and other times boys and sometimes Nonkers are boys, and other times girls. They will also be taught that sometimes people's bodies fall between the two types to an extent but that generally they are closer to one or the other.

Under circumstances where someone is completely intersexed, not strictly Kronker or Nonker then we can give that child a choice about which sports team or bathroom to use.

It is my contention that this is a much more logical way of segregating bathrooms and sports teams than to do it based on gender.

On Sports Teams:

One's gender does not determine one's physical capabilities. One's physical form does. Kronkers are proven to be more physically strong than Nonkers which is why we don't just have coed sports teams. It isn't fair to let a Kronker even if that Kronker is a girl on to the Nonkers' team. This is not to say that transgender students shouldn't get to play sports just that they should play on the team of their physical form. This is more important for keeping Kronkers off of the Nonkers team. If a Nonker whether the Nonker is a boy or a girl proves good enough to make it on the Kronkers team there is no real issue of fairness and so it is in my opinion that then that should be allowed, although that falls outside the scoop of the debate. All I must prove is that it's better to segregate sports teams on physical form than it is to do so based on gender, the question of whether to allow Nonkers on the Kronkers team being outside the scope of this debate.

On Bathrooms:

Nonkers don't want to see penises or testicles in their bathroom and we are putting Nonker boys at risk of teasing or worse if we let them in the same bathroom with Kronker boys and they see their vaginas. It makes a great deal more sense to just relabel all the bathrooms "Nonker's Room" and "Kronker's Room" and base the room you use the bathroom on your "physical form" rather than your "gender".

In doing so there is no discrimination against transgender students because we're making it clear that the segregation isn't based upon one's gender, it's based on one's physical form so by requiring them to go to the sports team or bathroom that is more appropriate for their physical form we are not making any pronouncements on what the child's gender should be.

Since children will be educated that just because someone has a "Kronker" physical form doesn't automatically mean they are a boy and just because someone has a "Nonker" physical form doesn't automatically mean they are a girl this policy will make it crystal clear that the segregations based on physical form are not a rejection of transgender children's gender identities and with the educational policy put into place we will be guaranteeing that all children are educated on the validity of transgender identity.
ejbailey

Con

What you want is to tell people that trans genders are FORCED to use a bathroom or join a sports team based on their physical appearance. Who's to say that that is any different than forcing them to use a bathroom based on their born "gender". It isn't. Trans genders should be able to use whatever bathroom or whatever sports team they choose more comfortable in. A "nonker" isn't going to always see testicles. I don't know about the bathrooms you go to but people don't usually walk around the bathroom naked. So the chances of "nonkers" seeing a trans gender's testicles is very rare unless they're peaking under the stall.
Now on to sports teams. You say that they divide teams by gender because of their physical ability. I am very weak. I am a male. I have very little physical ability. So by your standards if I want to join a, let's say, baseball team based on my physical ability I'd have to be on a softball team? I find that very hard to believe. I believe that the only reason why they separate the boys from the girls or "kronkers" from "Nonkers" is that they feel like a girl (or "nonker") has way less abilities than the boys (kronkers). So, what I'm saying is, if a trans gender student has a "nonker" body then they should be able to join a male team if they are more comfortable with that.
Debate Round No. 1
MasturDbtor

Pro

Correction

Physical form not physical appearance. The person's body may be the physical format that society typically ascribes as belonging to boys but they dress up looking like a girl, then if they want to play sports they should be allowed to do so on the Kronker's team not the Nonker's team.

How is it different?

It's different because we're not labeling the bathrooms and sports teams as "boy's" and "girl's" and hence not making any statements as to what the user of these rooms and sports teams genders are.

