Linford Christie's reaction

True, Captain. If anything, it'll be the farce that results from the unfairness that will turn off spectators, not the immorality of it. (Although some might be attracted by the farce.)

I'm not sure people do generally watch sport because of an over riding appreciation for fair competition. They watch it to be entertained.

Yes, that’s my argument, much better worded than I could :)

I agree completely with captain

I'm not sure people do generally watch sport because of an over riding appreciation for fair competition. They watch it to be entertained.

If a referee decision goes against their team, people get very exercised about fairness. If it goes for their team, even if it's proved to be in error, you don't see people clamouring for a replay.

Males in women's sports will get traction if it is waved through by governing bodies, because any dominant force in a sporting event will gain followers and there is big money involved in the top end.

Relying on the goodwill of people for whom this is a lucrative business, is about as fucking naive as I can imagine, tbh.

Yes Doctoress That's what I meant.

But there's no unfairness in the sense that the rapist doesn't have an advantage in competition, to put it crudely. Whereas when males compete against women in women's sports, spectators can see the unfairness play out before their eyes.

derxa

You’re changing the issue there. We aren’t talking about what’s fair or not. And I’d disagree it’s fair btw, revictimising women by allowing pro sportsmen to retain every benefit they had before an assault is unfair. It’s unfair to play them instead them instead of other men who are both players and not hurting women. But that’s not the question.

I asked if the unfairness of this would be enough for people to stop watching and paying for sport, in large enough numbers to make a financial impact. Sports fans tolerate quite a lot just to keep being entertained. How many times have you heard someone say that men’s rugby, as an example, is more entertaining and better quality than women’s? It’s not true, but it’s what a lot of fans men and woman, think. Maybe they’d like to see transwomen dominate the sport too?

Suggestive though that quite a lot of sports spectators don't give a shit about women's rights.

Paddy Jackson is currently playing professional rugby. Danny Care and Mike Brown continued to play for their country despite a 2008 rape claim that is not dissimilar to the Belfast rape trial. I have a thread on this. My god. I'm sure they're hideous men but they're men playing in a men's sporting category. It's not unfair in a sporting sense as a transwoman playing women's rugby would be. It may be morally repugnant but it's not unfair.

Does anyone know what the rules are in rowing? Can you self ID as a woman in rowing too? Imagine the boat race, with the women’s event only recently actually being televised, with males in the women’s boats...

LangCleg

Gosh, that’s a very good point I hadn’t considered. This is terrible for women in every direction. It’s enraging!

I certainly wouldn't pay to watch a very one sided race, or a low level race unless I had a personal interest in one of the competitors.

There will be less funding because ticket sales will decrease and advertisers will look for higher viewing figures.

So all the work women have done fighting for more visibility will be lost.

It's different because the transgression isn't staring you in the face in the same way as the unfairness of males beating women in women's sports.

I see your point. That’s answering the question I originally asked, somewhat. I just wonder if people will stop watching in large enough numbers to make a difference.

I mean, who on earth can watch Paddy Jackson and applaud after reading what he did??

I certainly wouldn't pay to watch a very one sided race, or a low level race unless I had a personal interest in one of the competitors.

I wouldn’t either. I also stopped watching rugby and football because watching and applauding men who get away with abusing women made me feel physically ill.

A man who chased and beat his gf on the street a few months ago, just laced up and played in the best rugby club in the world and was awarded man of the match, with his coach who’s poss the next All Blacks coach, calling him a great human. The player avoided even a conviction because the judge didn’t want to take away his right to provide for his family. He’s 22 with no kids.

You're implying that most top flight sportmen are evil abusers. Which is a bit unfair.

Are you flipping kidding me? Are you really NAMALT right now? Jesus.

Paddy Jackson is currently playing professional rugby.
Danny Care and Mike Brown continued to play for their country despite a 2008 rape claim that is not dissimilar to the Belfast rape trial. I have a thread on this. My god.

It's different because the transgression isn't staring you in the face in the same way as the unfairness of males beating women in women's sports.

I think that it would be very difficult to take woman's sport seriously, when biological men are trouncing women at their own sport.

I think most people both male and female would object to that. The pundits on athletics programmes would find it almost impossible to comment without discomfort.

So? We’re talking about whether or not the paying public would stop, which would create a financial reason for stopping males participating in women’s sport. I’m questioning that.

Jessica the point is that they wouldn't be going to watch a comparatively even top rank contest as they do now. You either have one person who is streets ahead of everyone else so no contest, or the "women's" events are just 3rd rankers who couldn't make it in the men's classes. Think Man Utd turning up to a local amateur football tournament (foregone conclusion), or expecting thousands and thousands of people coming to watch a couple of Sunday park teams playing (much less interest).

I certainly wouldn't pay to watch a very one sided race, or a low level race unless I had a personal interest in one of the competitors.

"You're implying that most top flight sportmen are evil abusers. Which is a bit unfair."

I don't think (or at least I hope not) Jessica was insinuating that many or all top flight sportsmen behave like this, but it never ceases to amaze me how quickly they are accepted back into the fold when they transgress against women.
Ryan Giggs was having an affair with his brother's wife, his family virtually disowned him and yet he won BBC SPOTY in 2009, despite not winning anything at international level, the same year that Jensen Button won the F1 championship. Football is absolutely littered with such cases, the worst being the Ched Evans case, and the appalling death and rape threats which Jess Ennis Hill suffered in connection with it.
The clubs and fans ignore any wrongdoing, very often the BBC and other media are just as bad.

A lot of women will object to males taking our places in sport. I think most people both male and female would object to that. The pundits on athletics programmes would find it almost impossible to comment without discomfort.
Just like a lot of women object to men getting away with hurting us and then repeating their country/region. You're implying that most top flight sportmen are evil abusers. Which is a bit unfair.

it's they or initials/name or person for me.

Same here.

representing their country/region

You really don't get it, do you.

I’m sorry, what am I not getting??? Ffs I asked a genuine question. Don’t be rude. A lot of women will object to males taking our places in sport. Just like a lot of women object to men getting away with hurting us and then repeating their country/region. But will enough stop paying and watching, to actually impact decisions?