Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

1274275277279280285

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,610 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    How many people self id as a woman and demand access to women's services and spaces though? A lot. For example , the doctor involved in the other case does not have a GRC as far as I recall but feels that a woman leaving the female changing room so as not be naked in front of him shouldn't be allowed. The paedophile prisoner who is trying to get a nurse sacked for "misgendering" is also unlikely to have a GRC. Its not about gender recognition certs, it's about women having the right to sex based facilities and services, and the right to say no to men



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 680 ✭✭✭ingalway


    Watching Labour MPs scurrying around trying to make out how delighted they are that at last everything is cleared up for them when all along they could have stopped this nonsense years ago. Instead they actively encouraged it.
    Open this thread to see who said what - it is unbelievable.

    https://x.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1442783035389325313



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,765 ✭✭✭Homelander


    Wonder what Graham Linehan makes of all this!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    I admire them for this. We have to make it easier for people to say - we got this wrong, or even to act that way, without saying it. Starmer has gone further on this than any of the five!! previous Tory prime ministers, going back to David Cameron. He should get credit for that, and there shouldn't be any kind of reprisal against people who've changed their minds, not least because the battle is far from over, imo.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,890 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    I agree with you if they say they changed their minds, what if they attempt to hide their previous assertions and now go with the flow? should they get credit for that?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    I'm not on twitter, so unable to see those. If you could do screengrabs, that'd be great.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,610 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    Meanwhile, back on the topic of this thread, apparently in 3 US states the top female high school high jumper is actually a boy. Again, what are the odds? At least one of these was no where near the top when competing against males just 2 years ago. Never happens though...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 133 ✭✭BP_RS3813


    Yet people here will advocate for this stuff based on mental health and feelings....

    Sport at EVERY SINGLE LEVEL should put competition and fairness first. If a transgender female cannot compete in a sport and suffers from "mental health issues" from not being able to do so then tough luck.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,946 ✭✭✭yosser hughes


    image.png

    the Supreme Court ruling means the @LadiesFootball own rules imposed without consultation with its own membership is in direct conflict with equality law

    Post edited by yosser hughes on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    And this will be how the ruling trickles into Ireland. Once it is applied to one sport, it will eventually apply to all sports, and from there to wider society.

    The madness is over.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,130 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Didn’t follow this closely before tbh.

    The way I understand it is that the Scottish government said people with a gender recognition cert are entitled to sex-based protections. For Women Scotland said those protections only apply to people born female and the UK SC agreed. Presumably the sex protections for men only apply to male born also.

    I know this ruling is in the UK but it will obviously apply to NI so very curious as to what it will mean in reality for trans people and for any organisation or business going forward.

    Using a simple example of a gym, ie. a facility for everyone. Say they currently have male, female, and a disabled changing area (reasonable accommodation for people with a disability).

    Will they now be obliged to provide eight changing areas, ie M, F, TM, TF, M disabled, F disabled, TM disabled, TF disabled? If they don’t, are they leaving themselves open to a case for discrimination?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    I think a 4th option should be available.... or we have single occupancy toilets.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,394 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Will they now be obliged to provide eight changing areas, ie M, F, TM, TF, M disabled, F disabled, TM disabled, TF disabled? If they don’t, are they leaving themselves open to a case for discrimination?

    As I understand it, they are not obliged at all.

    I can see this ruling just accelerating businesses and organisations using one mixed space changing area with cubicles, and provision for disability.

    We will all go the way of the likes of Germany and the Scandinavian countries who are not burdened by the religious shame of their bodies.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,130 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    It’s not the single toilets that would cause a problem from what I can gather, it’s the room/area/space where the single toilets are located. Does a 4th option mean M, F, D, T or just one space for everyone?
    Say an organisation were to provide only one dedicated space (with individual cubicles) to be used by everyone, somebody could say they are entitled to a separate area. Does the ruling not mean that changing rooms in gyms and sports facilities will have to be segregated from now on?

