Biological males in women's sport

Sir Oxman

FTA69 wrote: »

Meanwhile the left wing of the Labour Party over here in the UK is tearing itself apart over this issue. Yesterday it was all over the BBC and Politics Live, people signing up to some 11 point pledge filled with nonsense declarations about the trans issue while calling on anyone who disagrees with some aspects like transwomen in sports etc to be expelled. Feminist groups concerned with women's spaces etc are named and labelled in this document as "hate groups". Sections of the liberal left's wholesale support for utterly ridiculous situations like transwomen in elite sports or transitioned sex offenders being put in women's prisons is making a mockery of the left in the eyes of most normal people.

We now have a situation where women on the left meeting to discuss gender and sex legislation are now being physically attacked, hounded and mobbed and that's now being given credence by senior Labour Party figures. The whole thing is an utter joke.

IMO, that is the death of the Labour Party if other disasters haven't finished them off.
The very idea all (I think) candidates have immediately signed the 'pledge' actually naming two organisations both of which are nowhere near 'hateful' is the biggest disgrace I have witnessed in politics in a very long time.
The authoritarianism is astounding.
#ExpelMe is huge on Twitter - longtime female Labour party members speaking up and being told to shut the fck up or if not being expelled and branded '-phobe' and bigotted.
I am disgusted.

Sir Oxman

https://twitter.com/OptimistiCynic/status/1227710079526461443?s=20

Calhoun

Its great to see it, they are finally properly eating their own and soon all that will be left on the inner circle will be ****ed out into the cold by society.

whisky_galore

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

To be honest, I’d actually be kind of glad if the Olympics featured transgender athletes (or those claiming to be) winning lots of things. A world stage is the best place to showcase the absurdity of the situation.

cloudatlas

whisky_galore wrote: »

I was talking to someone the other day and some of these shows wouldn’t be allowed, this episode of futurism, Emily from little Britain, the episode where Roy pretends to be disabled in the it crowd.

BloodBath

cloudatlas wrote: »

Yeah we need more scientific information than a 'daily mail' headline. Not a science nerd myself but committees will have to know at which part of the developmental period would a transition be deemed too late for any of those benefits to be negligible.

Before puberty which should be illegal anyway. Don't need any scientists. Just some common sense and a logical brain.

CrankyHaus

FTA69 wrote: »

Dems in the US are rowing in behind Bernie who is speaking to people on an economic level. He talks about mass societal issues, industry and a fair deal. He can appeal to ordinary working people. Likewise, Corbyn’s policies regards nationalising rain and energy and supporting the NHS and raising wages were through the roof popular - the wheels only start come off when you have 24-year old student types couching everything in terms of “privilege” or demanding heads roll and blood is spilled for the crime of saying women have vaginas.

The ironic thing is that while this stuff has taken prominence on some sections of the left (while being monetised by corporate capitalism at the same time), it has nothing to do with socialism. It is individualistic liberalism and it has become a really horrible dynamic in left groups.

Without going too conspiracy theory I think an in depth study of the sources of all of this stuff and their funding would make for interesting reading.

It's very curious to see the Left hobbled by divisive identity politics at the same time as it's traditional arguments about economic inequality are more relevant than ever.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

At the very least, those who haven’t in any way transitioned should take their balls and go home.



:pac:

feelthepower

I just can't get my head around this nonsense. I don't mind transgender people whatsoever, I have transgender friends, but have a bit of self respect . courtesy and cop on for yourself if a man who was born was a penis and balls and went through puberty competes in female sports. Your nothing but an idiot.

How can these transgender men even think in their heads that its okay to compete against women? Would you not think they would have the cop on. Separate groups need to be setup for sports, Men, Women, Transgender Female, Transgender Male for all sports.

I can imagine now Katie Taylor coming up against some transgender female or whatever you call it and losing all her titles. Its an absolute disgrace.

Why are people putting up with this nonsense. Peoples dreams are been ruined by men competing in female sports.

Go ahead and have your operations, no one minds whatsoever but have a bit of self respect, courtesy and common sense when competing in womens sports.

Joe Rogan: Joe Rogan opposed Fallon Fox receiving licensing, saying, "First of all, she's not really a she. She's a transgender, post-op person. The operation doesn't shave down your bone density. It doesn't change. You look at a man's hands and you look at a woman's hands and they're built different. They're just thicker, they're stronger, your wrists are thicker, your elbows are thicker, your joints are thicker. Just the mechanical function of punching, a man can do it much harder than a woman can, period."

Ronda Rousey cleared it up fully:"I feel like if you go through puberty as a 'man' it's not something you can reverse. ... There's no undo button on that.

ittakestwo

Perhaps a solution to this would be calling the events the XX event and the XY event instead. The XX would be for athletes with XX chromosomes and XY for athletes with XY chromosomes.

Then the event will be fair from a physical piont and there is no gender name to the event so athletes cant claim they are being discriminated on gender grounds.

Peregrinus

cloudatlas wrote: »

I was talking to someone the other day and some of these shows wouldn’t be allowed, this episode of futurism, Emily from little Britain, the episode where Roy pretends to be disabled in the it crowd.

