Transitioned male cricket player from India cleared to play elite women’s cricket in Australia

Hm, the most class ridden society of all is India!

This! India is widely considered one of the most unequal and stratified societies in the world, driven by a deep mix of traditional caste hierarchies and modern economic disparities.

A decade into all of the justifications and obfuscations, I knew the class element had to come in. But I never guessed that would extend to the British as an imperialist colonialist supremacist group imposing the prison of biological sex categories on societies that were wholly gender-oriented paradises, the "third genders" all exalted for their gender non-conforming wisdom, had that pesky Victoria not ascended the throne, we'd all be Self IDing for over 150-200 years now.
It's the perfect complement to a new, and equally bonkers take I've read about, not so much from trolls like Gretel, but from the Ian Dunt types.
That trans identifying individuals were until the last couple of decades pretty much accepted and respected/encouraged, and only the last 15 years of ramping alt right culture war has weaponised the second wave feminists to become bio-essentialist stormtroopers in a culture war that only the right wants to fight.
Yes, JKR, Greer, Sex Matters, LGBA, Let Women Speak, the forthright gender criticals regularly writing blogs and Times/UnHerd-Spiked-Spectator pieces are corralled in the last 15 years to punch down on a group Dunt's dunces say were socially integrated.
And now we combine this theory with Gretel's, that MN and the whole Gender Critical industry is a front for winding back women's rights, carrying on the great work that Queen Victoria instigated in crushing gender-oriented paradises in places like India.
I guess this is all consistent. If you're going to re-write science and women's rights, you need to re-write history and politics as well.

Of course we can blame the whole issue on British colonialism. Neither Australia nor India would be playing cricket without it.

In india they do have a 'third sex' and that is the hirja, like Ladyboys in Thailand or other indigenous societies in which effeminacy or homosexuality in males is heavily sanctioned. Hirja though, are not really considered women and represent quite a different caste altogether, with very specific roles and functions. Often they make a living from begging and prostitution, and in doing so provide an acceptable societal avenue for males to have sex with other males.

Recently watched a Róisín Michaux podcast where these "third genders" are absolutely abused in their home countries, "escape" to the West, end up in sex trafficking hellholes in Paris, Madrid etc, Western heterosexual men (more like bisexuals) seek them out and use them, come home to have sex with their wives, GFs, mistresses, consider themselves good alpha heterosexual men, their female partners unaware, HIV and STDs now increasing in Western populations.
All the while the Pride spouting mouthpieces like Gretel say that these third genders, being so isolated from the worst aspects of British colonialism, are an example of an exalted future of gender non conforming paradise.
Maybe it's Britains historical fault, now continued by today's GCs, that have led to Parisian men etc abusing these third genders, and then again when they come home to their female partners?

@JanesLittleGirl

Playing cricket became a way to challenge those colonial rulers on equal ground!

Oh I say, that's hardly cricket old chap

It's a moo point.

We did not

I think he's trying to say they won't kowtow as in they refuse to "tow" the line.

We invented the game so, by association, we must’ve made it happen!!

See the film "Lagaan" which sends up Victorian colonial attitudes something rotten, in a parody of Boys Own jolly cricketing stuff, addressing caste, British sexism, and probably other matters I missed, not being fluent in Indian films.

I am also reminded of an episode of "Stumped",on the World Service on which a representative of Ozzie Cricket explained that indigenous Australians, despite having provided the first national team to visit Britain, to much approval.didn't really want to play it, because, reasons.

I think Cricket Australia has some attitudes of its own which Britain is not recently responsible for. We have grassroots games with sub-Continental teams, abd West Indian teams. I haven't checked out the white teams in the park, but I expect The Yorkshire Londoners have their own lot.

And every time I see Gretel's name here I see our local automaton clock in which to the Humperdink tinkly tune, a girl pushes a witch into a suspiciously 1940's oven. I've other reasons for disliking that clock, which our poster reminds me of.

Just as males could do then.

Damn it, I knew I should have trade-marked "bio-essentialist stormtroopers", lol.

Women's cricket? WOMEN'S? how on earth can a woman play cricket in her corsets and long skirts? Nonsense! Next you'll be telling me they can ride those new fangled bicycles. Balderdash!

You should look up FACTS!!

The first recorded match of Women’s Cricket took place on July 26, 1745, between eleven maids of Bramley and eleven maids of Hambledon in Surrey.

An early newspaper report from the Reading Mercury documented the game, noting that the women played "as well as most men could”.

You should buy a sense of humour. I'm being sarcastic if you are in any doubt. Check my username

@CivilisedVictorianBritishOverlord‘how on earth can a woman play cricket in her corsets and long skirts?”

During the Victorian era, women who played cricket typically wore long skirts or dresses paired with blouses, maintaining the strict standards of feminine modesty and propriety of the time.

Women were still expected to wear standard Victorian undergarments, including tightly laced corsets and multiple layers of petticoats.

Of course, it is an indication though that not one poster has tried with any evidence about competitive advantages, that this male cricketer should be supported to play in female teams.

Instead, the immediate response was that people from the UK should ignore an unsafe and oppressive decision made in Australia because of decisions made centuries ago.

As an Australian British person, I understand how this argument plays out and in this instance it is a very weak argument. It is also one that is rather superficial which is surprising if in the past you consider the pleas for considering ‘nuance’.

If all there is available is this type of blatant emotional manipulation, I reckon there is a good chance that some people realise there is not going to be any evidenced defence to the harm this decision will cause. However, It is quite something to see how much some people hate women who disagree that male people can be in anyway female people.

Always happy to hear from a CivilisedVictorianBritishOverlord, you have been such a silenced and marginalised group over the centuries😁

Isn't there a theory that overarm bowling was invented by women players because their skirts got in the way of bowling underarm?
.