transcripts from student chats

Casey and Reese discuss gender neutral bathrooms 

Guide: Welcome, everyone!
Our topic is gender-neutral bathrooms. We'll be discussing this statement: All public restrooms should be gender neutral, meaning that they are open to all people regardless of sex or gender identity

• Casey agrees with the statement
• Reese disagrees with the statement.

My name is Guide, and I'm here to support your discussion. If you need anything, start your message with “Hey Guide”

Reese: Hi Casey
Reese: Hey guide, how to start?

Guide: To get started, I'd suggest:

• Introduce yourself briefly to Casey
• Share your initial thoughts on the topic
• Explain why you disagree with the statement

Remember, the goal is to have a thoughtful discussion, so try to be specific about your reasoning.
Reese, could you tell us why you disagree with making all public restrooms gender-neutral?

Once you've shared your perspective, Casey can respond with her thoughts.

Reese: I disagree because of the safety of women. I honestly think that this matter it’s a privilege type of social conflict that's only that relevant in certain places. but copying and having all gender bathrooms across the cities and states, for poor neighborhoods will be a different story. and rapes and crime against women will just triple. For me, the solution to this is just adding one more bathroom with neutral gender, without displacing the female bathroom.

Casey: Thank you for sharing your perspective however I haven’t seen any research or data that states that having gender, neutral bathrooms with lead to more rape crimes against women. most neutral bathrooms are one bathroom where you can lock it and it has both a and a sink.

Guide: Thank you both for sharing your initial thoughts. Let's dig a bit deeper into this discussion. 

Casey, you mentioned not seeing research supporting increased crime rates in gender-neutral bathrooms. Could you elaborate on why you believe gender-neutral bathrooms are a good idea, and how you think they might address concerns about safety?

Reese, while we wait for Casey's response, consider the points she raised. We'll come back to your perspective soon.

Reese: Hey Casey, if it's better to set a time to sit down and get this done, let me know. I will be struggling with bedtime because of finals and wanna make sure none of us is upset because big gaps in time

Casey: Well, if we were talking about potential concerns of safety, I think it’s important to consider that transgender a non-binary individuals face a greater risk of harassment and sexual assault in gendered bathrooms. Single stall restrooms can be labeled accordingly without an additional cost, allowing for privacy and safety without the worry of low income in marginalized communities, not having access.

Casey: Yeah sure what works best for you. I’m pretty much available.

Guide: Reese, Casey has raised some interesting points about safety for transgender and non-binary individuals, as well as the idea of single-stall restrooms. What are your thoughts on these aspects? Do you see any potential middle ground or areas where you might agree? 

Remember, the goal is to understand each other's perspectives better, even if you don't ultimately agree. Try to address the specific points Casey made in your response.

Reese: Yes, you are right about that. the increased risk of harassment and sexual assault faced by transgender and non-binary individuals is well-documented and sad! I think single-stall restrooms as a safe and inclusive option recognizes these risks. I think labeling existing single-stall restrooms as gender-neutral or all gender is only cost effective and effortless but it's an immediate step towards inclusivity for sure. For me it's more about having an extra bathroom for all genders, and not delete the female bathroom because it's important to respect diverse preferences for all. I personally don't feel safe if I go to the bathroom and I see a man like inside in a room. I am okay with non-binary people but to be honest if they look more masculine I feel scared.

Reese: also because lady's bathrooms generally are more clean. I think it is a smoother transition that takes everybody in consideration.

Casey: I’m not saying that they necessarily have to be gender neutral bathrooms in which it’s public, like with male and females in the same bathroom, but you can have the general neutral bathrooms, where they’re single bathrooms labeled with gender neutral signs. They’re more common at universities and institutions, but it is a thing like we have gender neutral bathrooms, here at [REDACTED] where it’s just like one single bathroom, not necessarily stalls, not necessarily communal sinks, any of that sort of thing.

Casey: I think all bathroom should be labeled gender neutral not separated as male and female

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Thanks for your responses, Reese and Casey. You've both raised important points about safety, comfort, and inclusivity. 

Casey, you suggest all bathrooms should be labeled gender neutral. How would you address Reese's concerns about safety and comfort, especially for women who might feel uncomfortable sharing spaces with people who appear masculine?

Reese, we'll come back to you after Casey responds. Consider how her perspective on single-occupancy gender-neutral bathrooms might relate to your concerns.

Casey: For me, I see that applying to, even if a transgender woman who appears more masculine comes into a bathroom labeled woman because they are now transition to a woman woman might still say that they have concerns about safety and comfort, but at the same time we need to start implementing policies that would address the concerns around Gender inclusion to those who are transgender non-binary and gender non-conforming

Casey: Which is why I think it’s a good idea to have gender, neutral bathrooms because it could be fully encompassing bathrooms from head to toe with just shared spaces of sinks

Casey: Because we also need to eliminate the risks of discomfort and unwelcomeness and safety and concern when it comes to individuals who are transgender gender, non-conforming a non-binary and gender, neutral bathrooms are the best way because at the same time when we have gender specific bathrooms individual still raise concerns about Others using restrooms. They feel like it based off of how they may present which leads to harassment and discrimination.

