Dress-wearing guy stopped from being Prom Queen by school - Page 6

Quad4_72 · 30th April 2012, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

That's simply not true -- it's the definition that I know from having gone to high school and participated in the crowning of four Homecoming Courts and four Prom Courts. It's also a definition that fits the standard cultural understanding of Americans about what the cultural practice involves.

Again, you're continuing to conflate female with girl, and though the two are the same thing. They're not. It was having a boy elected Prom Queen that they had an issue with; it wasn't about sex linked traits but about the cultural bifurcation of genders.

The culture, of course, doesn't make a clear distinction between gender and sex either, which is fine, but we can be a little more clear about what we're actually talking about here.

Regardless if you want to say this is about gender or sex, he is wrong on both counts. If being Prom Queen was about sex, he is in the wrong as he is not a girl. If being Prom Queen was about gender, he is in the wrong as he does not identify as a girl. He is trolling, plain and simple.

NeilC · 30th April 2012, 11:24 PM

Originally Posted by AvalonXQ

Yes, I have.

The first argument was that men still have an award they can win; it's just a different award.

I explained how that exact "separate but equal" argument had been used for racial segregation for many years.

The next argument was the appeal to the majority -- the fact that most people agree with sex segregation.

Again, that was true of racial segregation for many, many years; the populist argument was one of its strongest justifications.

Finally, there's the "individual comfort" argument -- the idea that women feel better when not around men and vice versa.

Again, this was the primary argument used in support of Jim Crow laws; the idea that whites were uncomfortable around blacks, and so should be allowed their own public spaces.

So, all of the arguments that have been applied to sexual segregation are arguments that were originally applied to racial segregation. If you don't accept those arguments when applied to racial segregation, then the arguments must not be sufficient to accept the practice. That's basic logic.

No you haven't. You've demonstrated that similar arguments have been used in both cases. That does not make gender and race equivalent in all areas and does not show that the parallel is relevant here, which it isn't.

Similar arguments have been made for nationalities, age and others differences. These are not the same either. Unless you insist that an American must be able to win Miss France or that a 90 year enter a child's painting competition.

Look, gender discrimination has many parallels with race discrimination: in jobs, social rights and so on. That's fine. We know that. But it doesn't cover all areas.

I see that in another post you indicate that you are OK with women not being able to compete in mens sports events and visa versa because "there are physical differences". Well more specifically, there are physical differences that are relevant to the event. The event doesn't work. What parallel physical differences are there between races that should seperate blacks and whites at sports? None so great that we feel the need to segregate right? So you must admit that the parallel falls down at the physical level. Skin colour and ethnicity are not such great differences as between a man and a woman. The prom queen is specifically about the person being female. Be that by sex or gender that is a major difference that does not exist between races. That is why teh parallel makes no sense.

Rasmus · 1st May 2012, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

We also don't check genitals in male and female sports, and those are based on sex as well. Checking genitals is a very silly argument, please try another more serious argument.

uh, yes, we do, actually.

There are huge issues about transgender athletes.

http://trans.ilga.org/trans/welcome_...e_gender_tests

Quad4_72 · 2nd May 2012, 04:38 AM

Originally Posted by Rasmus

uh, yes, we do, actually.

There are huge issues about transgender athletes.

http://trans.ilga.org/trans/welcome_...e_gender_tests

Those are olympic games, probably one of the few competitions where sex is indeed determined by checking genitals/measuring hormone levels because it would be unfair for a male to compete as a female.

What does that have to do with Prom King and Queen?

30th April 2012, 05:55 PM	#201
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ That's simply not true -- it's the definition that I know from having gone to high school and participated in the crowning of four Homecoming Courts and four Prom Courts. It's also a definition that fits the standard cultural understanding of Americans about what the cultural practice involves. Again, you're continuing to conflate female with girl, and though the two are the same thing. They're not. It was having a boy elected Prom Queen that they had an issue with; it wasn't about sex linked traits but about the cultural bifurcation of genders. The culture, of course, doesn't make a clear distinction between gender and sex either, which is fine, but we can be a little more clear about what we're actually talking about here. Regardless if you want to say this is about gender or sex, he is wrong on both counts. If being Prom Queen was about sex, he is in the wrong as he is not a girl. If being Prom Queen was about gender, he is in the wrong as he does not identify as a girl. He is trolling, plain and simple.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

30th April 2012, 11:24 PM	#202
NeilC Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,331	Originally Posted by AvalonXQ Yes, I have. The first argument was that men still have an award they can win; it's just a different award. I explained how that exact "separate but equal" argument had been used for racial segregation for many years. The next argument was the appeal to the majority -- the fact that most people agree with sex segregation. Again, that was true of racial segregation for many, many years; the populist argument was one of its strongest justifications. Finally, there's the "individual comfort" argument -- the idea that women feel better when not around men and vice versa. Again, this was the primary argument used in support of Jim Crow laws; the idea that whites were uncomfortable around blacks, and so should be allowed their own public spaces. So, all of the arguments that have been applied to sexual segregation are arguments that were originally applied to racial segregation. If you don't accept those arguments when applied to racial segregation, then the arguments must not be sufficient to accept the practice. That's basic logic. No you haven't. You've demonstrated that similar arguments have been used in both cases. That does not make gender and race equivalent in all areas and does not show that the parallel is relevant here, which it isn't. Similar arguments have been made for nationalities, age and others differences. These are not the same either. Unless you insist that an American must be able to win Miss France or that a 90 year enter a child's painting competition. Look, gender discrimination has many parallels with race discrimination: in jobs, social rights and so on. That's fine. We know that. But it doesn't cover all areas. I see that in another post you indicate that you are OK with women not being able to compete in mens sports events and visa versa because "there are physical differences". Well more specifically, there are physical differences that are relevant to the event. The event doesn't work. What parallel physical differences are there between races that should seperate blacks and whites at sports? None so great that we feel the need to segregate right? So you must admit that the parallel falls down at the physical level. Skin colour and ethnicity are not such great differences as between a man and a woman. The prom queen is specifically about the person being female. Be that by sex or gender that is a major difference that does not exist between races. That is why teh parallel makes no sense.
	__________________ MobileTechie Wokingham Bracknell Computer Repair Last edited by NeilC; 30th April 2012 at 11:36 PM.

1st May 2012, 11:19 PM	#203
Rasmus Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 6,138	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 We also don't check genitals in male and female sports, and those are based on sex as well. Checking genitals is a very silly argument, please try another more serious argument. uh, yes, we do, actually. There are huge issues about transgender athletes. http://trans.ilga.org/trans/welcome_...e_gender_tests
Rasmus Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 6,138	__________________ "Well, the religious community could not just make it up." - JetLeg

2nd May 2012, 04:38 AM	#204
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by Rasmus uh, yes, we do, actually. There are huge issues about transgender athletes. http://trans.ilga.org/trans/welcome_...e_gender_tests Those are olympic games, probably one of the few competitions where sex is indeed determined by checking genitals/measuring hormone levels because it would be unfair for a male to compete as a female. What does that have to do with Prom King and Queen?
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken