Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990598#Comment_121990598

All that was missing from that post was a patronizing “dear”.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990720#Comment_121990720

You’re completely off topic here. I presume that’s deliberate from you, but maybe the rest of us could get back on topic now. I think we’ve tolerated enough whataboutery.

AllForIt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990795#Comment_121990795

Well not really off topic, he's saying one is more likely to abused by family members than non-members, making any kind of 'safe spaces' for women in public unnecessary.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990795#Comment_121990795

Deliberately keeping on topic, yes. The topic only arose from the claim that women don’t engage in the sort of behaviour you attempted to claim was solely ‘a masculine behaviour’, to which I provided evidence that it wasn’t solely ‘a masculine behaviour’, then you moved on to make claims about young women being harassed and targeted by men in public, couldn’t support that either, and to counter it I made the point where women and young girls are actually more likely to be in danger of being the victim of sexual violence, within the family. Then Allforit claimed if strangers had access to people’s homes, more strangers would commit sexual abuse, I pointed out the non-sequitur and explained why it wasn’t the case.

So I guess you want to get back to pointing and leering at pictures of strangers then? Cool, entirely up to you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990829#Comment_121990829

making any kind of 'safe spaces' for women in public unnecessary.

I didn’t say anything about safe spaces, I don’t care for them one way or the other. If people are comforted by the illusion of safety, I’m certainly not going to argue with them. Having worked in a women’s domestic abuse shelter the only reason I didn’t like it was because the women didn’t want to talk to the staff who were women because they felt they were being judged. I would’ve happily preferred to have stayed eating my donut and coffee than sitting in front of a woman who I felt was reading me like a book. Hate anyone poking around in my head like that tbh 😒

AllForIt

I know you didn't say anything about safe spaces that's why I put it in commas. I was being succinct thinking you'd know I what I was getting at. You could say woman toilets are safe spaces if you don't know what I am getting at. I'm hardly going to repeat back what you said exactly as that would take forever.

In the meantime I was reminded of this story

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2023/12/07/sexual-predator-is-found-guilty-of-raping-woman-after-breaking-into-her-cork-home-at-night/

So I still stand by my claim that if homes weren't private you'd have more sexual abuse coming from outsiders.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990891#Comment_121990891

I’m sorry mate, you’ve lost me on the safe spaces thing 😂 I read it again, still not sure what way I’m supposed to be reading it. I dunno, maybe it’s because I don’t care for them one way or the other. I’m aware of the argument for their necessity, but there’s a few of them in Ireland now are taking in males over 12 to keep families together and that sort of thing, coupled with the agreement with AirBnb to give families accommodation of their own, which I think is a better idea even though I despise corporate partnerships like that and think it would be far better for the State to live up to it’s commitments under the Istanbul convention, but then I’m neither a woman nor a feminist so it’s really not my thing.

Does that story not indicate to you that for sexual predators like that, it doesn’t matter whether a space is public or private? Even a ton of stories like that, and there are a ton, would say everything about how easy it is for sexual predators to have access to women and children, and they don’t have to don a dress for it either or claim to be a woman, than anything it says about strangers, who generally don’t make a habit of breaking into other people’s homes, or entering without permission in any case. Be a strange sort of a society for anyone to come downstairs in the morning and find a stranger making themselves at home! 😳

Ten of Swords

Mod - Let's get the thread back on topic, thanks

Cupoftea3000

I'm all for inclusion and that people from all genders have the right to be able to enjoy sports. When it comes to people who have gone through male puberty and then transition to female, I'm not sure if there would be a level playing field for biologically female competitors.

I grew up in Australia and during the 80's was reasonably successful running the 100 metre sprint. At the age of 15, I ran the 100 in 11.3 seconds. I didn't win on the day and I didn't have formal training like my other competitors (I played Aussie Rules in the winter and cricket and tennis in the summer). My point is that at the time, I was running times that would probably get me into the quarter finals of the ladies world championships for the 100 metres. And without formal training.

My brother-in-law, several years earlier, when he was 14 years old, ran the 100 in 10.8 seconds. The world record for the female 100 metres sprint is 10.49 seconds by Florence Griffith Joyner. As you can imagine if either of myself or my brother-in-law transitioned in our later teens or early 20's we would potentially have an unfair advantage over biologically female competitors.

I would hate to be the people deciding what is fair and what is not. You are either excluding people from competing or potentially making it unfair for others.

ceadaoin.

