BBC prepared to block/report Twitter users for 'hate' after being called out on Hubbard reporting.

[quote ClumpingBambooIsALie]Even Reddit isn't gung-ho for transwomen in women's sport: www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/ovrvm9/whats_your_view_on_transgender_athletes_competing/[/quote]
The censors must still be in bed.

[quote Mrsjamin]@nettie434 there's no way you actually watched the BMX or skateboarding events - the abilities of males and females is dramatically different!! There are pretty much no sports that don't have a marked significant difference between men and women. No 'sport by sport' rule is needed.[/quote]
Equestrian sports are fine as "open" competitions.

I'm not sure that there are any actual physiological differences which matter when sailing. Sailing used to be "open" events but started to be segregated from 1988. I wonder if that is because of any physiological differences or if it was just to improve representation - the 1984 event had a mere two women across any of the sailing teams, one British, one Danish.

@OldCrone thanks.
I’ve complaint fatigue today. Slipped this one in with my Fallon Fox complaint (‘the irony’).

I am more bothered about Fallon Fox competing (and being consulted as a spokesperson) than I would be about a transgender skateboarder.

I'm bothered about any biological male in women's sport. If someone is biologically male they should not be competing against women in any sport that is segregated by biological sex.

In a small select number of sports like the equestrian events, men and women compete against eachother, which is great.

I've also really enjoyed seeing some mixed relay events in the swimming and athletics. Nice to be able to see men and women being able to compete together as a team. And also has provided a wonderful illustration of the stark physical differences between men and women. I mean just look at the size of Adam Peaty and James Guy. Anyone who says this is a complex argument is frankly stupid in my opinion.

To me it goes beyond physical differences anyway. It's about the sociological advantages that men often benefit from- just take football as one example but it extends to many many sports.

Segregating by biological sex is fair for women and I cannot understand how the feelings of a tiny minority (who could still compete in sport if they wanted to) are more important than the rights of 51% of the population.

archived here: archive.ph/bGfPV

twitter.com/BBCSport/status/1421893490066149377

Timestamp for both is 7.00pm on 1 Aug.

I've just got home from work and gone to check out the BBCs tweet,and it's vanished.
Makes me glad that I binned paying the TV licence several years back though.

Can you clarify: are you saying that in sport where there is male advantage you would segregate by sex, whereas in sport where there is no male advantage you would segregate by gender? What's the justification for segregation in the latter case?

What I was trying to say was that men always have an advantage over women when it comes to physical strength but that the consequences are greater in some sports than in others. Sex segregation is more important in contact sports or sports like weightlifting which are about physical strength.

I am quite aware that men have an advantage in every sport bar long distance running or swimming but we also have to accept that elite international sport isn't just about natural ability and skill. Other factors like training facilities also play a role, which is why Britain now gets more medals than before there was lottery money. We haven't just got better at sport! That's why I think we need research evidence from different sports, not just assuming the effect of male puberty is exactly the same across the board. It's also why people like FondofBeetles are so important because they address arguments like 'Michael Phelps had big feet. It's just the same as as transgender women competing in women's sports'. The various mixed relay events at The Olympics have helped show the importance of sex based differences really well.

I wasn't suggesting separating sports by gender identity, just highlighting the way in which the 'transgender umbrella' creates confusion by including non binary athletes. As another poster pointed out, there are lots of definitions of non binary. I was answering the BBC's question about why there has been more controversy about Laurel Hubbard than Quinn. Quinn has no physiological advantages compared with their rivals.

The same problem applies when DSD athletes are included under the transgender umbrella. As another poster pointed out, there is so much on social media about the unfairness of Laurel Hubbard and Stephanie Beecham (both white) competing in the Olympics when some African DSD women cannot.

I did watch some skateboarding, dressage and BMX cycling contrary to what some posters suggested. I was just highlighting that fairness and women's safety is more compromised in some sports than others. I am more bothered about Fallon Fox competing (and being consulted as a spokesperson) than I would be about a transgender skateboarder.

