AIBU to be surprised that Laurel Hubbard didn't register a lift in the Olympics?

[Gladiolixoxo]

I wonder if all the controversy around Laurel's participation led to her losing her nerve?

Categorise by oxygen intake - doesn't take into account total muscle mass.
Seriously, these suggestions are just silly.

Lets just continue to categorise by sex.

@FluffyBattleKitten

Pumper, people are implying that you aren't bright because the things you are saying are not well thought out. At all.

You sound like someone who has never seen a grown man or woman. Let alone played a sport.

Most five year olds understand men and women are different. It's not complicated.

Ok, thanks for your input.

NiceGerbil thank you for pointing out how ideas have consequences. I hadn't taken pumpers ideas to their logical conclusion as you have. I need to think around things more.:(

@Thelnebriati

Categorise by oxygen intake - doesn't take into account total muscle mass. Seriously, these suggestions are just silly.

Lets just continue to categorise by sex.

Ok. I’ll tell them just to leave it then.

Storm in a teacup. Every single women's medal at the Olympics has been won by... a woman. And yet this is "the end of women's sports" etc etc. Get a grip!

@Liberett0

Fantastic to see so many people have such a passionate interest in weightlifting on mumsnet. Shame that the only weightlifter they could probably name without the help of Google is Laurel Hubbard 😂

Yeah it's a travesty that we are talking about a mediocre male rather than talented females at the peak of their careers. Well done, Emily Campbell!! Brilliant achievement!

Do I really deserve to be called ‘not particularly bright’ or accused of being a sexual predator because of my easily-searchable username?

I don't think you're a sexual predator.

Not a storm in a teacup for the women denied a chance to compete.

@Cam77

Storm in a teacup. Every single women's medal at the Olympics has been won by... a woman. And yet this is "the end of women's sports" etc etc. Get a grip!

It's called a "long game". The entire point was to get Hubbard in and have her fluff so that people would think she had no advantage, and would say exactly what you've just said.

@Tlems

*Why?

She now has what she wanted all along.

A place in the history books.*

I doubt they threw it too, too big of an ego, if youre cheating to get in, I can't see someone throwing it.

Someone upthread mentioned LH smirking as they left the stage.

This is not the reaction of someone that has trained hard for a pinnacle event of their sport.

Look at how any other athlete has reacted to not just winning but losing, watch any other event and you won't see her reaction on any other face.

@IonaLeg

She is schroedinger’s trans woman. Had she done well, she would have been held up as an example of why trans women shouldn’t be allowed to compete in sports. But by not doing well, she has shown herself up as a stool pigeon, infiltrating sport and bottling to prove it’s ok for trans women to compete.

Just so long as it isn’t concluded that trans women can compete and may or may not do well, like any athlete. That couldn’t possibly be.

Exactly that.

Biological women vs biological women and none of that angst about fair is an issue.
Trans people can compete in a trans event based on gender not sex or their own sex.
Easy peasy,

The excellent Ross Tucker (ScienceofSport on Twitter) has explained numerous times why it is nigh on impossible to segregate sport by anything other than sex.

Here’s his most recent explanation: twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/1421806095518113792?s=21

I would also like to point out that LH has what would be a career ending injury for an actual elite athlete of either sex yet they still managed to meet the requirements for the women's team.

@Cam77 tell that to the women who missed out on a place at the Olympics because of LH's ego and fantasy.

Pumper.

I'm pretty sure my point about the change in how the whole of society views men, women and physical advantage, will have other consequences is fairly clear?

I don't know if anyone else doesn't get what I mean.

No of course men don't assault women because of Olympic categories.

The shift in thinking in society to accept that men do not have any underlying physical advantage over women is a huge one. All over the world the vulnerability of a woman when a man decides to attack her is accepted, as a general rule. (Not always obv, some do get away, good for them).

You want to change that whole accepted view for at least the Olympics. So globally. India, Mexico, here etc.

That is a change in societal understanding that will have consequences for women everywhere.

At the moment eg a teen boy attacks an adult woman. Same height he weighs less. At the moment, it's understood he will likely be stronger than her.

Your approach reverses that. She should have an advantage over him physically. Why didn't she stop him, hmmm? Cue popular false report myths.

This is serious point.

What you want will need buy in globally. A massive shift in thinking.

That will have consequences.

@Kittii

Essentially, it comes down to the question of whether you believe that a man literally becomes a woman just because he says he feels like one. Unless you believe you can magically change sex at the click of your own fingers (which is a fantasy) then there is simply no argument for allowing men into women's categories.

