Trans Park Run Deletion

[TheUterati]

Poorly played, MN, very poorly played.

The perspective that when male athletes identify as female athletes and on the basis of that are eligible to compete against women, they are cheating is an absolutely valid one that is deserving of discussion.

Points in its favour are:

1. The context of cheating in sports as a whole - those self-harming activities that athletes willingly participate in to give themselves a competitive edge.
2. The evidence that mediocre male athletes who identify as female manage to then carve out glittering careers where those would not be available to them had they continued to compete as males.

It is an absolutely valid perspective.

Accusations of cheating against specific individuals may well be against talk guidelines, in the absence of supporting evidence, but those individual posts can be deleted and a friendly warning from MNHQ posted on the thread.

Males identifying as females and competing in female sports is a key issue in GRA, whether it occurs at the 'social, fun' end of things or at at Olympic level. To silence this debate is an appallingly heavy-handed.

Having a T category is now a requirement in equalities monitoring. In one situation it's absolutely mandatory for inclusion and in another you are a nazi.

Once you've sorted out the rules, let us all know.

I can see it would stir up that emotion, Rat, sorry. But most of the time, sex and/or gender don't need to be declared anyway. I'm not suggesting anyone stamp it on their forehead, but that where neither M nor F is appropriate, a third option should be available.

Marking your run entry as N could mean 'trans' or any other reason for 'prefer not to say - please just give me the time, and not set it against either sex'.

I know very well that man cannot physically become a woman. My issue is with self id and TRAs. There's no harm in certain instances in respecting that someone can be allowed to call themselves a woman if they want to (like, i dunno.. if they've got a grc?) Or at a parkrun for instance where it is not a competition and the only victim in this case was the OPs pride because the trans woman came in front of her when the trans woman probably didn't even know that the OP was treating it as a competition. If you want rules and regulations about categories then parkrun probably isn't for you.

The cheating accusations were rife throughout the thread pretty much from the front page by the way. What exactly do you think would happen if Mumsnet HQ deleted a thread stating that it was transphobic? You'd get another one of these threads where everybody who posted on the first one what arguing that it wasn't transphobic and why. Except that it was. If you can't see that, maybe you're one of the ones who needs to take a step back and look at what you're saying and what it might do to mumsnets reputation.

Another voice calling bullshit on the deletion of that thread. Poorly played MNHQ.

It isn't transphobic to say that decent people play by the rules of fair play and consider others.

Bobbybabbler, agree.

which is possibly the most abhorrent thing I can imagine

I'm so glad you put possibly in there

Transcrime is a good website. No one else is counting.

erishgal Have you ever been to parkrun? It is NOT a competition, fair play for what? Everyone's on an equal playing field. If you feel the need to compete and think others are being "unfair", it's probably not the best place for you (general you) to run.
In a competitive race, you'd have a point.

We had this conversation repeatedly on the other thread. As you know.

This thread has reminded me that I haven't been to ParkRun for ages. Time to get the trainers out.

Have you ever been to parkrun? It is NOT a competition, fair play for what?

No, not a competition at all.

Oh hang on...

I'd say more people disagreed with you than agreed with you. Certainly 50/50.

If you can't see that, maybe you're one of the ones who needs to take a step back and look at what you're saying and what it might do to mumsnets reputation

I do not agree that the whole thread was transphobic

Some comments definitely...some posters....maybe

The whole thread, no

I dont need to take a step back

I just dislike exaggeration when its being used as a fact

There were 'logically' non transphobic posts on that thread

And then there's that "Trans Crime" website, which is possibly the most abhorrent thing I can imagine.

More abhorrent than terfisaslur.com/ ???

In a competitive race, you'd have a point.

So "transphobia" (your definition) and not being inclusive of trans identified males could be considered justifiable then? How does that work?

Having a T category is now a requirement in equalities monitoring. In one situation it's absolutely mandatory for inclusion and in another you are a nazi.

Well "nazi" is taking what I said a bit far, but... overall, yes! In some situations something's fine, in others it isn't. Absolutely yes.

In the same way that noting someone's race or immigration status or sex is sometimes completely inappropriate - see the call to have companies declare lists of their foreign nationals - didn't go down very well did it. But other times it's completely reasonable to ask.

Them's the rules, and most people have got a fair handle on them. Although they do come up for discussion both in wider society and notably in court.

They're summed up in the Equality Act actually; you can be as discriminatory as you need when it is a "proportionate means to a legitimate aim". Otherwise it's simply discrimination.

Don't worry Lance I can see from a practical perspective why you would suggest it.

And for the cheap seats

I do not think that mumsnet should delete threads saying they are transphobic

I do believe that they should delete posts saying that they are transphobic

Otherwise you get what you have now...disingenuous fuckwits inferring that every post in the thread that was deleted was because it was transphobic

That's just a results table of who placed where and in order with their details in it. It matters not a jot when running parkrun as you're not put into categories. You just run.
All this thread is doing is showing that there isn't really a need for the column at all. It'd be a shame if they took it out though.

They're summed up in the Equality Act actually; you can be as discriminatory as you need when it is a "proportionate means to a legitimate aim". Otherwise it's simply discrimination.

Yes, and you'd need a court case to tell you which.

Or at least mark themselves "assisted".

The deletion was because of the cheating, another runner arrived to challenge the description of the subject cheating and someone had clearly complained about the cheating conversation.

So this is another thing that is now apparently forbidden to be spoken of.

The more human behaviour is placed out out of bounds to accommodate a confused and incoherent version of "inclusion" the more exclusionary and it becomes. A paradox.

But in any event, the fact that we are making women's sporting activities inclusive of men for their wellbeing with no apparent regard for women's wellbeing is a contradiction. No matter how many words used to prevaricate around why it is all lovely, it just isn't

Who are the fuckwits you're referring to rufus?

That's just a results table of who placed where and in order with their details in it. It matters not a jot when running parkrun as you're not put into categories.

There are loads of results categories. Because people see it as a competition. I asked on the other thread why you think you have the authority to tell everyone who runs that it isn't a competition and you didn't answer. Why do you think it is your given right to tell everyone that their results don't matter?