Biological males in women's sport

Zorya

https://twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1051507432847884289

McKinnon, a college professor, thinks that the reasons men outperform women in sport are sociological rather than biological. McKinnon states ''there is NO relationship between endogenous testosterone and performance. None.''

If that thread loads properly, you can read a conversation between McKinnon and Kirsti Miller, where they decry the necessity for altering hormone profiles at all in trans athletes.

PlaneSpeeking

Zorya wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1051507432847884289

McKinnon, a college professor, thinks that the reasons men outperform women in sport are sociological rather than biological. McKinnon states ''there is NO relationship between endogenous testosterone and performance. None.''

If that thread loads properly, you can read a conversation between McKinnon and Kirsti Miller, where they decry the necessity for altering hormone profiles at all in trans athletes.

What precisely is McKinnon a Doctor of ? Lunacy Studies ???

Zorya

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

What precisely is McKinnon a Doctor of ? Lunacy Studies ???

Philosophy :rolleyes: You know... philo - love of, sophia - wisdom/knowledge :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Gravelly

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

What precisely is McKinnon a Doctor of ? Lunacy Studies ???

From her university page:

I work in metaphysics, action theory, decision and game theory, metaethics, ethics, feminism, and gender and women's issues. I am also a feminist. While most of my work would be considered "mainstream," I often approach issues from feminist perspectives, even when it isn't explicit.

Zorya

Gravelly wrote: »

From her university page:

I work in metaphysics, action theory, decision and game theory, metaethics, ethics, feminism, and gender and women's issues. I am also a feminist. While most of my work would be considered "mainstream," I often approach issues from feminist perspectives, even when it isn't explicit.

Ahh. McKinnon the Metaphysician. :rolleyes:

2 Scoops

I gotta be honest, seeing idiocy like that tweet annoys me far more than it should. A faux professor with a faux degree who's cheating honest hard working Women speaking in such an arrogant and condescending tone, it's also like they're living in a dystopia not based in reality but somehow because the system is twisted so much they are validated by their peers. It's scary how much power people with similar lines of thinking hold over campus's and faculty at least in the US.

If someone asks me why I wanted Trump to win I'll point them to lunatics like that "professor". Imagine if they got in power again. Some posters defend these things as isolated situations but it's not the case, give an inch and they'll take a mile.

wexie

Gravelly wrote: »

From her university page:

I work in metaphysics, action theory, decision and game theory, metaethics, ethics, feminism, and gender and women's issues. I am also a feminist. While most of my work would be considered "mainstream," I often approach issues from feminist perspectives, even when it isn't explicit.

mainstream sure ain't what it used to be

Gravelly

wexie wrote: »

mainstream sure ain't what it used to be

If the mainstream is now a man, pretending to be a woman, while teaching feminism, and thrashing women in sports, then I'm glad I'm not mainstream anymore.

3DataModem

Noveight wrote: »

Reminds me of the story of Laurel Hubbard (formerly Yannie), a trans weightlifter from New Zealand.

She'll be competing in the 2018 Commonwealth games in April. The results of those events should be interesting to see.

Fixed typo for you.

PlaneSpeeking

Zorya wrote: »

Philosophy :rolleyes: You know... philo - love of, sophia - wisdom/knowledge :rolleyes::rolleyes:

If she loves wisdom that much why is she f**king it over ?????

God I bet she's a pain in the hole to have a pint with.

PlaneSpeeking

Gravelly wrote: »

If the mainstream is now a man, pretending to be a woman, while teaching feminism, and thrashing women in sports, then I'm glad I'm not mainstream anymore.

Genuine query - are there any similar benefits to be availed of by me saying I'm a bloke ?

I mean I wear pants all the time, know the offside rule and only sit through rom-coms as sometimes Matthew McConnaughey gets his kit off.

I should be able to exploit that!

Gravelly

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Genuine query - are there any similar benefits to be availed of by me saying I'm a bloke ?

I mean I wear pants all the time, know the offside rule and only sit through rom-coms as sometimes Matthew McConnaughey gets his kit off.

I should be able to exploit that!

No more queing for the jacks on a night out, and it only takes 10 minutes to get ready. Would be worth it for those alone.

PlaneSpeeking

Gravelly wrote: »

No more queing for the jacks on a night out, and it only takes 10 minutes to get ready. Would be worth it for those alone.

