Continuation thread re IOC/trans policy and related trans issues

[fidel1ne]

Also a plug for the FB group

www.facebook.com/groups/ATWIWS/

BTW does the Facebook group show up on your page if you join?

No, not in any way at all.

Ridiculous discussion if you can even call it that -I listened to it 3 times (not very testing since it went on for a measly 3 minutes). What a joke, someone who knows nothing on the subject discussing it with a biased ftm who thinks that 'some women are tall' is a good argument for disparity physical ability between men and women.

You cant really get much more biased than a wife beating mtt boxer, can you :(

I didn't hear the discussion on radio 4, but I am right in thinking that the entire discussion took place with no mention of the impact of this on biological women in sport?!

Is this worth a complaint to the bbc about bias?

I'm so angry.

Men don't just want everything, they even want to be women too. We are literally supposed to cease existing.

How do I join fb thing?

In terms of scientific analysis, I've only seen one piece of actual evidence which has been linked to on the Facebook page but is currently not loading (think too many people are trying to link to it). It's not 100% clear who the test subjects are (at one point it talks about being 3 years post op but does not make it clear whether this is always the case) but one thing that is clear is that they are looking at the effects of transwomen who have very low testosterone levels - about 1.0 nmol/L.

This is well within the standard women's range of testosterone rather than within the suggested limits from MTT for the IoC but the language suggests that these are MTT who, even if they are not post-surgery, are not making efforts to retain masculine musculature. It also looked at the impact of taking oestrogen.

Essentially, even after 3 years of very low testosterone levels TW had muscle mass of 15-20% higher than women but maintained an average man's body fat %. Taking oestrogen actively reduced their cardiovascular efficiency (but this won't be a requirement for athletes) oh and for interest, TM taking testosterone achieved the muscle mass of men but did not reduce the subcutaneous fat so would never have the power to weight ratio expected for their size. Post surgical transwomen still had 10% higher muscle mass than women and did not gain the same levels of subcutaneous fat even though these individuals would be on the equivalent of HRT.

So even for the transwomen who make no efforts to retain their male advantage, they still have muscular and cardiovascular advantages over women before taking things like bone structure, shoulder breadth, height, reach, muscle density etc into account.

It's outrageous how much we're being gaslighted.

Someone said to me earlier "but didn't they decide years ago that trans women could compete?", and I had to articulate (to myself as well as this person) what the real difference now is and why it matters.

In 2004, the IOC decided that transgender athletes must fulfill three conditions - they must have had reassignment surgery, they must have legal recognition of their gender, and they must have had at least two years of hormone therapy.

This new decision removes the requirement to have had surgery, and that is why it is worrying. The statistics tell us that approximately 80 - 85% of trans people do not have reassignment surgery - before I read up on this, I blithely assumed that surgery was the norm, but it isn't at all. So many more thousands of trans women who were not previously eligible to compete, now are. And, as inevitably happens in trans issues, the benefits to the trans population are celebrated, while the potential harms to women go unacknowledged.

Incidentally, where are the intact-penised transwomen athletes showering after the events, I wonder? And when squads go on training camps together, do the natal women in the team get a choice about whether they share a room with a pre-operative transwoman or not? Would they dare to object? Or would they just get dropped from the team for being bigots. I wonder.

Would they dare to object? Or would they just get dropped from the team for being bigots.

Hmmm, I've thought about that question for all of 2 seconds and I'm pretty sure I know the answer.

Yy to hully's post above. It's as if we're expected to cease to exist. Someone on one of these tgreads made the comment that it really is allbbeginning to feel a bit Handmaid's Tale: That we're going to end up with men, transwomen (being feted for their athletic prowess and glamorous cover photos on Vanity Fair) and breeders. It really is beginning to feel that way.

A complaint to the BBC and all media outlets that they didn't bother to get a single quote from a woman athlete or representative organisation. Pathetic journalism.

What about womeninsport.org? They are on twitter (sorry, I'm not ). Surely they have to take a position?

the whole thing is silly

Place marking to catch up!

We should stop using the term 'pre-op transwoman' and instead use the much clearer term 'fully intact male'. They mean the exact same thing but the former is much more sympathetic to the trans agenda.

I've also started using the term 'sex role' instead of 'gender'. Again, they mean the exact same thing but 'sex role' gives a much clearer view of what is going on.

On another note, I see Hadley Freeman is currently on maternity leave... I was just thinking she sounded like a Mumsnetter with that throwing women under the bus comment

I genuinely cannot believe that this is happening.

It seems to be running away with us and few seem to care.

Where does the under the bus comment come from?

They're not being given the facts in a responsible and balanced way. They're getting spoon fed a very biased view of things with no questioning allowed.

I was wondering, are any of the posters reading this those who have previously said "ffs, not another trans thread"?

This whole thing is making me so angry. From the painful 'right on' language associated with all things trans (I'm not cis, I view cis as an absolute insult. I am a woman) to this intrusion into female sport. Surely a 'third gender' category could be created? Because MTT are NOT female (and vice versa). Gender is one thing. Sex is a whole other area and biologically they are and will always be male.

It's all completely fucking absurd, none of it makes any coherent sense, yet no one is asking even the most basic of questions.

It's quite terrifying how little people think about things, to be frank.

Hasn't anyone started one of those 38 degree or other petitions yet?

It needs to get publicised and out there.