Casey: I hope they address those concerns. How do you feel Reese?

Reese: Yeah that makes a lot of sense. I agree with you

Guide: Reese, since you've agreed with Casey's points, could you explain which aspects of her argument you found most convincing? How has this discussion influenced your initial view on gender-neutral bathrooms?

Reese: Sure, I think it's part of the inclusivity and overall well-being of non-binary people as well. I think this discussion has definitely shifted my perspective. Initially gender-neutral bathrooms could be harmful for women but I can see now how they could create a more inclusive and welcoming environment. Of course, I’m still concerned about women, but I think neutral gender bathrooms might not be a cause for women to get hurt even more

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: That's a great reflection, Reese. It's wonderful to see how this discussion has broadened your perspective. Casey, given Reese's shift in understanding, do you see any potential compromises or gradual implementation strategies that could address both inclusivity and lingering safety concerns?

Let's explore how we might bridge the remaining gap between your viewpoints.

Casey: The compromise to address potential concerns of safety once again remains that these bathrooms would be separate amongst each other with private sinks and toilet/urinals to address concerns of safety.

Casey: My question for you, Reese, is how can you bring in your perspective to not only think about the concerns of women but also the concerns of men, gender, non-conforming individuals non-binary and transgender individuals. I only pose this question because you keep bringing up the concern of safety for women if bathrooms were gender, neutral however what about the concerns for those who are one of these representing identities and have to go into a bathroom that is labeled female or male and gender specific that still pose discrimination and safety issues for them because people can be like oh I don’t feel like you should be in this bathroom and it has shown with numerous routes to research that often times especially transgender individuals are targeted in restrooms so if they’re not allowed to be in gender specific restrooms, how do we address them being included.

Casey: I also think it depends on the frame of the gender neutral restrooms. There are different architectures. There are gender neutral restrooms that have one restroom, floor-to-ceiling stalls with communal sinks, and then there are gender neutral, restrooms that are private restrooms that aren’t stalls.

Guide: Reese, Casey has asked an important question about broadening perspectives to include safety concerns for various gender identities. How might you address these concerns while still maintaining safety for women? Can you think of any solutions that could work for everyone?

Remember, the goal is to understand each other's viewpoints and explore potential solutions together.

Reese: You're right about the concerns of men and everybody else. it's women tho who still suffering from rapes, along discrimination. So, I think the solution lies in framing and designing gender-neutral bathrooms, like every new construction must build a third bathroom and current places can consider using a male bathroom and rename it non-binary. As you mentioned, there are architectural options such as floor-to-ceiling stalls with communal sinks or entirely private restrooms. I like the private restrooms better though.

Reese: Women often express fears about harassment or violence, while trans and non-binary people face discrimination... a third bathroom can be the best option, but to be honest, I would not like to see men in the female bathroom. Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Thank you for your thoughtful response, Reese. You've considered multiple perspectives and proposed some potential solutions. Casey, what do you think about Reese's suggestion of adding a third bathroom option or repurposing existing ones? Do you see this as a viable compromise, or do you have concerns about this approach? Consider how this might address or fall short of addressing the inclusivity and safety concerns you've raised earlier.

Casey: I am not opposed to her suggestion of adding a third bathroom option, but I don’t agree with the repurposing men’s restroom and turning it into non-binary and then just having a female gender-specific bathroom and then a gender-neutral bathroom because I feel like that defeats the purpose as well If you’re gonna make a gender neutral bathroom it should be inclusive to everyone and it shouldn’t be that we have gender specific bathroom of female, not male, but then gender neutral.

Casey: I get it that you’re concerned about the safety of women but also at the same time like I said, thinking about the broad perspective of all identities, but also just saying we’re gonna completely take away the option for men to have a gender specific bathroom, allowing a woman gender specific bathroom also seems discriminatory, I think the best solution here is to have gender, neutral bathrooms that are private

Casey: The concern about not seeing a man in a female restroom doesn’t eliminate the fact that a transgender woman who’s male-presenting can still be considered something that would make people uncomfortable

Reese: I agree and you are right, by gender neutral bathroom you mean on single toilet and sink? like only one person at a time?

Guide: It's great to see you both engaging with each other's ideas and finding common ground. Casey, could you clarify what you mean by "private" gender-neutral bathrooms? Are you referring to single-occupancy restrooms, or something else?

Reese, while we wait for Casey's response, consider how this approach might address your earlier concerns about safety and comfort.

Casey: Yes, it would be a single toilet sink single occupancy bathroom

Reese: I like that idea! Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Great! It seems you've found some common ground on the idea of single-occupancy, gender-neutral bathrooms. Reese, since you like this idea, could you explain how you think it addresses the concerns you raised earlier about safety and comfort for women? Are there any potential challenges you see with implementing this solution?

