Caitlyn Jenner's statement on trans girls in girls' sports (MOD NOTE IN OP)

ILoveYourVibes

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Do you mean the Williams sisters? No one thinks they are on steroids. They are tested for that stuff. That statement in itself is pure misogyny, but hey its ok to diminish women and throw them under the bus to try and prove a point and appease small segment of males I guess.

Serena Williams is an amazing FEMALE athlete. One of the best. No cheating involved. Still can't compete against lower ranked male tennis players, and that's ok, because she is a woman and luckily there is a women's tour.

I think she is...and a lot of people do.

39 ..still playing like a 21 yr old? No one has that kind of longevity.

I also think martina navratalova was.

She is the most tested ..and she is also the one who objects to being tested. Which is strange for an athlete.

EddieN75

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Again , that's not what you said. You blindly challenged a poster without knowing who they are or what sports they play.

You don't know who I am or what sports I play. I would be quietly confident

Akrasia

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Spurious comparison. That world that earth you live on...is not your own self. You are not defining your own self ..you are defining the planet everyone else lives on ..an EXTERNAL reality not an internal reality.

We can see the world. We can't see inside other people's minds only they can do that and we have to rely on the information they tell us about their experiences. Whereas we can see the world for ourselves.

I don't have to share someone's life with them. I have to share the planet with people.

Flat earthers often use their believe to have other views such as denying climate change.

The external reality relevant to this thread, is sports and the regulations around which classification you get to compete in.

You might self identify as male or female, but the sport needs to set a definition or else people will take the P1ss

It’s not fair that my kids birthday is 24 hours before the cut off date for age participation so She has to compete in the older age category against bigger kids, but if there wasn’t a cut off date, it simply wouldn’t work

Classifications are there for a reason. To protect participants from having to compete against physically more powerful participants, and to keep sports competitive. They need to be justified on the basis of competitiveness, not political correctness

Annasopra

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

No they are not. They are just equally protected against violent hate crimes under law.

What are you on about?

suicide_circus

Leroy42 wrote: »

Can you? I find it very difficult. It certainly was easier when I was growing up. Boobs and vagina was it really.

But that has changed now, psychology also appears to be a major component, which I don't think was taken into account before. Trans people feel that the physical is less important that the mental.

I googled define: woman and it gave me; "an adult female human being" which aligns with my own understanding of the word.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

So the deciding factor is strength then in boxing? Some women can be massively stronger than other women in the same weight class. Are you saying we should change that?

Why didn't you answer my questions? Here they are again:

If it is about not excluding, why have weight classes in the first place?

Why not have Michella Tyson fight Katie Taylor?

Would having Mannie Pacquia step in to the ring with Katie be a fair and safe fight ('she' would only be 1 inch taller, and 4-5kg heavier.. But far far stronger')?

I am suggesting we keep things as are and not have men fight women (or males fight females if you prefer). Quite simple really. Can you answer the above please, or will you duck and dive the questions again!?

ILoveYourVibes

Annasopra wrote: »

That isnt an example of a male who identified as female just to compete in sport.

Yes it is.

mohawk

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

No they are not. They are just equally protected against violent hate crimes under law.

Really well the likes of stonewall and other charities say they are.

jackboy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Right, so the grades already exist. WHat is the problem then?

No problem. Biological men should continue to be banned from competing against biological women. Stick with the current grades that work well.

ceadaoin.

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I think she is...and a lot of people do.

39 ..still playing like a 21 yr old? No one has that kind of longevity.

I also think martina navratalova was.

She is the most tested ..and she is also the one who objects to being tested. Which is strange for an athlete.

She's not playing like a 21 year old. She's playing like a ****ing amazing 39 year old, complete with injuries etc. Do you actually watch tennis because her game is not the same as it was. I mean, you do realise, she is tested regardless if she "objects" or not?

cloudatlas

ILoveYourVibes

Annasopra wrote: »

What are you on about?

Cross dressing hetero men are not trans. But certain legislation that protects trans people from discrimination or attacks also protects cross dressing hetero men. That doesn't make them less male or hetero. Nor does it make pre operative transwomen cross dressers or any less female.

Annasopra

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Yes it is.

Nah. It really isnt. You're talking bollox there. They had an intersex condition.

suicide_circus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If only.

This issue is going nowhere i'm afraid.

mohawk

mohawk wrote: »

For example as an example of the spectrum Cross dressers are now under the trans umbrella.

Absolutely untrue.

Guy:Incognito

EddieN75 wrote: »

You don't know who I am or what sports I play. I would be quietly confident

Its good to know you can maintain top level status in every sport there is and still have time to post on boards.

