CassieMaddox
I said I thought Lisa Nandy was fair enough in saying it should be dealt with by sporting bodies, you disagreed and said she should be applying pressure, I said I think bodies should deal with own cheats. I didn't put words in your mouth, you did that to me.
I quoted you directly about it being authoritarian of government to write competition rules. No-one had suggested that LN rewrite the rules herself so that is you introducing a straw man.
You talked about dealing with cheats, said that it should be up to each body how they dealt with them. I pointed out that the government has a duty to ensure fairness for women in sport and therefore it would not be authoritarian to apply pressure to on sport governing bodies to fulfil their legal duties and the conditions of their funding. How is this putting words into your mouth? Or indeed strawmanning your position?
I'll try again though. My position on this is not about trans. My position is about where its appropriate for the government to actively intervene and where it isn't. I would be worried about the precedent of active intervention in this case.
My position is also not about trans. It's also about where it is appropriate for government to actively intervene. I think it should intervene in a clear case of sex discrimination and human rights violations. Just in case you're not clear - the "inclusive" policies which enable cheating are discriminatory against women because only men benefit from these policies. Allowing men into women's sport violates women's rights to fair and safe sport, and equal access to sport. Allowing men to use communal female changing rooms is a denial of their absolute human rights to privacy and dignity. Women with identities are entitled to participate in women's sport provided they are not taking testosterone.
It's not possible to know from what Nandy has said what she's doing behind the scenes and I'd prefer not to speculate.
I'm not addressing what she may or may not be doing behind the scenes. Luckily, it is possible to know what her approach is because she outlined it in the Telegraph article. So no need to speculate. I think her approach is wrong because it enables discrimination and denial of women's human rights by sports bodies.
At the moment this cannot happen in the UK. The US is nuts in lots of ways, I'd prefer not to apply their nuttiness to the UK because its really irrelevant.
A result like this may not be possible in cycling, but LN is talking about all sporting bodies, not just British cycling. And as I said in my previous post, most sports in England, Wales, Scotland and NI allow men in women's competitions. So it can happen in the UK.