Throwing women's sport under the bus

[andyoldlabour]

Former US soccer player sees no problem in allowing male bodied people competing in women's sport. Lori Lindsey says that it would help their mental health, and that anyone who opposes this is a white supremacist.

dailycaller.com/2021/04/24/former-us-soccer-player-lori-lindsey-banning-transgender-athletes-upholds-white-supremacy/?

A lot of the girls on my team can tackle the guys harder than any other guy could

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.
Aye right. LOL

Come down to NZ and play against the Māori and Pacific lads, willithappen. What a joke!

Very interested to hear your response to @Sophoclesthefox’s questions.

I've been dragged into this argument after someone showed me a 'neutral' video which was heavily TWAW:

We were wondering which arguments they would use to justify the inclusion of transwomen in women's sports. It turns out it was number 3. The usual arguments I've seen are:

1. There are so few transwomen in women's sports that it won't make any difference.

2. When transwomen take hormone therapy, they lose any physical advantage.

3. If they do have a physical advantage, it's the same as having longer legs or being taller. Some people are just naturally better athletes.

4. Not allowing transwomen to compete against women is the same as racism.

5. You're not interested in sports, so why should you care?

6. If you think women are physically weaker than men then you're a sexist and can't call yourself a feminist (I've honestly seen this argument on Twitter, from posters like Hettyspoon).

7. Where are the stats that show transwomen have an unfair advantage?

8. Not allowing transwomen to compete against women means banning them from sports, which is an infringement of their human rights.

9. Being trans is no different to having a DSD.

10. There have been no trans Olympians yet, and if transwomen are at such an advantage, surely there would be.

Bollocks willithappen

I have taught some of the women's team, worked with their coaches, and even the strongest, fastest and most skilled of them are useless against a fairly good, regular playing boy.

Your 'experience' is utter nonsense. If you play mixed sex rugby under aegis of an RFU registered team it had better be a game of touch. Or even now all insurances and even coach registration will be void!

I don't even need my years of teaching physiology to know any of that!

Such claptrap cannot go unchallenged. Which is why many of us continue to provide the RFU with reminders. They are playing a very dangerous game... or rather they are trying to force women to.

If they do have a physical advantage, it's the same as having longer legs or being taller. Some people are just naturally better athletes.

For the benefit of anyone who can't figure out the fallacy.

The advantage is not the same - the advantage is being male.

And we already have a place for male players. The problem is male players trying to get into the restricted classification for people without the male advantage.

If we did have separate classifications based on leg length or height, should we let tall people into the short people category? With the excuse "well, some tall people aren't better than short people"?

The male/female classification was created for a reason. That reason has not gone away. Letting transwomen play defeats the point.

Can we give willit the benefit of the doubt?

I am also a former player and have played mixed sex scratch games at rugby tournaments - for fun, not seriously. The men were expected to hold back.

And she’s saying things that women players are saying, and apparently genuinely believe.

I know we get a lot of drive by scoldings, and that causes tension, but Like any good ref, I want to see a good clean game

I love number 10.

Answer: we don't know of any recently because nobody was looking. The last ones were rooted out with sex tests, which have since been deemed degrading, but not by women who ever competed against a male cheat

Last year's olympics would have been the first time any transwomen would have been able to compete under the testosterone rule. And, as is fairly obvious, that didn't happen. When it does the whole pack of lies will be seen by millions and many governing bodies will have to make changes.

Exactly, NecessaryScene1.

The 'some people have a natural advantage - being male' argument could be used to justify scrapping separate sport categories for males and females. In fact, that's what logically follows.

I dunno why we even have to defend women’s sports

It’s ridiculous to even think that men and boys can play on women’s and girls teams

They can play on men and boys teams

Just completely bonkers

Like could I identify as a junior and play on a junior team

🙁

Last year's olympics would have been the first time any transwomen would have been able to compete under the testosterone rule. And, as is fairly obvious, that didn't happen. When it does the whole pack of lies will be seen by millions and many governing bodies will have to make changes.

Yes, the next Olympics will be the first real test, but I think it'll snowball. If males start competing in women's sports, what's to stop hyper-competitive countries sending males to compete as standard?

@NotTerfNorCis

I've been dragged into this argument after someone showed me a 'neutral' video which was heavily TWAW:

We were wondering which arguments they would use to justify the inclusion of transwomen in women's sports. It turns out it was number 3. The usual arguments I've seen are:

1. There are so few transwomen in women's sports that it won't make any difference.

2. When transwomen take hormone therapy, they lose any physical advantage.

3. If they do have a physical advantage, it's the same as having longer legs or being taller. Some people are just naturally better athletes.

