Biological males in women's sport

Roger Hassenforder

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Roger I’m not meaning to be nasty at all, Effects asked how I could possibly have made the mistake and I explained how at the time I perceived Sonia O’ Sullivan. I probably wouldn’t think the same way now as I did then because I’ve since become aware of the fact that my perception can be skewed at times towards what my brain tells me does or doesn’t conform to my idea of a woman. It’s still fundamentally based upon my ability to observe the presence or absence of physical characteristics.

Ah Jack in fairness, i think you're being very unfair on Sonia. She's not my type, but very obviously a woman,even at her peak

Paddy Cow

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Roger I’m not meaning to be nasty at all, Effects asked how I could possibly have made the mistake and I explained how at the time I perceived Sonia O’ Sullivan. I probably wouldn’t think the same way now as I did then because I’ve since become aware of the fact that my perception can be skewed at times towards what my brain tells me does or doesn’t conform to my idea of a woman. It’s still fundamentally based upon my ability to observe the presence or absence of physical characteristics.

You're making progress :pac:

Paddy Cow

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Nope, biology is everything. Have a look at the results for the 2012 London Olympics as an example.

Shelley Ann Frazer Pryce won gold in the women's 100m with a time of 10.75

Of the 54 men who competed in Round 1 heats of the men's competition, 51 of them ran faster than her.

If any one of those 51 men declared themselves a transwoman tomorrow they would be a gold medal winner overnight in the women's competition, the majority aren't within an asses roar of the men's final.

Pole vault: Women's gold medal height: 4.75m
All 24 men in the qualifying round for the men's competition cleared 5.20m and the top 12 cleared 5.50m to reach the final. Incidentally the women's world record which has stood for 10 years is 5.06m. The world record holder wouldn't even make the men's qualifying round.

Nothing to do with biology though...... must be all those women not trying hard enough.

https://www.olympic.org/london-2012/athletics/100m-men

Absolutely! Just get rid of sex segregated sports and that will give women the motivation they need to do better

One eyed Jack

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Nope, biology is everything. Have a look at the results for the 2012 London Olympics as an example.

...

Nothing to do with biology though...... must be all those women not trying hard enough.

I didn’t once ever say their achievements in their chosen sport had nothing to do with their biology. In fact what I said was that in the same way as their biology will give some people an advantage over others in some ways, in other ways it will mean they are at a disadvantage where others will have an advantage due to their biology. The IOC as one body governing sports have decided that participants will no longer be required to have surgery. It’s going to mean that some people will be pushed out, and it will also give other people opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have had. I don’t think it will upset any sport to the degree people are claiming here, and having to make their points with outlier circumstances which aren’t in any way representative of the number of athletes who are transgender who are already participating in sports and aren’t competing at elite levels. You might as well be pointing out that elite athletes of the same sex have biological advantages over their competition. It’s far too obvious a point to make though.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

metaoblivia wrote: »

You brought my girl Simone into this so I have to respond.

I love Simone, and believe her to be the best female athlete in the world. But all of her tumbling passes were performed by men first. In the case of the triple double, there aren't many men who have done it - just a handful. But they definitely did it first. Those guys don't get the media attention because they aren't American and because in Western countries, women's gymnastics always gets more attention than men's gymnastics. And while Simone has dominated the women's sport since 2013, Kohei Uchimura on the men's side dominated the sport for almost a decade.

The one true directly comparable event for men and women in gymnastics is vault. Vault is a better comparison than floor because men and women have very different requirements on floor. But vault is virtually the same, except that women's vault is set a few centimeters lower to account for a lower average height among the athletes. Simone is the best female vaulter right now and one of the best ever, but her vaults - even the Biles - do not compare in difficulty to the best male vaulters.

Men's vault final is INSANE. The most difficult vault a woman has ever landed is a double front tuck, which not even Simone does. Only one woman - Yelena Produnova - has ever landed a decent double front in competition and even she only ever managed it a few times. By comparison, the double front vault isn't even difficult enough to get a male gymnast into World/Olympic vault finals anymore because the guys are doing it with twists and in piked position. One guy has even attempted a triple front.

