But obviously I don’t believe I am the one making the mistake here. I am also not being disingenuous in the slightest — I expressed my sincere beliefs that you just happen to disagree with. I also don’t understand how you can have an informed opinion on my sincerity and motives based on what I wrote, but whatever. Finally, I also didn’t comment on whether the belief that transgender people should be able to participate as women was either right or wrong.
What I did comment on was Colinio’s statement that allowing transgender people to participate in women’s sports is a “farce and is political correctness and pandering gone mad”. My point being (which I stand firmly behind) is anytime a person believes a complicated and contentious issue is so simple that their opponents have to be acting in bad faith (i.e. “pandering gone mad”) they should have the humility to step back and analyze whether the problem may be with their lack of knowledge and not their opponent’s bad faith. This logic would also equally apply to anyone accusing opponents of transgender participation of bigotry. If everyone would take this step disagreements would be much productive and pleasant. For more information on how lack of knowledge on a subject is often correlated with confidence in one’s beliefs please see the Dunning Kruger effect. It is really interesting stuff.