Trans Park Run Deletion

Transphobia is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed towards a trans person solely on the basis of the fact that they are trans

Making them feel excluded from an inclusionary, for everyone event, kind of is discriminating against them though.

and this
If you are proposing a change in the law to allow trans identified males to compete in women's sports, the onus is on you to produce the evidence that this will not harm girls' participation in sports

we have a well established, fair method of dividing people into categories for certain sports. If you wish to change that the onus should be on you to explain why, and how fairness is retained.

I mean if we are to start at sqaure 1 here, with facts like girls in school in UK being disengaged with sports being challenged then we are never going to get anywhere.

I suppose the desire to get women to produce evidence and studies to support each and every well known and accepted fact they they state is a distarcting technique.

So taking self ID out of the equation, you are saying that fully transitioned males to females are still male?

Yes. Humans cannot change sex.

Can you not see that that is kind of the definition of transphobic?

No. Transphobia is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed towards a trans person solely on the basis of the fact that they are trans. Understanding that humans cannot change sex and making judgements and decisions based on this fact is not transphobia.

I would say that preferring to believe that a person wishing to dress or behave according to stereotypes traditionally associated with the opposite sex has changed sex than rather accept them as a gender non conforming individual is in fact transphobic.

"I very clearly asked for a reasoned argument, ideally evidence. By that I don't mean that you should have a study, I mean that you should be able to explain the chain of events through which girls become disengaged with sport so that each part can be discussed."

Right-ho...

So, I wonder if anything like that exists? How could anyone possible find out?

here, let me google that for you

As per my post:

"It is difficult enough to retain engagement of girls with sports at secondary and past that, for a variety of reasons, some connected to our bodies (periods (swimming / martial arts outfits / pain etc), breasts (uncomfortable / embarassing / etc) and social reasons (girls not wanting to be seen red faced / sweaty / hair out of order etc).

This issue and the reasons are well known."

When posters say, this is reasonably well know, it is because it is reasonably well known. For anyone who has any intterest in women and girls, women's rights, that sort of stuff. As most posters in feminism chat might be expected to have.

So there you go, off you go and read that lot, maybe you can track back to some of the studies around this yourself.

Exclusing people is directly damaging, so if you want that to happen I'd expect a high quality argument, and ideally evidence.

What's your evidence that this is damaging?

What exposure are you suggesting girls will have to trans athletes, and at what age, and in what numbers? In what other field has a similar effect been observed that we can use as a benchmark for this consequence you're predicting?

If you are proposing a change in the law to allow trans identified males to compete in women's sports, the onus is on you to produce the evidence that this will not harm girls' participation in sports.

trouser

thebewildreness

Who had the lemon curd recipe?

I wonder if Lily will be doing the women's race for life this year?

Rich - there have been lots of studies why teenage girls drop out of sport and physical activity

Google is your friend

I did consider women and non-women actually I don't think men would go for that somehow. And obviously describing a transwoman as a non-woman would not go down too well either. So biologically female and other is the best phrasing I could think of.

The Green Party like that kind of clarity don't they?

What like Women and Non women?

Yes I would agree with biologically female sports and then "other" as the other category.

richmarr is getting close to bingo

SardineReturns, "obvious" isn't enough, no. Plenty of things people consider obvious turn out to be untrue.

I very clearly asked for a reasoned argument, ideally evidence. By that I don't mean that you should have a study, I mean that you should be able to explain the chain of events through which girls become disengaged with sport so that each part can be discussed.

If it's so clearly the case you should be able to make a reasonable argument that it's a likely outcome. Especially since you seem to claim so much as fact "we know [X]... we know [Y]". I'm sure there's plenty you know that I don't, but if you want to convince me you need to do more than make unsupported claims.

There are a huge number of challenges and injustices facing young girls, but they don't have an attempted suicide rate of 40%, so this is not an area where I personally am comfortable coming to hasty judgements.

At the end of your comment you say "And so, here is the solution. Put sport back where it belongs" but I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that. Could you clarify?

Makes perfect sense to me onthelist

I think some don't like the fact that I think of women first and foremost. My main concern is keeping women safe, and making things fair for women. So I really do not think that in saying transmen on T should run with men...means that transwomen should run with women. Given transwomen have an advantage over women too.

Maybe the best way to sort this mess is to have womens sport, and then 'other'. As men will not be disadvantaged in any way by having both transwomen and transmen running with them, so this is the fairest way I can see.

Well it was in reply to someone saying that if transwomen should run with men, then should transmen run with women. I said yes of course, however if the transman is taking testosterone then they should be treat the same as any other woman who was taking testosterone and disqualified, so in that case they should run with men so they do not disadvantage women.

Apparently that was transphobic. Rather than common sense.

i was accused of being transphobic in there for saying that if a transman was taking testosterone then they should not be competing with women

Absolutely

If a transwoman is a women and should therefore run with women

A transman should obviously be in the mans race

I mean thats the logic isn't it (not sure if i agree with it myself)

So taking self ID out of the equation, you are saying that fully transitioned males to females are still male? Can you not see that that is kind of the definition of transphobic?

They will always BE male.

They cannot change their very essence of being, their whole socialised history and they will never have experienced any of the 'issues' that women experience.

How do these 'women' identify out of prostrate cancer?

Biology is transphobic it would seem.

It seems to me that feminist chat has got very anti-feminist all of a sudden. I don't recognise all these new posters but they certainly don't seem to have very feminist views. Are we under attack by MRAs?

MRA/TRA, whats the difference really? Same tactics, same views on women..

But yes, I appreciate the work MN are doing, and do accept that sometimes I will disagree with some of their decisions, but I am very grateful for them continuing to allow discussions on this topic when it would have been so much easier to give in to the transactivists bullying.

Ahh I wish I had been back on this morning before it was deleted. I was accused of being transphobic in there for saying that if a transman was taking testosterone then they should not be competing with women and it should come under normal doping rules. Wanted to see if there had been any further replies to me.

(I understand park run is not a race as such, but I was speaking more generally about transpeople in sport)