Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

GreeBo

km991148 wrote: »

Let me try again.
Put trans people aside for a moment.

There are issues with equality in sport in general, right?
Is it possible that there is a system that could be devised that grouped people not strictly by gender, but on some other basis?

I'm asking and exploring that as an Idea, not saying I've got it all figured out..
Like at least on this issue there seems to be agreement- ensuring fairness for all.

What are the equality issues in sport that you speak off?
That the best players get paid more?
Systems like you suggest already exist in many sports, but not at the top level. You can't restrict the top level and still call it the top level.
The top level is what attracts the fans and typically pays to support the lower levels.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's very unlikely that this would be the case.

Many pro women rugby players are in the 80-90kg weight class and fairly muscular. You really think they couldn't play with a 70kg cis man or trans woman?

Ok and what level do you reckon 70kg men play at? Junior cup that's at most. What sort of career do you think these women are in for, playing against 13 and 14 year old boys? Not too much money in that I'm afraid and even then the best boys at that level will still be stronger, faster and bigger

GreeBo

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Underage rugby in New Zealand is divided by weight not age, as it is here. There are, certainly, “options” out there.

Yeah, underage sport, what do you think the earnings difference is between current ladies professional rugby and schoolboy rugby?

km991148

GreeBo wrote: »

What are the equality issues in sport that you speak off?
That the best players get paid more?
Systems like you suggest already exist in many sports, but not at the top level. You can't restrict the top level and still call it the top level.
The top level is what attracts the fans and typically pays to support the lower levels.

Men's and women's sports are equal? Sorry, didn't realise.
I don't think you can generalise the men are better that's why they are top tier (if that's what you are saying??).

JamesFlynn

One eyed Jack wrote: »

the short answer is no, I don’t think that particular mismatch was either fair or just

Thanks for the clear answer Jack.

The Fallon Fox scenario is not unique - there are lots of other examples such as Laurel Hubbard, Hannah Mouncey, Veronica Ivy, etc, and based on current trends this will only become more common.

If you hold to the ideology that transwomen like Fallon Fox are women, then surely it is simple justice that a male-born Fallon Fox should have the right to compete in Women's MMA against female-born women?

Why is it unjust in this case and not unjust in other cases of male-borns competing against female?

LLMMLL

JamesFlynn wrote: »

If not, how under your ideology could this be prevented?

Answer please based on the real world that we all live in, not under some utopian future where we categorise sport participation based on skeletal structure and bone / muscle density.

You're basically asking a question but putting restrictions on how it could be answered.

Is banning transwomen from participating in women's sports your "utopian future" then?

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok and what level do you reckon 70kg men play at? Junior cup that's at most. What sort of career do you think these women are in for, playing against 13 and 14 year old boys? Not too much money in that I'm afraid and even then the best boys at that level will still be stronger, faster and bigger

Um no the 70kg figure comes from professional rugby.

Why would they play against underage boys? Nobody has suggested to remove age restrictions.

Not sure whose points you are arguing against because they're certainly not mine.

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

Um no the 70kg figure comes from professional rugby.

Why would they play against underage boys? Nobody has suggested to remove age restrictions.

Not sure whose points you are arguing against because they're certainly not mine.

I think the question being asked was how many professional male rugby players weigh 70kg? I can't think of a single one. There may be some, but not enough to make up a league.

70kg sounds more like the average weight of under 18 boys - in which case women are not going to be able to have a professional career if those are to be their opponents.

JamesFlynn

LLMMLL wrote: »

You're basically asking a question but putting restrictions on how it could be answered.

Is banning transwomen from participating in women's sports your "utopian future" then?

I don't think it's unreasonable to request that answers are based on the reality we all share today, not some future imaginary perfect world. In any case, Jack was kind enough to give a direct answer.

In terms of a "utopian future", only the very naive believe in utopia. There's plenty to keep us busy trying to make the real and imperfect world better.

I think there's enough nuance and complexity to the topic that the claim "transwomen are women" therefore "all male-borns who identify as women have the untrammelled right to compete against women in all sports" is naively misguided and puts women at greater risk.

LLMMLL

volchitsa wrote: »

I think the question being asked was how many professional male rugby players weigh 70kg? I can't think of a single one. There may be some, but not enough to make up a league.

70kg sounds more like the average weight of under 18 boys - in which case women are not going to be able to have a professional career if those are to be their opponents.

Again nobody has proposed that women play underage boys.

All that has been proposed is that safety is scientifically determined and the chips fall where they fall.

