A picture speaks a thousand words. Transwomen in women’s sport

[LemonGingerCakes]

I've never started a thread like this before, but this is bothering me.

No comments. Just letting the pictures speak.

Spot the transwoman.

How is this fair?

God this whole issue is the Emperor's New Clothes. How stupid / led by the nose do you have to be not to recognise the unfairness?

At first I thought the images had been photoshopped but then I realised they are all genuine :(
OMG this is so ridiculous transsexuals are stronger and double the size of women who were born female it's just not fear, why cant we have a separate league for transsexual in sport?

Most of you clearly don't know what transgender means, what the difference between sex and gender is, or even how hormone therapy affects someone's body. Your opinions, when you don't understand these terms, are uneducated and frankly they are not valid. Once you are educated enough in the subject, you can speed about it, otherwise you look like a complete idiot

That winning combination of ignorance and arrogance.

I'm always baffled by this idea that if I was just 'educated' enough I'd agree with this.

It was educating myself on this subject that meant I formed the decision, for myself, that someone's biological sex is a fixed fact, it cannot be changed, there are bleeding obvious reasons why males should not be competing in women's sport for fairness, safety and basic equality of women let alone anything else. And women's sport is not focused on supporting the preferred identity of someone born male, regardless of how distressed or vulnerable that person born male is.

Fundamentally, this is about prioritising people born male at all costs over people born female, with people born female being told how wrong and thick and unkind they are if they don't agree.

I'm all for the education. Bring on the education, please, and I'll be delighted to read and reply - using critical thinking obviously. But I think what you actually mean by education is that you will tell me what to think, and then expect me to be compliant to it.

A few deletions on this thread. Someone is watching.

How educated does one need to be? And does Biology education count? Probably puts you at a disadvantage to be fair in the whole believing people can change sex thing.

This video shows a feminist, Democrat lawyer, talking about McKinnon, trans issues in general and why the voices of left leaning feminists are being shouted down, particularly where gender issues are concerned. Tucker Carson is one of the few political commentators to take this subject on.

video.foxnews.com/v/6097204442001/#sp=show-clips

Once you are educated enough in the subject, you can speed about it, otherwise you look like a complete idiot.

Perfectly said, those bloody science-believers. Seriously, they believe in biology and human anatomy?! Probably same people who think the earth is round, it's obviously flat. Idiots, the lot of them. How can someone be so uneducated? Beyond me. Anyone with any common sense knows that psychology changes reality. Perhaps science should just be scrapped all together and replaced with ideology. They really ought to close their eyes more, stop seeing what science proves. It'd certainly make me feel better, which is all that matters.

I think empty seats and falling ticket revenues would get the message across pretty quickly.

Or it might just give the message that nobody wants to watch women's sport.

I think you're right Three - science and biology just keeps getting in the way of magical thinking. It's so inconvenient that a person can't change sex - far better to believe that men can literally become women and 2 + 2 can = 5.....

Or it might just give the message that nobody wants to watch women's sport.

If women refuse to be silenced, then they'll hear our equality and rights message. At the moment, they have ear plugs in, but to quote a favourite song of mine from my childhood "and if you can't hear us, WE'LL SHOUT A LITTLE LOUDER"

I think you're right Three - science and biology just keeps getting in the way of magical thinking. It's so inconvenient that a person can't change sex - far better to believe that men can literally become women and 2 + 2 can = 5.....

Of course I'm right, it goes without saying. Maths, another subject of logic - needs to go too really. But of course start with science, so that way it's just one thing.

I wish that the old men who are responsible for making the rules in sport, would step outside their vacuum chamber and actually listen to what ordinary, sensible people think about this ridiculous situation.
Read the comments at the end of this article.

www.westernjournal.com/transgender-cyclist-wins-womens-world-championship-goes-critics/

”I just want to play rugby."

Funny. In 1996 we told a local rugby club that. We were told “sure you use the facilities, go and find enough women to make it worth while”. So we did.

Why aren’t transwomen being told to raise funds, to create their own teams like women were. If they’re so desperate to be women, why the special fucking treatment?

I’ve been involved in rugby for well over 20 years. First time I am expected to tackle a bloke I will be hitting him where it hurts.

If you have a penis, play on a sports team with other people who have penises. It isn’t tricky.

If only there were meaningful words to describe the people with penises and those without - wouldn't it be great if one day there was a way of testing cells to see which category people belonged to - futuristic musing obviously.

That article in the WesternJournal was distinctly unimpressed with McKinnons claims. The last quote from McKinnon made me chuckle.

“If you win because bigotry got your competition banned … you’re a loser,” he said.

Most of you clearly don't know what transgender means, what the difference between sex and gender is, or even how hormone therapy affects someone's body. Your opinions, when you don't understand these terms, are uneducated and frankly they are not valid. Once you are educated enough in the subject, you can speed about it, otherwise you look like a complete idiot.

Since you're interested in "educating" us, care to comment on this article?

Wiik et al 2019
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/782557v1

Especially the final figure, showing isometric torque and muscle volume levels - even after 12 months on T for transmen and 12 months of T suppression for transwomen, there is no overlap between the two groups. Transmen's strength improves relative to women who do not take testosterone; transwomen's strength drops off relative to men who do not take testosterone suppressants. But there is still no overlap between biological males and biological females.

The Western Journal is a conservative US publication. It says 'We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism'.
They use male pronouns throughout that piece.

Maybe the transactivists would like to take a break from harassing MumsNet and take them on?

"Maybe the transactivists would like to take a break from harassing MumsNet and take them on?"

Errol, I think we both know why that will not be happening any time soon

Most of you clearly don't know what transgender means, what the difference between sex and gender is, or even how hormone therapy affects someone's body. Your opinions, when you don't understand these terms, are uneducated and frankly they are not valid. Once you are educated enough in the subject, you can speed about it, otherwise you look like a complete idiot

Another article for you to comment on while "educating" us:

web.law.duke.edu/sports/sex-sport/comparative-athletic-performance/

Just in the single year 2017, Olympic, World, and U.S. Champion Tori Bowie's 100 meters lifetime best of 10.78 was beaten 15,000 times by men and boys. (Yes, that’s the right number of zeros.)

The same is true of Olympic, World, and U.S. Champion Allyson Felix’s 400 meters lifetime best of 49.26. Just in the single year 2017, men and boys around the world outperformed her more than 15,000 times.

This differential isn’t the result of boys and men having a male identity, more resources, better training, or superior discipline. It’s because they have an androgenized body.

The results make clear that sex determines win share. Female athletes – here defined as athletes with ovaries instead of testes and testosterone (T) levels capable of being produced by the female non-androgenized body – are not competitive for the win against males—here defined as athletes with testes and T levels in the male range. The lowest end of the male range is three times higher than the highest end of the female range. Consistent with females’ far lower T levels, the female range is also very narrow, while the male range is broad.

These biological differences explain the male and female secondary sex characteristics which develop during puberty and have lifelong effects, including those most important for success in sport: categorically different strength, speed, and endurance. There is no other physical, cultural, or socioeconomic trait as important as testes for sports purposes.

What I love about biology is that I don't have to believe in it. Biology goes on regardless of my feelings about it.

Because biology isn't a belief system of a faith but a science.

'Or a faith'

Sometimes the clue is in the user name, d'you think Golgi?

I'm still waiting to be educated about the difference between sex and gender.

Don't think much of this teacher. Can I call OFSTED?

Dear Endoplasmic reticulum, is there an endomembrane system I should know about who posts here?

And are you rough or smooth?