Quizbowl questions and trans people

Elaborate on the merits of specific tournaments or have general theoretical discussion here.
Post Reply
SortesVirgilianae
Lulu
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:58 pm

Quizbowl questions and trans people

Post by SortesVirgilianae »

**Major content warning for transphobia and direct quotation of hateful myths about trans people**

Generally, it's been very pleasing to see increasing discussion of transgender issues in quizbowl questions. I personally am also heartened to see trans representation that does not focus on oppression - CMST's questions on transgender philosophy (packet 9 TU 6) and intersex individuals in ancient history (packet 8 bonus 2) are wonderful examples of this trend.

Not all such representation is welcome, though, and I was deeply disappointed to encounter a question (C++ packet 11, tossup 5) which excessively quotes hate speech against trans people and would likely be distressing for trans players to play. I have attached a screenshot; the full text is pasted below:
5. Kate Bornstein argued in a 1995 book that these people inspire fear because they are “outlaws” that threaten people's “cognitive systems.” A 2020 book by Abigail Shrier whose cover features a young girl with a hole cut in her stomach is subtitled for these people's “craze” and argued that a certain non-dementia condition is “rapid-onset.” Julia Serano modeled these people by comparing human and animal behavior in “Whipping Girl,” where she claimed that being one of these people is an “innate inclination.” In a book titled for their “empire,” (*) Janice Raymond claimed that these people “rape women's bodies by reducing them to objects.” Major sporting competitions let these people switch categories based on the level of testosterone in their blood. For 10 points, name these people whose gender differs from their sex assigned at birth.
ANSWER: transgender people [accept trans men, trans women, or nonbinary people; accept transsexual people; prompt on LGBTQ+ or queer people; prompt on transvestites or drag performers or crossdressers before “Abigail” is read; do not accept or prompt on “gay people” or other answers to do with sexuality] <FW, Social Science>
You might argue that transphobic thought is important in contemporary perceptions of trans people, and sadly you would be correct; however, this does not justify reading out litanies of transphobic hate speech to rooms full of players (or to anyone). It is unconscionable to make people sit and listen to the moderator stating 'Janice Raymond claimed that these people "rape women's bodies by reducing them to objects"', and it makes the quizzing environment actively hostile to trans quizzers. The question seems to go out of its way to pick the most poisonous and incendiary statement possible here. Cluing this neutrally places it on the same level, within the question, as, say, scholarship by Julia Serano; saying that Raymond and Shrier 'claim' their beliefs to be true is not enough. Asking players to try to guess, in-game, which minority group Raymond is saying this about is, frankly, grotesque.

Why am I raising this in public? My intention is not to put the writer, or social science editor, on blast here. But more generally, I want this to function as a lesson in what not to do when writing questions about the history (or social science, or philosophy) of discrimination against minorities. Do not legitimise hate speech by treating it as scholarship (no matter how widely-published it might be). Do not presume to characterise, and write questions about, minorities by cluing statements made by those who wish to eradicate them.
Attachments
C++TU.png
(39 KiB) Not downloaded yet
Last edited by SortesVirgilianae on Sat May 27, 2023 1:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Alexandra Hardwick (she/her)
Cambridge 2013-16
Oxford 2016-21

Editor: ACF Fall 2020 (all literature), ACF Regionals 2022 (world literature, linguistics), ACF Regionals 2023 (European literature, world literature, linguistics), ACF Fall 2023 (European history)
forrestw
Lulu
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2023 1:11 pm

Re: Quizbowl questions and trans people

Post by forrestw »

The first thing I want to do is apologize for quoting Janice Raymond directly–you are correct that there is absolutely no reason to include that in a tossup and the same information could have been conveyed without doing so (as the CMST tossup essentially did). It was careless of me not to think about the effect this could have on players or moderators or the political implications of including such a quotation.

I wrote this tossup because I'm a trans woman and I wanted to write about an issue I cared about, essentially. This is not to say that being trans gives me a "pass" to write anything I want about trans issues–the vast majority of people who encounter the question have no idea who wrote it and being trans does not prevent me from creating harmful content. Nevertheless, I hope to elucidate what my motivation was for choosing some of the clues (which could have absolutely been executed better.) I think that understanding how transphobia functions is important, especially given its disturbing popularity. One clue I think did this well was:
Major sporting competitions let these people switch categories based on the level of testosterone in their blood.
This is fundamentally a clue about how transphobic attitudes impact trans (female) athletes, and it was clued in a way that didn't directly cite anything hateful. I think CMST's method of cluing Janice Raymond also does this very well:
Sandy Stone titled that essay “The Empire Strikes Back,” referencing a book by Janice (*) Raymond.
It clues Raymond in the context of trans people's criticism of her, which is absolutely a route I could have gone–I absolutely should have taken the time to look up one extra thing to be able to clue this in a safer way.

I'm still not sure how to take the statement:
"Cluing this neutrally places it on the same level, within the question, as, say, scholarship by Julia Serano; saying that Raymond and Shrier 'claim' their beliefs to be true is not enough."
I think that given the amount of quotation I did of Raymond the question was absolutely not critical enough of her. I don't necessarily see where the clue with Shrier went wrong, though, unless the argument is that we should not clue transphobic writers without explicitly condemning them. I don't think that cluing Sandy Stone's criticism of Janice Raymond is any more condemnatory than juxtaposing Serano and Shrier's writings. I also don't think the clue about Shrier is that bad. It doesn't say or quote anything directly hateful, although it does allude to rapid-onset gender dysphoria, which I should have probably done more critically. Nevertheless, I should have erred on the side of caution with this clue, which I definitely did not.

That being said, you're absolutely right that I should have been much more careful and critical when deciding to clue transphobic thought. I'm sorry for including unnecessary details of hateful thought and for any harm that caused. I also appreciate the thoughtful criticism of the tossup and will keep it in mind when writing in the future. I know the intention of your post was not necessarily to criticize me specifically, and I absolutely agree with the principles of careful writing about minority groups that you discuss. I just hope to provide some context as to why I wrote this tossup and what went wrong during the writing process.
Last edited by forrestw on Sat May 27, 2023 2:04 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Forrest Weintraub (she/her)
Columbia '24
SortesVirgilianae
Lulu
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:58 pm

Re: Quizbowl questions and trans people

Post by SortesVirgilianae »

From one trans woman to another: thank you so much for this thoughtful, considerate and intellectually generous reply! I agree that this balance isn't easy at all. Just as you say, transphobia is sadly a prominent part of our lives and history, and cluing this in some questions is important (besides, it helps make cis people more aware of forms of oppression that they don't encounter regularly, or even at all) - but in doing so, it's easy to end up unintentionally giving a "both-sides"-y treatment to hate-fuelled pseudoscience, or in some cases making players feel actively unsafe. I admire both the level of thought you put into the writing process, and your willingness to engage with this difficult issue. If you'd like to discuss this further, you have my permission to contact me directly (via Discord is easiest), but please don't feel obliged to!
Alexandra Hardwick (she/her)
Cambridge 2013-16
Oxford 2016-21

Editor: ACF Fall 2020 (all literature), ACF Regionals 2022 (world literature, linguistics), ACF Regionals 2023 (European literature, world literature, linguistics), ACF Fall 2023 (European history)
Post Reply