oimissus

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can someone please clarify.. > > Reading this thread there seems to be a conclusion > that: > > Questioning physical fairness of women competing > with other humans with higher > testosterone/strength/power = transgender hatred > > Is that what is being said ? Yes - those 'other humans' being male, however they identify (see the need for clear language?). Got it in one. This is a useful resource comparing, in a single year (2016), high school boys against elite women at that years Olympics. The differences are stark. How anyone can deny this I can't think. If you have been through male puberty you have huge physical advantages over women, and the current IOC rules for trans-identifying males(which one of their trans creators has admitted weren't backed by data and are unfair to women) do not negate that. And one, just one, woman losing out is one too many. https://boysvswomen.com/#/

They are divided up by other things - AND sex. There are some mixed sex paralympian teams - but they are clearly mixed sex (and of course there's mixed doubles in tennis). Otherwise they are divided by sex and ability. That's fine by me. That's not sex denial, which is what's going on here. Hubbard would compete against other 'low testosterone' males. (And females taking testosterone could compete against other females taking testosterone - I believe Ross Tucker has said that females taking testosterone still don't stand a chance against men, by and large.) But not against women, who aren't low testosterone males. Manumua wouldn't be displaced from the women's team. The women's team would be a single sex, female-only team. Because sex is still the biggest determiner of difference on the playing field.

fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Two separate issues. > 1) Is it OK for MTF trans athletes to compete > against women? Many people would say no, and > that's fine. I get it. > 2) Is it OK to intentionally call trans women > "men", "he", etc. Accuse them of being delusional. > To call trans athletes "cheats". No. It's now > bordering on hate speech. The problem is is that not doing 2 leads to 1 happening. Which is what we are seeing here. I've been paying close attention to this debate since the IOC changed its rules in 2015. As many did, I started off 'being kind'. But the more I read and understood, the more I realised that if you ever say it's fine for someone male to call themselves female, you end up with the situations that are real and happening that I have described - men claiming to be women to enter the women's prison estate, men entering women's sporting competition. There is no way for a woman or a girl to tell if the male person in front of her in the communal changing room at, say, Camberwell pool, is 1. a transsexual (ie full surgery), 2. transgender (no surgery, which accounts for about 85% of those who identify as trans) or 3. someone posing as 1 or 2 for nefarious reasons. No way. So the only way to preserve women's and girls' privacy, dignity and safety (if you think those things are worth preserving, which most decent people do) is to say 'no male people in the women's changing room'. And you come up with a different solution - more mixed sex facilities or even men not beating up other men in the men's changing room. So now we ask ourselves, yes, more mixed changing rooms, alongside single sex is a good idea - why don't we do that? (or have a third category in sports compeitions?) And that can be answered by referring to the charming poster EDGuy89. Nothing but complete capitulation is acceptable. No compromise because that would mean women not validating male identities and that's what women are there for. I'm not going to report that poster because that post is highly instructive. Because I've seen that kind of post time and again from the 'just be kind' brigade - they're the ones posing with the baseball bats in trans colours and the blood stained T shirts saying 'I punch terfs'. They're the ones sending death threats to women who campaign solely for women (though no-one, and certainly no woman, attacks trans people who campaign solely for trans people - again, women must include everyone, though everyone else can exclude women no bother). And the thing is - no one calls that 'hate'. Because despising women is so ingrained in our society that no one sees it anymore.

So are you saying that it's possible for a human to change sex? How? A woman is an adult human female. It's not possible for an adult human male to become female. Taking female hormones and having surgery doesn't make a man a woman. So please - enlighten me (and everyone else who's reading) how what I've said - that no-one can change sex - isn't factual and true.

No - just facts. It is not possible for anyone to change sex. 'Woman' is not a costume to be put on by a man who's struggling with manhood. Perhaps if more men helped those men fewer would need to medicate themselves and have surgery. But instead you expect women to be the support humans for those men, and you really don't like it when women say 'no. no more.' And of course you want to forget Hubbard - because Hubbard is waking everyone up to the facts and you can't have that, can you? You know that everyone can see how incredibly unfair this situation is and people are starting to join the dots (including people who have DM'd me following my posts, thanking me for speaking up). And, yet again, not a single shred of sympathy for the women getting trampled all over. Not a second's thought spared for them. No idea that women might be reading your words in despair. Nini Manumua. Know her name.