They are only being excluded from the female category though, on the basis that they aren't actually female, not from competing at all.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990990#Comment_121990990

Nobody is excluded.

We have two biological sexes. Sport is divided by sex. Everyone has access to sport.

A tiny minority of people argue that discrimination against women's sport should exist, but I'm not with them — for very, very obvious reasons.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991312#Comment_121991312

I don’t get it - how is it not understood that when a punch is thrown; when a javelin is thrown or when a burst of speed or power is required to win a race on land or in water - it is the physical body that is doing this, not whatever is in a person mind.

Puberty’s effect on a male body is known and no amount of female hormones will reduce lung capacity, bone strength, greater muscle mass, more red blood cells etc etc.

Female sports are for females, not men who wish to legally (not not morally) cheat.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990990#Comment_121990990

I would hate to be the people deciding what is fair and what is not. You are either excluding people from competing or potentially making it unfair for others.

Categories are about excluding those who don't fit into them though - by their very definition. I would love to participate in the female under-12 swimming category - I still see myself as a child really - so isn' it unfair to exclude me from it?

(Plus I'd smash it. Be great.)

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990990#Comment_121990990

No one is excluded from playing sports. They play in their sex based category.

greyday

Have two daughters in their twenties and both have been harassed in public, I would say it is par for the course that at some stage of your life if you are a woman that you will at some stage suffer harassement, I dont even think it is controversial to say that, and I am a male.

MilkyToast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121990131#Comment_121990131

It's worse than that - barely any of them actually believe that a trans-identifying men are women.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121993345#Comment_121993345

It’s not a question of belief, it’s a question of acknowledgement of reality. I don’t care for the identity politics nonsense that some people are tripping over themselves to find new ways to classify and organise society in accordance with their own beliefs (or indeed lack thereof), for me personally anyway it’s no more complicated than men and women. I don’t care much for the whole ‘biological male’, ‘biological female’, ‘’natal’ whatever, ‘trans’ this that and the other, or the most unusual and newest one yet ‘original female’. It’s as though a tiny minority of people are adamant to make ordinary language as convoluted as possible to satisfy themselves, like ‘sex realists’ realising that term carries with it connotations of ‘race realists’, so they have to go back to the drawing board to come up with a new term to refer to themselves 😂

MilkyToast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121993317#Comment_121993317

The argument was at cross purposes really. It's true that many, if not most, women will experience some form of sexual harassment or assault (SA/H) in their lifetime. It's also true that in the vast majority of those cases, the perpetrator of said SA/H will be male. It's also true that the vast majority of men will never commit any form of SA/H in their lives, and that most SA/H is perpetrated by a small group of male recidivists.

But that's always been the case. Safeguarding exists to protect women from those male recidivists (MRs), and we know that some/many of those MRs will go to any lengths to access victims. We know this more in Ireland than in most places, because it was a pretty big scandal brought to public attention when a fairly significant number of MRs were found to be embedded in various parishes, using their theological bona-fides (and the community trust afforded by them) to gain access to victims. One MR can impact many, many lives. This is why a growing number of people are against creating a special category of men who can pay a fiver and gain access to any women's spaces they want, including the single-sex locker rooms and changing rooms at sports facilities.

It's tangential to arguments about fairness, but no less relevant to debate around where and how people who believe in gender ideology and identify as transgender should access sports.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121993414#Comment_121993414

It's tangential to arguments about fairness, but no less relevant to debate around where and how people who believe in gender ideology and identify as transgender should access sports.

And you’d have an absolutely incontrovertible argument were it not for the fact that there already exists in Irish law exemptions based upon gender for sports and many other activities and aspects of Irish society where gender is a relevant characteristic. Meaning that organisations can, and do, legitimately and lawfully discriminate based upon gender.

You’d also have a cracker of an argument regarding male recidivists and access to women in sports were it not for the fact that many male recidivists in women’s sports are coaches, trainers, managers etc with unquestionable access to women who they have abused. Larry Nasar is one of the most prolific and prominent examples, and in recent Irish related news, there was this prick:

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/swimming-coach-who-filmed-girls-changing-jailed-for-three-years-1554452.html

The whole attempt to limit women’s access to sports with the purported aim of protecting women is nothing more than a load of patently transparent bigotry and prejudice couched in nonsense about protecting women when in reality it does nothing of the sort.

MilkyToast

"Some men already abuse women so **** safeguarding" is a heck of an argument.

