Trans people being allowed to compete against women in the Olympics

[OhShutUpThomas]

The Olympics are now allowing men who have taken hormones for 12 months compete against women.

It is NOT transphobic to say that this is grossly unfair and a huge violation of women's rights.

Women who have trained all their lives cannot be expected to compete against people with male bodies and who will be allowed roughly 4 times the normal female testosterone levels.

It's not on. We can't stand for it.

Please get behind this mumsnet. Someone needs to take a stand.

It's NOT transphobic to state that this is unfair. It really isn't.

Yes, dd's school (she's in y4) has a mixed football club. Her best friend attends it and was thrilled with the football we gave her for her birthday. The local youth cricket team is a mix of girls and boys and the school has a local coach go in in the summer term. Apparently he started off splitting the kids into girls and boys teams but had to mix it up when the girls kept beating the boys - apparently it pissed the boys off disheartened them too much.

In many sports at the amateur level, there are mixed and women only teams. That is fine, individuals can decide which they prefer. But at a competitive level we need different rules.

I wasn't.

Deliberately disingenuous then. Don't be that. Nitpicking that I was stressing that of course you could abstain for whatever reason you felt like is not an argument.

I don't necessarily agree with your argument Iceberg, but I can follow your logic.

Either men and women have fundamentally different physiques and there is a point in having different categories (along with the categories that many sports have to divide according to weight, age, professional status, ability, disability, league etc.), or women and men aren't really different and everyone should compete with each other, trans or otherwise.

It's as though the ioc's think women's sport is a social event for people who want to talk about lipstick.

(Ioc thinks!)

As someone who spent years playing football (both women's 11-a-side at university and then Sunday league afterwards, and mixed and women's 5-s-side - and arguably, men's 5-a-side because quite frequently I'd end up the only woman in the game) I'd just like to say Ice is completely wrong about football.

Regarding children's football - yes, there's no reason why girls and boys can't play together, and indeed (barring a few clubs run by completely sexist dinosaurs) they do.

But in 11-a-side football, the difference in strength, height, speed and power really matters (incidentally it is a contact sport as well!) As a woman, you're very very unlikely to be able to play much of a part in the game even at a scratch park football level, unless the blokes do what most decent people do in a scratch game, which is ease up on the competitiveness with the deliberate intention of including everyone in the game.

5-a-side is different. It is non-contact, and because the pitch is small and congested, favours an intelligent game based on short accurate passing and positional play, which irons out a lot of the issues round strength and speed. It can be an excellent mixed sport.

Out of interest, Ice, did you watch any of the women's world cup? Most of the matches were on free-to-view TV (admittedly some of them at ridiculous hours of the morning). I think if you are not actually interested in a sport yourself, don't play it, and in fact on your own admission don't even think it should exist, maybe you're not the best qualified person to hold an opinion on it.

My DS plays under 10s football. Some of the opposing teams have the odd girl. Every time they do us parents just sigh, because our boys hold back, they really do. Despite the coach telling them otherwise none of them will tackle or get really physical or competitive with a girl.

I don't think it's a good experience for anyone. Mixed kids teams are really annoying for boys.

I very much doubt trans women will be holding back.

Venus
Deliberately disingenuous then. Don't be that. Nitpicking that I was stressing that of course you could abstain for whatever reason you felt like is not an argument.

You asked me to explain why I thought the available options might not represent people's views, which I did. I pointed out that you had added wording to the 'abstain' option, reflecting your interpretation, but maybe not everybody's. I'm not sure why you're challenging me on a minor point, rather than the more significant points I've made. Calling me deliberately disingenuous is inappropriate and unnecessary and doesn't advance the discussion.

Let me ask you a question, Venus. What did you think of the previous IOC policy on transgender competition in the Olympics? Did you think it was fair? Or do you object to transwomen competing as women, full stop?

No I doubt that professional athletes of any sex will hold back if they believe they are on a level playing field.

But my comments were about kids, and directed to those who think mixed kids teams are a positive thing. And my view is that they are not.

I object to transwomen competing as women full stop but at least the previous rules set the bar high enough that only genuine transwomen would be competing against women rather than just any man that fancied a go.

Fascicle

In the context of the poll, people can put their reasoning, or not. Whatever. It's just a poll to gauge support or otherwise for a Mumsnet campaign. It's not a survey, a debate or a questionnaire. It doesn't have to cover every imaginable option. Do feel free to start an alternative poll if you don't feel this one is representative. I don't agree.