World Rugby did its own thing, examined the science and ended up with a clear compromise. Surely that's better than just following IOC rules, like the New Zealand weightlifting or Canadian archery federations?

It is all a bit like the Minions in Despicable Me, where the absence of observable male genitalia means "Not Boy."

I certainly don't feel I confidently understand it.

There are a variety of distinct disorders of sexual development. Some mean that although external development of male genitals is not typical, male puberty will be experienced.

Not only will testosterone levels be in the male range, but the physical advantages of male puberty will be conferred.

People who fall into this category - they have XY chromosomes, they have testosterone levels above a particular limit and they are ‘androgen sensitive’ but were observed to be female at birth, must reduce testosterone levels to compete in some women’s events, but not others.

However, although we can discuss at length the specification for bikes used in cycling competitions or acceptable use of inhalers, these are the rules that must not be named.

Would like to be clear about the link between the hatewontwin tweet and gender critical views before complaining about it.

Is it the timing? Did it appear at the same time as the article about Laurel Hubbard? Or was the link made some other way?

...Oops.

Was going to say, that would be Lewis Cashmore, the nominatively determined rent-a-quote controversialist.

Yes, IIRC there was an academic on Women's Hour a year or two ago who said that women hadn't really pushed themselves to the limit while they were only competing with other women, but if they found themselves competing against people who were stronger/better, they would try harder. Jawdropping nonsense.

Tokyo Olympics: Laurel Hubbard out of weightlifting after failing to register successful lift www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58054891

Did LH do it to prove the Olympics are inclusive? Interesting quote.

Yes, IIRC there was an academic on Women's Hour a year or two ago who said that women hadn't really pushed themselves to the limit while they were only competing with other women, but if they found themselves competing against people who were stronger/better, they would try harder. Jawdropping nonsense.

The Gap between what Fallon Fox says and what Harper and Budgett say is noticeable. Harper and Budgett are aware of the science and fall back on being a bit waffly and suggesting that fairness might not be that important. (Even though neither seems to be aware of the existence of non binary people and trans men when they talk about inclusivity).

Fallon Fox is just talking rubbish.

This is modern mythology with no grounding in established physiology.

@Triphazards that's my point (not clear in hindsight!)! People are reading articles like the BBC ones which say "women with high T" and believing that they are women with high T, and thinking it's unfair. Which is exactly what they're meant to think, of course!

Most people aren't experts in this, and trust sources like the BBC which makes it all the more insidous and harmful.

It makes me wonder what else these once trusted sources are lying about

I just put this on another thread but will repeat it here as it was refreshing to hear:

Radio 4’s coverage this morning was better. The male sports correspondent said something like
“LH is 43 and not a very good weightlifter but the issues are much wider... “

Then they cut to some dumb activist saying the science shows conclusively that there's no advantage.
So how do they explain then that men run faster, throw further, jump higher etc. Are women just a bit lazy? Don't train enough?

I have a relative who needs testosterone suppression to treat his prostate cancer. Pretty bizarre to me to think that there are sporting bodies out there that think that means he counts as a woman if he wants to.

From www.news.com.au/sport/olympics/what-time-does-transgender-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-compete-tonight/news-story/428139b691228ebc9c65c14c0a9fda40

“Hubbard was the last of the 10 competitors out as they lined up to be introduced to the crowd. There were cheers and loud applause for many of the weighlifters.”

“When Hubbard’s name was announced, she gave a short wave and there was a warm smattering of applause — however it wasn’t the most raucous reception of the night.”

“Spectators are banned but there are hundreds of people — if not more than 1000 — inside the convention centrre where the event is taking place in front of a whopping crowd for what’s allowed.”

“Journalists from around the world are packed in, and have been given a 20-page guide on how to correctly report on transgender athletes.”

“The guide says reporting trans athletes have an unfair advantage over their rivals is “misinformation”.”

Plus, I know to my cost that tall and strong as I am, a smaller man can still overpower me.

Exactly.

The male winner of the 81kg class lifted 378 kg.

The women's record at 87kg is 335 kg.

Why does the BBC print such stupid arguments?