I really should have learned to stop clicking through the block when you comment on any trans-related thread by now. Will do better.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121993744#Comment_121993744

You really should when you manage to misconstrue so badly the point being made, that it doesn’t even remotely resemble the point being made at all. For the absence of any doubt though:

Safeguarding in sports: Good Idea, in fact, great fcuking idea and more of this please, rather than the current situation where voluntary organisations involved in sports, have to have in their safeguarding policies a nominated liaison officer who deals with any disclosures before the organisation makes a report to the authorities, which is nothing more than the provision of protection for the organisation, not for the victims.

Bad Idea: Policies that do nothing for safeguarding, fairness or anything else in sports other than upholding, maintaining and promoting bigotry and prejudice in Irish society.

Also interesting is how in your previous post you referred to male recidivists, and now it’s “some men”…

plodder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991574#Comment_121991574

Apparently, you could in Canada …

According to the competition coordinator, Wiseheart has the right to
compete in girls’ competitions under Swimming Canada’s ‘trans inclusion’
rules. He has registered himself as female and is thus treated as
female. And although the competitions he swims in consist almost
exclusively of teenage girls, this is simply a matter of convention. It
seems that, since no adult had ever tried to enter a teenagers’ race
before, there had been no need to draw up explicit rules. In other
words, Wiseheart did not even need to ‘identify’ as a 13-year-old girl
to assert his ‘right’ to enter the girls’ competition.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/29/why-is-a-full-grown-man-competing-against-teenage-girls-in-swimming/

mjsc1970

Jebus fuppin wept

CatFromHue

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121993374#Comment_121993374

I see we're back to the race stuff again and yes some people are tripping over themselves to find new ways to classify and organise society in accordance with their own beliefs.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121994557#Comment_121994557

This part really stood out:

I don’t care much for the whole ‘biological male’, ‘biological female’, ‘’natal’ whatever, ‘trans’ this that and the other, or the most unusual and newest one yet ‘original female’.

Basic denial of scientific fact. But then, nothing new from them.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121994557#Comment_121994557

Ahh we’re not, Jesus, you probably don’t remember it but it was posted in the thread already, way back (the search function is shyte and frankly I can’t be arsed), but it was to do with Bev Jackson, head of LGB Alliance posted a poll on Twitter about what they should call themselves. Things went a bit awkward 😬

https://twitter.com/BevJacksonAuth/status/1749561371828670929

I’m not on Twitter and the search function is shyte there too (or maybe it’s just me if it’s happening here and on twitter, I dunno), but hopefully you get the idea. It was more to do with the coming up with convoluted terms and efforts to distinguish between themselves and others. It was like the way TERF was originally coined with positive connotations, and we all know how that’s worked out… and the same will happen with every term that people imagine is soo clever and different and distinguishes them from the people they wish to appear superior to. Except the N word… that’s still pretty much a no-no for it’s absolute out and out racist connotations 😂

Jack Daw

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/39901710/naia-essentially-bans-transgender-athletes-women-sports

"The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, the governing body for mostly small colleges, announced a policy Monday that all but bans transgender athletes from competing in women's sports.

The NAIA Council of Presidents approved the policy in a 20-0 vote. The NAIA, which oversees some 83,000 athletes at schools across the country, is believed to be the first college sports organization to take such a step."

This is the correct decision, transgender people and their advocates may not like it but it ensures fairness when it comes to womens sports.

Also puts pressure on the NCAA to do likewise in future.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995225#Comment_121995225

Also puts pressure on the NCAA to do likewise in future.

It doesn’t do any such thing. They’re a tiny organisation by comparison, literally doing the same as any other organisation hoping to promote themselves by hopping on the bandwagon. Just put the figures in perspective like:

The NAIA, which oversees some 83,000 athletes at schools across the country

the NCAA, accusing the sports governing body for more than 500,000 athletes

There are some 15.3 million public high school students in the United States and a 2019 study by the CDC estimated 1.8% of them - about 275,000 - are transgender. The number of athletes within that group is much smaller; a 2017 survey by Human Rights Campaign suggested fewer than 15% of all transgender boys and transgender girls play sports.

The number of NAIA transgender athletes would be far smaller.

Bit of free advertising and publicity more than anything else tbh.




ceadaoin.

Well for such supposedly small numbers, male bodied transgender students sure seem to be disproportionately represented in girls/womens sports at the high school and college level. Strange. Its almost as if they have an advantage or something?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995307#Comment_121995307

Just for **** ‘n’ giggles ceadaoin, the estimated percentage of transgender athletes in public high schools in the US, amounts to 0.27% of the 15.3 million public high school students.