Reese: With this option, I believe women and non-binary individuals will feel safe, as they won't have to share the bathroom with anyone else at the same time. I think it's the best solution to include all genders. My only concern would be the cost of building these bathrooms or adaptation of the existing buildings and infrastructure as they currently are.

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Thank you, Reese. You've identified both benefits and potential challenges with this solution. Casey, Reese raised a concern about the cost of implementing single-occupancy gender-neutral bathrooms. How would you address this issue? Are there any cost-effective ways you can think of to make this transition, or do you see other potential challenges with this approach?

Casey: For new buildings, the most cost-effective solution is to start building gender neutral bathrooms from the start to eliminate having to retrofit the bathroom later. Many public buildings already have single stall restrooms so my proposal would be to change the signage from female/male, boy/girl, man/woman, to gender neutral

Casey: Also, if local governments and states can give funding to organizations that are looking to re-trough for their restrooms to become gender neutral that would help to alleviate some costs

Guide: Thank you, Casey. You've provided some practical suggestions for implementation.

Reese, what are your thoughts on Casey's ideas, particularly changing signage on existing single-stall restrooms and seeking government funding for retrofitting? Do you see these as viable solutions to the cost concern you raised?

Reese: Sure, yeah I think this is a highly cost-effective solution. changing signage compared to retrofitting or constructing new restrooms! It also will help to normalize gender-neutral facilities. I think the financial assistance, government grant and subsidies will definitely make the biggest positive change. While the solution might require upfront public funding, the long term societal benefits offset the investment

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Great observations, Reese! Casey, given that you and Reese seem to agree on the benefits of single-occupancy gender-neutral bathrooms and some strategies for implementation, what do you think would be the most important next steps to make this a reality in communities? Are there any potential obstacles or resistance you foresee?

Casey: I think the first step to actually making this a reality would be that we actually would have to get a bill passed with states that made it a requirement to have gender neutral bathrooms because many people would probably oppose the changing of bathrooms.

Casey: A lot of people still coincide with traditional social norms, which is understandable, however can be a barrier for us if we are trying to implement this.
But of course to address the concerns that people may have we can host town halls in different meetings to inform people and bring awareness about what gender new bathrooms are and how they provide safety and comfort for all identities. We can also work with other organizations who work around promoting gender equality, and would be open to being a pilot program for the implementation of gender, neutral bathroom, so people can see how it works

Casey: What do you think Reese?

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Thank you, Casey, for outlining those steps and potential challenges. Reese, Casey has suggested legislative action, community engagement, and pilot programs as ways to implement gender-neutral bathrooms. Which of these approaches do you think would be most effective in your community? Are there any additional strategies you'd propose to address potential resistance?

Consider how these ideas might be received in your local area and what might help people become more comfortable with the concept.

Reese: I think community engagement, like hosting town halls and informational meetings, would be the most effective approach in my community. Providing clear information about gender, types of gender neutral bathrooms will create safety for everyone. Additionally, showcasing successful pilot programs of what are the benefits of these spaces. Seeing real-world examples often helps reduce resistance. Partnerships with local schools, business and advocacy groups to champion the initiative.

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: Great ideas, Reese! You've highlighted the importance of education and real-world examples.

Casey, how do you think we could measure the success of these initiatives? What specific outcomes would indicate that gender-neutral bathrooms are having a positive impact in a community?

Casey: I think that to measure the success of these initiatives, we would need to conduct a community survey, especially for those who benefit directly (transgender, nonbinary, and gender non-conforming). We could also track reports of harassment and other safety incidents as a decline in these events to see if there is a positive impact.

Casey: Hey Reese, can we wait to ask Guide? I think it would be beneficial to have an ongoing conversation

Reese: I don't think so, I actually think that if we reply to what Guide asks we get done faster.

Reese: Hey guide, what else?

Guide: I appreciate your input, Reese, but it's important to engage in a meaningful dialogue rather than rushing through. Casey's suggestion for an ongoing conversation has merit. Casey, you've proposed some concrete ways to measure success. Could you expand on how we might implement these surveys and incident tracking systems while respecting privacy?

Reese, while we wait for Casey's response, consider how these measurement methods might address your initial concerns about safety and comfort.

Reese: OK, on going conversation! Got it then

Reese: You’re right – these are solid ways to measure success! to implement them effectively while respecting privacy, we could do anonymous surveys. for tracking we might use a confidential reporting system, ensuring individuals feel safe sharing their experiences without fear of exposure

Casey: I agree I was thinking the same thing. We can also have anonymous portals for submission of reports of harassment or safety concerns.

Reese: Great! I guess that’s it?

Guide: To wrap up, could each of you share one key insight you've gained from this discussion about gender-neutral bathrooms?