Even if 70kg is rare for a pro rugby player, I'm sure 80kg is less rare. And there are pro women whose weight is in the high 80s. They could play with any group that it is deemed safe for them to play with.

Can those concerned about safety in rugby explain why it's ok for a 140kg person to play in the same match as a 70kg person?

LLMMLL

JamesFlynn wrote: »

I don't think it's unreasonable to request that answers are based on the reality we all share today, not some future imaginary perfect world. In any case, Jack was kind enough to give a direct answer.

In terms of a "utopian future", only the very naive believe in utopia. There's plenty to keep us busy trying to make the real and imperfect world better.

I think there's enough nuance and complexity to the topic that the claim "transwomen are women" therefore "all male-borns who identify as women have the untrammelled right to compete against women in all sports" is naively misguided and puts women at greater risk.

The scientific approach to safety is only "utopian" in your mind.

Examining the safety involved in collisions between two individuals playing a contact sport is absolutely.possible and it's a little.bizarre to claim it's some kind of pie in the sky unattainable ideal.

And claiming that "trans women are women" and allowing them to compete against other women leads to greater risk is no different than saying "cis men are men" (which we ALL agree on) and allowing them to compete against other men leads to greater risk.

If you are concerned about safety then you should be addressing the fact that "cis men are men" and no other restrictions leads to a 140kg man colliding with a 70kg man.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

Again nobody has proposed that women play underage boys.

All that has been proposed is that safety is scientifically determined and the chips fall where they fall.

Even if 70kg is rare for a pro rugby player, I'm sure 80kg is less rare. And there are pro women whose weight is in the high 80s. They could play with any group that it is deemed safe for them to play with.

Can those concerned about safety in rugby explain why it's ok for a 140kg person to play in the same match as a 70kg person?

You are.
You said that women could play against 70kg male players. We have pointed out that 70kg make players are boys. Can you show otherwise?

Feel free to choose another sport to explain how your approach would work.

One eyed Jack

JamesFlynn wrote: »

Thanks for the clear answer Jack.

The Fallon Fox scenario is not unique - there are lots of other examples such as Laurel Hubbard, Hannah Mouncey, Veronica Ivy, etc, and based on current trends this will only become more common.

If you hold to the ideology that transwomen like Fallon Fox are women, then surely it is simple justice that a male-born Fallon Fox should have the right to compete in Women's MMA against female-born women?

Why is it unjust in this case and not unjust in other cases of male-borns competing against female?

There’s a bit to unpack in that one James which I feel is worth explaining. When you referred to my “ideology” earlier, I thought you meant my opinion that it wasn’t necessary for sports to be segregated by sex or gender. ‘Transwomen’ is just not a term I use, I don’t care for the terms at all. I genuinely and honestly couldn’t give a stiff one for however anyone chooses to identify themselves. I’m only interested in their opinions, not their identity politics.

In that particular match you’re referring to, it was obvious that there was a mismatch between the two fighters that made it completely one-sided and therefore unfair. That’s not to suggest that Fox couldn’t have been beaten by a woman, and looking up the stats, they have been beaten by a woman - the same woman who called for Fox to be banned for cheating, was herself later banned for cheating, in order to give herself an unfair advantage over her opponents. That’s just all sorts of awkward really :pac:

I’m saying that in competition in any sport, the criteria for qualification should not be based upon sex or gender, and you’re right, it is only set to become more common at elite levels in sports, because by definition competitors in sports are going to have advantages over their competitors which enable them to win. You wouldn’t put Conor McGregor in the ring with Mike Tyson for example - “it was nice knowing you Conor” would be the inevitable outcome of that one, even with an out of shape Tyson as he is now, never mind when he was in his prime! So why would you put mismatched competitors together at all?

The examples you’re giving are just a handful of competitors who transitioned as adults, as opposed to acknowledging the reality of where society is actually going and acknowledging that some of these children will want to go on to become professional sports athletes, and by all accounts they aren’t likely to outnumber either the number of men or women already participating in sports, and even more unlikely to be gaining notoriety for their sporting achievements as opposed to the tabloid media spotlight they attract as a result of their sex or gender identity.

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

You are.
You said that women could play against 70kg male players. We have pointed out that 70kg make players are boys. Can you show otherwise?

Feel free to choose another sport to explain how your approach would work.

Peter Stringer

Born: December 13, 1977 (age 43 years), Cork
Height: 1.7 m
Weight: 73 kg
Spouse: Debbie O’Leary (m. 2015)

Should someone tell poor Debbie she's accidentally married a 43 year old underage boy?

