Judge dismisses Wyoming KKG lawsuit

[33girl]

Originally Posted by honeychile

In reality, it's hard to believe that this is even under discussion. Only up to 1.7 percent of the population are intersex, but they need to be in a sorority, AND live in the house?

Intersex and transgender are two completely different things. Intersex means (oversimplifying) you were born with genitalia that can have features of both biological sexes. That is nowhere near the issue here.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Intersex and transgender are two completely different things. Intersex means (oversimplifying) you were born with genitalia that can have features of both biological sexes. That is nowhere near the issue here.

The terminology has changed a lot over the years. Terms that were totally acceptable years ago aren't now and no one makes grand announcements when they change; you innocently use them one day and people go for the jugular. And a lot of people are demanding that everyone use their preferred vocab and that won't be happening.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Intersex and transgender are two completely different things. Intersex means (oversimplifying) you were born with genitalia that can have features of both biological sexes. That is nowhere near the issue here.

I stand corrected. I was doing my best to cover all bases without going through the whole alphabet LGBTQ+ bit.

[*winter*]

Originally Posted by TweedleDee199

Hi. I'm going to chime in with the millenial perspective no one asked for. I know there are plenty of women who have devoted decades of service to their sororities and view acceptance of trans members as a seismic and incomprehensible change. I happened to grow up in a place where acceptance of trans people has been common place for a long time - but I have family members whose experiences and opinions are VERY different from mine. Something I've heard from them a lot is frustration that it feels like they can't have any conversation relating to inclusion of trans people because it just ends with them being yelled at rather than heard. That's completely justified- people should be able to have conversations without feeling talked down to or yelled at. On the other hand, I think a reason a lot of people my age and younger end up frustrated is that they feel like folks who are skeptical of including trans people in certain groups - sports teams, GLOs, etc. - often speak about trans people in an invasive way you just wouldn't speak about a non-trans person. I personally can't say I've ever seen another GC thread that spoke so candidly about a collegiate member's sex organs or speculated on their sexual orientation. I fully believe it's possible to have a civil conversation about how trans or non-binary members fit into GLOs but I would hope it could be done in a way that is respectful of particular individuals.

FWIW, I’m only three months away from being a millennial. I was raised around all kinds of people, including transgender people. I’m not exactly straight myself.

Just because someone doesn’t agree with the actions of a particular individual does not give anyone the right to just assume they’re some closed minded person who just fell off the back of a turnip truck.

Perhaps if people stopped collectively talking to “us” that way, they’d get further.

[TweedleDee199]

You're absolutely correct - I don't mean to suggest that someone's opinion is a reflection of a lack of education or experience on their part. I also recognize that generalities based on age aren't going to capture the nuances of opinions- again, poor phrasing on my part.

[FSUZeta]

Originally Posted by TweedleDee199

Hi. I'm going to chime in with the millenial perspective no one asked for. I know there are plenty of women who have devoted decades of service to their sororities and view acceptance of trans members as a seismic and incomprehensible change. I happened to grow up in a place where acceptance of trans people has been common place for a long time - but I have family members whose experiences and opinions are VERY different from mine. Something I've heard from them a lot is frustration that it feels like they can't have any conversation relating to inclusion of trans people because it just ends with them being yelled at rather than heard. That's completely justified- people should be able to have conversations without feeling talked down to or yelled at. On the other hand, I think a reason a lot of people my age and younger end up frustrated is that they feel like folks who are skeptical of including trans people in certain groups - sports teams, GLOs, etc. - often speak about trans people in an invasive way you just wouldn't speak about a non-trans person. I personally can't say I've ever seen another GC thread that spoke so candidly about a collegiate member's sex organs or speculated on their sexual orientation. I fully believe it's possible to have a civil conversation about how trans or non-binary members fit into GLOs but I would hope it could be done in a way that is respectful of particular individuals.

I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I guess for me extending membership to people with male genitalia is dissolving the single sex barrier sororities had up until recently. It doesn’t matter if they feel that they are women. Physically they are not. It’s the same with allowing males to compete on female sports teams. A mediocre male athlete still has a testosterone advantage despite taking female hormones, as proven by the UPenn swimmer. . How fair is that? Why is the NCAA willing to compromise the integrity of womens sports, and negate the chances of hundreds of female athletes success for a minute minority of athletes who couldn’t achieve greatness on the male side of the sport. And why is it that sorority leadership is willing to compromise the comfort and safety( as some of the KKG members expressed in the Artemis article) of its initiated members, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of alumna donations that are drying up, because of these new policies, which were decided on by a committee behind closed doors , not up for vote by the membership at large? These actions marginalize women. The first sororities founded in the Midwest were begun to offer friendship, support, and a haven of safety and comfort to women who were often not welcomed in a male dominated student body. Women need to stand for women first. It should not be “well, if you aren’t comfortable around Artemis or you feel that sororities should not extend membership to transgender people then there’s the door.” It should be, “I hear you sisters. Your feelings are important to us. Let’s take this under consideration and have the entire international membership decide.” But that’s not happening.