The percentage in the private schools managed by that organisation is thought to be even less than that figure. I don’t know how you could claim they are over-represented in terms of competition in women’s sports when there’d be a few zeros behind that decimal point if I could have calculated a true figure of their representation.

Over-represented in the media in terms of their participation in women’s sports? Absolutely. Women’s sports only gets about 4% coverage of all sports (think it was about that anyway last time I checked), and with the proliferation of stories about transgender athletes in women’s sports in the last couple of years, it’s understandable you’d have formed the impression that they are wildly over-represented in women’s sports.

That’s not because they have any particular advantages over other athletes, it’s because of the media’s laser-focused attention on those athletes specifically. Women’s sports would receive fcukall coverage in the tabloid media in their absence, and things would go back to normal. Transgender athletes themselves can’t be blamed for the media’s hyper-focused attention with the phenomenon, but with increasing interest in women’s sports anyway, they’re bound to be showing up in greater numbers than expected:

https://news.osu.edu/womens-and-girls-sports-more-popular-than-you-may-think/#:~:text=Allison%20noted%20that%20there%20have,women's%20college%20basketball%20exhibition%20game.

The expected number is zero, in case there was any doubt about that. At least that’s the intent of numerous legislative efforts at State level.

El Gato De Negocios

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995225#Comment_121995225

The fact that the vote went through unanimously says alot imo.

In other news, in their first professional fight, FTM boxer Pat Manuel was knocked out in 21 seconds of the first round.

https://www.worldboxingnews.net/2024/04/06/trans-boxer-pat-manuel-knocked-out-21-seconds/

Of course quick knockouts have happened in mens boxing matches previously but its pretty interesting that a woman competing against a professional man gets pasted in less than half a minute. Also interesting that the WBC is looking to have seperate categories for trans athletes. This is of course the most sensible option as it would provide additional safeguards for all fighters.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995225#Comment_121995225

For want of a better phrase, the game is up with this nonsense.

Too many sporting organizations have decided against the inclusion of biological males in women's sport. It started as a trickle, now it's a wave.

This took way too long though, and too many female athletes have suffered in the meantime.

But better late than never.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995647#Comment_121995647

The fact it took so long after a biological male - Fallon Fox - not only broke the skull of their opponent, but gloated about it on social media - is reprehensible.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121995839#Comment_121995839

When you see the quote in context, it's alarming that Fallon Fox was even allowed to compete at all.

It's utterly vile.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121996263#Comment_121996263

It's almost if millennia of biology giving rise to male aggression isn't countered by a few months of saying you're a woman.

Horrific that quote.

batman_oh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121996279#Comment_121996279

So brave, we should celebrate the bravery. Disgusting that this was allowed at any point

plodder

CNN making fools of themselves over that NAIA decision

Advocates of banning transgender women from women’s sports
have argued that transgender women have a physical advantage over
cisgender women in sports.

But mainstream science does not support that conclusion. A
2017 report in the journal Sports Medicine that reviewed several related
studies found “no direct or consistent research” on trans people having
an athletic advantage over their cisgender peers, and critics say the
bans add to the discrimination trans people face.

Debate in the scientific community about whether androgenic
hormones like testosterone serve as useful markers of athletic advantage
remains ongoing.

Even the NCAA accepts that testosterone gives trans women an advantage. Otherwise, they would not have rules on T suppression for trans women.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/08/sport/naia-bans-trans-athletes-dawn-staley-reaj/index.html

I don't think the NCAA will change anything off their own bat. The curious statement they released makes it sound like they want guidance from the US government, or the courts first.

ceadaoin.

Another example of CNN being an absolute joke. Its pure ideological crap and gaslighting to state there's no evidence that testosterone gives athletic advantage. If there the case then why is it considered a performance enhancing drug and it's usage banned then?

I had a quick look at the reddit thread in r/news and even the posters there agree with the decision and acknowledge the advantages trans women have.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121997148#Comment_121997148

Even if testosterone on its own had no effect (it very much does!) it's the physical attributes that it enhances during male puberty that won't go away.

eeepaulo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121996481#Comment_121996481

This is the report CNN quoted link

Conclusion

Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore, competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.

The word currently is quite important in the conclusion really isnt it, especially if CNN want to quote a 7 year old review. Since then the landscape has totally transformed everywhere except the ideologues heads.