If a guy with a standard double front decided to identify and compete as a woman, he would immediately become the best female vaulter in the world, no contest, even against Simone. He could probably be brought up to speed on floor pretty quickly too, considering men do 5-6 tumbling passes in their routines compared to 4 for the women.

All this to say, there is absolutely a difference between men and women in most sports, including the more feminine ones like gymnastics, and even an athlete as great as Simone can't bridge that biological gap, no matter what hyperbole the announcers use when calling her routines.

(the one skill Simone's done that she is truly the first gymnast to ever compete is the double-twisting double tuck dismount on balance beam. Men don't compete balance beam)

It’s a pleasure to read such a knowledgeable post.

One eyed Jack

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Ah Jack in fairness, i think you're being very unfair on Sonia. She's not my type, but very obviously a woman,even at her peak

I don’t mean to be unfair, but I couldn’t guarantee I wouldn’t make the same mistake even now if a woman didn’t conform to my expectations of how a woman should look. That’s why I’m keeping an open mind at least on the Chinese athletes in question. I think there’s a malicious attempt to suggest they are men based upon their achievements. Had they not performed as well as they did, there wouldn’t be a word questioning their sex, and I’m wondering is this the way sports are going to go now? Where it was once acceptable for the losers to to accuse other competitors of using performance enhancing drugs, now it will become acceptable to accuse fellow competitors of being transgender. The whole thing just seems very unsportsmanlike to me tbh.

ceadaoin.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t mean to be unfair, but I couldn’t guarantee I wouldn’t make the same mistake even now if a woman didn’t conform to my expectations of how a woman should look. That’s why I’m keeping an open mind at least on the Chinese athletes in question. I think there’s a malicious attempt to suggest they are men based upon their achievements. Had they not performed as well as they did, there wouldn’t be a word questioning their sex, and I’m wondering is this the way sports are going to go now? Where it was once acceptable for the losers to to accuse other competitors of using performance enhancing drugs, now it will become acceptable to accuse fellow competitors of being transgender. The whole thing just seems very unsportsmanlike to me tbh.

No, it's the fact that they look exactly like men, speak exactly like men and appear to have male genitalia that is leading to people questioning whether they are in fact men. Nothing got to do with their achievements ffs

I mean, you really think the obviously female Sonia O'Sullivan looks like a man but these people? Nope totally not men? I think you need your eye tested tbh!

Paddy Cow

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I didn’t once ever say their achievements in their chosen sport had nothing to do with their biology. In fact what I said was that in the same way as their biology will give some people an advantage over others in some ways, in other ways it will mean they are at a disadvantage where others will have an advantage due to their biology. The IOC as one body governing sports have decided that participants will no longer be required to have surgery. It’s going to mean that some people will be pushed out, and it will also give other people opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have had. I don’t think it will upset any sport to the degree people are claiming here, and having to make their points with outlier circumstances which aren’t in any way representative of the number of athletes who are transgender who are already participating in sports and aren’t competing at elite levels. You might as well be pointing out that elite athletes of the same sex have biological advantages over their competition. It’s far too obvious a point to make though.

Jack I will forever be grateful to you for pointing out the buzzer control button on my dryer but you are all over the place in this thread.

You made the point about the rugby player who wiped the pitch with everyone and talked about Simone. Every so often, whether it's men's or women's sports, someone will come along who is a beast and is the gold standard to beat. Just look at the Williams sisters. They dominated women's tennis.

The problem with biological males in women's sports is that they are nearly always guaranteed to beat their biological female competitors, not because they have trained harder but because they are simply stronger and faster. They are not a once in a generation phenomenon that younger athletics can learn from and aspire to be. It's becoming a regular occurrence which is going to demoralise female athletes.

As an analogy, imagine if they allowed athletes who dope to compete with athletes who don't dope. Who do you think would win? Of course the athlete who takes performance enhancing drugs is always going to beat the clean competitor. Trans women don't intentionally dope but puberty did it for them.

Whatever the ethics about allowing/disallowing trans women to compete in female sports, can you at least admit that their male puberty fuelled by testosterone gives them an unfair biological advantage over their female counterparts?

ingalway

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Roger I’m not meaning to be nasty at all, Effects asked how I could possibly have made the mistake and I explained how at the time I perceived Sonia O’ Sullivan. I probably wouldn’t think the same way now as I did then because I’ve since become aware of the fact that my perception can be skewed at times towards what my brain tells me does or doesn’t conform to my idea of a woman. It’s still fundamentally based upon my ability to observe the presence or absence of physical characteristics.