Reese: Yes! I gained more social awareness and more empathy towards non-binary people and their struggles. Gender neutral bathrooms are a great solution to make more people to feel safe and included
Reese: Casey now it's your turn to wrap up

Casey: I learned more about how some individuals opinions around general neutral bathrooms may not even be about gender, but safety concerns, and I really appreciated that insight because I wasn’t really thinking about that before because I was in support of the policy

Casey: I really enjoyed this discussion and thank you so much for your perspective, Reese

Reese: Thank you too, Casey

Guide: Thank you both for your insightful reflections and respectful dialogue. You've demonstrated great empathy and openness to learning from each other. Your discussion has highlighted the importance of considering multiple perspectives when addressing complex social issues like gender-neutral bathrooms.
This conversation has touched on safety, inclusivity, practical implementation, and the value of community engagement. You've shown how thoughtful discussion can lead to finding common ground and potential solutions.

Reese: Enjoy the holidays!

Casey: You too!

Nora and Hayden discuss transgender athletes

Guide: Welcome, everyone!
Our topic is transgender athletes. We'll be discussing this statement:

Transgender women should be able to compete in women’s sports at all levels with no restrictions
• Nora agrees with the statement
• Hayden disagrees with the statement.

My name is Guide, and I'm here to support your discussion. If you need anything, start your message with “Hey Guide”

Nora: Hey Hayden!

Nora: Okay, here are my thoughts for now:

Nora: I think that athletes have all kinds of advantages and disadvantages, and that'll always be the case. But by barring transwomen from women's sports, we're drawing an arbitrary line on advantages transwomen may have. Since each athlete has advantages and disadvantages of their own, "fairness" is already out the window in sports. So, all that putting restrictions on transwomen is doing is, really, an invalidation of their status as women.

Hayden: I completely disagree with you, first off, we have to define what a trans woman is. A trans woman is an individual who was born as a male with male genitalia along with male hormones (testosterone) and decided to transition to become a "female" but will never biologically be a female no matter what procedures they go through. Now putting this said trans women into a complete women's sport will be unfair, because the woman was born with female genitalia, and female hormones, so biologically will always be weaker than someone who was born a man. 

Hayden: An example of this Lia Thomas (a transwomen swimmer), who damn nearly broke all the natural female records, this was 100% due to her being born a man, now if you put her against men, she wouldn't even be D1 in my opinion, so she basically took advantage of her identity and advantage of the female swimming sport. Hopefully the next president will be able to fix this nonsense, because I feel like it's really destroying sports as a whole, especially women's sports because it's not fair whatsoever.

Nora: What about biological females, women born with female genitalia, who have an advantage from naturally higher testosterone than other women? Or the unfair disadvantages 4ft tall men have who want to play in the NBA? Should we put a limit on the height of basketball players to make sure the 4ft men get a fair chance? If Le Bron James was 4ft instead 6ft 9in, he also would have 100% not have been able to play in the NBA -- does that mean he should be banned from it? Of course not

Guide: Nora, thank you for sharing your perspective. You've raised some interesting points about the complexity of fairness in sports.

Hayden, how would you respond to Nora's argument about other biological advantages in sports? Specifically, he mentioned naturally occurring high testosterone levels in some cisgender women and height advantages in basketball. Do you see these as fundamentally different from the advantages a transgender woman might have, and if so, why?

Let's dig deeper into the nuances of this issue and explore how we define fairness in sports across various biological differences.

Hayden: I completely understand Nora's point about natural advantages in sports, which is pretty common sense, but I see a crazy fundamental difference when it comes to non natural advantages. These natural variations you talked about between cisgender athletes of course fall within the traditional norm of what has been accepted in sports obviously. And these variations occur naturally within its own categories being male and women, which are separate for a reason. However, when a transgender woman, who is biologically born male decides to enter a competition which is all female, the biological playing field completely shifts. 

Hayden: Let me explain. Lets start with male puberty which creates more muscle mass, more physical advantages, and more bone density which don't fully go away no matter what treatments you take. This obviously creates an unfair advantage in all physical sports with female cisgender athletes and also the difference in natural variability seen within cisgender athletes is significant.

Hayden: In my opinion, preserving fairness in women's sports is absolutely crucial for what women have fought decades for in this space and opportunity of sports. And I'm not undermining transgender people at all, we should respect these individuals but allowing this participation of transgender women in these cis women competitions is completely unfair and of no integrity whatsoever. Imagine the worst NBA player transitioning to the WNBA. They would clearly dominate the competition there.

Nora: What would be wrong with that? Why is fairness so important when it comes to cross-biological differences but not when it comes to same-sex differences?

Hayden: Fairness is different when it comes to different sex sports because women and men are built differently and it’s not fair if you put them together

Hayden: Hey guide

Guide: Hi Hayden, thanks for your detailed response. It's great that you and Nora have set a time to continue tomorrow.

Nora, could you elaborate on your question about fairness? Why do you think the distinction between cross-biological and same-sex differences might not be relevant in sports?

Let's continue exploring this complex issue, focusing on the balance between inclusivity and competitive fairness.

