Guardian article on women in sport - Holy Moley - concludes that there is a debate!

[MacaroonMama]

Read it! Impressed. Will link in next comment.

Yes, as far as I know, Hubbard has undertaken no modifications to their body or hormone treatment at all. They are physically a man (which is the only thing that matters)

God, I’m getting sucked into cats can become dogs speak aren’t I?

I meant that even in upside down pomo land, Hubbard is physically a man

a guiding principle surely has to be that anyone who transitions does not leap from being bog-average to world beater in a year.

A guiding principle surely has to be that male athletes do not belong in female sport.

Fixed it for him.

Seriously, apart from the fact that Ingle highlights what happened to Feagaiga Stowers in the opening, this is not a good article. He starts from the premise that it's both unreasonable and unrealistic to have a female-only category for sport, falsely claims that the issue is 'complex' when in fact it is very straightforward, and then at the end basically railroads women into believing that we HAVE to make way for testosterone-suppressed men, and that as long as they don't win everything then that somehow works out to a fair solution.

Also I have to take issue with this:

"As one leading expert put it to me last week: “How can you be fair to everyone? It is almost impossible.”

This is so much smoke and mirrors, based on the sexist premise that male wants are the same things as needs or rights. A fair solution is eminently possible and would be very simple to enforce. Just have everyone compete against members of their own sex. Men's sports should include male athletes who identify as trans, and female sports should include female athletes who identify as trans, provided they aren't doping. No one is excluded from competing, and women have fair competition again. Easy. Done.

Fuck the Guardian. As the writer acknowledges the unfairness of it all and that testosterone isn’t the be all and end all why don’t they come to the logical conclusion rather than say there’s a debate to be had? Also ironic that they offer up a ‘debate’ but then don’t allow any comments as they know 95% of them will be akin to you’re having a laugh mate

Some people are giving the writer too much credit and being overly grateful who says the world might be round or maybe is more than 10,000 years old. The statement that how come someone who never made a ripple on the elite scene as a man is suddenly challenging for gold only has one fucking conclusion. How can it be denied they have an advantage in the women’s category? It’s all there. They would be both either Olympic class in one or the other unless shock horror they are a cheating bastard

The other important point is that this debate must be had. No longer can men tell women, such as Martina Navratilova, that when they stick up for a separate women’s sport category that they are ignorant or prejudiced.

Are you listening, McKinnon?

Some people are giving the writer too much credit and being overly grateful who says the world might be round or maybe is more than 10,000 years old No! They/we are just marvelling (sarcastically) that The Grauniad UK has found it's bollocks and has published this, despite / inspite of the inevitable reaction from the US branch!

No credit for understanding goes to the writer, just credit for being one of the few who will actually put their name to a piece that will, inevitably, attract the wrath of TRAs and The Woke!

twitter.com/guardian/status/1153247466889895936

Supportive comments on Twitter.

"I've got a novel idea...stop letting men compete in women sporting events?"

"It's like a nuclear meltdown, the best approach isn't contemplating the clean-up, it's avoiding it in the first place".

Hubbard still has reduced performance due to last year's elbow ligament injuries, yet can still be winning golds ffs.

Natacha Kennedy is upset. twitter.com/natachakennedy/status/1153258694056038401?s=19

Joss Prior on that Twitter thread describing this incredibly cautious and measured article as ‘right wing trash’

Natacha Kennedy:

"@seaningle is quite clearly being highly transphobic in this article. “Men”; Ingle you are a transphobic bigot. #trans women are women".

So another poster on Twitter says Ingle actually meant men (cis men). Sean Ingle pitches up to say yes, he meant men.

Natacha not having it:

"When you use language like this why do I need clarification? This is as clear as it gets".

So any reference to men anywhere is offensive to NK as clearly "men" always refers to transwomen.

And Joss Prior pitches in:

"He follows titiana mcgrath for gods sake and a raft of t e.r.f.s".

A few of the prominent TRAs on that thread.

But their erstwhile "allies" seem to have deserted them. The Yaniv effect maybe.

The authors of the BMJ piece argue that it is time to end male and female sections and instead put athletes in categories based on factors such as their weight, VO2 max, physiology

But women would never reach the top categories and would compete with many more males in the lower categories. And those men would probably win because all men, not just those who had transitioned would be competing and it’s impossible to categorise to remove all the advantages males have (faster muscle twitch rate, greater lung capacity and so on).

Can easily imagine random mediocre man fancies a gold medal in his sport and so reduces his testosterone for the occasion, qualifies, competes and wins. (NB just talking about any random man here not a transgender person)

Why are we throwing away things that work for women to pander to a tiny tiny minority of people?

Once again a “journalist” presents an apparently “unbiased” article about #trans ppl by appearing reasonable but revealing himself as a transphobic bigot by his use of language

I don't know why but I just love this comment from the Twits thread, being angry about someone for basically saying things that are very reasonable, so having to resort to insults.

