Graham Linehan banned from twitter for questioning "trans ideology"

Gruffalox wrote: »

No matter how often the mantra is repeated that transwomen are women most people will eventually have a a moment where they will say No.

I had a No moment myself just now when I saw Arlene Foster on the news.

I don’t expect Arlene Foster should be deprived of her liberty because in my opinion her visage is offensive.

That’s essentially what you’re expecting should happen because someone, for whatever reason, offends your sensitivities. How far do you imagine you can stretch that before people have their own No moment that deprives you of any authority you imagine you should have over others?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I had a No moment myself just now when I saw Arlene Foster on the news.

I don’t expect Arlene Foster should be deprived of her liberty because in my opinion her visage is offensive.

That’s essentially what you’re expecting should happen because someone, for whatever reason, offends your sensitivities. How far do you imagine you can stretch that before people have their own No moment that deprives you of any authority you imagine you should have over others?

So you're ok with trans women competing in female sports despite the scientific data showing they have a massive advantage from going through male puberty?

Screw the rights of biological women eh? Only trans rights are important.

I think you would find a lot more support if you conceded ground on at least a couple of issues like this one and if some of the LGBTQ community didn't set out to destroy the reputation and careers of those opposed to it.

LLMMLL wrote: »

Would 99/100 people repeat those definitions?

Do you always define words by playing a round of Family Fortunes?

“We asked 100 people to define woman...”

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Check out this fantastic mic drop by Martina Navratilova on the topic yesterday:

https://twitter.com/martina/status/1278543915830870016?s=21

If you accept transwomen to be women then logically you are for biological males in women’s sports.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

And what do you expect will happen when you make that declaration?


“Pack it up lads, Cteven decides who gets to compete against who”


It reminds me of the same sort of attitude of the Girl Scouts organisation when the Boy Scouts organisation recently decided that girls were welcome to join their organisation. Some people weren’t happy about it -


Girls can join the Boy Scouts now -- but not everyone is happy about it


Essentially, nobody is suggesting that girls and women cannot compete in girls and women’s sports any more. None of the competitors are entitled to medals in the first place, and other people competing if they really want to compete will continue to do so, and the minority who imagine it’s unfair will always find excuses to shove their competitors out of the competition in the hope of increasing their chances of winning. That mentality is as old as competitive sports itself. If other people don’t want to compete, I can’t see anyone trying to force them to.

It’s not imagined that it’s unfair, it is unfair to have the biological advantages of being born male while competing in women’s sports.

BloodBath wrote: »

So you're ok with trans women competing in female sports despite the scientific data showing they have a massive advantage from going through male puberty?

Screw the rights of biological women eh? Only trans rights are important.

I really don’t care about sports enough to be bothered who does or doesn’t compete to be honest. The governing bodies are free to set whatever rules they wish as long as they are compliant with the law in their respective jurisdictions.

That’s not saying screw anyone’s rights, it’s saying that everyone has equal rights and equal opportunities. You appear to want an advantageous outcome for women, but then how do you determine who among women is entitled to compete against other women? Because there are always winners and losers, and there are far more losers than winners. Do the losers get to decide who should compete against them? No they do not, and they never did.

BloodBath wrote: »

I think you would find a lot more support if you conceded ground on at least a couple of issues like this one and if some of the LGBTQ community didn't set out to destroy the reputation and careers of those opposed to it.

I don’t think it would make any difference to the level of support anyone has if they allowed themselves to be discriminated against and accepted being treated as less than, when they are entitled to be treated equally.

You imagine people should be able to maintain positions in society where they are in a position to keep other people from being treated equally? Respectfully, I disagree. I don’t think anyone deserves to be protected by law when they aren’t willing to comply with the law themselves.

Sounds very much like do as I say, not as I do, or rather like JK pulling the ladder up after herself.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Essentially, nobody is suggesting that girls and women cannot compete in girls and women’s sports any more. None of the competitors are entitled to medals in the first place, and other people competing if they really want to compete will continue to do so, and the minority who imagine it’s unfair will always find excuses to shove their competitors out of the competition in the hope of increasing their chances of winning. That mentality is as old as competitive sports itself. If other people don’t want to compete, I can’t see anyone trying to force them to.

jesus man...

21 February 2020 • 9:40pm
Transgender women were on Friday night facing further curbs on playing women’s rugby amid fears the sport’s rules could lead to serious injuries.

World Rugby on Friday announced a “comprehensive review” of its policy on transgender players, which currently allows trans women to play women’s rugby provided they reduce their testosterone levels.

It was also reported earlier this season that referees were quitting the women’s game over fears rules allowing trans women to play would lead to serious injuries and that officials had been warned not to challenge bearded or heavily muscled players....

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2020/02/21/world-rugby-tighten-transgender-policy/

Gruffalox wrote: »

Most people would say it is unfair that this person won the 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships for Women

Most people would say it is unfair that this person won two golds and a silver in three of the women’s heavyweight categories at the Pacific Games in Samoa in 2019

Most people think it is unfair that this person smashed a woman's skull in an MMA fight

and is still boasting about it....on Twitter (until they deleted the tweet)


No matter how often the mantra is repeated that transwomen are women most people will eventually have a a moment where they will say No.

This might be a good time to remember that no such issues have arisen in sport in Ireland in the past four or five years since self-id was introduced.

It's also again fascinating to see the dedication to digging up obscure issues from obscure sports from obscure parts of the world to worry about, while ignoring the many difficulties that women and girls have in Ireland today competing in sports.

Are those highlighting the big bogey man of transgender women doing anything to address to poor coverage in Irish media or second-class status of female sports in general or the problems of drugs in sport?

Nah, they're sticking to the non-existent trans issue -which would lead a skeptic to question their genuine concern for women in sports.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

They can. The best 2 footballers in the World are Linoel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. Messi is 5'6, whereas Ronaldo 6'2.

Now, do you think any female footballer would ever have a shot at being the best footballer in the World if football was mixed? I'll help you out, they wouldn't. None would even make it to the professional ranks. The USA women's football team infamously lost 5-2 to to an U-15 academy team from Dallas. These lads weren't even the best 11 for their age group. The USA were the World Champions at the time (I think). Women's football would cease to exist if the sport became solely mixed.

I didn’t ask whether they could or the couldn’t, I already know they can. I asked Kiki does she think it’s UNFAIR?

I’m not surprised the US Women’s football team were beaten by a couple of teenagers, just like I wasn’t surprised when the US Women’s football team trounced Thailand Women’s football team 13-0 in the Women’s World Cup when they got the chance to show the world what they could do. They demonstrated they have no sense of fairness or sportsmanship -


U.S. women’s soccer is relentless — and unapologetic — in World Cup-record rout of Thailand


They genuinely couldn’t see how they could possibly have done anything wrong :pac:

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

New Zealand is obscure is it? No it isn't.

It's a long, long way from there to here, isn't it?

Not sure why you'd expect to have much credibility on facts when you choose a username like that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Crowder#Coronavirus_misinformation