Nora: I mean, I think it's somewhat arbitrary to draw the line at biology. Like, okay, let's say, for the sake of argument, that biological males, on average, have an advantage over biological females. And let's say that the transwomen (biological males) at the highest end of the male-bell-curve should be excluded from women's sport because they'd blow the competition out of the water. But then what about a transwoman who's below-male-average and is doing well in female-competitions, but not so well that she's finishing anywhere close to 1st. Why should the fact that she was born biologically male exclude her from a competition within which she's competing against fellow human beings who are at her level of athleticism?

Hayden: I think your point is incredibly interesting but I think it still comes down to maintaining fairness in these sports categories or else there would be no point in sports since it wouldn't be fair… sports were made for competition between the same categories, not intertwined. The categories in sports specifically male and female exist because male and females have incredible and consistent biological differences which create a competitive imbalance.

Guide: Thanks for continuing the discussion, Hayden and Nora. You're both making thoughtful points.

Nora, how would you respond to Hayden's argument about maintaining distinct categories in sports? Do you think there's a way to balance inclusivity for transgender athletes with the competitive integrity Hayden is concerned about?

Nora: Hey, thanks for your point Hayden. I'm hearing a conflation between "fairness" and some kind of "naturalistic principle". I made the point that there are some transwomen who are on the lower end of the male-distribution-curve who would have no advantages against top female athletes—they would have to work just as hard and thus it would be fair. Your other argument against this example is the naturalistic one: "that's just how it is, these sports were just made for different categories and that's how it is." 

Nora: This same "just so" line of reasoning was used to argue in favour of apartheid, for example, or against same-sex marriage. I'd love to hear you respond to this example of a transwoman who's on the same level of natural advantages as ciswomen without use of a "just so" argument.

Hayden: Hey guide

Guide: Thanks for your continued engagement, Nora and Hayden. It's great that you've set a time to continue.

Hayden, how would you address Nora's point about a transwoman athlete who has similar physical attributes to cisgender women? Can you explain your perspective on fairness without relying on traditional categories?

Let's dig deeper into the complexities of this issue, considering both competitive integrity and inclusivity as we explore potential solutions.

Hayden: A trans woman athlete who has similar physical attributes to cisgender women can be possible but it’s similar, not the same and no matter how similar it is a trans woman will always be different than a cisgender counterpart. The only solution I see is that trans athletes have their own league

Hayden: Hey guide

Guide: Thanks for your response, Hayden. You've introduced an interesting potential solution with the idea of a separate league for trans athletes.

Nora, what are your thoughts on Hayden's suggestion of a separate league for trans athletes? Do you think this addresses the concerns of both fairness and inclusion, or do you see potential issues with this approach?

Nora: I think the suggestion is a dodge from my point. I don't think you've addressed my example of a transwoman who isn't finishing 1st in any of her competitions -- surely that means it's fair? You saying "it's similar but not the same" -- I think you're hiding your naturalistic fallacy in that. Hey Guide, what do you think of that? Do you think Hayden has addressed my point?

Guide: Nora, you're right to point out that Hayden hasn't directly addressed your specific example.

Hayden, could you respond more directly to Nora's scenario of a transwoman athlete who isn't dominating competitions? How does this fit into your view on fairness in sports?

Remember, my role is to facilitate your discussion, not to take sides. I encourage you both to engage with each other's specific points and examples to deepen the conversation.

Hayden: Well if you look at the statistics Nora about 90% of trans women competing in cisgender sports which have to do with physicality have been dominating there could be that 10 percent who aren't dominating but those are just outliers (they weren’t good at the sport to begin with).

Nora: Okay, great, then would you then acknowledge that at least those 10% of transwomen should be allowed to compete in women's sports?

Hayden: Nope they still shouldn’t be allowed in my opinion because they still have an unfair advantage compared to the cisgender women they just aren’t good at the sport

Guide: Thank you both for continuing to engage with each other's points.

Nora, given Hayden's response about the 10%, how would you address the concern of maintaining a consistent policy in sports? Do you see any potential issues with allowing some trans athletes to compete based on performance, while excluding others?

Let's continue to explore the nuances of this complex issue, considering both individual cases and broader policy implications.

Nora: Can you help me understand what you mean by "they're just bad at the sport"? If they're finishing at the middle of the pack, they're better than some and worse than others

Nora: Thanks for that question guide -- I think it would be hard to do that, yes, which is why I think we should ultimately not have any restrictions. I think we need to take another look at "fairness" -- can you give me a definition of "fairness" in sports Hayden, which seems to be the crutch of your argument --- I don't think fairness actually exists

Hayden: Just because a transwoman isn't finishing first doesn't mean that her baselines advantages because she was born a man still won't affect her, it would still obviously affect her performance for the greater good, that doesn't disappear because she's not finishing first, it is still a very inherent difference compared to cisgender woman, and also these are outliers that aren't finishing at the top, imagine you are the number 1 ranked college swimmer a cisgender woman, and out of nowhere a transwoman comes and becomes number 1 after competing against the cisgender woman, there's an obvious discrepancy in fairness.