More insulting than that male cheating a woman out of her rightful place on the team? No. Hubbard has done nothing to earn my respect, in fact he's done everything possible to lose it. So he doesn't get it. I couldn't care less what he's done to himself in terms of medication and surgery - a man who takes hormones and has surgery is still a man. If that man is a decent person I might go along with his delusion to make him feel better about himself. But this man? No. Lying is obscuring what is going on here. I will not be a part of that. You can do what you please and tell yourself you're doing the right thing, but you don't get to force that on anyone else. Interesting that you don't care about Nini Manumua losing her place, in part because this is happening in NZ, in a slightly obscure sport ('niche', as you keep saying), but at the same time you care about me misgendering Hubbard. Why might that be? What's the difference between these two lifters? Why is one worthy of respect and one not? Answers on a postcard...

fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wow. > > "a man who's cheated a woman out of her place". Yes, it's really shocking, isn't it? When you strip out the obfuscating verbiage that's what you're left with. He's already cheated 3 women out of medal positions at the Pacific Games. Luckily NZ are getting a lot of global condemnation for this, it's really waking people up to the reality of the situation (despite the writing being on the wall for years), lots of former Olympians speaking out and even Jacinda Ardem only gave muted endorsement for this. One of those occasions where a picture says a thousand words.

fishbiscuits Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm not trying to shut you up. It's the lounge. > Say whatever you want. > > I am merely providing a counterpoint to your > bigoted views. Only you're not. You haven't actually engaged with a single thing I've said, other that to lie and claim that I've said things I haven't, and call basic facts, all verifiable, bigotry. You're nothing new or original, I've seen it all before, the insults, the shutting down of debate, the refusal to actually engage with the substance of what's being said, the deflection. You just don't think it matters when a woman gets cheated out of her place. You call it niche because it's happening on the other side of the world and because you have no idea of the scale of it (Hubbard isn't the only man who's cheated a woman out of her place at the Tokyo Olympics, and the Olympics aren't the only sporting competition out there) - though any decent person knows that one woman cheated in this way is one woman too many. So we have here why this issue never gets raised on the EDF - the thread has been taken over by someone who, by their own admission, knows and cares little about the issue at hand but is going to share his pearls of wisdom anyway, and someone who doesn't want the conversation to happen at all, so tries to end it with insults but no actual argument.

Mate, all you're doing there is showing your own inability to give a damn about women and girls, and your increasingly desperate attempts to shut me up. It's actually very instructive. I'm happy to leave it to those reading to look into what's been said and perhaps research further if they're so inclined.

No - the US are up to their neck in this with ever-growing numbers of clinics dedicated to medicalizing children's personalities and wrecking their bodies (plenty of $$$$s to be made from turning children into lifelong patients). Biden and Harris have made it clear they will support self ID come what may and never-no-mind the cost to women and girls. Some very brave girls and young women are touring the US discussing the sport issue but the Democrats aren't interested. Canada is even worse. WE are leading the way. Why do you think the TRAs call us TERF Island? There may be precious little good to be said about the Tories but Liz Truss and Kemi Badenoch know exactly what's what here, certainly far more so than most of Labour, even the women MPs (honourable exception: Rosie Duffield) - even Jess Phillips won't stick her neck out and as for H Harman... The Lords are also doing good work - Baroness Nicholson, Lord Philip Hunt, Baroness Grey-Thompson, Baroness Fox. This is a cross-party issue and the Lords seem to have a better handle on working in that way than the Commons.

On Radio 4 yesterday a man who identifies as a woman, Joanna Harper, who was involved in the IOC decision in 2015, stated on Woman's Hour that in 2015 the data wasn't especially robust but never mind, it was more important to allow men who identify as women to compete as women than consider the impact on women, and in another programme, compared this situation with lesbians taking the place of straight women. This second programme was The Moral Maze, who had 4 male people as the 'experts', discussing participation in women's sport. Where was Emma Hilton? Where was Sharron Davies? Yes, I have an agenda. My agenda is standing up for the rights of women and girls, wherever they are in the world. Yes, I'm angry. This situation has come about by ever allowing a man to call himself a woman. We have been shouting from the rooftops about this for years, to be continually shut down with cries of 'bigot', 'transphobe', 'unkind', 'it'll never happen'. Enough. I'm done with being kind or polite about this. I'm done with watching women and girls being dumped on by the kind and inclusive brigade who care nothing for them. I daresay this post will be reported, and I daresay that Admin will delete it. But if one woman or girl reads it and knows that there are people out there standing up for them, that's enough. If one person who's starting to feel disquiet about what they're reading in the papers and this encourages them to find out more, that's enough. WOMAN noun adult human female

