To think that Martina Navratilova should not have to apologise for the transgender comment?

[Nickersnackersnockers]

Rachel McKinnon is a transgender cyclist, who, surprise surprise, is winning races against women.

Ok, maybe Navratilova shouldn't have used the word cheated, but surely nobody can disagree with the fact that Ms McKinnon has a male body, and the size and strength of a man, and having the right to compete against women is just plain wrong?

Until the trans-debate gathered pace I considered myself reasonably progressive. It's a new (and uncomfortable) experience to now find myself taking the stance of the 'bigot'; to coin the language oft-used by minority groups against those who would deny them the rights they are asking for.

I'm always interested in both sides of a case so I tracked down and watched a lengthy lecture McKinnon delivered on trans inclusion in sport in Germany. She based it on sports science, philosophy and international law (quite a heady mix of disciplines, but her work is co-authored with a legal expert; no scientists). In many senses, I find her admirable. She's an articulate speaker who comes across as very persuasive, but her academic practice is at best questionable. She's a philosopher, not a scientist, in which case she's straying way beyond her academic remit into scientific/medical discourse. I'm all for multi-disciplinarity practice - provided the co-researcher/authors are appropriately qualified for that - but this is stretching it.

If I'd been in that audience I'd have liked to ask her three questions. 1. in terms of her interdisciplinarity can she do justice to the other academic side of the debate? How does she see human rights law square with these supposed biological factors? Where's the connection between the two? 2. if biological sex is no longer the determinant for eligibility, then is she arguing for getting rid of separate men's/women's categories altogether? And if so, what would she like to see put in their place? 3. Is she just interested in sport, or society beyond sport and other binary categories as well?

I doubt any answers would have been forthcoming, because McKinnon's major downfall is her intensely aggressive approach to anyone who even mildly calls her stance into question. This is fatal for any academic who wants to achieve credibility. Without objectivity, you're falling back on emotion, and emotiveness and aggressively brow-bearing your points across won't (and shouldn't) convince others to accept your arguments.

I listened carefully to what she had to say, but to say the least am unconvinced. Be interesting to hear what others who have listened to her views think of her!

BanginChoons I’ve missed your original post. Do you have a child who wants to transition? If so the feminism board would probably be a good source of support. There’s currently a good AMA on there by someone who’s now de transitioned.

@RepealTheGRA, yes I do, thank you, I will head over there and read it.

I'll be in my car, but I'm going to identify as a woman on a pushbike.

I'm identifying as a staffordshire terrier, so I can compete in Crufts.

OP I completely agree, it is utter madness. Men competing with women is NOT FAIR.

Rod Liddle article in the Spectator notes that The only piece of research done on transgender women competing in women’s sports had a sample size of eight people

spectator.us/womens-sports-consist-men/

Those who support the rights of transgender women to compete in women’s sports often cite the only piece of research done on the issue which ‘proves’ that it is a myth that transgender women have an advantage over normal women. This study was published in 2015 and is cited every time the issue arises — but I have one or two problems with it, to tell you the truth. First, it concerned a total of just eight athletes, which is a smallish sample (no control group, either). Second, it was not carried out by a qualified geneticist or social scientist, but by a ‘medical physicist’ by the name of Joanna Harper. And third, Joanna Harper, once an athlete herself, was, um, how can I put this, not always called Joanna. She was raised as a boy and transitioned to being a fairly fast lady in her thirties. So she has skin in the game and we might surmise that she, or he, set out to prove a thesis, rather than, in good Popperian practice, trying to disprove it.

This year, I'm going to identify as a 6 year old, and fucking smash the egg and spoon race at sports day. (no pun intended)

Any 6 year olds whingeing and whining about it can stfu, it's my right to participate in sport as a trans 6 year old. Anyone who disagrees is clearly ageist and probably a right fucker too.

My stance remains the same one I've expressed on a couple of prior threads on the subject. It's absolutely unfair to expect biological women to compete with trans women, as the latter have benefited from male physical development.

But calling them cheaters and men pretending by be women isn't helpful to the debate.

On the "women can compete if they try harder" thing, no, that's ridiculous. An example is a YouTube channel I watch has a video series comparing different sports disciplines, and the most recent one was with women, doing a deadlift. These are professional athletes with years of training, sponsorship etc, including an Olympic weight lifter and a powerlifter.