GreeBo

km991148 wrote: »

Men's and women's sports are equal? Sorry, didn't realise.
I don't think you can generalise the men are better that's why they are top tier (if that's what you are saying??).

You are saying they are unequal, the onus is on you to back up that statement. I already showed how pay will be different, due to the different skill levels involved.

Men are better, as I already said, in 99.99% of scenarios and disciplines where both compete. To be honest it's an even bigger percentage.
Again, do you have anything that would show otherwise?
Fwiw I'm basing my answer on every measurable record and the outcome anytime women have competed directly against men. For your statement to be true you need to show that women are winning at least 50% of the time.

Better athletes earn more, from both winnings and sponsorship, more people pay more to watch the best at everything, to argue contrary to that is simply an untenable position.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

Peter Stringer

Born: December 13, 1977 (age 43 years), Cork
Height: 1.7 m
Weight: 73 kg
Spouse: Debbie O’Leary (m. 2015)

Should someone tell poor Debbie she's accidentally married a 43 year old underage boy?

You've picked the traditionally smallest player on the pitch to back up that women can play against a league of 70kg men?
Poor, retired Peter will be worn out, playing well positions and all teams on his own.

Remind me what era stringer played in btw?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.rugbypass.com/news/the-world-under-85kg-xv-the-lightest-team-on-the-planet/
Lightest player on that team is 75kg, most are 80kg+. Again, your point is simply untenable.

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

You've picked the traditionally smallest player on the pitch to back up that women can play against a league of 70kg men?
Poor, retired Peter will be worn out, playing well positions and all teams on his own.

Remind me what era stringer played in btw?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.rugbypass.com/news/the-world-under-85kg-xv-the-lightest-team-on-the-planet/
Lightest player on that team is 75kg, most are 80kg+. Again, your point is simply untenable.

It's not untenable at all. Here's an even lighter player playing In a league where he will be up against players weighing up to 140kg:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumiaki_Tanaka

I guess he is also an underage boy...

Do you think this is safe?

JamesFlynn

LLMMLL wrote: »

The scientific approach to safety is only "utopian" in your mind.

Examining the safety involved in collisions between two individuals playing a contact sport is absolutely.possible and it's a little.bizarre to claim it's some kind of pie in the sky unattainable ideal.

And claiming that "trans women are women" and allowing them to compete against other women leads to greater risk is no different than saying "cis men are men" (which we ALL agree on) and allowing them to compete against other men leads to greater risk.

If you are concerned about safety then you should be addressing the fact that "cis men are men" and no other restrictions leads to a 140kg man colliding with a 70kg man.

Well I'd suggest as a way forward then that you advocate for a global change in the way sports are organized to have participation based on weight/bone density/muscle strength rather than on how biology defines male/female.

Many are happy with the relatively easy system we have now, and as you said yourself a few posts ago, your proposal will ruin sports like Rugby. So it might take some time to achieve.

in the meantime I think a female athlete should have the right to object to a male-born transwoman like Fallon Fox competing in their sport.

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

Even if 70kg is rare for a pro rugby player, I'm sure 80kg is less rare. And there are pro women whose weight is in the high 80s.

It's not just weight, it's power and speed differences.
Just look at the Olympic weight lifting records for men and women.
The female category tops out at 75kg+, the 65kg male category is equivalent to the max women's record. Biology is so unfair!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting

LLMMLL

JamesFlynn wrote: »

Well I'd suggest as a way forward then that you advocate for a global change in the way sports are organized to have participation based on weight/bone density/muscle strength rather than on how biology defines male/female.

Many are happy with the relatively easy system we have now, and as you said yourself a few posts ago, your proposal will ruin sports like Rugby. So it might take some time to achieve.

in the meantime I think a female athlete should have the right to object to a male-born transwoman like Fallon Fox competing in their sport.

Oh I wont be campaigning for a change in sports. The only thing I'd campaign against is applying rules that treat trans women the same as men and similarly for transmen.

Is anyone capable of answering my point about the size differences of cis men currently playing rugby. I've raised it at least 5 times and curiously people keep ignoring it...

GreeBo

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's not untenable at all. Here's an even lighter player playing In a league where he will be up against players weighing up to 140kg:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumiaki_Tanaka

I guess he is also an underage boy...

Do you think this is safe?

Yet another scrum half to prove your point?
A 72kg man is still strong enough to compete against other men, you just proved that yourself.

The problem is that you haven't proven any woman can compete and survive against even the smallest male. Furthermore you are suggesting that half the world population could have careers in mixed rugby... Yet you've given us 2 men, 1 long retired and the other from s 2ndb tier nation also about to retire.
I'm afraid it just doesn't add up at all.