4. Not allowing transwomen to compete against women is the same as racism.

5. You're not interested in sports, so why should you care?

6. If you think women are physically weaker than men then you're a sexist and can't call yourself a feminist (I've honestly seen this argument on Twitter, from posters like Hettyspoon).

7. Where are the stats that show transwomen have an unfair advantage?

8. Not allowing transwomen to compete against women means banning them from sports, which is an infringement of their human rights.

9. Being trans is no different to having a DSD.

10. There have been no trans Olympians yet, and if transwomen are at such an advantage, surely there would be.

That there encapsulates almost all the arguments I have seen around this debate to support inclusion.

It is always interesting to watch activists work down the list while never addressing the evidence presented by the studies.

Last year's olympics would have been the first time any transwomen would have been able to compete under the testosterone rule. And, as is fairly obvious, that didn't happen. When it does the whole pack of lies will be seen by millions and many governing bodies will have to make changes.

Hang on though!!! Don’t you know they have been able to compete since 2004! We get told this every thread. We were told it last night.

The misinformation that keeps being perpetuated would be funny, if it wasn’t being believed by others.

The challenges that athletes face this Olympics are already extremely high. Females having to compete with males with those pubertal advantages is just a travesty.

There is no way that history will show this era is a positive light in decades to come.

Benefit of the doubt? Anyone who thinks that the average female rugby player can tackle as hard as the average male player is indulging in wishful thinking. Jonny Wilkinson fits the height and weight profile for transwomen in female rugby, I wonder how many of the English Ladies would be able to get up off the ground after this tackle.

I think that point was wishful thinking, 334. And I disagree with it. But I’ve seen women players put this thinking forward in places other than here, and I want to understand how they’re arriving at that conclusion and why. And then I would like to use science and reason to hopefully demonstrate why it is wishful thinking, why it’s dangerous, and why it’s not “kind” at all. I think we’re heading in the same direction.

I oppose this move to open up women’s sports with ever fibre of my being, just so we’re clear on that part, though.

Pulling the ladder up after herself in order to grab some virtue cookies. Always a classy move.

Fair enough Sophocles, good luck with that.
Somehow don't think that anyone willing to hold onto a belief which is so obviously a lie will be open to a logical argument against it, but you never know. Hope it doesn't take some woman being killed or disabled to convince them.

As she hasn’t been back, I’m thinking it’s much more likely that you’re right than I am, 334.

Here's hoping I am not.

A lot of the girls on my team can tackle the guys harder than any other guy could

Bull. Shit.

Hang on though!!! Don’t you know they have been able to compete since 2004! We get told this every thread. We were told it last night. Yeah! I keep seeing that. But really, no! At lower levels of competition some men have managed to compete in male cmpetition oe seasone and the mens the season after (a cyclist - not that one - springs to mind). Because of testosterone and social statement rules.

Others have had to work at reducing testosterone levels and maintain health, go through selections and stages of competitions in order to qualify for championships.

But the olympic decision was not taken on 2004. And no trans athlete has had time to be selected and compete because of covid!

It's all obfuscation and out and out lies!

🐂 in fact.

This is laughable. My 16y old son plays rugby at school and broke a smaller boy's collar bone last week playing rugby for fun. There is a female PE teacher at his school who is an extremely fit, early thirties ex-England Rugby player and he towers over her and would annihilate her in a tackle. And we're not talking about flabby, overweight dads playing a bit of weekend Rugby - we're talking about putting highly fit, highly trained men who have been selected for their particular size and strength into games with women - I know very recent ex-England women players and, as amazing as they are, they would be destroyed by these men, playing at full strength and not holding back.

This will end in a death of a female player if it goes ahead.

CuriousaboutSamphire

It is like history is being rewritten, isn't it?

The photo taken of Fallon Fox the boxer punching the lights out of a woman competition made me feel physically repulsed. That wasn’t a sport photo I saw right there , woman abuser came to mind. It’s sickening to believe that women are expected to endure this. In fact why of earth would any female boxer agree to a fight with someone who is essentially (and I make NO apology here) a Man? I feel nothing but anger when I see a transwoman on the podium. Go and compete against men why don’t you? Or form your own leagues, and strike out your OWN ground in securing your rights. But don’t dare stamp all over women and everything they have achieved thus far.

It is like history is being rewritten, isn't it?

Well, it's partially true. 2004 is when males were first permitted. But sex change surgery was a requirement until 2015. And a top-level athlete is unlikely to take that sort of risk on a serious permanent procedure. And how easily or fast can you get back into training after doing that to your body? That really was filtering it to extremely serious old-school transsexuals.

The post-2015 situation is totally different - the only requirement is hormone suppression. Having low testosterone for a while is not that daunting a prospect. Few (or any?) permanent effects. (No actual oestrogen is required...)