Top winning woman on the American show Jeopardy .

RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

Fundamentally, it sounds like blues problem is that women exist and blue really doesn’t like that

(And as stupid as i find the above sentence and as sure as i am that blue doesn’t think that, my sentence makes just as much ‘sense’)

Fundamentally, it sounds like your problem is that a trans woman existed and you really don't like it when they do that

Fundamentally, it sounds like you don't have an actual argument against what Goat actually said.

You don’t get to tell women that their achievements of overcoming sexist discrimination and the lack of educational opportunities this raises, the lack of confidence this brings, or even the fact that a woman is more likely to not have support for their family situation to have the freedom to participate can be given to a male. Someone who never experienced those disadvantages in the same way.

Brilliantly put. A million times this.

The vast vast majority of Jeopardy winners are prostate havers. Same old same old for this winner.

I mean ffs I can’t believe in the 21st century we’re having to say “no biological men are not women however they present”

No thank you

I don't accept someone pissing down my back and telling me it's raining.

This person is not a woman and therefore is not the top scoring woman.

That's all that matters. Not whether the achievement is notable enough, or whether a woman can beat the score in future. A lie is being told and accepted as fact.

This person is described not just as a woman but as female

This is why the ridiculous idea that "woman" can be used for men must be rejected.

Trans ideology uses woman, female, girl, daughter, mother, aunt, sister etc for men. They are all wrong.

The Jeopardy "Champion Archive" is 90% men.
Why would that be?

I agree that there is no biological advantage. But it’s the fact that she now counts as the top winning woman.

I'm not sure about that, the "no biological advantage" issue.

Looking at the "Hall of Fame" of Jeopardy winners, 100% male list obviously, I wonder if the fact that women are generally undermined in most areas of life lead to a lack of confidence to take part in shows like Jeopardy?

And of course, women are socialized and expected (by men) to stay at home with the babies etc.
I wonder if this trans winner actually does have a male privilege and therefore advantage.
This winner would never have had to take a break from their run of wins because they fell pregnant for example.

The show seems to be male-dominated in terms of winners.
This particular win is not challenging that. At all.

This is about biology in that the person who won is male. And has been since birth.

That male has had advantages due to being male. That male has been socialized from a male perspective.

There is a reason females need to be rewarded and recognised for their achievements. They still experience sexist discrimination due to their female body. ie. Biology.

Only someone either ignorant or determined to ignore this history of discrimination would not understand the significance of celebrating a male’s achievement as a female one.

Absolutely celebrate this person’s achievement as a trans woman. One who has overcome their own unique difficulties and discrimination.

Fundamentally, it sounds like your problem is that a trans woman existed and you really don't like it when they do that.

Only someone attempting to gaslight others would suggest this. It is your usual tactic *blueberry’. The usual ‘all or nothing’ absolutist bullshit.

No. You don’t get to tell women that their achievements of overcoming sexist discrimination and the lack of educational opportunities this raises, the lack of confidence this brings, or even the fact that a woman is more likely to not have support for their family situation to have the freedom to participate can be given to a male. Someone who never experienced those disadvantages in the same way.

And it seems you also have a problem with women who say no to you.

I agree that it seems trivial but really is not. This person is described not just as a woman but as female. I think this is the most worrying thing. We are losing the language to describe ourselves as a sex class. That is erasure and has no advantage for actual biological females (

If there is no advantage to being male they should not have make abs female categories , but they should capture data to prove that assumption

I think genuine transwomen exist and it is an aspect of womanhood,

What is a genuine transwoman?

How can any aspect of womanhood be about a man's experience?

But there has been no mention of Amy being trans. Someone seems to be denying trans people's existence, and it ain't us.

And it's why some arts things are going from 2 prizes to one. Controversy sensitivity of two is pita. Just one means no issues.

It solves the issue of having to decide which category someone should go in, but not the issue about how you describe that prize giver. To be able to analyse the male and female experience, in whatever field you are looking at, you need to know whether someone is a man or a woman, it is as simple as that. If it is of interest that someone is a man or a woman (which clearly it is in this case, or why the article?), then there can be no justification for this type of gaslighting. Claiming this as a woman's victory is the erasure of an actual woman's achievement.

I feel similarly about the IPSO guidance which says that trans status should only be mentioned if it is relevant to the story. In my view if it is worth mentioning that someone in a story is a man or a woman, then it should be beholden on the story writer to be honest and not gaslight the reader; if it is worth writing a story about it is not trivial.

Women's prizes, lists etc exist because of the history of being ignored/ entirely written out of so much for so long.
Exist because historical discrimination/ sexism etc.

IF males who ID as woman/ girl are included.

Then why have separate.

Business person of the year.
Writers prize.
First person to do X in army.
Etc etc.

The fact that from what I've seen what's wanted is-

Male/female, men women things stay. Sports, business awards, firsts in certain areas notable for women when achieve etc.

BUT have both male and female in the mix for the women/female thing.

That is totally nonsensical.

And it's why some arts things are going from 2 prizes to one. Controversy sensitivity of two is pita. Just one means no issues.

Has it occurred it might be a "different" aspect of womanhood for the sole reason they are men?

Quite.

I wondered why I'd seen jeopardy being talked about!

On twitter, as per some comments on this thread, there's, what physical advantage is there here haha! Just proof it's TW problem full stop and sport prisons etc just a cover.

I mean yes this at first glance is trivial.

But then thought of other situations like this.

-When there was a piece on a site that heard of but not massive or anything.
Bridget Jones films - first Hollywood trilogy with all female directors!
Complaint- what about matrix (made before directors came out as trans).
Oh right ok. Article and headline updated to second trilogy female directors.

• Well known best book of year female author, opened to anyone who ID as woman

• First front line woman certain army role, TW. When got that widely reported first for a woman. Was a little while after army said women could do if they did xyz training and passed. The time the training took meant that no women had got into that role yet. TW first woman was already doing that thing so there you go.

• Gender fluid individual in v high up banking role included in business woman of year list.

• etc.

Each one by self easily taken as petty.

Each one meant a male took place of female in sex categories.

Each one vagina have who was second/ was number 101 in list etc put aside for a male.

Add it together and all that's to come. Means a lot of female (people with cunts) out picture in women/female things.

Trans women are a sub set of men, not an “ aspect of womanhood”

@WhoAre

Nightwatch have now hidden your thread until MNHQ can take a look (note: night watch can only hide threads not delete them).

Sorry that was to @WhoAre