Women’s Sports and Fluidity

Not that I care about women’s sports, but here’s a fun development:

A biological male who identifies as a transgender woman won a women’s world championship cycling event Sunday in California.

Even this kind of job is not safe from fluidity. These are the jobs that can’t be automated away but fluidity is still messing with them.

That’s not an accident. It’s a design. Everything must constantly be in doubt all the time.

18 thoughts on “Women’s Sports and Fluidity”

  1. So a “biological male” competing against women in a contest where strength and speed largely determine the outcome beat all the women. Who would ever have guessed that outcome??
    That a “biological male” was allowed to even enter the race is absurd!


      1. I believe that Judith Butler argued in _Gender Trouble_that feminism wasn’t supposed to revolve around “women.”


  2. Yes, I saw this news over the weekend. Maybe we’re headed toward the end of women’s sports? RIP, Title IX, which was originally created to ensure equality for women playing sports in universities.


    1. Yeah, I think it’s dead. Nobody will have to underfund or ban women’s sports. It will die out on its own because it can’t coexist with the new gender philosophy.


      1. I’m surprised they still have separate categories for Actor and Actress at the Academy Awards….
        Of course the Oscars are trivial and unimportant but if they ever decide to merge the sexes there then that would be a major win for fluidity (and a loss for sanity).


    1. Global capital. There are immediate practical uses, such as selling both male and female products to “gendrefluid” consumers. And there are long-term uses, such as training us all into the ideology of fluidity.


  3. What were the ritual phrases that one was supposed to recite when denouncing Enemies of the People in the Soviet Union? I need to know so that I can follow the proper ritual when denouncing you as a transphobe, Clarissa!


  4. Well, my whole schtick on race in Brazil, which they have been claiming is fluid for many decades now, has long been that the fluidity claim is just so they can escape charges of discrimination. Remember when “hybridity” was such a big deal?


    1. “race in Brazil, which they have been claiming is fluid …. is just so they can escape charges of discrimination”

      Many years ago a friend (from readings and lectures and the like) pointed out the weakness of the “racial democracy” model vs the old American “one drop” rule (which certainly had some terrible side effects on its own).
      The ultimate benefit of the American model is that it helped create racial solidarity (which was crucial to the success of the Civil Rights Movement). More successful, or lighter skinned, blacks could not really throw in their lot with the whites – it was in their interest to try to improve the situation of all blacks.
      That type of solidarity was impossible in Brazil where more successful blacks (usually lighter skinned) could leave others behind in the favelas and start hiring their own domestic help to abuse.
      In parts of Spanish speaking Latin America there’s a similar dynamic with the indigenous population.

      In other words, fluidity is incompatible with any kind of solidarity (just as intersectionality neatly excludes class distinctions).


      1. Yes. But I thought class was supposed to be one of the elements in intersectionality (which it isn’t, really, in corporate multiculturalism / tokenism)?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.