Brave reporter undergoes inhumane sex test for sports. Brace yourselves.

I encourage you to read about the things Canadian lifter Archer said about April Hutchinson and how April was treated after raising concerns about the fairness of the competition.

Even Harper, the male researcher with a transgender is identity has admitted that no male people should be competing in female weightlifting.

Male people are not being ‘excluded’ from sports. They are only excluded from female sports categories.

To keep saying they are being excluded is misinformation.

Male people who have or do produce testosterone and which their body processes are not EXCLUDED from sport. They are simply expected to compete in their sex category based on their sexed body formation.

@Deadlifter* *How about reading some of the many links that have been posted, rather than hanging around taking swipes at individual posters.

I think perhaps the majority of us recognised it, as I did, as being a riff on one of the phrases that is trotted out whenever anyone suggests maybe men ought not to do this or that. The reply comes back like clockwork from the TRA side of things to the effect that we obviously expect genital checks to be made, eg at the doors of public lavatories. (On the whole, I suspect nobody here is dimwitted enough to expect any such thing!) It has become such a clichéd response that making fun of it is also commonplace, and I suspect that many of the people here simply don't notice it any more. I didn't, I admit.

Would you also feel that the men banging on about the expectation are reprehensible and thoroughly deserve to have the, ahem, urine extracted for it? I have definitely had the impression now and again that the person saying it was looking forward to the experience, let's say; some people apparently regard a strip-search as sexy, after all. Takes all sorts.

Ok. I’ve explained why I disagree with you on that.

Yep, it's that straightforward.

For people who still struggle with this concept then the answer is trans categories where the oh so complicated and nuanced issue of sex v gender can be battled out on the mat, court, track or wherever, without cheating women out of medals or having to show anyone your genitals.

Well I didn’t see that so I couldn’t call it out. But I DID read someone insinuating on here that maybe trans people WANT their genitals checked, and I do think just calling trans people fetishists or whatever IS transphobia.

Thank you to the people explaining the trope. I’m aware people point out that it would be very difficult to police toilets without checking gentials (we’re not doing a genetic test on everyone using a loo, right!) but I still think the post I read was deliberately creepy / implying people would be disappointed for a fetish reason rather than the reason that it didn’t back up their worst-case-scenario-argument, and I don’t think that’s acceptable really.

It's 'old', 2019, but the IAAF said:

"We have seen in a decade and more of research that approximately 7.1 in every 1000 elite female athletes in our sport are DSD athletes with very high testosterone levels in the male range. The majority of those athletes compete in the restricted events covered by the regulations. This frequency of DSD individuals in the elite athlete population is around 140 times higher than you will find in the general female population, and their presence on the podium is much more frequent even than this."

https://worldathletics.org/news/press-release/questions-answers-iaaf-female-eligibility-reg

ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY TIMES the general population.

It is that straightforward. The rest is just special pleading for men which disadvantages women.

I have seen male athletes write about looking forward to having their genitals checked. I am sure others have too.

Mentioning it is for a reason, it is pointing out that some male people have written about looking forward to it, not that the posters mentioning those male people are the issue.

I have personally overheard a group discussion of male people with transgender identities discuss this. One declared that when a female gym manager questioned their sex, he dropped his gym gear and showed her his groin.

Another of the group discussed with a very young girl how he was just like her and her mum and had ‘female breasts’.

I would suggest anyone calling out female people’s discussion about these discussions we hear in real life or see on social media is calling out the wrong people’s inappropriate behaviour. Telling women they are in the wrong for discussing the behaviour of male people is an act of misogyny, supporting those male people, in my opinion.

Thank you. Definitely not a domestic goddess or a cake maker! I was drawn to this thread specifically rather than any of the other gender critical threads because I have a genuine interest in women’s sports (as I say, I compete in a strength sport where performance expectations across male and female, weight and ages classes are of course very different). I want my sport and all sport to be fair for women, but I also don’t want to exclude trans or intersex people (and there ARE quite a few trans people in lifting communities)…. And that’s because I love my sport! I think everyone should get to do it!

I honestly don’t know what the answer is, but I don’t think it’s as straightforward as ‘there’s male and female, that’s it, no variance or discussion to be had’.

Sometimes the moderation is really odd on this website. Not sure why we're not allowed to say that these are adults we're dealing with, and adults understand that they can't have their own way in competitive sport. They're not children.

This.

Acknowledging that I don't speak for everyone, or even anyone other than myself, everyone here is fully familiar with the TRA obsession (even in the negative) with the idea that genital examinations are "a thing", under consideration, or requested or required.

It's way beyond a trope, in TRA circles, that all GC people allegedly want "genital examinations" at toilet doors. We're bored with it, and sometimes we play the ball back at you.