Wow. I?m actually really shocked at how little some people think of women athletes. You have no idea, or more likely couldn?t care less, at how much of an advantage male people, even if they have transitioned (and the IOC require very little in the way of meaningful transition), have over women in sport. The requirement is simply to lower testosterone to a level that is still over 3x higher than that of a woman, and disregards every other advantage that male athletes have, such as greater heart and lung capacity, narrower pelvis, longer limbs. In answer to your question, however, Sharron Davies has experience of competing against doping East Germans, and she has been a strong voice in this debate, standing up for the rights of women and girls to compete safely and fairly. As she has just said today on Twitter ?those who stay silent are complicit, if you?re not part of the solution you?re part of the probem.? And judging by Twitter, and indeed this thread, there are plenty out there for whom that fits the Bill exactly.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Haven't got time to read that so I will not > contribute to the discussion. Sorry, but please > can you summarise your points better before > starting a new thread. I'm not your secretary, malumba. It's a shame you can't spare 5 minutes to read this article, which lays everything out far better than I can, and from someone who's an expert in the field, but that's OK, you don't have to comment.

We also got offered a place there. My husband went to look round and liked it a lot. My main reservation is that they start their GCSE subjects a year early, which I didn't like as I feel it narrows the curriculum too early. However, if we didn't have other options up our sleeve I would have gone for it and seen how it went. I definitely wouldn't dismiss it.

This article by the aforementioned Ross Tucker lays it all out (share token) https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9b297206-d2bc-11eb-b50d-ece47261907f?shareToken=59149129aeb801fc084a51e627daffd0

I started a thread celebrating the efforts and talent of a young woman, who has been denied the opportunity she has worked towards for many years. I'm sorry that you don't think that's worth anyone's time. I'm sorry you regard women's and girls' sport as 'a fringe issue'. However, you don't need to stay here, you know. (I've been on the EDF for many years, though I haven't posted for a long while. I have very real concerns about women's and girls' rights and have decided to speak up and speak out on them. Of course there will always be those who don't want those concerns raised, and that deserves scrutiny of its own. Women's and girls' sport isn't a fringe issue - that's incredibly dismissive.)

No, they won't. Why do many police forces record sex as whatever the arrested person says it is, no questions asked, certainly no GRC or diagnosis required? We absolutely do need to listen to prison governors - I find that extraordinary that anyone would want to ignore the voices of those on the ground.

I didn't claim that. That is your interpretation of what I said, which is that increasing numbers of male sex offenders are claiming to be trans in order to get housed in the women's prison estate or have their sentences reduced. This is a known *fact*, prison governors have been raising this for a while. The issue there is with self ID and the potential, which has already been realised, for it to be abused by predators. There is nothing offensive in what I said. I didn't mentioned what they wear - clothes aren't what make someone female, after all. I care about women and girls. I care about women's safe spaces, women's prisons, women's refuges and women's sports. There is a lot of hyperbole around this, claiming that transpeople are being banned from competing. They aren't - they merely have to compete according to their sex, just like everyone else. Otherwise, I assume you think it's fine for a heavyweight boxer to compete in the flyweight class, or an adult play on a children's football team. For anyone who is genuinely interested, Ross Tucker is a good person to follow on Twitter, and he has a piece in The Times today discussing it.

Nini Manumua is a young woman who should have been going to the Olympics to represent her country, New Zealand, in her sporting discipline of weightlifting. But she isn't. Her place has been taken by someone who has no business on a women's team. I won't name that person. I would like everyone to know her name instead.

Thank you.

That's fine, but in that case you need to remove the accusation of transphobia that I was responding to. Will you do that?

Why has my post been deleted? It wasn't about the case at hand, and was simply stating the background behind the stats cited by another poster earlier in the thread. If my post is to be deleted then please delete the (baseless) accusation of transphobia thrown out by *snowy*.

I will not comment further on this case but to answer Duncan?s question, and respond to snowy?s claim against FPFW - FPFW gathered their data using FOIs from prisons, after they had no luck in simply asking the Ministry of Justice for the information. About a week after they published their findings, the MoJ released the official data which showed that FPFW had actually slightly underestimated the case. Prisoner governors have also raised concerns about this. That?s all I?m going to say, but I wasn?t going to allow yet another casual accusation of transphobia go unaddressed.

@thewitchofdullness the Met, along with many other forces, have stated that they will record the sex of anyone they arrest as whatever that person chooses, regardless of whether any meaningful transition has occurred. But as others have said - this could end up being a male crime recorded as female. And that matters, a lot. We know that men increasingly ?identify? as women on arrest in order to enter the women?s prison estate. The police are facilitating this. But self ID is not law in this country (thank God).

I think we can safely say that these attacks were committed by someone male. Unfortunately in such instances the woke idiots at the Met think it's more important to massage the feelings of an assailant than deal with facts.