Simone Biles attacks Riley Gaines

It smacks to me of the usual TRA refrain of 'you make me feel unsafe' when someone disagrees with them.

Ironically, Simone had that down pat herself - telling Riley no-one in sports is safe with her around.

I do however think that person has been allowed to derail the thread enough.

On the subject of women never being ‘anti woman’ - there were of course many women opposed to women’s suffrage. I expect they thought they were on the right side of history

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42704341.amp

"It's very much like the Twitter campaigns that you get at the moment, whenever a high-profile woman says something of a feminist nature."

like smoking a celebratory cigar on a yacht

Why couldn’t you just leave it?

From someone who's ongoing contribution to feminism and women's sport is dozens of pages about how Riley Gaines is icky.

And apparently expecting that you should feel "comfortable" while doing that.

Okay...

just to say I didn’t find @Helleofabore ’s posts strange at all. They seemed perfectly comprehensible to me

what was strange about them?

I see that you still feel the need to dig in even when I said I felt the environment was uncomfortable. Why couldn’t you just leave it? But no. Another strange post.

So, we're back to 'I agree with this person but she's not being kind enough'.

really gives off Drew Barrymore vibes.

Handy meme for anyone too shit scared to say, openly, that women and girl's sports should be, well, for women and girls.

I was going to answer MissScarletintheBallroom but Helleofabore - you just make the environment uncomfortable.

I see. So you believe that because you are an individual just posting on the internet that your efforts to discredit Riley Gaines are not to be considered as undermining her? And no one should point out that you are actively seeking to undermine her with your weak arguments to discredit her?

Ok. You can use that as an excuse to not answer a question. It is manipulative of you though.

Well, there's a standard form of argumentation we've seen repeatedly, which goes like this:

1. I agree with what RG says about fairness in women's sports.
2. However, I would like to introduce some other issues including [RG expressing some views on unrelated issues that I disagree with] + [RG maybe holding some views that she hasn't actually expressed, but I deduce she holds based on my stereotype of what someone with her demographic background probably believes] + [RG talking to some people who separately may hold views I disagree with] + [RG being brazen enough to make media appearances that she might even have got paid for]
3. Therefore, RG is proven to be a bad actor who can't be a serious advocate for the main thing she advocates for, which I claim to agree with her on.

Several posters in succession have tried this kind of starting with the conclusion that "RG is a bad actor" and arguing backwards from there, and it's become quite boring.

Huh?

I was going to answer @MissScarletInTheBallroom but @Helleofabore - you just make the environment uncomfortable.

I think there is a huge gulf between “not agreeing with everything someone does” and “trying to make every effort and twist what they do to undermine their campaigns because you don’t agree with everything they do. “

We have witnessed the latter on this thread. And that is not the behaviour that I recognise as being ‘grown up’.

Yes, I do.

OK. So what is your problem exactly?

See my earlier posts. I said I agreed broadly with what she said in her interview on Fox, so yes.

Do you believe that women and girls should be entitled to fairness in their sports, i.e. not being forced to compete against male athletes who say they are women, or not?

There’s some odd positioning on this thread.

If you are a campaigner and your goal is to broadcast your message to as many people as possible, it’s completely rational to try and make money whilst doing so. This literally buys you more time for campaigning and reaching/influencing more people.

News outlets platform issues that support their aims. A campaigner who has successfully got their message across before on a given platform, is likely to want more opportunities like this and do repeat appearances.

When I was younger, I thought that labelling someone as ‘right wing’ was highlighting someone of dubious morals. Since maturing, and developing better critical thinking skills, I understand being ‘right wing’ or ‘left wing’ mostly involves holding different views about how to promote a strong economy and what is the fairest way to distribute wealth and create a safe and stable society.

Using the label ‘right wing’ as a means to discount a person’s view out of hand is a strategy that is backfiring globally. Insisting that people are evil or immoral for disagreeing with one’s own views about what inclusion involves and how much heterogeneity within society is desirable, is ridiculous and nothing good will come of it.

Not at all. I’m being a woman who plays sports.

Right, but the topic of this thread is Riley Gaines.

Do you agree with her that women and girls should be entitled to fairness in their sports or not?

My position is ‘not necessarily agreeing with everything a person says or does just because they are a woman and/or a woman’s rights campaigner’ - and this is not misogyny. It’s sensible and what a grown-up generally does, I find.

Well if you do believe that women and girls should be entitled to fairness in their sports, you should be on the same side as Riley Gaines.

Can you quote where I said that? Because it isn’t something I believe.

Absolutely it is.

Not agreeing that women and girls should be entitled to fairness in their sports cannot possibly be described as a pro women position.

Of course it's possible. What an odd question.