Not really interested in debating anything with people who I don't believe to be doing it in good faith. Nitpicking the specific wording of my posts when you knew perfectly well what I meant is not what I consider a decent argument, and I don't believe that was "advancing the discussion" either.

I'd agree Tinkly and would think a world that really respected women's sport and therefore sport in general would tend to have separate teams for girls and boys of all ages, as they grow up and train for the separate adult teams.

And my view is that they are not.

I totally agree.

And according to the new rules you really can just have a go at being a woman, because after 4 years you can go back to competing as a man.

Blimey merry that really doesn't sound right does it?

So just in time for the next Olympics then?!

DS Juggling I imagine girls are often forced into the position of football with lots of boys or no football at all.

On the question of a campaign, we tend not to run them on issues where there's strong polarisation on the site (ie some people -albeit a minority - feel v strongly against)

Hmm. I have to say that MN would never campaign on anything if this was really one of the arguments. The second point is fair but I do find this one a bit disingenuous.

I think perhaps the real argument is more that MN do not want to be seen campaigning on anything relating to transgenderism because they effectively have to 'pick a side' or at least will be seen to, by one group or another. MN is for women and those who identify as women.

Personally I would prefer if MNHQ were just straight about it and said they didn't want to get involved in transgender issues because of the make of their members and this potentially means they have a conflict of interests and wish be a platform for discussion for both groups rather than pussy footing about it, and coming out with crap about how they don't want to campaign on controversial subjects. It's being politically correct at the expense of honesty.

The fact is the reason you campaign on anything is generally because its a controversial subject that has been neglected by others because it will come against hostility and opposition.

The trouble is that this admission by MNHQ has the potential to prove the exact point that a lot of women feel about their spaces being marginalised and their views such as this one are not being properly discussed because it is being put second to the considerations of being politically correct thus meaning they are marginalised again.

This is part of a wider issue where the conflicts of interests of women and the transgendered community are not being properly addressed. It will lead to more, not less, problems further down the line for both groups. It does nothing to address the problems of minority or disadvantaged groups.

I do think that actually MN has to start thinking about ways to bridge this problem to serve both groups better. I think there is a gap that needs to be addressed.

venus
Not really interested in debating anything with people who I don't believe to be doing it in good faith. Nitpicking the specific wording of my posts when you knew perfectly well what I meant is not what I consider a decent argument, and I don't believe that was "advancing the discussion" either.

You continue to misunderstand the point I was making. Hugely disproportionate to use it as a reason not to address other points, particularly whether or not you believe transwomen should compete as women at all. As for not debating in good faith - couldn't be further from the truth. I would never say anything on here that I don't firmly believe and that I wouldn't say in real life.

I wasnt fond of the old rules, but it seemed somewhere towards a compromise - in theory made sure that only tw who were 'serious' about transitioning were included. Of course i'd prefer the males stayed in their own category and the females could compete without being totally walked over.

But these new rules are just a fucking joke. Especially given the crap about "masculine presenting transwoman with a beard who is a lesbian" that is so fashionable right now

Women wont be competing with a handful of sex-dysphoric people, they'll be competing with any special snowflake who thinks they deserve to win at the cost of the real women.

And you continue to ignore my point. Whether "hugely disproportionate" or not, I don't care to engage with you any further on this point. So let's leave it at that.

That was to Fascicle. Fast moving thread!

My DS plays under 10s football. Some of the opposing teams have the odd girl. Every time they do us parents just sigh, because our boys hold back, they really do. Despite the coach telling them otherwise none of them will tackle or get really physical or competitive with a girl.

That's very sad. Perhaps you should be teaching your boys to be less pathetic about it. Do they not play football or other sports with girls in the playground?

My dd plays in an u10s team. She's the only girl. The boys used not to pass to my dd but now that she's the top goal scorer in the team they can't get the ball to her quickly enough

No, venus, I haven't ignored any of your points.

Especially given the crap about "masculine presenting transwoman with a beard who is a lesbian" that is so fashionable right now

Pretty sure that is deliberately intended by contrarian wankers just to rub our noses in it a little bit more. Let's celebrate people who look like women by no stretch of the imagination that you can't say are men! And let them access all women's spaces!