"What my brain tells me does or doesn't conform to my idea of a woman". This is the problem - your perception of what you think a woman should be like is based on GENDER which is how a woman presents herself - long/short hair, makeup or no makeup, skirt/trousers - most cultures have gender norms as to what they think a woman should look like which are often stereotypical and limiting. Whether a woman wants to dress like a stripper or a lumberjack does not change the fact that she is a female, which is ONLY based on her biological sex, XX, and nothing else. A Trans GENDER woman is altering only their gender appearance; they can never alter their biological sex, XY.
Use biological science to determine what a woman is (1st clue: no penis) and stop judging women on how they should look based on your limiting gender stereotypes.

One eyed Jack

ceadaoin. wrote: »

No, it's the fact that they look exactly like men, speak exactly like men and appear to have male genitalia that is leading to people questioning whether they are in fact men. Nothing got to do with their achievements ffs

I mean, you really think the obviously female Sonia O'Sullivan looks like a man but these people? Nope totally not men? I think you need your eye tested tbh!

Would they have come to prominence at all were it not for their achievements? I would suggest they wouldn’t have, and there wouldn’t be any questioning what they look like or that they appear to have all the physical characteristics associated with the male sex.

As far as Sonia goes, I questioned at the time whether she was a woman as she didn’t conform to my expectations of what a woman should look like. That was back in the 90’s. Of course I know now she’s a woman, but at the time, I questioned it because she didn’t look like any woman I’d known up to that point.

Because I now know that Sonia is a woman, it would stand to reason that I wouldn’t immediately be given to thinking the Chinese athletes are of the male sex. I’m saying that as someone who pointed out it was immediately obvious just by glancing at McKinnons thighs at the time that something wasn’t kosher.

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Whatever the ethics about allowing/disallowing trans women to compete in female sports, can you at least admit that their male puberty fuelled by testosterone gives them an unfair biological advantage over their female counterparts?

Absolutely their biology gives male athletes a number of advantages over their female counterparts in the same sports as the rules and qualifying criteria for competitions are right now. It also means that biological women will have a number of advantages that males won’t have. It absolutely does not mean that women won’t be able to compete against men or vice versa, or that we’ll see any massive dropout of women in sports. I think that’s just naysayer fearmongering tbh. I see what the IOC are trying to do as making opportunities in sports available to everyone regardless of their sex. I just can’t see that as a bad thing.

I don’t think the current rules will stay as they are, they couldn’t, and I can see the rules being changed again in the future to make opportunities in sports available to even more people. Advances in sports technology have enabled people to do things that weren’t thought of as humanly possible before someone actually went and did it, and there are all sorts of limitations on the technology athletes can use to enhance their performance. I imagine permitting athletes to compete against each other in sports regardless of their sex is only the beginning of a revolution in sports as we know them today. I don’t imagine it was ever going to be possible to exclude people who are transgender from participating in sports, and I don’t think it would be fair on them to attempt to do so. Once they meet the qualifying criteria of the governing bodies of their chosen sports, that should be enough to allow them to compete. They might win, and they might not, but the idea that women’s sports are going to be overrun with men in spandex and singlets romping to victory and making a clean sweep at the Olympics? I just don’t see it tbh.

I don’t know do female athletes themselves care all that much either unless they’re directly affected by the issue which is why I don’t think there’s any “silent majority of women afraid to speak up for fear of a backlash”. I know there are a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes, but I don’t think they should be able to dictate who should and shouldn’t be able to compete against them. If they don’t want to participate or they think it’s unfair, then there appears to be no shortage of support online at least to defend their honour. I’ll admit I’m curious to see will the same supporters put their money where their mouths are in support of women’s sports, because they sure as hell haven’t up to now.

Dante7

Jack, I suspect that you are an ardent believer of the mantra that "Transwomen are women", and that you are tying yourself up in all sorts of mental contortions to justify this belief. You are prepared to ignore science and to deny all women any achievement in sport, and to risk their safety in order to maintain this delusion.