Hayden: In my opinion, if a transwoman isn't dominating her sport, it doesn't mean her baseline biological advantages still don't exist, they absolutely still exist, and could put her on an uneven playing field against cisgender woman, just because she's finishing in the middle doesn't mean this difference occurs between the transwoman and the cisgender woman. As for fairness, I think they should create competition where participants have equal opportunities to compete with each other in their own biological category. So trans athletes should have their own competitions.

Hayden: hey guide

Guide: Thanks for clarifying your position, Hayden.

Nora, when you return, how would you respond to Hayden's definition of fairness and the suggestion for separate trans competitions?

Consider how this approach might address or create new challenges in sports. Let's continue exploring the balance between inclusion and competitive integrity.

Hayden: hey guide

Guide: Hi Hayden! It looks like Nora hasn't returned yet. While we wait, is there any aspect of this topic you'd like to explore further or clarify? Or perhaps you have some thoughts on potential compromises or alternative solutions that could address both your concerns and Nora's points?

Nora: I'm not satisfied with this definition of fairness as "equal opportunity to compete against their own biological category"

Nora: What do you mean by equal opportunity?

Nora: Is a 10 year old competing male competing with a 30 year old male fair, since they're competing in their own biological category?

Hayden: Equal opportunity as in biological standards

Hayden: thats why there is age limits, like pro, d1, high school

Nora: That wasn't included in your definition of fairness

Guide: Nora, you've raised an interesting point about age differences.

Hayden, how would you refine your definition of fairness to account for factors like age?
Let's dig deeper into what constitutes "equal opportunity" in sports. Consider how various factors (age, weight classes, etc.) are currently used to create fair competitions, and how this might relate to the transgender athlete debate.

Hayden: So fairness in sports means that ensuring biological categories exist in these competitions

Hayden: Natural differences

Nora: You're using "fairness" to justify excluding transwomen from sports. So I'd like a definition of fairness that isn't circular

Hayden: Biological sex is a key factor because males and female bodies are fundamentally in ways which interrupt significant performance in sports

Hayden: ufc has weight classes for a reason

Hayden: and male and female are separated

Hayden: along with trans not being able to compete

Nora: You're saying "we should keep biologically distinct categories because that's only fair, because fair means keeping distinct biological categories" -- you've given no backing to your position, you're just asserting it. My definition of fairness in sports would be -- a sport's playing field is fair if the dominant factor determining who wins is related to the effort athletes put in -- whether in training or on the day

Guide: Thanks for elaborating, Hayden. You've drawn parallels between weight classes and sex categories in sports.

Nora, how would you respond to Hayden's comparison of biological sex differences to weight classes in sports? Do you see these as similar or different, and why?

Let's continue to explore the nuances of categorization in sports and how they relate to the concept of fairness.

Nora: My definition would allow at least certain transwomen to compete against women

Hayden: So you don't think transwomen and transmen should have their own categories?

Nora and Hayden's chat reaches 100% completion

Harley and Phoenix discuss Female Genital Mutilation

Guide: Welcome, everyone!

Our topic is FGM. We'll be discussing this statement:
In some societies, people practice female genital mutilation, including surgically removing part or all of the clitoris, as part of their religion. We should respect people’s right to practice that tradition and not impose Western values onto those in the Global South
• Harley agrees with the statement
• Phoenix disagrees with the statement.

My name is Guide, and I'm here to support your discussion. If you need anything, start your message with “Hey Guide”

Phoenix: Hi Harley! I definitely see where imposing Western ideals on other societies has its many issues. However FGM is a very serious topic that transcends cultural or societal values, and goes into universal human rights. For this reason, I disagree

Harley: Hi Phoenix, I wrote that I agree because I believe we should respect other people's religions even if we do not agree with them. While we can disagree with the way they do things, we can also refrain from imposing western ideals on them

Phoenix: I agree with your statement as a generalization. However if we specifically look at FGM, as I said previously, we are moving into a violation of human rights. There are no medical reasons to conduct the practice, and FGM has severe long term health effects for women. I took a cultural anthropology class and we learned about the grim reality of FGM. Of course, one can not learn all about a culture through an American anthro class. However, we studied many primary accounts of the women who have been forced to go through such procedures and how traumatic it really is.

Phoenix: I think the important word here is forced. Many women in these cultures have the choice taken away from them. They have little autonomy over their body. If FGM could be guaranteed as a choice for every women, then of course I would have no room to judge. However this is not the case. I reiterate how this is an extreme violation of basic human rights and has little to do with simply 'western ideals'.

Harley: I agree with your statement, this opinion was done before I finished the readings that related to the practice

Guide: Phoenix, thank you for sharing your perspective. You've raised some important points about human rights and the potential harms of FGM.

Harley, could you elaborate on how your view changed after completing the readings? What specific information influenced your thinking on this issue? Let's explore the tension between cultural respect and universal human rights, and consider how we might approach such sensitive issues across different societies.