People not being naked in the bathroom

But we want an environment where transgender children can feel comfortable with being open about who they are. That would promote more tolerance and acceptance. This would also mean that for example, Girl Nonker Kelsey will know that Girl Kronker Tiffany has a penis and testicles and since people often speak of it being OK to be in the same bathroom (or gym lockerroom) on the basis "we have the same parts anyways" then it's likely Kelsey would not feel comfortable with Tiffany being in the same bathroom as her. We may still recognize Tiffany is indeed a "her" and a "girl" but her physical form is "Kronker" not "Nonker" so she must use a bathroom that is more appropriate for her physical form.

Another reason is that the ones now known as "Boy's Rooms" which I propose renaming "Kronker's Rooms" have yournels. Perhaps Tiffany thinks of herself as a girl but does not desire to change her genitals, some transgender people don't and even still likes using the yournel in spite of her "girl" gender identity. There may be many mtf transgender/transsexuals who still like using yournels. So this is really a better arrangement even for transsexual/transgender students.

Many Kronker's Rooms will also have less stalls thanks to having yournels so we're not doing Nonker Boys any favors by making them go to the same room as Kronker Boys. The stalls may all be taken and then they have no where to go. Furthermore Kronker boys getting curious about sexuality even if they are straight may think that a Nonker boy having a vagina is "at least something" and this sets us up for sexual harrassment in the bathroom.

And there's also that a child might just lie and say they are transgender just to sneak around the other bathroom. It is better if we just rename the bathrooms so that the segregation is based solely on physical form and makes no presumptions that the physical forms are supposed to be certain genders.

On Sports Teams

It's more important to maintain the distinction here for the sake of fairness. Yes, some students might fall outside these tendancies but since overwhelmingly a person of Kronker physical form will be stronger and more agile than a person of Nonker physical form then it at least isn't fair for a Kronker to be allowed on a Nonker team. It would mean that most Nonkers wouldn't be able to even be on the team.

If Transgender Students Can Go Where ever They Want then So Should Other Students

It's only fair and this would essentially mean having coed sports teams eliminating sports opportunities for all but a few girls and not to mention ftm transgender students (so in this context Nonkers lose opportunities for athleticism). It would also mean coed bathrooms and gym locker rooms. That's setting up a whole bunch of opportunities for sexual harrassment.

It is important that we respect and honor the gender identities of what ever gender a child identifies with, but there's no rule that segregations of bathrooms and sports teams must be based on gender, so instead we should base them on the physical form and give the physical forms different naems than the child's gender.
ejbailey

Con

ejbailey forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
MasturDbtor

Pro

All arguments extended.
ejbailey

Con

ejbailey forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
MasturDbtor

Pro

All arguments extended.
ejbailey

Con

ejbailey forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
MasturDbtor

Pro

What a pity. Vote Pro!
ejbailey

Con

ejbailey forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by MasturDbtor 3 years ago
MasturDbtor
ejbailey,

As I've had to before as well. I still gracefully accepted it meant I would likely be defeated.
Posted by ejbailey 3 years ago
ejbailey
I hope everyone reads this before voting. I did not drop out of this debate because I didnt have an argument but because life got busy.
Posted by cheyjordan 3 years ago
cheyjordan
I think the names "Kronkers" and "Nonkers" are silly, but I do think you are onto something. This is a really good idea. Society needs to adjust to the changes in society and this is something that needs to be considered.
Posted by Dragonfang 3 years ago
Dragonfang
Would probably accept the challenge if it remains avaliable later on.
Posted by MassiveDump 3 years ago
MassiveDump
I'm imagining what we'd have to call that.

"I really have to pee, could you politely show me to the penis's restroom?"

"Don't forget, students! Next week is tryouts for the Varsity Vagina Volleyball team!"
Posted by KBattleson 3 years ago
KBattleson
that, or we could have co-ed bathrooms.
Posted by KBattleson 3 years ago
KBattleson
excellent idea 'ol chap.

all bathrooms shall be renamed men, women, and other.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
MasturDbtorejbaileyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.
Vote Placed by WilliamofOckham 3 years ago
WilliamofOckham
MasturDbtorejbaileyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Four forfeits is pretty bad. Also, pro's arguments were pretty good.