If you are a male heterosexual, answer me this. If Transwomen are women, would you suck a lady dick?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Would they have come to prominence at all were it not for their achievements? I would suggest they wouldn’t have, and there wouldn’t be any questioning what they look like or that they appear to have all the physical characteristics associated with the male sex.

Their achievements depend on their biology.

As far as Sonia goes, I questioned at the time whether she was a woman as she didn’t conform to my expectations of what a woman should look like. That was back in the 90’s. Of course I know now she’s a woman, but at the time, I questioned it because she didn’t look like any woman I’d known up to that point.

You realise that’s just you, right? Sonia looks like a woman.

Because I now know that Sonia is a woman, it would stand to reason that I wouldn’t immediately be given to thinking the Chinese athletes are of the male sex. I’m saying that as someone who pointed out it was immediately obvious just by glancing at McKinnons thighs at the time that something wasn’t kosher.

You are making an analogy that doesn’t make sense to anybody but you, since you are the only person who thinks Sonia was a male. Not that any of this matters to your (insane) argument since you think that sports shouldn’t be divided by gender.

Absolutely their biology gives male athletes a number of advantages over their female counterparts in the same sports as the rules and qualifying criteria for competitions are right now. It also means that biological women will have a number of advantages that males won’t have. It absolutely does not mean that women won’t be able to compete against men or vice versa, or that we’ll see any massive dropout of women in sports. I think that’s just naysayer fearmongering tbh. I see what the IOC are trying to do as making opportunities in sports available to everyone regardless of their sex. I just can’t see that as a bad thing.

And again the argument changes from your support of getting rid of all gender categorisations to support of the IOC which is a transgender issue only, with restrictions. Your claim that there will be little change to female competitiveness in sport is belied by your first sentence which admits biological differences.

I don’t think the current rules will stay as they are, they couldn’t, and I can see the rules being changed again in the future to make opportunities in sports available to even more people. Advances in sports technology have enabled people to do things that weren’t thought of as humanly possible before someone actually went and did it, and there are all sorts of limitations on the technology athletes can use to enhance their performance. I imagine permitting athletes to compete against each other in sports regardless of their sex is only the beginning of a revolution in sports as we know them today. I don’t imagine it was ever going to be possible to exclude people who are transgender from participating in sports, and I don’t think it would be fair on them to attempt to do so. Once they meet the qualifying criteria of the governing bodies of their chosen sports, that should be enough to allow them to compete. They might win, and they might not, but the idea that women’s sports are going to be overrun with men in spandex and singlets romping to victory and making a clean sweep at the Olympics? I just don’t see it tbh.

Again this is non sequitur followed by non sequitur. There’s a dozen different statements here, rules are going to change, transgenderism has to be accepted, some garbled nonsense about technology in sports, a circular argument about the rules of the sports bodies being the rules of the sports bodies, and a claim that female sports will not be overrun, when of course the biological facts - which you don’t deny - would indicate that they would.

I don’t know do female athletes themselves care all that much either unless they’re directly affected by the issue which is why I don’t think there’s any “silent majority of women afraid to speak up for fear of a backlash”. I know there are a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes, but I don’t think they should be able to dictate who should and shouldn’t be able to compete against them. If they don’t want to participate or they think it’s unfair, then there appears to be no shortage of support online at least to defend their honour. I’ll admit I’m curious to see will the same supporters put their money where their mouths are in support of women’s sports, because they sure as hell haven’t up to now.

Of course female athletes who are affected by this will be the most vocal, you’ve already denied the right of Navratilova her opinion.

I’m putting you on ignore now because the lack of logic coupled with the verbal diarrhoea is tiresome.

ingalway

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Would they have come to prominence at all were it not for their achievements? I would suggest they wouldn’t have, and there wouldn’t be any questioning what they look like or that they appear to have all the physical characteristics associated with the male sex.

As far as Sonia goes, I questioned at the time whether she was a woman as she didn’t conform to my expectations of what a woman should look like. That was back in the 90’s. Of course I know now she’s a woman, but at the time, I questioned it because she didn’t look like any woman I’d known up to that point.

Because I now know that Sonia is a woman, it would stand to reason that I wouldn’t immediately be given to thinking the Chinese athletes are of the male sex. I’m saying that as someone who pointed out it was immediately obvious just by glancing at McKinnons thighs at the time that something wasn’t kosher.