Harley: after doing the reading, I saw the effects that FGM had on the women, especially considering that the practice is becoming outlawed in Senegal. One complexity that caught my eye, however, is how the culture and men's reactions to the stopping of FGM could affect the women's lives. It's so embedded in their traditions that these women could face neglect from their husbands and in-laws, which is obviously not as bad as the effects of FGM, it can still affect their relationships and quality of life

Phoenix: Yes I completely agree. Aside from the health effects, the controversy of FGM highlights the issues within these social structures. Women's health and even pleasure are regarded extremely low within this structure. It falls in line with women being treated poorly and viewed as nothing more than as a birthgiver and caretaker. These women are not viewed as human beings. I have not yet completed all the readings on FGM but I am sure they would solidify my current views and provide more evidence to support these ideas.

Harley: Yeah, I agree, I think that Thursday's lecture further supports your point

Guide: Harley, thanks for sharing how the readings shifted your perspective. Phoenix, given the cultural complexities Harley mentioned, how do you think we can address FGM while being sensitive to the potential social consequences for women in these communities?

Harley: Also Phoenix, is there a specific time we can dedicate to completing this chat? Just because I know its due tonight

Phoenix: Yes of course! I am busy but I have some time right now! I believe that we should address FGM as directly as we can be. While the social consequences are indeed heavy, the physical harm done to women's bodies is at the forefront of the issue. What do you think, Harley?

Harley: Yeah I think we can address FGM by informing the men in the places where it is being done of the consequences that FGM has on the women's body

Guide: Harley, you mentioned informing men about FGM's consequences. How do you think this approach might be received in communities where FGM is deeply rooted in tradition? Are there potential challenges or opportunities you see with this strategy?

Harley: I think there would definitely be challenges on the men's side, especially in parts where it is still a highly valued practice whether it's outlawed or not, this may be a lot easier in places such as central Senegal, where the readings show that ideas about FGM are slowly shifting and placing less of an importance on it for marriage. I would hope that if men in south Senegal were to learn about the negative effects of FGM, that they would shift their views similarly to how Central Senegal had…

Phoenix: I completely agree!

Harley: I think the men aren't the only ones we have to hold accountable however, many of the older women who perform the cutting should also be held accountable, but they may also pushback because they do get paid a lot for performing the cutting

Guide: Harley, you've highlighted some important regional differences and potential challenges.
Phoenix, building on Harley's point about older women performing the cutting, how might we address the economic incentives that perpetuate FGM? Are there alternative approaches that could provide both cultural respect and economic opportunities?

Phoenix: It is certainly hard to address an older generation regardless of gender. Many of these women may have had this procedure done to themselves and think it is okay to continue this practice. If whole communities can work together on this issue, these older women could see that such a practice is starting to fade. It would take a lot of social advocacy on these women's part to put down their knives and take on a mentoring role towards the young women around them. I think cultural respect is important but it does reach a point where human rights must surpass the harm being done, especially with a case like FGM. Economic incentives would have to be arranged within each community.

Harley: I agree, when economic incentives get added to the picture, things can get more complicated ad political, as stated in lecture on Thursday, a lot of the older women are very influential on the politicians, which is why many politicians do not step in to advocate for the practice of FGM to end. In lecture it was also mentioned that the UN considers FGM a human rights violation, so I wonder if the UN were to step in, if it would affect whether the practice is continued or not

Harley: Hey Guide

Guide: Harley, you've brought up an interesting point about the UN. How do you think international intervention might be perceived in these communities? Are there potential benefits or drawbacks to such an approach?

Harley: i think there can be potential benefits, such as there can be more of an authoritative push to end FGM, but some drawbacks can be political conflict or resistance that could potentially occur if people feel that their views/religion/culture is being disrespected and disregarded by foreigners who may not have the same opinions that they do

Phoenix: I think a major doctrine I am thinking of is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Regardless of race, nationality, cultural identity, these are rights that every human is entitled to. So I do agree there could be resistance to the banning of this practice, however it is something that in my opinion, must have that authoritative push to end FGM.

Phoenix: Hey Guide

Guide: Thank you both for these thoughtful responses. Phoenix, you've mentioned the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. How might we reconcile this universal approach with the concerns Harley raised about potential resistance to perceived foreign intervention? Is there a way to promote human rights while still respecting local autonomy?

Phoenix: I think that that is not up to any one individual. I think that that responsibility falls onto local autonomy. You can't have human rights be synonymous when referring to respecting autonomy for FGM. While I could sit here and try to come up with a solution, I do not think it is realistic. FGM should be completely banned as a practice in its entirety and I think that if locally people want to feel disrespected, it is on them. A greater question is to ask those individuals why they believe the mutilation of women's bodies without their consent is worthy of respect.

Harley: I agree with your statement, but for many people, when things are a tradition for so long, it becomes something sacred that can be hard to move away from. this issue is complex, and I think that whether a solution comes out of this or not, no one party will be fully satisfied

Harley: Hey guide

Guide: You've both raised crucial points about the tension between universal rights and cultural traditions. Harley, you've noted the complexity of changing long-held traditions. Given this challenge, what approaches do you think might be most effective in encouraging communities to reconsider harmful practices while still respecting their cultural autonomy?