I do that already!!!! At Liverpool Airport the other week - ladies had 12 people queuing, lads zero.

They have cubicles, no worries!

3DataModem

Wibbs wrote: »

men die younger too.

The reasons men die younger is largely societal rather than biological;
> More likely to be victim of violent crime
> More likely to die in war
> More likely to die by their own hand
> More likely to be deprioritised for medical care

The biological reasons include;
> More likely to be aggressive
> More likely to do risky stuff (motorbikes, etc)

PlaneSpeeking

Today is Martina Navratilova's 62nd birthday.

Harder and tougher - both mentally and physically - than most other female (and a lot of the male) sports champions ever.

And all woman. Yet, would definitely lose to a comparable male tennis player (i doubt she'd get a point off McEnroe at their respective peaks).

But if you started allowing bigger, stronger competitors - i.e. McKinnon in a tennis skirt - she'd be hammered.

Why should her achievements be taken away by sociological and politically correct nonsense ????

GreeBo

If you have a medical procedure to transition from a man to a women, it no more makes you biologically a woman than a red head dying her hair blonde becomes a biological blonde.

Self ID might be fine in a social context but once you involve other people we should revert to the definition of the terms male and female. If you want a third or three hundredth noun then by all means go ahead, but it wont change the fact that you are male or female from birth* despite what other labels you put on yourself.


* Vast majority of cases, yadda, yadda

Wibbs

Zorya wrote: »

McKinnon, a college professor, thinks that the reasons men outperform women in sport are sociological rather than biological. McKinnon states ''there is NO relationship between endogenous testosterone and performance. None.''

Hahahahahahahahhahaha. Oh wait... What a gold plated atomic powered grade A moron. Testosterone is about the most anabolic naturally occurring substances going. The clear differences in strength, explosive power, bigger denser bones, denser muscles and lower fat between men and women is almost entirely down to that hormone flooding the male body in puberty. Well clear differences if someone isn't mistaking ideology for biology.

When doping is found in sports, one of the biggies that comes up in failed drug tests is testosterone or similar molecules. The usual doping regime is testosterone, human growth hormone and some variety of red blood cell count enhancer. Look at the pro cyclists who were found out down the years. All of them included testosterone in the mix. They didn't do it for the laugh. It makes for big gains in competition. The first drug test regimes in sport specifically looked for testosterone. Testosterone is an anabolic steroid. More specifically an androgenic anabolic steroid. Androgen, from the Greek "Andro" for "man"(women have them too, but at much lower levels. Naturally occurring higher levels are considered a medical problem).

So no, not benefit in sport at all at all. :rolleyes: That McKinnon and others are publicly claiming this kind of nonsense shows how far down the rabbit hole they've gone. And how utterly clueless they are.

wexie

3DataModem wrote: »

The reasons men die younger is largely societal rather than biological;
> More likely to be victim of violent crime
> More likely to die in war
> More likely to die by their own hand
> More likely to be deprioritised for medical care

The biological reasons include;
> More likely to be aggressive
> More likely to do risky stuff (motorbikes, etc)

And more likely to be married to a woman. :pac:


I'll go hide behind the couch

PlaneSpeeking

Wibbs wrote: »

What a gold plated atomic powered grade A moron.

Internet Awards 2018 "Best Descriptor" goes to Wibbs!

keano_afc

Maybe she only identifies as a meta-physicist.

ceadaoin.

Zorya wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1051507432847884289

McKinnon, a college professor, thinks that the reasons men outperform women in sport are sociological rather than biological. McKinnon states ''there is NO relationship between endogenous testosterone and performance. None.''

If that thread loads properly, you can read a conversation between McKinnon and Kirsti Miller, where they decry the necessity for altering hormone profiles at all in trans athletes.

Silly women, we just don't try hard enough. I'm thankful McKinnon has arrived to show us all how it's done.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Genuine query - are there any similar benefits to be availed of by me saying I'm a bloke ?

I mean I wear pants all the time, know the offside rule and only sit through rom-coms as sometimes Matthew McConnaughey gets his kit off.

I should be able to exploit that!

