Martina Navratilova on trains in sport

I think it was fair considering also the previous interview. What struck me about the first speaker was that she didn't even try to say it was fair (obviously a non-starter) but just that it "wasn't Wimbledon ". So what? Do we really want to teach our girls that fairness no longer matters as much as "being kind"?? My dd is an athlete and she trains really hard. It wouldn't be acceptable to let another athlete have a 10 second headstart so why this? There are far better ways of including trans kids in sports - this way can surely only breed resentment.

People using trains in sports is clearly unfair, especially for things like long distance running, I agree with Martina on this.

But what a reminder of a great word I haven’t used for an age

I'm sorry to have maligned Nick Robinson and called him a plank In context it's a perfectly reasonable statement.

NR’s quote concisely summarised the absurdity of this situation. Intentionally I think.

No train jokes tho'..

I see there is another longer thread on this already.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4154828-Radio-4-not-5

For some reason I happened to wake up and turn on the radio just towards the end of this interview. I dont know who the last speaker was, droning on about "trans girls" and being fair to them, but have had a headacke and sense of despair every since.

The sheer madness of having a structure of sport divided on sex, and then because a small but fanatical groups says it isn't fair on me, they just wipe under the carpet all the reasons why there is male and female sport.

It just keeps going round in my head.

But this "balance" approach means that I have heard interviews with Covid deniers and they aren't challenged more a sort of polite why do you think that.

If there are no facts they in fact there is no news. Everything is just a matter of opinion.

I think Nick did a much better job of presenting the argument that Martina. She forgot that people who are not familiar with this debate won't understand things like what self-ID means.

Homophobic not homophones... ?

Ironically I remember watching her play as a child.
There were comments about her being 'too masculine' (I guess in hindsight homophones euphemism) and that it gave her an unfair advantage... 🤔

Having listened again she did limit it to elite sports at school, college and adult level. I think it should be wider but she wants to start a debate and base it in science rather than feelings.

X posted!

Yes, I also would like to know how she answered.

Navratilova answered really well - bringing in arguments about reducing testosterone doesn’t reduce men’s strength sufficiently so that there is no advantage for transwomen competing against women. Brought in height, lung capacity, safety etc which would always be there.

She did say in some sports there may be no advantage e.g. equestrian events (which are mixed sex anyway), shooting etc.

But how did Navtratilova answer?

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000rvjm

Interview with McGowan starts about 48 minutes in and the interview with Navratilova is at about 2:44.

I actually think you're being too harsh on Robinson, OP, his actual question is this:

"Your argument, essentially, is that there is something called biological sex which is different from gender identity and you need to recognise that in sport?"

In both interviews Robinson seems pretty clear on the sporting advantages of male puberty.

I'd've liked Martina (or anyone else being interviewed) to keep asking the question:

Why do you think males and females are segregated at all, would you be in favour of men playing against women and no separate categories.

I get that it's pointless and mostly rhetorical as interviewers ignore questions and it looks like trans rights activists still will not debate this on the media because they're pathetic.

(Unless someone here knows there was another reason why the two were not on the programme at the same time?)

How did she reply?

He has a point.

No, bear with me for a minute...

If you say there is a thing called biological sex, then it could be taken to suggest that there are other ways in which you can have a sex which are not biological. Otherwise, why would you need to qualify "sex" with the word "biological"? That would be absurd, of course, but possible.

I didn't hear that bit of Today today, but if Navratilova had answered by saying "I am claiming that sex is biological", it would have cleared up the (technical) ambiguity.

I want more train jokes.

Your argument is that there is something called biological sex

I thought this was said to make things a little clearer. When a guest is talking about girls in sport who haven't gone through puberty, the average listener would think they were talking about girls.

Your argument is that there is something called biological sex

Not listened yet - and I am trying to be generous even though I loath the BBC but was he saying this - in a more indirect way because of BBC bias - to make it clear to the uninitiated listener who probably still thinks that transgirls and transwomen are girls and women who identify as trans, and don’t realise they are males - just like other boys and men who compete in men’s sports, and the exclusion is based on sex, not trans status?

Or am I getting mixed up with Justin Webb - who I remember was quite incredulous with Jo Swinson who???!!! before the last election about her trans stance.