Absolutely their biology gives male athletes a number of advantages over their female counterparts in the same sports as the rules and qualifying criteria for competitions are right now. It also means that biological women will have a number of advantages that males won’t have. It absolutely does not mean that women won’t be able to compete against men or vice versa, or that we’ll see any massive dropout of women in sports. I think that’s just naysayer fearmongering tbh. I see what the IOC are trying to do as making opportunities in sports available to everyone regardless of their sex. I just can’t see that as a bad thing.

I don’t think the current rules will stay as they are, they couldn’t, and I can see the rules being changed again in the future to make opportunities in sports available to even more people. Advances in sports technology have enabled people to do things that weren’t thought of as humanly possible before someone actually went and did it, and there are all sorts of limitations on the technology athletes can use to enhance their performance. I imagine permitting athletes to compete against each other in sports regardless of their sex is only the beginning of a revolution in sports as we know them today. I don’t imagine it was ever going to be possible to exclude people who are transgender from participating in sports, and I don’t think it would be fair on them to attempt to do so. Once they meet the qualifying criteria of the governing bodies of their chosen sports, that should be enough to allow them to compete. They might win, and they might not, but the idea that women’s sports are going to be overrun with men in spandex and singlets romping to victory and making a clean sweep at the Olympics? I just don’t see it tbh.

I don’t know do female athletes themselves care all that much either unless they’re directly affected by the issue which is why I don’t think there’s any “silent majority of women afraid to speak up for fear of a backlash”. I know there are a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes, but I don’t think they should be able to dictate who should and shouldn’t be able to compete against them. If they don’t want to participate or they think it’s unfair, then there appears to be no shortage of support online at least to defend their honour. I’ll admit I’m curious to see will the same supporters put their money where their mouths are in support of women’s sports, because they sure as hell haven’t up to now.

Congratulations. I'd say with your utter drivel, exceptionally long winded utter drivel, you have probaly managed to kill this thread. You did exactly the same on the Yaniv/wax my balls thread. Well played. You would win Gold in the trans, non-binary, pan, gnc, lady penis Olympics.

ingalway

Dante7 wrote: »

Jack, I suspect that you are an ardent believer of the mantra that "Transwomen are women", and that you are tying yourself up in all sorts of mental contortions to justify this belief. You are prepared to ignore science and to deny all women any achievement in sport, and to risk their safety in order to maintain this delusion.

If you are a male heterosexual, answer me this. If Transwomen are women, would you suck a lady dick?

OR, if you were a female lesbian (can't believe I have to use female before lesbian but that is where we are) would you have a sexual relationship with a lady dick lesbian?

kildare lad

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Absolutely! Just get rid of sex segregated sports and that will give women the motivation they need to do better

That would be the end of women's sport

Paddy Cow

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Absolutely their biology gives male athletes a number of advantages over their female counterparts in the same sports as the rules and qualifying criteria for competitions are right now. It also means that biological women will have a number of advantages that males won’t have. It absolutely does not mean that women won’t be able to compete against men or vice versa, or that we’ll see any massive dropout of women in sports. I think that’s just naysayer fearmongering tbh. I see what the IOC are trying to do as making opportunities in sports available to everyone regardless of their sex. I just can’t see that as a bad thing.

Jack this is a classic example of you being all over the place. On the one hand you are saying that male biology gives them an advantage over their female counterparts but on the other you are saying that females have advantages over males. Give me an example of one sport where females surpass males, based on biology. It just doesn't happen.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t think the current rules will stay as they are, they couldn’t, and I can see the rules being changed again in the future to make opportunities in sports available to even more people. Advances in sports technology have enabled people to do things that weren’t thought of as humanly possible before someone actually went and did it, and there are all sorts of limitations on the technology athletes can use to enhance their performance. I imagine permitting athletes to compete against each other in sports regardless of their sex is only the beginning of a revolution in sports as we know them today. I don’t imagine it was ever going to be possible to exclude people who are transgender from participating in sports, and I don’t think it would be fair on them to attempt to do so. Once they meet the qualifying criteria of the governing bodies of their chosen sports, that should be enough to allow them to compete. They might win, and they might not, but the idea that women’s sports are going to be overrun with men in spandex and singlets romping to victory and making a clean sweep at the Olympics? I just don’t see it tbh.