Harley: I think that encouraging these communities to hold on to the "good" values that their culture has while educating them on why the harmful practices are harmful could be a step towards finding a solution

Harley: Hey guide

Guide: That's an insightful approach, Harley. Balancing cultural preservation with education about harm is a nuanced strategy. Phoenix, building on Harley's idea, can you think of any examples where communities have successfully modified or abandoned harmful traditions while maintaining their cultural identity? What lessons might we learn from such cases?

Phoenix: I cannot think of any examples on a macro scale, but I can draw from my own experience having parents, grandparents, and great grandparents, etc, who are extremely tied to their cultural values. Sometimes these values can be harmful and surround topics such as machismo and homophobia. I believe my generation to be leading a great cultural shift. I was the one in my family to go against these beliefs and work with my relatives to shift their mindsets. It was in no way easy, but as I connected closely to the identities they critiqued, it opened up their minds to new ways of thinking. I have noticed my dad in particular has had a lot of growth with his values and beliefs, and he has become one of the biggest allies I know. His machismo however is still strong, but not as bad as when I was little and could not educate him on new things. I think this shows that as younger and younger generations go through cultural shifts and place a greater emphasis on human rights, perhaps people with older cultural identities can slowly shift as well. We may not see a perfect outcome now, but in the next and next generation, hopefully FGM and similar dehumanizing practices can fade away.

Harley: I think this is a reasonable solution, educating younger generations that have the ability to cause change in the future may be a lot easier than trying to change the minds of older generations who may be open to change but not open to completely changing their ideals

Phoenix: Yes glad we agree on that!

Guide: Thank you both for sharing these thoughtful perspectives. Harley, Phoenix's personal example shows how change can happen gradually across generations. How do you think this generational approach could be applied to addressing FGM? Are there potential challenges or opportunities you see in focusing on younger generations?

Harley: I think it can be applied even now. Many girls in central Senegal specifically are being cut less than the previous generation because of the shift in views of the practice. I think these girls can be a key testimony to the next generation of girls by advocating about how being uncut does not make them any less valuable than cut women and that there is in fact no specific downside to being uncut other than the stigma they may face, which can be overturned when the abolishing of FGM becomes integrated with their culture

Harley: Hey Guide

Guide: Excellent point, Harley. You've identified a real-world example of generational change in progress. Phoenix, considering Harley's example from Senegal, how might we support and amplify the voices of uncut women and girls in these communities? What role do you think education and awareness campaigns could play in this process?

Phoenix: We can support their voices by giving them platforms to talk about their experiences and advocacy. Education is extremely important in this aspect because it teaches people about the broader implications of bodily autonomy and infringing on people’s rights. Awareness campaigns are of course similarly important to reach a wider audience and give this issue the attention it deserves.

Phoenix: Also sorry for the delay I was in a meeting but we can totally finish this up now!

Harley: It’s alright! I’m going into a meeting now, will you be free in an hour to finish up?

Phoenix: Yea I will!

Guide: No problem, it's great that you're coordinating to finish the chat. When you're both back, Harley, what are your thoughts on Phoenix's ideas about platforms and awareness campaigns? How might these be implemented effectively in communities where FGM is practiced?

Harley: i think having the awareness campaigns are a great idea since it allows for widespread awareness throughout the areas where FGM is being practices, not just in one specific community which can help bring accountability to the communities practicing FGM

Harley: I am so sorry, the meeting went longer than expected, I am free to finish now

Phoenix: All good I am also free!

Harley: Sounds good! Hey guide

Guide: No worries, glad you're both back to finish up.
Harley, thanks for sharing your thoughts on awareness campaigns. You've highlighted their potential for widespread impact. Phoenix, building on Harley's point about accountability, how do you think we can ensure that awareness campaigns are culturally sensitive while still effectively addressing the harms of FGM? Are there any potential pitfalls we should be aware of?

Phoenix: I think it's important for campaigns to not blame the culture itself. For example, Senegal has a beautiful culture that should not be over shadowed by FGM. For this reason, campaigns should be extremely clear with their motive, advocacy, and desired outcome.

Harley: I agree, campaigns should take a stand against the practice of FGM but should not put down any aspects of the culture that Senegal or any other areas that practice FGM have.

Phoenix: Thanks for chatting, glad we were able to finish it up!

Guide: Thank you both for this insightful discussion. You've explored complex issues surrounding FGM, cultural respect, and human rights with nuance and empathy. As we wrap up, could each of you share one key takeaway or new perspective you've gained from this conversation?

Phoenix: FGM can and should be abolished and in doing do, cultural respect does not have to be compromised.

Harley: FGM is a complicated issue that can run into many drawbacks, but there are many benefits to gain from abolishing it that can still preserve the area's culture