Actually it doesn't even come down to that.

Even if you accept that a male who says he feels like a woman is a woman, it doesn't follow that the pre-existing stuff that was set up for "women" back when woman was synonymous with "adult human female" must be opened up to everyone who can be defined as a women under the new definition.

If you change the meaning of a word in one context all bets are off. You can't just take the changed meaning into a pre-existing context and say "Aha, we changed the meaning of one of the words you used so now you have to honour our new definition"!

IMO there has been a great big step missed out between "turns out some male people are actually women" and "ok male women, you have open access to all the Women's stuff", and that's the step when we work out what pre-existing "Women's" stuff is still women's stuff with the new definition and what is really adult human female stuff that needs to be kept for adult human females of whatever gender they identify as.

The question it comes down to is - "What is the purpose of having separate sports classes for women and men?"

Once that has been answered, the question of who gets to be included in Woman's sports will be simple.

I don’t think it bothered Laurel that they are a cheat which they are

Laurel wasn’t up to it simple as that but never should have been competing against women, females

And to counter the “Well Laurel just isn’t good enough to beat women so why are you all complaining?” comments, Laurel’s qualifying lift for the place at the Olympics was 285kg which would have earned the Silver medal today. Laurel, aged 43 and nowhere near peak fitness, was more than capable of winning a medal today.

I asked for clarification on this

Which is why I know that’s the way the world is turning. I think you might be in for a surprise if this is the first you’ve heard of it.

And I figured you’d miss it (it is a fast moving thread). So I asked again. And you have answered this This is a theory that comes up every year, it’s a discussion that’s been had many, many times before. But with every passing year (as we get closer to the absolute limits of human achievement) it gets more likely.

If this is a theory that is floated every year and you have been following it, you should have a much more thought out solution then what you have posted.

Because, if people who have actually got some experience in this have been discussing it and you have been following it (as you snidely point out that I have not), you’d be posting links that support your position.

Frankly, I don’t care if records are broken. The events celebrate the best female and male for the sport category they are in in the world at that moment. If a record is not broken, so be it. At least it provides something to work towards.

[quote Waspsarearseholes]@ChainJane - explain it to me like I'm a 5 year old. What is a 'non- trans woman' please?[/quote]
I'd like to know this too!!

Fucking hell I'm furious at my sex being described this way.

I would also like to tell a little anecdote

A bit random.

But it illustrates that men who don't practice sports with, or get in fights with/ attack women. Have very little understanding of what the difference physically actually is. They know theoretically they are stronger. What they honestly don't realise is how much.

Any takers to hear my random experiment

@NiceGerbil

Pumper.

I'm pretty sure my point about the change in how the whole of society views men, women and physical advantage, will have other consequences is fairly clear?

I don't know if anyone else doesn't get what I mean.

No of course men don't assault women because of Olympic categories.

The shift in thinking in society to accept that men do not have any underlying physical advantage over women is a huge one. All over the world the vulnerability of a woman when a man decides to attack her is accepted, as a general rule. (Not always obv, some do get away, good for them).

You want to change that whole accepted view for at least the Olympics. So globally. India, Mexico, here etc.

That is a change in societal understanding that will have consequences for women everywhere.

At the moment eg a teen boy attacks an adult woman. Same height he weighs less. At the moment, it's understood he will likely be stronger than her.

Your approach reverses that. She should have an advantage over him physically. Why didn't she stop him, hmmm? Cue popular false report myths.

This is serious point.

What you want will need buy in globally. A massive shift in thinking.

That will have consequences.

I must have missed your apology now that you’re ready to have a conversation in good faith.

I don’t see why it would have consequences. It’s not challenging the idea that women are just as good as men, it’s changing the categories of entry for sports to stop the Olympics being record-chasing, and to widen the variety of athletic ability. Going by your theory, the idea that world records are not infinite, everything can be beaten, surely means women just have to try harder? Deserve to be paid less? Deserve to have categories such as ‘football’ and ‘women’s football’, because they’re weaker?

Surely if you can lift 285kg you can lift 285kg? Was she injured? If not the whole thing looks like grandstanding

@swimlyn best comment ever

I don't accept that the meaning of woman has changed, it still means adult human female. Some activists are campaigning for it to include any men that feel like they are women but I don't certainly don't accept that, and I'm pretty sure the majority of people don't accept that either. It's a very outspoken minority -sect- that is pushing for it.