This is a waffle post. No one here is debating the rules and regulations. We can't do anything about that. I just can't get over your wishy washy stance. On the one hand you admit that males have a physical advantage over females but on the other you think that having sexless competitions is somehow a good thing?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t know do female athletes themselves care all that much either unless they’re directly affected by the issue which is why I don’t think there’s any “silent majority of women afraid to speak up for fear of a backlash”.

I'm pretty sure those female weightlifters who got beaten by the New Zealander felt affected by the issue. Obviously they're not going to say anything for fear of a backlash.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I know there are a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes, but I don’t think they should be able to dictate who should and shouldn’t be able to compete against them. If they don’t want to participate or they think it’s unfair, then there appears to be no shortage of support online at least to defend their honour. I’ll admit I’m curious to see will the same supporters put their money where their mouths are in support of women’s sports, because they sure as hell haven’t up to now.

Another waffle post. You claim to know that it's only a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes but if you look at this thread that's not the case. Both men and women are posting here and a lot like me, wouldn't even follow sports but this bullsh!t has filtered down from sports to everyday discussion, that's how divisive it is.

One eyed Jack

Dante7 wrote: »

Jack, I suspect that you are an ardent believer of the mantra that "Transwomen are women", and that you are tying yourself up in all sorts of mental contortions to justify this belief. You are prepared to ignore science and to deny all women any achievement in sport, and to risk their safety in order to maintain this delusion.

If you are a male heterosexual, answer me this. If Transwomen are women, would you suck a lady dick?

Your suspicions are wrong, but I wouldn’t let that stop you. Go back through my post history if you like, and other posters here who are familiar with my posts in other threads on these sorts of issues will know that I certainly am not a supporter of the idea that “trans women are women”. It’s complete nonsense as far as I’m concerned. I would hope that gives you an idea as to how I would answer your second question which frankly isn’t worth dignifying as it has nothing to do with the topic.

I’m certainly not ignoring science btw, the science is pretty clear that gender dysphoria is a recognised medical condition. I just don’t agree that people who experience gender dysphoria should be excluded from participating in sports, whether they are biologically either male or female. I’m also not prepared to deny women any achievements in sports, and to even suggest as much indicates that you imagine only male sports are worthy of recognition. That’s why I suggested that I’m curious to see will all the online support for women’s sports translate into investment in women’s sports, or is it as I suspect nothing more than a disingenuous attempt to prevent people who are transgender from competing in sports.

I don’t imagine anyone who doesn’t want to take risks is going to achieve much, and contrary to your belief I have suggested changing the rules to make the sports safer for everyone involved in the sport. Increased safety of course lowers the risk of achieving anything worthy of recognition regardless of the sex of the participants which is why I suggested for those people who want to win medals with as little risk to their safety as possible, they could always take up bowls if they’re actually that precious.

One eyed Jack

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Of course female athletes who are affected by this will be the most vocal, you’ve already denied the right of Navratilova her opinion.

I’m putting you on ignore now because the lack of logic coupled with the verbal diarrhoea is tiresome.

No I haven’t? She has every right to her opinion and every right to express her opinion. I also have the right to express my disagreement with her opinion. You have the right to ignore my opinion in the same way as I have the right to ignore Navratilova’s opinion. The difference of course is that I won’t claim I’m being denied the right to express an opinion.

Woodsie1

Maybe having two eyes helps

ceadaoin.

Yes, these are definitely the faces of women who dont object to or care about a male beating them

IAMAMORON

I am sure if the males were non-bio it would be fine. At least their clothes wouldn't be as itchy after.

Dante7

ingalway wrote: »

OR, if you were a female lesbian (can't believe I have to use female before lesbian but that is where we are) would you have a sexual relationship with a lady dick lesbian?

That's the real life incarnation of what is happening. It is not men who are being expected to suck dicks of transwomen, it is lesbians.
Heterosexual Autogynephilicc men are putting on a bit of lippy and demanding that lesbians should suck their cocks, or else be branded as transphobic. And this nonsense is being cheerleaded by the woke bros. Fcuk em.