Because genital inspections is well known trope employed endlessly by trans rights activists who seem to think that it's what gender critical women will demand to ensure same sex provisions aren't used by opposite sex people. It's been doing the round for years, I couldn't even guess the number of times I've seen it deployed to try and portray gender critical women as perverts.

Gender critical women have never demanded genital inspections and there is a bit of suspicion that some of those who go on about it are having some sort of fantasy and may even be disappointed at the lack of drama involved in a cheek swab.

If you believe biological sex doesn’t exist you are equivalent to a flat earther.

I guess I’m more worried about men calling women like us pigs who should be gassed than what the terrible women on MN say 🤷‍♀️

Is this the poster you say you have given hope to? Because this is not in reference to the three instances you mention.

This is in response to your post “This is the second time someone has suggested that not holding gender critical views is the same as being a flat earther. And then other people keep telling me how open people are to challenge in this definitely-not-a-bubble”

This poster seems to be agreeing that somehow on a publicly accessible forum with many different opinions, that no one else has come in to support you means somehow this the bubble you wish it to be.

If you actually had been challenged in the past on your view, I would expect that you would have more than emotionally reasoned fallacies in mind to support your arguments.

I think your swivel to sexualised innuendo doesn’t really seem to be answering the question and is more of a distraction to shame some other posters.

Thanks for the apology.
As a general point, not speaking about you, what new posters with strong trans allegiances fail to realise is that women on here are fine tuned to new posters who rock up with an agenda. They often start seemingly so reasonable "I'm as GC as they come ... but...", and usually identify as mothers of 12, cake makers and domestic goddesses (I may be exaggerating here 😁).
As a thread progresses the mask starts to slip and claims of women's inability to understand, allegations of bigotry & unkindness & more recently a very odd obsession with claiming that women are somehow creepy for mentioning body parts or talking about children transitioning.

It soon becomes apparent that the poster is another transactivist solely here to educate women about our wrongthink. It happens time and time again and there's always the same pattern.

It's very refreshing to be proved wrong about this and to see a poster genuinely engaging in good faith. Some of us have been fighting to return women's sport to women and girls, to stop the undermining of child safeguarding and to reinforce the importance of women's rights to safety, privacy and dignity for many many years. So many organisations and individuals have been trashed by extreme transactivism and it's wearying watching the frantic attempts to stop these wrongs being put right.

Perfectly put!

I think that’s sort of right, except that when someone upthread said people would be disappointed not to have their genitals checked, nobody except me challenged it at all. It’s a reprehensible thing to say, and maybe YOU wouldnt say it, but you’ve all taken the time to challenge me multiple times, and ALL of you let that slide.

It may very well be weird sexual, because the origin of the phrase is what you very likely thought it is, but very possibly aimed the other way.

In any case, "some of you" is a fairly huge generalisation to take from two whole posts by two people: contrary to what is said by people who haven't bothered to look but condemned sight unseen, the women who post here are not some sort of collective mind, just a lot of individualists who may happen to agree about some thing or things but will be wildly divergent in other ways.

It is just a few…

AN ANALYSIS ON HOW JUST A FEW MALE PEOPLE CAN CAUSE HARM TO MANY FEMALE ATHLETES - THE FALSITY OF 'JUST ONE'

@hecheateddotorg
18th March 2025

To analyze performance differences between "trans"-identified male and actual female participants in girls' sport, we need look no further than girls' high school track and field.

Track and field provides the clearest data as it is an individual sport and has had the highest number of recorded male participants to date at the high school level.

There are a total of 37 male athletes on record who have participated in girls' high school track and field in the United States.

Of these 37, one athlete participated in only one race due to the cancellation of the season during the COVID 19 pandemic. Another athlete participated in a tech/private school league that did not participate in a state championship. These two athletes will be excluded from the data.

Out of 1,276 completed events, male athletes finished as follows:

1st place: 440 (34%)
2nd place: 188 (15%)
3rd place: 123 (10%)
Other: 485 (41%)

Male athletes came in 1st 34% of the time, only 7% less often than they did than any other place outside the top 3.
They finished in the top three in 59% of their events and outside the top eight in only 19% of their events.

24 of the 35 male athletes (68%) qualified for their respective State Championship meet in a total of 136 events.

When looking at athletes competing against same-sex peers, depending on the state and division of competition, anywhere from 5 to 15% of athletes are expected to qualify.

For example in states that use regional-sectional qualification, the top 4 finishers at a regional meet (often with 2 heats of 8 runners each) qualify for the sectional meet where the top 4 finishers at the sectional then advance to State. This means that out of 32 runners at regionals, only 4 (12.5%) will advance to State.

This number also does not take into account the fact that only the best runners on a team will be entered in a regional meet and often the same runner will qualify in multiple events. A runner may also have a higher chance of qualifying in a relay as 8 runners (top 2 teams) advance to state rather than 4 in this type of qualification.