Funnily enough, I haven't seen women who identify as men dominating business and sports. Have any received an award for men in business or sports or similar? Just a couple of weeks ago, a man who comes to work dressed as a woman sometimes, was named in the top 100 Female Executives by FT. Has also been named before as a female rolemodel. I mean ffs. A crossdresser is under the "trans" umbrella now and is definitely a woman, but only sometimes. Even the outfits he wears on his "woman days" would see a real woman sent home probably and definitely not taken seriously in the financial industry.

It only seems to go one way. I wonder why that is?

wexie

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Just a couple of weeks ago, a man who comes to work dressed as a woman sometimes, was named in the top 100 Female Executives by FT. Has also been named as a female rolemodel. I mean ffs. It only seems to go one way.

Isn't it interesting that a lot of the very same people that would be applauding this are also the ones waffling on about the patriarchy?

Zorya

wexie wrote: »

Isn't it interesting that a lot of the very same people that would be applauding this are also the ones waffling on about the patriarchy?

That is the thing really. The contradictions. How can people like Wild Flower McKinnon get away with such sloppy theory?
The more it is sought to annul biological gender/sex the more emphasis it seems is put on genderised objects, behaviour and appearance. Which is completely contradictory. So, a girl child liking mud pies is showing a taste for activity from the ''other'' gender and might be born in the wrong body, instead of simply being a girl who likes mud (or swords etc., or conversely a boy who likes long hair and dancing etc.)
There seems to be a hyper-sexualisation of the preferred gender's traits among trans activists. Brassy makeup, big boobs, bouffant blondiness etc. And that hyper-sexualisation is being extended too into childhood - children are being asked to consider their gender and sexuality many years before such matters should ever cross their minds. I was seriously going on 20 before I gave a damn about any of that, I would have been mortified to think about things like that as a child.
This sexualised genderification (I hope I have invented a new word!) is why I see a fine line between some of this sh!t and paedophilia normalisation.

ceadaoin.

Zorya wrote: »

This sexualised genderification (I hope I have invented a new word!) is why I see a fine line between some of this sh!t and paedophilia normalisation.

The push to portray children as able to consent to medical and hormonal treatment and make life changing decisions is iffy IMO and there are lots of trans people who don't agree with this at all. I mean, where do you draw the line about what they can consent to? What's next? We know that the gay rights movement was piggy backed on by more unsavoury types in the 70s and 80s who tried to use it to further their own agenda. Wouldn't be surprised if we find it's happened again.

Zorya

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The push to portray children as able to consent to medical and hormonal treatment and make life changing decisions is iffy IMO and there are lots of trans people who don't agree with this at all. I mean, where do you draw the line about what they can consent to? What's next? We know that the gay rights movement was piggy backed on by more unsavoury types in the 70s and 80s who tried to use it to further their own agenda. Wouldn't be surprised if we find it's happened again.

Well, if you have ''disrespected'' children being publicly invited to skype McKinnon the Metaphysician so that they can find their ''glitter family'' and their real bodies - I mean ta fcuk!? Didn't that used to be called grooming or something?

DEFTLEFTHAND

Zorya wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1051507432847884289

McKinnon, a college professor, thinks that the reasons men outperform women in sport are sociological rather than biological. McKinnon states ''there is NO relationship between endogenous testosterone and performance. None.''

If that thread loads properly, you can read a conversation between McKinnon and Kirsti Miller, where they decry the necessity for altering hormone profiles at all in trans athletes.

It's pure denial of science and nature. A common trait with this type of extremist.

A 5 yr old could refute what 'Professor' McKinnon has stated here.

DEFTLEFTHAND

How somebody like this could be lecturing at a third level institution is downright frightening.

These pseudo scientific courses have no place on a college campus.

Zorya

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It's pure denial of science and nature. A common trait with this type of extremist.

A 5 yr old could refute what 'Professor' McKinnon has stated here.

A 5 year old would probably say give back the medal, you didn't win, ya big cheat. Pointing out the emperor's naked state. But no one else in public life is allowed to - they might be actually hounded out of their career if they did.

wexie

Zorya wrote: »

But no one else in public life is allowed to - they might be actually hounded out of their career if they did.

Not might, would.

Gazzmonkey

Hande hoche! wrote: »

From what I understand, they test the level of testosterone. Still imagine there is some advantages post transition in terms of bone density and muscle mass owing to their previous gender.

lol... previous gender, nice way of putting it.

But I agree its unfair to let Frank the lady compete against actual females, but the world has gone mental about over equality.