Trans Park Run Deletion

"Who is gaslighting who? You are asking posters to defend positions they have never taken. It's really really annoying."

Pot, kettle, colour check!

I do not think you have understood my post about how putting unworkable conditions is a ban. (like saying 'yes, you can join the golf club, no-one's banning these members, but they can't count their strokes, even though stroke play is the whole reason the club was set up' or 'I never said I wanted to ban private schools, don't put words in my mouth. I just want to strip them of charitable status' and it doesn't matter how many times it is pointed out that means forced closure and amounts to the identical thing, they just refuse to see it is the same thing.)

Have there been any consultations within Parkrun about that?

Well it won't have been done by TW that's for sure. TW want, nay demand to enter everything women have to validate their feelz.

yes, I suppose it could be done like that (trans section)

Is there a model for that which could be followed?

Otherwise, it would mean that everyone lost their %ages (as you would want each section's results to be processed in the same way), and all those who like to see if they are 'good for age' miss out, as do all those who currently get a shout out for good effort. I would not like to see that change. Have there been any consultations within Parkrun about that?

Ok. Just had a look you can stay in youth hostel on own from 16 by the looks of it.

Transgender guests are welcome to use the accommodation and facilities which match their gender identity.

www.yha.org.uk/staying-yha/accessibility

"There have been posts saying she should not be doing it in the way she is doing it. Please do not pretend otherwise. "

This is totally different to saying that they should not run at all.

Who is gaslighting who? You are asking posters to defend positions they have never taken. It's really really annoying.

There have been posts saying she should not be doing it in the way she is doing it. Please do not pretend otherwise. Saying is unethical for some partipants is a statement of exclusion.

No one is pretending otherwise for heavens sake, it's all written in this thread for all to see. People are saying TW should not participate in the woman's timings/placings as it skews the results. I can't see why it's so difficult to run in a trans section or none binary section. Appropriating the women is not on!

Youth hostelling have done that? Off course they have.

Just to add to the risk free confidence that women can indulge in when travelling alone all over the world :D

There have been posts saying she should not be doing it in the way she is doing it. Please do not pretend otherwise. Saying is unethical for some partipants is a statement of exclusion.

Because the speed of a participant relative to others is wholly irrelevant. It's not a competition, and it doesn't matter if a runner is fast/slow/average in relation to the others, nor whether they are at their home run or are touristing. People have a single entry in the system, so it would update all their results each time updated.

The only way to get what pp asks for, is for certain runners to be barred from taking a time based on who else shows up that day. That is unfair, exclusionary, and directly against Parkrun's purpose of providing a timed event to all who want to participate and who show up with their barcode. Telling people that they can't fully participate sometimes is a form of ban.

But I am interested in the lostics of this. You have about seven hundred people turning up at ten to nine for a nine o'clock start. About one hundred is those are unknown first timers or tourists. You are Run Director. You have to decide whether this is a field of participants in which certain people should not take times, and (because there's no chance an individual runner could work it out). you have to announce it in the briefing It can't be sorted out at the end, because if things go wrong at the funnel it messes up the time of every single participant behind, and adding inaccurate times for possibly hundreds of people doesn't seem to be the aim here.

Genuine question - how would you do it?

Or would you change the IT? If so what functionality or published data would you add/remove?

No one is saying that Lucy can’t join park run.

What is being said is where do we draw the line. Is it ok if lucy played football at a senior level and joined a woman’s team? Is it ok That the youth hosteling association has decided to categorise accommodation /dormitories on a gender basis rather than sex? Where do we draw the line about what is a woman?

"Ok, I'll say things to try to placate these bloody awkward women. If I can placate them and they begin to warm to me then I can get my violin out again and make them feel sorry for me. Once I've done that I can appeal to them to see that allowing me into their spaces is fine. I will have won 'cos women are inherently stupid".

Not sure how many dobber marks on the Bingo card that post achieved, quiet a few I think.

NatLuc. Did you watch the Linda Bellos vid?