I'm a man, who lift weights to look a bit better and not be so fat. I've been back into doing so for a couple of months after years of not really doing any exercise. I out lift every single one of these women, even where they're beating their personal best by 20-40lbs.

To point out where I sit in terms of male strength standards, the equivalent men's comparison video? The winner lifts more than double what I can.

If you call them cheaters and me pretending to be women, you open up the avenue of attack that we currently see being used.

You have to pick your battles, and the fact based reasons for why it is unfair due to physical capability represent much better ground for this particular fight.

Sorry but they are cheaters. I'll happily list the reasons why they are cheaters but they're aware of the physical disparities between men and women as I am, even if they deny it. They know how incredibly unfair it is. And they are not women. They never will be. I'm not going to sit here and deny the facts. There's far too much of that going on already.

Then you're missing my point entirely.

I didn't miss anything thank you very much just because I refuse to pussyfoot around men who are actively robbing women of their medals, opportunities and safe spaces.

I think we all know why they are there. You don't see the likes of Rachel McKinnon entering competitions they simply couldn't win - anything that requires the flexibility of a woman for example. McKinnon is strong but would be rubbish at women's gymnastics, lacking the flexibility and being too big to make the manoeuvres.

That's why we know there is more to this than simply genuinely feeling like a woman (which doesn't make you a woman anyway but that's another post). It's about taking advantage. That's why we are calling it out in the terms we are using.

PickledLimes when you look at the bear bones of it, that is exactly what it is and what is happening. The misogny continues through this channel. I never see the transmen or biological Females wanting to exert their authority over male spaces or males sports, and shouting down the menz, they would not be allowed to and would swiftly be put in their place.

But calling them cheaters and men pretending by be women isn't helpful to the debate.

Boo fucking hoo.

In case I wasn't clear: there is NO debate.

It’s morally cheating regardless of the rules that allow it, they’re not women regardless of the polite fiction rules that insist we must say they are. Not being allowed to name the behaviour or state the facts to spare feelings is what got us here in the first place. Not helpful? Well, pussyfooting around the elephant in the room hasn’t been too helpful either has it?

If you want to win, you have to take a step back and look at the tactics the other side are using, then look at what you can do to negate these.

Why trans women transitioned, or want to compete in women's sports, makes no difference to the reasons why it's not fair competition to have them do so.

Argue that the rules should be changed for those reasons.

I honestly think that continuing to push the "cheating" or "they're really men" angles won't achieve anything, and may well lose you the argument overall, the "transphobia" narrative is an extremely potent one for them to use.

Not wanting to use the argument does not mean there aren't men who actually would do this. It just means recognising that this approach immediately turns it into a slanging match over bigotry that doesn't help win the argument.

Exactly. I'm tired of women constantly being told to be nice to their oppressors,

If you want to win, you have to take a step back and look at the tactics the other side are using, then look at what you can do to negate these.

I cannot believe - though I should by now - the arrogance of a man telling women on a board about feminism how they should think and act.

FML. I'm being mansplained to again. Just because I disagree with you it does not mean that I didn't understand what you were saying.

DauntlessFaction

"Many people seem to have a problem with calling a trans woman a woman even if she's just quietly living her life."

That has nothing to do with it, and is neither here nor there.

The fact is, nothing a TW does or doesn't do will ever make them a woman simply because they're a man.

Humans cannot change sex.

Conforming to the gender stereotypes of a person's sex, and feeling that you align with that sex more closely does not mean you are that sex; that is just your personality.

If a man feels more comfortable dressing in traditional, stereotyped feminine clothing, wearing their hair long and feels that their interests or hobbies correspond more to traditional feminine interests. That's fine, but it doesn't make them a woman because humans cannot change sex.

Maybe they feel that they're more emotional and caring than traditional masculine stereotypes. Again, this is perfectly fine, BUT none of these things turn a man into a woman because humans cannot change sex.

HTH.

FML. I'm being mansplained to again. Just because I disagree with you it does not mean that I didn't understand what you were saying.

Yeah, yeah, mansplaining. Great argument there. You see how easy it is to revert to attacking the person rather than the argument, which us what is happening in the debate over trans women in sports.

I support the same position as pretty much everyone else in this thread. I disagree with how this position is being asserted, and I'm not going to shy away from saying so.