GreeBo

JamesFlynn wrote: »

Well I'd suggest as a way forward then that you advocate for a global change in the way sports are organized to have participation based on weight/bone density/muscle strength rather than on how biology defines male/female.

The problem with this approach is that it will still end up with men at the top tiers, because of biological advantages.

LLMMLL

GreeBo wrote: »

Yet another scrum half to prove your point?
A 72kg man is still strong enough to compete against other men, you just proved that yourself.

The problem is that you haven't proven any woman can compete and survive against even the smallest male. Furthermore you are suggesting that half the world population could have careers in mixed rugby... Yet you've given us 2 men, 1 long retired and the other from s 2ndb tier nation also about to retire.
I'm afraid it just doesn't add up at all.

What does whether they are going to retire or not have anything to do with anything.

The point is that both players have completed against absolutely massive players who can be nearly twice their weight.

I'll ask again:

Do you thinK there is a safety issue in an 80-90kg transwoman competing against a 60-70kg ciswoman in rugby?

Do you think there is a safety issue in a 72kg cis man competing against a 140kg cis man in rugby?

Also after you've answered those 2 questions can you also explain how whether they may be retiring soon affects your answer to the above because it's a total mystery to me...

km991148

GreeBo wrote: »

You are saying they are unequal, the onus is on you to back up that statement. I already showed how pay will be different, due to the different skill levels involved.

Men are better, as I already said, in 99.99% of scenarios and disciplines where both compete. To be honest it's an even bigger percentage.
Again, do you have anything that would show otherwise?
Fwiw I'm basing my answer on every measurable record and the outcome anytime women have competed directly against men. For your statement to be true you need to show that women are winning at least 50% of the time.

Better athletes earn more, from both winnings and sponsorship, more people pay more to watch the best at everything, to argue contrary to that is simply an untenable position.

No I wouldn't need to show that. Your argument is flawed, particularly obviously so for someone who is so keen on pointing out biological differences..

Equality isn't about setting records. It's about a lot of factors including the opportunities and facilities for women to participate. Is women's football less popular than men's because women are worse? Who's to say without the same level of funding and support womens football wouldn't be more comparative than mens? Without the decades head start?

For such a champion of women, your comments are almost offensive.

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

Peter Stringer

Born: December 13, 1977 (age 43 years), Cork
Height: 1.7 m
Weight: 73 kg
Spouse: Debbie O’Leary (m. 2015)

Should someone tell poor Debbie she's accidentally married a 43 year old underage boy?

That's one player. You need enough for a league.

GreeBo

km991148 wrote: »

No I wouldn't need to show that. Your argument is flawed, particularly obviously so for someone who is so keen on pointing out biological differences..

Equality isn't about setting records. It's about a lot of factors including the opportunities and facilities for women to participate. Is women's football less popular than men's because women are worse? Who's to say without the same level of funding and support womens football wouldn't be more comparative than mens? Without the decades head start?

For such a champion of women, your comments are almost offensive.

Who's to say? Biology says.
You can have all the training, support, funding in the world, men will still be stronger, faster, bigger, have more muscle and denser bones than women.

Yes, women's sports are less popular because the quality is lower than men. That's not sexist or any other term you want to use, it's just plain old fact.

Women's rugby is a great example, they stupidly use the same size ball as men do, despite having smaller hands, and so cannot have the same handling skills. That's ignoring all the other factors already listed.

GreeBo

km991148 wrote: »

No I wouldn't need to show that. .

So you can't show or point to any inequality then?

LLMMLL

volchitsa wrote: »

That's one player. You need enough for a league.

Well you don't really. As I said the chips can fall where they fall.

There are plenty of men in the 70-80kg weight class and plenty of women too. Obviously very few , maybe zero, cis women will be safe competing against a 140kg cis male, but equally how many cis men are safe competing against a 140kg cis man in rugby?

LLMMLL

volchitsa wrote: »

That's one player. You need enough for a league.

And let's not forget that all the arguments against trans women participation usually pick the one gigantic trans woman and try to make arguments based on individual cases. Why should I not be able to use individual cases then?

km991148

GreeBo wrote: »

So you can't show or point to any inequality then?

Show me what sports are equal? I think the exception rather than the rule is preferred in these scenarios.

Pay, opportunity, participation numbers are alll down in most sports. And yes pay is down because there isn't enough money on the game, but I'm sure that could be corrected if we, I dunno, promoted womens sports in the first place..