Baroque

I see . Not really nowhere though. Very much inserted for effect, I think

@Dozer - Having slept on it and thought about everything that has been said and discussed over the thread, I think I agree with this.

If I started to feel that I was improving very quickly in my times week-on-week and that my endurance was increasing in line with how I USED to be able to run (I mentioned in my first post that I was running 12km, six times a week in around an hour) then I would use some sort of 'assisted' designator whilst still giving female on registration forms.

I know someone is going to ask 'but where do you draw the line? When would you start doing it?'

She here is my answer based on what I have read about differences in performance between a natal male and natal female (non medicated and otherwise healthy).

If the supposed male performance advantage is 10% then I would start to use the assisted category once hitting the top 25% of runners. I think that this more than compensates for any residual benefit that I might have retained even beyond my diminished muscle mass and a cardio-vascular system being limited by reduced oxygen saturation.

I know that still won't satisfy many of you.. But that is my line in the sand if I had to put one down.

Happy to discuss it though?

Yes, yes I understand. I meant the original comment came out of nowhere.

Baroque

I just wanted to reiterate that no-one said anything about badges, except the transperson who imagined/made up the fact that some transphobe had said people should wear sex badges

It's always worth pointing out what people haven't said. Just to be clear to anyone watching

No one said anything about badges either.

That one came out of left field.

No one said anything about badges either.

Yes, no one has said transwomen shouldn’t do parkrun.

The number of transwomen at a specific ParkRun is likely to be very small so I don’t personally think Ada or Lucy - average parkrunner speed - being in the F category is a big deal, relative to many of the other sports and leisure examples of unfairness to women.

It would, however, be unethical for a transwomen who was fast relative to most other women at their local parkrun to appear in the female category in the data analysis shared with parkrunners.

There could easily be an option during registration for “don’t wish to be included in the comparisons by sex” (or age). Parkrun could still use sex stats for its own / funders’ purposes. Data scientists and software developers could easily sort it.

Gaslighting - another dobber mark on the Bingo card.

And this is the thing when we have these discussions - people make shit up. Not one person has said that Ada or Lucy shouldn't be in ParkRun. It's open to everyone and that's brilliant.

But they are putting themselves in the biological women/female category and that's unfair.

And it really doesn't matter if it's elite sport or amateur as some have argued. Elite sportspeople - particularly in athletics - come from the ranks of amateurs.

And yes, there have been plenty i comments that Ada should not be in Parkrun as she currently is.

I'm sure there aren't because I and many others would have disagreed. Please point them out if they are.

Having read the whole thing too, I would think that IJustNeedA's post above is closest to most people's stance on this:

I'm happy that Ada (or any other person) joins parkrun, I think it's ace.

imo, it's a mark of respect to your fellow runners who do want to compare themselves with their biological peers, to categorise oneself biologically accurately or, at least, make use of the "assisted" category.

Please do not gaslight,, by suggesting (even if it was not your intention) that I have not been on this thread through, or that my understanding is faulty.

How is her saying that she finds it frustrating that people comment on long threads without reading or understanding them fully gaslighting? You certainly don't have a clue what gaslighting means. It's a deliberate abusive tactic to manipulate someone, it's not something one does unintentionally.

AuntieStella, you obviously didn't understand what is written on the thread, because you said "some don't think Ada should be there", which I don't think anyone has said. You are the one that's 'gaslighting' here.

I'm a parkrunner too. I'm happy that Ada (or any other person) joins parkrun, I think it's ace.

However, for those who aren't parkrunners, this is the type of email I receive after every parkrun:

"Congratulations on completing your th parkrun and your at parkrun today. You finished in th place and were the th female out of a field of parkrunners and you came * in your age category **"

Even parkrun clearly recognise that some people want to compare themselves to other runners both overall and split by sex and by age and that's why they provide that information individually to each parkrunner. Not all parkrunners care, but some obviously do. Even if one personally don't care about one's position in the categories, imo, it's a mark of respect to your fellow runners who do want to compare themselves with their biological peers, to categorise oneself biologically accurately or, at least, make use of the "assisted" category.