KeepItLight

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Cross dressing hetero men are not trans. But certain legislation that protects trans people from discrimination or attacks also protects cross dressing hetero men. That doesn't make them less male or hetero. Nor does it make pre operative transwomen cross dressers or any less female.

And what is the difference between cross dressing men and trans other than self-proclaimed identity?

ILoveYourVibes

mohawk wrote: »

Really well the likes of stonewall and other charities say they are.

No they don't. They simply advocate for them and for their rights.

They are not suggesting that cross dressing hetero sexual men ..interesting in being men and having sex with women are trans. Nor are they suggesting that pre operative trans people are cross dressers.

And you know this.

You know the difference between a pre op trans woman and a hetero male cross dresser.

Annasopra

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Cross dressing hetero men are not trans. But certain legislation that protects trans people from discrimination or attacks also protects cross dressing hetero men. That doesn't make them less male or hetero. Nor does it make pre operative transwomen cross dressers or any less female.

What legislation?

EddieN75

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If only.

I take offense to your snide remark. I'm entitled to my opinion.

Cancel culture

ILoveYourVibes

KeepItLight wrote: »

And what is the difference between cross dressing men and trans other than self-proclaimed identity?

Put on a skirt and you will see.

Leroy42

jackboy wrote: »

No problem. Biological men should continue to be banned from competing against biological women. Stick with the current grades that work well.

Work well on what basis? They certainly don't work well based on trans people.

Using the earlier poster google definition of woman being an "adult female human being" than a female trans is entitled into sport.

Things need to adapt as we get more knowledgeable, simply sticking to what worked before is not ever the answer.

Trans women consider themselves to be female, many disagree, but under the previous rules they should be allowed to compete. It is the rules that are looking to be changed to 'gender at birth' rather than gender.

KeepItLight

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Put on a skirt and you will see.

How about an actual answer, if you have one?

ILoveYourVibes

KeepItLight wrote: »

How about an actual answer, if you have one?

If i dressed you in a skirt would you be trans?

Sardonicat

Annasopra wrote: »

Yep

In every case where there were trans women prisoners in Ireland they were kept separate but yet again noone ever gives a s h i t about female prisoners safety from Cis male staff or other female prisoners until the trans "debate" comes up. The whole prison discussion is complete nonsense. Its complete faux concern. Where it has come up in Ireland it has been risk assessed and the risks have been addressed.

So, why are trans women kept separate?

Akrasia

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you will find that the split has more to do with the historic thinking that women were not suited to sport rather than anything deeper than that.

Even recently, boxing for women was frowned upon on the basis that women couldn't handle it.

It is changing now or course, but the reason for the split is mainly traditional. That doesn't mean it is inherently wrong (one can land at the right answer by the wrong calculations).

Previously, women were seen as very much second class citizens. Not able for sport, politics, work. Childcare and cooking they could handle. This crossed into sport as why would any watch the inferior sex play sport.

All of those attitudes were wrong and times have changed mostly to encourage girls and women to participate in sports

I have a daughter who is hugely into gymnastics and sports in general. She is very good and dedicated and can beat most of the boys she plays against, but when puberty comes and the boys start to grow taller and stronger, no amount of training will allow her to compete with the boys who train alongside her

I want her to be able to compete in a level playing field against other athletes

ILoveYourVibes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Sure.





It would be factual to suggest not everyone agrees on those definitions. And yes not everyone would agree they are male. I don't know if they are male or not. But not everyone would agree on that. Which is what i said.

It is useless for use to argue about definitions of gender as not everyone will agree on those.

Ooookay. This is a truely strange argument. You agree then that there is a definition re male and female (pertaining to humans at least) that is widely agreed upon, as in by the huge majority, though, yes? I did not realise your argument was pedantic and was referencing literally 100% of people.

It is ofcourse true that people deny/don't believe many things that are evidently true or well known (or believe things that are evidently not true). Evolution, the shape of the Earth the two most well known examples

Leroy42

if it is about not excluding, why have weight classes in the first place?
Quote:
Why not have Michella Tyson fight Katie Taylor?
Quote:
Would having Mannie Pacquia step in to the ring with Katie be a fair and safe fight ('she' would only be 1 inch taller, and 4-5kg heavier.. But far far stronger')?

I honestly don't understand the questions. I am not arguing against weight classes.

Michella Tyson would be in a different weight class so they won't fight.

I would use strength, rather than gender, that is what I am arguing.

KeepItLight

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

If i dressed you in a skirt would you be trans?

Can't you answer the question directly if you're capable of it?

I asked if there was a difference between a cross-dressing man and trans other than self-proclaimed identity.

I'm guessing you think the answer is no, then?

ILoveYourVibes

Akrasia wrote: »

but when puberty comes and the boys start to grow taller and stronger, no amount of training will allow her to compete with the boys who train alongside her

She would have an advantage.