[carnation]

YES!!!! YES!!! HEAR HEAR!!!!!

[jolene]

Bravo, FSUZeta! Yes!

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I guess for me extending membership to people with male genitalia is dissolving the single sex barrier sororities had up until recently. It doesn’t matter if they feel that they are women. Physically they are not. It’s the same with allowing males to compete on female sports teams. A mediocre male athlete still has a testosterone advantage despite taking female hormones, as proven by the UPenn swimmer. . How fair is that? Why is the NCAA willing to compromise the integrity of womens sports, and negate the chances of hundreds of female athletes success for a minute minority of athletes who couldn’t achieve greatness on the male side of the sport. And why is it that sorority leadership is willing to compromise the comfort and safety( as some of the KKG members expressed in the Artemis article) of its initiated members, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of alumna donations that are drying up, because of these new policies, which were decided on by a committee behind closed doors , not up for vote by the membership at large? These actions marginalize women. The first sororities founded in the Midwest were begun to offer friendship, support, and a haven of safety and comfort to women who were often not welcomed in a male dominated student body. Women need to stand for women first. It should not be “well, if you aren’t comfortable around Artemis or you feel that sororities should not extend membership to transgender people then there’s the door.” It should be, “I hear you sisters. Your feelings are important to us. Let’s take this under consideration and have the entire international membership decide.” But that’s not happening.

FSUZeta killed the entire thread with this response. Everybody put on your nuclear blast glasses.
https://youtube.com/shorts/8pztSupdQ...OzVvQTITNZZzCf

Edit: she dropped the bomb from the FSUZeta bomber plane, with honeychile as the pilot and carnation the copilot. They said “Drop that shit, FSUZeta!” Lol

[OpinionatedLady]

It seems this forum is woefully uninformed regarding current research in respect to transwomen participating in athletics, so it's unsurprising that you also share a majority opinion that trans women are not women. A forum filled with TERF's is surprising given the origins of so many sororities - exclusion from places they felt capable of contributing to equally (not to create "safe spaces" for the women on campus as others have mentioned). I can only hope that none of you represent your organizations leadership currently because the lack of understanding of the current collegiate experience is very apparent and it is those younger members that are the lifeblood of our groups. There will be no hill left to die on if this is where you feel like planting your flag.

[carnation]

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by OpinionatedLady

It seems this forum is woefully uninformed regarding current research in respect to transwomen participating in athletics, so it's unsurprising that you also share a majority opinion that trans women are not women. A forum filled with TERF's is surprising given the origins of so many sororities - exclusion from places they felt capable of contributing to equally (not to create "safe spaces" for the women on campus as others have mentioned). I can only hope that none of you represent your organizations leadership currently because the lack of understanding of the current collegiate experience is very apparent and it is those younger members that are the lifeblood of our groups. There will be no hill left to die on if this is where you feel like planting your flag.

https://youtu.be/cAUwXCL-lYY?si=Vd-GCS9Y3NsRyXg2

[FSUZeta]

Originally Posted by OpinionatedLady

It seems this forum is woefully uninformed regarding current research in respect to transwomen participating in athletics, so it's unsurprising that you also share a majority opinion that trans women are not women. A forum filled with TERF's is surprising given the origins of so many sororities - exclusion from places they felt capable of contributing to equally (not to create "safe spaces" for the women on campus as others have mentioned). I can only hope that none of you represent your organizations leadership currently because the lack of understanding of the current collegiate experience is very apparent and it is those younger members that are the lifeblood of our groups. There will be no hill left to die on if this is where you feel like planting your flag.

Do you notice something about this thread? People of varying opinions were having a civil discussion without name calling. And then you showed up. Your opinion is welcome unless you are unable to express yourself without reverting to elementary school playground insults. Please refrain from name calling or you will be banned. As to the hill? It will have crumbled much sooner without alumnae donations.

[OpinionatedLady]

I'm sorry, I'm genuinely confused by what you mean? How am I breaking any rules? TERF is an acronym that means Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist. The ideas being shared here align with the ideas of someone who is excluding transwomen from feminism. It is truly disappointing that this forum sees my own opinion on the matter as a "childish" attack. I am merely expressing my viewpoint on the issue being discussed.

Additionally do you believe young people will never make money and donate to their organizations? That's a surprisingly short sighted perspective that only current donors are the future donors as well.

[carnation]

No, you are not just expressing your opinion. Calling someone a TERF is intended to be an insult. This won't be tolerated here.