I'm with you Donkey.

If I have to read one more article about how incredibly complex and difficult this 'issue' is, I'll puke on my university women's rowing kit.

My toddler was pretty good at posting blocks into the right holes aged 18 months. That's about how complex it is. Thanks to the miracle of modern yet basic testing, not even athletes with DSD are that complex an issue any more. It's all really straightforward! Hooray!

If sport is transphobic, so is life. But I don't think sport is.

To clarify, I am not going ga ga over a man writing an article that, while acknowledging there is a debate to be had, is probably a bit splinter bum-ish.

What I am amazed at, and glad for, is that this piece is in the Guardian! And so hopefully will plant seeds in the minds of its readers (used to be me!), and do the drip drip thing.

So not perfect. But I am bloody glad it is there at all.

Love the way one of them is whining about the author casting the trans athlete as a man cheating his way to the gold. Erm, I don't think Sean Ingle is the one who cast Laurel as that love...

Whoever said the Guardian has worked out that GC feminists are more likely to be able to afford to pay for news than the woke squad is probably right. Cynical a take as it is!

Enough obfuscating language already!

The gender identity movement advances its aims primarily through the use of obfuscating language. Without that, it wouldn't be anywhere, because clear language immediately exposes the absurdity and sexism of what's going on.

Consider:

Do transgender athletes have an unfair advantage in sport?

Vs.

Do male athletes have an unfair advantage in women's sport?

The second sentence would never be a premise for 'debate', because the answer is obvious to everyone.

Interesting accompanying article in The Guardian today here.

Mack Horton lauded by fellow swimmers after protesting Sun Yang's win

Olympic champion refused join Sun on podium
Australian given standing ovation at athletes’ village

www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jul/22/mack-horton-accused-of-disrespecting-china-after-protesting-sun-yangs-win

Standing ovation for a male athlete making a stand over cheating.

But women should STFU over 3 biological males taking gold, silver and bronze in the 800m women's event in the Rio Olympics.

It's a man's world all right.

Puuuulll!

Cautiously good news. Another one thinking there was a lot of very tightrope-walky editing going on behind the scenes to get this into print. Would lay odds that someone prepared to stick their head above the parapet in this climate holds much firmer views than the language in the article lets on.

Standing ovation for a male athlete making a stand over cheating.

But women should STFU over 3 biological males taking gold, silver and bronze in the 800m women's event in the Rio Olympics.

When I saw that Mack Horton protest, my first thought was, 'This is what male athletes do when they feel they are being cheated out of a rightful victory.' And to wish fervently that a female athlete somewhere would do the same. Of course the 'progressive' media would jump all over her, and she'd probably lose sponsorships and be sanctioned by sporting authorities.

It's always worth reposting this excellent 4th Wave Now article about how women's Olympic competition was almost destroyed by the Soviet-era doping program, and how US swimmer Shirley Babashoff was treated by the media when she protested the cheating.

4thwavenow.com/2018/04/15/surly-shirley-and-the-assault-on-womens-sport-then-and-now/

From the article:

In many ways the failure of women athletes to object to transgendered men in their sports is not surprising. There is a strong taboo in athletics against appearing to refuse to take personal responsibility for one’s sporting losses. No matter the circumstances, athletes are expected to take all of the blame when their performance does not measure up to standards. Even in circumstances that are objectively unfair and unequal, a female athlete – faced with the pressure to be socially correct, the requirement that females be “nice” at all times, and worries about being judged as a griper and a sore loser – will hold her fire and not point out the obvious.

That said, I do think there would be huge public support if a female athlete protested losing to a male a la Mack Horton. Most people can see the extreme unfairness of the situation.

From the 'Surly Shirley' article:

Women athletes are in an impossible bind: speak out and suffer Shirley’s fate, or continue to lose in lopsided and unfair competitions. Nothing will change until the athletes themselves, and not their surrogates, begin to protest, speak out, and refuse to participate in patently unfair competition. Until then, women’s sports will continue to be vulnerable to domination by transgender males.

Sorry Macaroon, of course you're right. I'm hopeful.

Maybe it is me being too cynical, but if Ingle had any bottle then he wouldn't say -

"This is a contentious and complicated issue".

No, it really isn't Sean, it is a very simple issue, which is based on biology, the very simple matter of chromosomes - XX and XY, and what happens to the male body before birth, immediately after birth and at puberty.
It only becomes contentious and complicated, when you try to put the 0.1% before the 50%, when you bow to gender ideology, instead of recognising science.

My immediate thought on reading the article was that he is actually full TERF on this issue but has had to toe a more, ahem, balanced" line to get it published. So heartening to see this being addressed!

Yes I agree, Phoenix. Andyoldlabour, also agree - we know it is simple - but we also know full well the Guardian just wouldn't print it.

All these little chinks are letting the sunlight through...