They have all been broadcast repeatedly, which suggests that whoever told you they "wouldn't be allowed" is a bit out of touch with the real world.

BloodBath

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, it will be allowed at the upcoming Olympics. The IOC kinda fucked up there. They tried to row back on the relaxed guidelines but didn’t get anywhere. It’s a clusterfuck.



https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/24/ioc-delays-new-transgender-guidelines-2020-olympics

They are probably terrified of being labelled every phobe under the sun and having their careers attacked and ruined. The classic strategy of this group.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

BloodBath wrote: »

They are probably terrified of being labelled every phobe under the sun and having their careers attacked and ruined. The classic strategy of this group.

The people who have mostly spoken out have been people with nothing to lose. The most prominent have been Martina Navratilova and Sharron Davies. Navratilova’s legacy is assured and Davies lost out at the Olympics to a doped East German who was trying to capture some of what transgender women have benefitted from naturally. People earlier into their careers are probably much more reluctant to speak out which is what makes those Connecticut teenagers so admirable.

FTA69

On sections of the left it’s almost impossible to speak out about this without becoming a pariah. Like if I started publicly commenting on this on Facebook for instance I’d have no doubt complaints would be made to the Union I work for, in numbers. The activist group around this issue act like a mob and the fire they whip up then gets fanned by certain lefty journalists with huge social media platforms encouraging the pile on. The idea that Women’s Place in the UK is a “hate group” is preposterous, a bunch of middle aged feminists getting compared to the f*cking BNP.

One eyed Jack

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

The families of three female high school runners filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday seeking to block transgender athletes in Connecticut from participating in girls sports.

The case is only a publicity stunt really. They know they can’t win as the complainants aren’t being prevented or prohibited from participating. They’re not any more entitled to scholarships and medals than any other participants either.

FTA69

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The case is only a publicity stunt really. They know they can’t win as the complainants aren’t being prevented or prohibited from participating. They’re not any more entitled to scholarships and medals than any other participants either.

Yeah women who have trained all of their lives getting shunted to the back in order to make way for transitioned makes. Sour grapes though eh?

One eyed Jack

FTA69 wrote: »

Yeah women who have trained all of their lives getting shunted to the back in order to make way for transitioned makes. Sour grapes though eh?

I couldn’t give a ****e for individual cases tbh, the law is the only thing that interests me, and Title 9 protects these individuals right to participate in the sport as anyone else. Attempting to block their participation wouldn’t be held up in Court. That’s all.

FTA69

I love the way you’re invoking the absolute nature of the law as if it’s some immovable thing that can never be challenged or changed or is always morally correct. I wonder do you apply the same standards to trans activists who are furiously trying to change the law around self identification in other countries? “Sorry folks that’s the law so b*llocks to your individual cases”.

The question is whether transwomen should be allowed unqualified access to compete, often unfairly, in women’s sports and rather than engaging with the substance of that point you’re dodging it completely.

One eyed Jack

FTA69 wrote: »

I love the way you’re invoking the absolute nature of the law as if it’s some immovable thing that can never be challenged or changed or is always morally correct. I wonder do you apply the same standards to trans activists who are furiously trying to change the law around self identification in other countries? “Sorry folks that’s the law so b*llocks to your individual cases”.

The complainants aren’t trying to change the law in this case though, they’re trying to use existing law to set a precedent which would exclude individuals who are transgender from participating in sport as their preferred gender. They’re going to fail to exclude anyone from participating in their chosen sport, so when you ask me is there an element of sour grapes involved in this particular case? Certainly seems that way on behalf of the complainants.

FTA69 wrote: »

The question is whether transwomen should be allowed unqualified access to compete, often unfairly, in women’s sports and rather than engaging with the substance of that point you’re dodging it completely.

I’ve never dodged it. This thread gets resurrected every so often and I’ve always been of the opinion that people who are transgender should be permitted to participate in sport as their preferred gender. It’s up to governing bodies and organisations how they choose to comply with legislation. I’m not going to get het up about cases in the US or Olympics or even politics in the UK as it doesn’t affect my life directly in any meaningful way.

But if you’re asking me is it sour grapes again on some people’s part? It’s a bit sour grapes and a bit dog in a manger tbh - the amount of people who never gave a shìte before who give a shìte now has risen in direct proportion to the visibility of people who are transgender in Western society.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

The families of three female high school runners filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday seeking to block transgender athletes in Connecticut from participating in girls sports.

Good. I hope they win.

People claiming that this lawsuit is a "publicity stunt" perhaps don't realize how many American children (especially minority children) rely on athletic scholarships to attend college. Girls who consistently lose races to transgender athletes will wind up with a less impressive record, and thus have fewer opportunities to win scholarships, which could affect their entire course of their lives.

Wibbs

FTA69 wrote: »

I love the way you’re invoking the absolute nature of the law as if it’s some immovable thing that can never be challenged or changed or is always morally correct.

Indeed. I have always considered those who think "it's the law" a good debate position as being shortsighted, or ignorant, or both. If this debate was happening in the 17th century around slavery, would they be so quick to reference the law and say this made it OK? Actually many would and many did.