Dante7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No I haven’t? She has every right to her opinion and every right to express her opinion. I also have the right to express my disagreement with her opinion. You have the right to ignore my opinion in the same way as I have the right to ignore Navratilova’s opinion. The difference of course is that I won’t claim I’m being denied the right to express an opinion.

I'll ask you again, would you suck a girl dick?

One eyed Jack

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Another waffle post. You claim to know that it's only a minority of female athletes who object to the idea of having to compete against male athletes but if you look at this thread that's not the case. Both men and women are posting here and a lot like me, wouldn't even follow sports but this bullsh!t has filtered down from sports to everyday discussion, that's how divisive it is.

I didn’t mean that this thread was representative of the number of female athletes there actually are who object. I meant that of the number of female athletes there are, I’m only aware of a small minority who object to having to compete against athletes who are transgender. I wouldn’t generally follow sports myself either, but I disagree that this issue has filtered down from sports to everyday discussion. Their participation in sports is just another aspect of the existence of people who are transgender in society - the everyday discussions are far broader than just this one single aspect of the issues presented to a society that has to adjust to the reality of the existence of people who are transgender.

There are numerous other aspects such as parenting, education, employment, healthcare, etc. I don’t agree with all of it, I don’t have to, but that’s a luxury I enjoy as an individual, whereas the laws governing society and the rules governing sports have to adjust to accommodate the existence of people who are transgender. It means of course that some people are going to lose out on something they always imagined they were entitled to, but that’s no different than suggesting someone else took a job that I imagined was meant to be mine and it’s just not fair on me. I could play the victim which would likely achieve the sweet sum of fcuk all, but I’m just not that sort of person.

One eyed Jack

Dante7 wrote: »

I'll ask you again, would you suck a girl dick?

You can ask, but the answer you get won’t be any different than the first time you asked, no matter how many times you ask.

IAMAMORON

Dante7 wrote: »

I'll ask you again, would you suck a girl dick?

If she was attractive most def, but only if she was being nice about it. It would want to be clean as well.

Wibbs

There is no such thing as "lady dick". Women don't have a penis. Mad crazy world shattering thought that this is.

ingalway

One eyed Jack wrote: »

...whereas the laws governing society and the rules governing sports have to adjust to accommodate the existence of people who are transgender. It means of course that some people are going to lose out on something they always imagined they were entitled to...

Those "some people" are women, 51% of the planet. Sex based rights are incredibly important, very hard fought for by women and they are not "Imagined".

It's not only sport but single sex bathrooms, changing areas, showers, hospital wards, health care, education, rape and abuse services, prisons, census stats, crime stats. Trans people, rightly, are protected by equality laws and hate crime laws. Women also have legal sex based rights. Those should not be eroded by someone who decides they 'feel' like a woman having full and equal access to those sex based rights.

ingalway

Dante7 wrote: »

That's the real life incarnation of what is happening. It is not men who are being expected to suck dicks of transwomen, it is lesbians.
Heterosexual Autogynephilicc men are putting on a bit of lippy and demanding that lesbians should suck their cocks, or else be branded as transphobic. And this nonsense is being cheerleaded by the woke bros. Fcuk em.

It is very true and it's young lesbians who are being bullied the most - if they don't accept trans women who 'identify' as a lesbian as being 100% fully a female and a lesbian (and must be willing to have sex with them) then they are a transphope and there is nothing worse in that world than getting that label - for a young person who already is feeling vulnerable and coming to terms with their own sexual orientation this is very scary - they will not be allowed into LGBT spaces/events etc and no one will want to be associated with them for fear of social isolation contagion.

Young women are feeling the backlash most and either conform to ladydick or declare themselves trans - in the UK in the last decade there has been a 4,400% (not a typo) increase in the number of young women being referred for transitioning treatment. This is a new form of gay conversion therapy, instead of 'pray the gay away' it is now transition the girl into a boy - at the end of it they still want relationships with women but now we can call them straight - trans activism gets what it wants, girls get to sleep with girls but have to be butchered to do it and many will have serious medical/mental health issues for the rest of their lives.

Yes, homophobia and misogyny definitely a part of it for the younger ones and their parents pushing it. And definitely some AGPs going on as well