Trans Park Run Deletion

Isn't it obvious from the deletion message that most of the thread was transphobic and that's why it was deleted? Mnhq can't say that though. The best they can do to avoid backlash from the posters on that thread is to say "not in the spirit".

Richmarr is happy to give away anything that is a woman's, it's no skin off his nose is it?

He just doesn't realise he should not be giving away things that don't belong to him.

richmarr Yes, in society we make allowances so everyone can rub along together but it really isn't reasonable to expect women to not have women-only sports any more because it would make some TW feel better. Do we have to put on weight to make anorexics feel better or give up running as every time a wheelchair user sees us it's a reminder that they can never run?

Trousers: I do like it that richmarr puts the important words in bold there, it makes the mansplaining so much more, well, more mansplainy.

Quite. I have resisted the urge to throw any herrings that way.

Pratchet: The women will start xx leagues and they'll want in on that too. Nothing will ever be enough.

Correct. That is what TRA have done every step of the way, first it is one thing, then all things for women (like DV shelters and DV counsellors), regardless of the impact to females. There is only slim, limited protection in the EA at the moment, they want that gone.

On the same subject, backtracking to an answer Cady gave to:
if women set up a park run just for women, this would be illegal wouldn't it.
And Cady replied: No it wouldn't. People are still free to set up their own parkrun with their own rules and ethos,that's not illegal.

Actually it would under the EA, it does not allow enough provision for a female-only group and to exclude transwomen (particularly those with a GRC). It has been a while since I have read the EA and guidance notes. You could have a disabled group or disabled women's group and exclude the able-bodied. But you cannot have a bulk standard woman's group and exclude transwoman (at that time, with a GRC). You could exclude the male-born on religious grounds (for example, Muslim women). So clearly we need to establish a church of the Holy Uterine Lining or something.

...and furthermore, the incessant aggressive and bullying tactics (like calling "transphobia" at every single turn as a silencing tactic) to become part of the group just puts backs up and makes us want to dig our heels in even more because now the demands are feeling suspiciously male.

Exclusion is not just about not being allowed to physically run, it's also about not being allowed to feel part of the group they want to belong to.

That’s really key phrasing. They want to belong to the group, and I don’t think there is anyone who doesn’t sympathise with that. But the fact is that they don’t belong to this group.

Publicly othering them as "not women" reduces that hope of acceptance. Exclusion is not just about not being allowed to physically run, it's also about not being allowed to feel part of the group they want to belong to

Supporting that exclusion is both callous and transphobic

No. It isn't. They aren't part of the group they want to belong to. Sometimes it's ok for them to hang out with that group and approximate belonging, but sometimes it isn't ok because it harms the people who really are part of the group. For very specific reasons for which that group has protections.

Use of the word "butch" is very interesting indeed.

"Exclusion is not just about not being allowed to physically run, it's also about not being allowed to feel part of the group they want to belong to."

This is nonsense isn't it?

I have a physical disability and am unable to run.

I want not only to join in running events (not walking, running) but to be accepted as a person work no disabilities.

Otherwise, it is exclusionary.

How's that going to work, then...

It seems like you're expecting an army of sporty butch trans kids to come and push your daughters out of the medals and there's simply no reason to believe that will be the case.

Lol. It will obviously NEVER HAPPEN.

Oh.

I do like it that richmarr puts the important words in bold there, it makes the mansplaining so much more, well, more mansplainy.

Exclusion is not just about not being allowed to physically run, it's also about not being allowed to feel part of the group they want to belong to.

No it isn't. They might want to be women, but signing in as a woman when they are men skews all the figures against which all the women are measured.

@richmarr this x

*@FloraFox *

If you actually read what I wrote, you will see quite clearly that I have repeatedly asked for either evidence or a reasoned explanation of why it's reasonable to assume the effect on girls will be significant. It seems like you're expecting an army of sporty butch trans kids to come and push your daughters out of the medals and there's simply no reason to believe that will be the case.

My evidence on the other hand quite clearly describes both the extraordinary suffering that this group is already experiencing, and the fact that factors like hope of being happy or accepted as who they are have an effect on limiting self harm and suicide attempts.

Publicly othering them as "not women" reduces that hope of acceptance. Exclusion is not just about not being allowed to physically run, it's also about not being allowed to feel part of the group they want to belong to.

Supporting that exclusion is both callous and transphobic.

@ReluctantCamper Anyone signing up to an event with limited places will be taking the place of someone else. But there's no one-in-one-out policy for womanhood. Do you really think there should be a set amount of space that women are allowed to take up, and a new member of the community tips that over the size limit?

@RatRolyPoly - thanks for writing this, nails it.

So if the top x places in the women's rankings are all transwomen, will that be ok from their point of view? Is it the name that is important, or comparing to "other" women?

I mean, if tw want to be in with women then they want women, usually, not tw. We see this with dating.

Sometimes people want things that have an impact on other people. I think those situations need to be carefully negotiated: it's not enough for one person to say, "I want x, so that's the end of the discussion."

Exactly.

I think I understand why trans women want to be recognised as women. And I believe they have very good reasons to want this and to ask for it. Nevertheless I have questions about whether that's always appropriate. Sometimes people want things that have an impact on other people. I think those situations need to be carefully negotiated: it's not enough for one person to say, "I want x, so that's the end of the discussion."

I feel that there's a massive cultural shift going on at the moment, and I want to include trans women wherever possible, but I'd like plenty of acknowledgement that there are some details that need to be discussed. When anyone (trans or otherwise) says, "But I want..." I hear in my head, "You can't always get what you wa-ant" - and I don't even like the Stones that much.

You can’t categorise trans women differently as they want to be seen as women and not men or “other”. That is what the whole trans debate is about. They want to be recognised as women. If a trans women has a gender certificate then the law protects their right to be recognised as a woman. The issue is the self identification. Anyone without a gender certificate can identify as the gender they chose.

@richmarr most people have endlessly said that we don't want to stop people taking part in things, it's the categorisation we object to.

What would constitute 'pro-segregation evidence' in this case? Remember we're JUST talking about the rankings, not the actual race.

'Isolating transgirls from cis girls' oh honestly 🙄 Nul points

Great posts Flora and Susan. I remember the "this girl can" campaign, evidently established in order to encourage females to surmount the barriers they face accessing sport. Those barriers have been described upthread. They are not fictional.