Sports ireland released the studies they used including 2 more up to date reviews.

https://www.sportireland.ie/transgenderguidance under references

sorry link wouldnt save

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121997163#Comment_121997163

The advantage question disappears into thin air when you consider the following fact:

• Lia Thomas went from 554th in the men's division, but post-transition, jumped into the top 5 ranking in the women's division.
• We never ever see a biological female in 500th position in the women's division of their sport, then post-transition, jump into the top 5 ranking in the men's division.

It only ever goes one way.

That's because of the inherent and axiomatic advantage.

Debates over advantage is a red herring because we already have real-world data such as the above, not that it was needed to begin with. Not deep philosophical debates, but actual hard evidence.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121999872#Comment_121999872

I was very struck by the cyclist Emily Bridges who refused to compete in an “open” category in cycling.

No they have to race against biological women cyclists only! Why ??

Cheating!! Same as Thomas and others. It’s not about rights, it’s not about competing - it’s about mediocre athletes wanting an advantage.

It’s Lance Armstrong but with ideologues supporting you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121999904#Comment_121999904

If Bridges refuses to compete, that's their decision.

I have no sympathy for athletes that want to secure any kind of unfair advantage.

Repackaging unfair advantage under the term "inclusion" is embarrassing.

Enduro

This just popped into one of my sports feeds this morning…

https://marathonhandbook.com/aayden-gallacher-oregon-state-championship/

Whilst I don't think it's fair to the athlete, who is competing as the rules allow, it shows how these rules, which allow male sex athletes to compete in the female category, are very unpopular in reality (as well as being fundamentally unfair, IMO).

Everybody is ending up worse off under these rules.

Gamergurll

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122161415#Comment_122161415

Finally some logic in all the madness

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122161415#Comment_122161415

More women have decided enough is enough with this nonsense. It seems we're at a turning point.

We recently had the case of Deta Hedman in darts, too:

British female darts player Deta Hedman refused to play against a transgender competitor in the Denmark Open over the weekend and removed herself from the competition.

Hedman was set to face Noa-Lynn van Leuven in the quarterfinals of the tournament but opted not to play instead and forfeited.

She added, “This subject causing much angst in the sport I love . People can be whoever they want in life but I don’t think biological born men should compete in Women’s sport.”

CatFromHue

Once the conversation moves from theoretical to practical it's going to become more and more obvious that male advantage is actually an advantage.

This will be uncomfortable for many but it didn't have to be this way. The science behind this is very basic.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122164266#Comment_122164266

It goes towards what a lot have been saying in here, that those who support this kind of nonsense of letting males compete against females and lobbying it as "fair" are pretty much on a faith based foundation. They will use every and any excuse that this should be allowed over some rubbish to do with human rights…it is pathetic and evil.

The sooner that some common sense kicks in, along with just understanding that it is scientific fact, the better.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122166847#Comment_122166847

Anyone who believes that biological males should compete against women is an ideological extremist.

We then have said extremists calling anyone who calls out their extremism as bigoted and prejudiced.

That gaslighting and manipulation is extraordinary — and absolutely disgusting.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122161415#Comment_122161415

Is this the same event or another one? It came up in my feed this morning, but I can't be certain it's not the same race, as the camera angle is different.

https://twitter.com/salltweets/status/1794659018121810033

Title IX is in the process of effectively being rescinded by the Biden administration by allowing male students who declare themselves to be female to participate in female sports on the grounds of anti LGTQ+ discrimination. They haven't yet released the separate set of rules dealing with transgender athletes’ participation in sports, but if the rules are as currently proposed, that will be the result, so that is how schools and universities are being advised to proceed in the run-up to the final publication.

The revised regulations for Title IX, the law outlawing sex discrimination at federally funded schools, expand the definition of sex-based discrimination and harassment to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sex stereotypes, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics.

The U.S. Department of Education already interprets Title IX to include protection against discrimination based on gender identity and sexuality … But the new rules make that explicit under Title IX without room for interpretation otherwise. The department released a resource for schools as they work to draft policies that align with the new rules. In it, the department states that schools must adopt, publish, and implement a “nondiscrimination policy.”

https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/new-title-ix-rule-has-explicit-ban-on-discrimination-of-lgbtq-students/2024/04

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122188384#Comment_122188384

It's absolutely outrageous to amend Title IX to increase discrimination against women in sports.

Because that's what it amounts to; appealing to some biological males at the expense of women.

The Biden Administration has been radicalised by this extreme ideology.