Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sticking with sport, let?s consider Emily Bridges. A man. I can say that with respect because Emily is currently competing in cycling as a gender non-confirming man for his university in the men?s team. Grand.


Emily is also planning to compete in the Commonwealth Games on the national women?s team.


Can someone tell me exactly what it is that I?m supposed to respect about this entitled man?s identity? Or are we still on ?deeply insulting?? Because I?ll tell you what?s deeply insulting. Women being gaslit by this absolute BS and missing out.

Dulwich Hamlet Women's Team are playing against a team comprised solely of male players.

[edited as this is not the photo of the team that will be playing. Interesting that we're not getting to see that team - I wonder why?]


All lovely and inclusive and a world first - and not a care for the safety of the women players.


Still 'deeply insulting'?


https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/all-transgender-team-plays-local-football-club-in-world-first/

Listened to Putin this morning. He just stood up for JK Rowling but he's just trying to divide the west - that's why I don't want division like this if he does.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/putin-jk-rowling-cancel-culture-b2043978.html


He also said we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and then persuaded Japan that we didn't - that's a South Park 2009 plot called "Whale Whores".

Given that JK Rowling is currently pouring substantial amounts of her own money into ensuring the safety of children in institutions in Ukraine, that his forces are attacking, he's got a bloody cheek. You can donate to her charity Lumos, she is matching all donations up to ?1 million. She published an article about Lumos's work in Ukraine here: https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/hidden-victims/


However, no doubt the more stupid will now say, if Putin agrees with JKR then we were right that she's a horrible person.

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But time and time again...raising some practical

> concerns gets conflated with 'hatred'.....and

> instantly dismissed...


When a certain poster, time and time again makes a point of calling trans women "men", then I'm sorry but their posts cannot be described as "practical concerns", they are quite obviously being deliberately confrontational and disrespectful (and these are the mildest words I can use to describe this behavior).


To then complain that sensible debate is being shut down is absolutely ridiculous. Surely you can see this.

oimissus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Because they're being bullied by the 'just be kind' 'can't see the issue' 'deeply insulting' crowd? I hope they turn up and then refuse to play.


You might want to take a step back and spend a little bit of time learning about the Women's team at Dulwich Hamlet before jumping to those sorts of conclusions.


I'm not particularly involved but I've been to a few women's games, and my family sponsor a player in the squad and they've always made it clear, as a team they are open to participation and support from trans supporters. Some of them have made that support clear on their bios in the match programs, others have talked about it publicly in response to the abuse and on-line pile on that they've been receiving for being involved in this match. When someone on Mumsnet brands you a "traitor to your sex" because you're going to play a game of football, the world truly has gone mad and none of them deserve the online pile on, on here or anywhere else.


Please remember these are real people, a number of which live in this area and read this forum, and the suggestion that they are being bullied into something because they're too weak to stand up for themselves is pretty offensive. If you wouldn't say it to their face, don't say it on here.


For the record, I agree that the participation of trans-women in competitive sport raises some extremely complex issues which need to be addressed to protect women's sport, as does the access of self-identifying people to single sex spaces and the risks that poses to women including trans-women.


But unlike the majority of people on here, I would guess, I have direct experience of working with and being friends with people who are trans and gender non-conforming - most of whom are a lot younger than me. The idea that women who are transitioning are trying to "take something away" from women or are inherently a danger to women is laughable when you look at the actual lived experiences of the vast majority of people in that category. But it's easy to lump them all into a largely dehumanising category when you only ever focus on the extreme examples (on both sides).

I?m glad to hear none of the women felt bullied. You mention your family sponsor a player - tell me, if that player had spoken up to say that she didn?t believe that transwomen are women and she wasn?t happy about playing a team of male players - would she have lost that sponsorship? Because we know that that?s exactly what happened to women obliged to race against Lia Thomas - that if they spoke up or refused to swim, they would lose their sponsorship, their college scholarships. Hence my comment. Happy to be proved wrong.


With regards to the rest of your post - well, that all hinges on your belief that humans can change sex. Many people don?t share that belief. No one *has* to share that belief. And I?ll finish by directing you to Spartacus?s post with the information released today from the EHRC.

oimissus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?m glad to hear none of the women felt bullied.

> You mention your family sponsor a player - tell

> me, if that player had spoken up to say that she

> didn?t believe that transwomen are women and she

> wasn?t happy about playing a team of male players

> - would she have lost that sponsorship? Because we

> know that that?s exactly what happened to women

> obliged to race against Lia Thomas - that if they

> spoke up or refused to swim, they would lose their

> sponsorship, their college scholarships. Hence my

> comment. Happy to be proved wrong.


This. 100%. People of sane & rational thought are being bullied & cancelled out of existence. People are afraid to speak up, specially those who do not come from wealth / are not financially stable & therefore cannot afford to lose what little they have.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...