FTA69

Imagine having to get into a boxing ring or stand on a weightlifting platform with someone who went through puberty as a man and then being accused of sour grapes because you think it’s unfair?

My ex is an elite amateur boxer and all the women she competes with are terrified of this issue, especially the ones at heavier weights. I suppose they should all step back and make way. Literally no right-thinking people agrees with this, even the majority of transactivists don’t in my experience.

One eyed Jack

Cassius Whispering Scavenger wrote: »

Good. I hope they win.

People claiming that this lawsuit is a "publicity stunt" perhaps don't realize how many American children (especially minority children) rely on athletic scholarships to attend college. Girls who consistently lose races to transgender athletes will wind up with a less impressive record, and thus have fewer opportunities to win scholarships, which could affect their entire course of their lives.

I do, and I believe that’s why the parents on all sides involved are certainly interested in the outcome of this particular case, but when I say it’s a publicity stunt, I mean on the part of the ADF. A snowball has a better chance in hell.

One eyed Jack

FTA69 wrote: »

Imagine having to get into a boxing ring or stand on a weightlifting platform with someone who went through puberty as a man and then being accused of sour grapes because you think it’s unfair?

My ex is an elite amateur boxer and all the women she competes with are terrified of this issue, especially the ones at heavier weights. I suppose they should all step back and make way. Literally no right-thinking people agrees with this, even the majority of transactivists don’t in my experience.

So the wrong-thinking people (ignoring the vast majority of people who haven’t expressed an opinion either way) who don’t share your opinions should just get back in their boxes? I’m absolutely certain that’s not going to happen.

Hector Savage

Sir Oxman wrote: »

https://twitter.com/OptimistiCynic/status/1227710079526461443?s=20

I remember seeing some lunatic saying how it was an act of "violence" that the bigoted doctor assigned "her" male at birth just because "she" had a penis.

I mean saying a baby is a boy just cos he has a penis !! - I'm OUTRAGED!!!


:rolleyes:

suicide_circus

future generations will look back at this stuff with incredulity and derision and they will be right.

sabat

As long as this nonsense is confined to relatively marginal sports like weightlifting and boxing which are viewed as masculine anyway nothing will change but when it starts to affect the mainstream you'll see it clamped down on immediately. The women's winner of Wimbledon gets over £2M-plenty of motivation for some journeyman ranked around 100 in the world to pretend to be a chick. The sight alone of some 6"5' Serbian in a little white skirt blasting his way through the lovely ladies will turn the public against it permanently, and there's nothing the twitter mob could do about it.

FTA69

I don’t think any of these trans athletes are transitioning just to get an advantage, I mean it’s a massive thing to do in your life. I believe they’re genuine in being who they want to be and who they identify as and that’s fair enough and can and should be accommodated in most cases.

That does not however mean that their right to identify as female etc supersedes the right of women to compete in a fair environment.

One eyed Jack

FTA69 wrote: »

I don’t think any of these trans athletes are transitioning just to get an advantage, I mean it’s a massive thing to do in your life. I believe they’re genuine in being who they want to be and who they identify as and that’s fair enough and can and should be accommodated in most cases.

That does not however mean that their right to identify as female etc supersedes the right of women to compete in a fair environment.

I get what you’re saying, but their right to be regarded in law as their preferred gender makes them equal in law at least to women or men, whichever they’re competing with in the area of sports. It’s up to the sporting bodies to act within the law to ensure the competitions are fair, and that’s where the problem lies - who determines the criteria for fair competition and what does it mean for the sport and for the development of the sport in society.

All these things are factored into deciding what’s fair, not just the opinions of women who are trying to illicit sympathy for their cause by their latest effort claiming to be “politically homeless” :rolleyes:

FTA69

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I get what you’re saying, but their right to be regarded in law as their preferred gender makes them equal in law at least to women or men, whichever they’re competing with in the area of sports. It’s up to the sporting bodies to act within the law to ensure the competitions are fair, and that’s where the problem lies - who determines the criteria for fair competition and what does it mean for the sport and for the development of the sport in society.

All these things are factored into deciding what’s fair, not just the opinions of women who are trying to illicit sympathy for their cause by their latest effort claiming to be “politically homeless” :rolleyes:

Would you ever jog on with that nonsense. I know a load of women worried about this stuff for very good reason and basically you’re portraying female athletes as a bunch of spoiled brats in your quest to appear virtuous on this issue.

The whole point is that many of the sporting bodies are way off on this, mostly out of fear of being condemned as bigoted. If you think the likes of Rachel McKinnon and Fallon Fox and Hannah Mounsey present no contradictions then you’re either ignorant about the effects of physiology in sport or else being wilfully disingenuous.

The law and the rules in sporting bodies are being constructed in a climate where there’s huge lobbying for this stuff, it’s all part of the same thrust with the same goals - the idea that sex is simply something you opt in or out of.

I fully support female athletes speaking out against this and I fully condemn those portraying them as sore losers or bigots because they don’t want to see women’s sports made a mockery of.