    If it does trickle into RoI, will everyone have to produce an original birth cert to prove which team or event they are eligible for?
    Will EU legislation be challenged after the UK ruling?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    I see David Cullinane of Sinn Fein tweeted that the ruling was common sense. Apart from getting the name of the court wrong, it was a reasonable tweet. Not least by pointing out that equality legislation still protects trans people in the UK. Within hours though he was whipped into line, deleted it and posted a grovelling apology. It seems his error was to suggest that we need to "examine" the ruling in this country. You can be sure that the full force of the media and political system will be used to stop that from happening. Both tweets are screenshotted below:

    Post edited by plodder on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    We will all go the way of the likes of Germany and the Scandinavian countries who are not burdened by the religious shame of their bodies.

    Spas and saunas in Germany often have sections where clothing is optional, but when I lived there, changing rooms were still sex segregated. So, this issue has nothing to do with "religious shame" of bodies.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    Meant to reply to this. These women are heroes who have fought for their rights. They've had the might of the Scottish government and the NHS directed against them. They've won the science argument. The law is turning to support them.

    So, all that's left is insults and personal attacks like this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,394 ✭✭✭✭Boggles




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    Because they know they have lost, their argument was exposed to be as flimsy as a house of cards, and it had no scientific support.

    So now they are left to just insult and pretend they have the higher moral ground.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    Show me an example of an open mixed sex changing room (not gender neutral individual cubicles) in Germany, that the general public are likely to encounter.

    I find it hard to believe they would be common. Muslim women for starters are never going to use facilities like that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,608 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Weeeeell, except that:

    So no. It would not be a good idea to remove single-sex changing rooms.

    I have no idea what the rates of sex assault are like in Sweden or Germany, but even if there is a cultural difference that means that women and girls do not risk assault the way they do in the UK or Ireland, I would need evidence that removing single-sex areas is the solution, rather than a consequence.

    IOW, fix the problem of sexual assault by men first, then remove the single-sex areas.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,608 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    I don't really understand your logic about multiple changing rooms. Men can use male changing rooms, however they dress. Females ditto.

    If they aren't comfortable with that, they can use the single spaces that are available for the disabled.

    Where's the problem?

    On the eligibility question, how does someone prove they are eligible for, say, the under-18 category? What's the difference?

    Also, at elite level, do you know how they prove they aren't taking performance enhancing drugs? They have to pee into a recipient, in full view of an examiner - not someone from their own team of course - an unknown person. Hard to find a more intrusive test than that, yet it's accepted as necessary.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,394 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Did you not go to a swimming pool when you lived there?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    Yes, including saunas and spas where clothing was optional or even not allowed. But, in all cases, changing rooms were segregated by sex. Which was the point, ie even people who don't mind being naked in the presence of others (of either sex) still prefer to get changed in sex segregated facilities.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,394 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Not from my experience. I remember my first time in Stuttgart which was quite an eye opener for a repressed catholic.

    Never stared at a point on a wall so hard for so long as I wriggled out of my clothes in a constricted towel.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,750 ✭✭✭plodder


    Good for you! If you don't mind me saying. Religion and Catholic repression seem to figure quite prominently in your last few posts on this. They really have nothing to do with the issues we are discussing here. So, maybe we should move on…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 42,394 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Religion and Catholic repression seem to figure quite prominently in your last few posts on this.

    Well no they didn't.

    And any time I did were both pertinent and relevant to my opinion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,608 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    So does this not mean that many Muslim women are de facto excluded from swimming pools in Germany? And is this acceptable to you?

    Perhaps you were there back in the day, when this sort of thing (exclusion of Muslims) was par for the course? Or you were in an area with a tiny Muslim population?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,427 ✭✭✭eeepaulo


    So where are they at in the UK now, it is correct to use whatever pronouns people choose for themselves, but calling a transwoman a woman is misgendering?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,610 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    I wonder if that poster would apply the "god bothering bigots" label to Muslim women who will only use single sex facilities? Probably not so I'm sure this point will just be ignored.



Advertisement