In other types of qualification or less competitive, smaller regions, it may be easier to qualify.

At the State Championship meet, there are typically 24 entries in each event. 1 of the 24 will win, meaning 4% of the 15% of athletes who have qualified for state will be a state champion, or 0.6%.
Of the 24 male athletes who qualified for state against girls, 11 of them (46%) have won a state championship title, or 31% of the total.

4 of the 35 male athletes (11%) have also achieved a top 10 national ranking.
The percentage of male athletes who have been in the top 10 of all track and field athletes in the female division in the entire nation is higher than the percentage of female athletes who have won a state title.

To find the percentage of female athletes who are in the top 10, we can take the 57 indoor and outdoor events ranked on milesplit. com multiplied by 10 (10 athletes in each) then divide by the total number of female athletes in high school track and field - 506,015 (according to nfhs. org).

This number does not take into account the fact that many athletes in the top 10 appear there in multiple events and several of the 57 events are less commonly run. (All 4 male athletes in the top 10 achieved that placement in a main event).

This means less than 0.11 percent of female athletes achieve a top 10 ranking.

"But not all states require hormone therapy!"

It is true that some states do not require males to undergo any sort of testosterone suppression or medical intervention in order to compete against girls.

We can therefore, look to the athletes who have reportedly begun "identifying" as the opposite sex and undergone "medical interventions" prior to puberty or in early middle school as it has been proposed that males who do so are in line with "average female performance."

There are 3 athletes who have reportedly "transitioned" prior to puberty. Based on their feminized appearances and high voices, we can infer this included puberty blockers.
All 3 athletes qualified for the state championship meet, 2 of the athletes were conference champions, and one athletes was not only a state champion and New England champion, but he was ranked in the national top 10.
None of these performances are in line with an "average" athlete. In fact, the national ranking out of three athletes is statistically unlikely to the point of being impossible without an athletic advantage.

"But you just know about the athletes who are good. There could be more you don't hear about because they don't win anything."

When we look at the expected percentages, we can see that about 6 out of 1,000 athletes win state and 1 out of 1,000 are in the top 10 national ranking.

In order to see the 24 males as state champions and 4 males in the top 10, there should be around 4,000 males who have competed in the girls' division in track and field. (3,965 additional athletes, none of whom can have won a state title).

There have been 37 on record.

Numerous state senators and legislators have come forward testifying to the number of "trans"-identifying males participating in their states.

When these legislators testify that there have "only been 2" in the state, or in the case of Ohio, 17 athletes in 8 years, and these numbers include all sports, and when male athletes have been banned from participating in girls' sports in about half of the states in the nation, it is not likely that there are an additional 3,963 male athletes that not only does nobody know about, but who also have not won a single state title.
In regards to the prepubescent "transitioners," there should be an additional 1,000 of them who have not won a state title or achieved a top 10 ranking. This is also highly unlikely, as we've seen multiple prepubescent "transitioners" in other sports also winning national and state championship titles.

Male participation in the female division is not just unfair, it is blatantly so.
These percentages do not reflect the cost to the female athletes behind them. Just 2 male athletes in cross country and track and field in Maine have negatively impacted over 2,000 female athletes.

If each male athlete negatively impacted 500 female on average, that means over 18,500 female high school track and field athletes in the United States have been forced to compete against and have been negatively impacted by these boys.

This includes loss of titles, loss of medals, loss of relay spots, loss of entries in large meets, loss of qualifications for championships, loss of records, loss of privacy, and loss of confidence.

*2 male athletes in Maine negatively impacted over 1,600 girls

3 boys in Washington, over 2,000

ah ok, thanks for clarifying.
TWO people have said weird sex things in that case! (Although this third person IS being vulgar, right?)

Deadlifter
One person said my posts have given them a bit of hope, and that’s enough for me.

Ah. You haven't encountered that particular poster before? I wouldn't feel too encouraged really.

And I think that "circle jerk" was being used in a derogatory way about Mumsnet, rather than being anyone getting at you. I might be wrong, but the meaning of the phrase makes it seem likely since you are more or less a solo effort;

• Circle jerk is a vulgar slang phrase often used figuratively to describe a group where people only agree with, praise, or validate each other.
• It is usually negative and suggests that a discussion lacks critical thinking, fresh ideas, or opposing viewpoints.
• In online slang, it is similar to echo chamber, groupthink, or mutual admiration society.

That post wasn’t jumping to defend anything. It was pointing out the phenomenon which has happened three times on this thread of gender critical people making weird wink wink sexual comments or insinuations, despite the fact that being fetishistic or over sexed or something is one of the accusations they throw at the trans community all the time. Three times in this thread someone gender critical has said a weird sex thing! It’s weird!