Woman’s Hour now on Trans athletes

[GoodbyePorpoiseSpit]

Discussion now - focused on the benefits /strength of male puberty despite testosterone levels later

Wow go Emma! She’s found her mojo. She sounds like someone who’s realised that facts and logical argument are key in this issue and the more she asks, the less it makes sense.

Next week, guest presenter Jenni Murray :o

Is JH still a PhD student, or a post-doc now?

@MaudesMum

Emma Barnett made it very clear at the end that they'd approached a wide range of people, including current female athletes, female weightlifters, representatives from IOC and British sport bodies, and none had been willing to take part.

So everybody is terrified of the subject. Of what will happen to them on twitter etc if they dare speak their minds.

Joanna Harper is in an increasingly difficult position, as a trans-inclusion advocate.

Their most recent work agrees with Emma Hilton's - males on hormones do not lose all their advantage. The original case Harper put to the IOC is not valid, by Harper's own research.

So Harper now has to fallback to McKinnon-style philosophical arguments about "fairness not mattering", which isn't really Harper's area. Harper's a scientist.

Here's Joanna Harper arguing for trans women's inclusion in rugby:

www.outsports.com/2020/8/28/21405145/joanna-harper-world-rugby-transgender-athlete-ban-science-research-transphobia

I found it very illuminating: JH's bias shows quite clearly in the picture.

Harper is going to be on the Moral Maze talking about this, along with Debbie Hayton and another two male guests. No women invited, to discuss women's sports. It isn't as though they are short of very articulate and well informed women to choose from

JH's presentation to the World Rugby workshop was pretty feeble too...

Can’t believe JH straight up said that it’s ok to include TW women category because (according to JH) they’re closer to the women than to the men in strength. So that’s the right category for them. Yes because it’s all about what’s right for the TW and not anyone else

It’s like saying a cat is closer to a mouse in strength than to a tiger, so cats should be put in with the mice and it will be perfectly fine. It’s just a non-argument.

They really needed to have had Dr Emma Hilton on to give balance, though.

It's interesting how the WH "be kind" narrative seems to have run out at the point of this blatant cheating. They can empathise with elite female athletes being pushed out, but they cannot see the effect of trans activism on ordinary, every day women in their day to day lives.

The bottom line for JH seems to be - crap data, obvious advantages but who cares, validation is more important, it's only women!

Yes JH sounded kind of confused and wrong-footed that the topic had turned to factual analysis and asking difficult questions, instead of being just a lovely be kind celebration.

But… but … hmm no TW do have an advantage I suppose, but you know, not really! not if you would just be kind and stop talking about it and remember that TW matter more than women!

@AmericanSlang

Harper is going to be on the Moral Maze talking about this, along with Debbie Hayton and another two male guests. No women invited, to discuss women's sports. It isn't as though they are short of very articulate and well informed women to choose from

Jesus. Looking at the blurb, I think it's more of a discussion about the concept of fairness, rather than looking at the science as such:

The New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard looks set to make history after being confirmed as the first transgender athlete to compete at an Olympic Games. Hubbard previously competed in men’s events before transitioning in 2013. She is eligible due to a change in International Olympic Committee guidelines on testosterone levels in 2015, and after qualifying requirements were modified by the International Weightlifting Federation. For many campaigners this is a landmark moment for trans people, whose participation at grassroots level sport is shamefully low. Moreover, while there are many different male and female body types, they see elite sport as reflecting society’s obsession with gender stereotypes and worry about the implications for anyone who does not meet ‘conventional standards’ of femininity. Opponents think that allowing trans girls, who were assigned male at birth, to compete with cisgender girls is unfair. They argue that, in the vast majority of cases, males are stronger, faster and more powerful than females – if that were not the case we would not have had to segregate sport in the first place. The New Zealand Olympic Committee chief executive, Kereyn Smith, said this complex issue required, “a balance between human rights and fairness on the field of play”. This raises a deeper philosophical question: what is the relationship between rights and rules? And which of these is best placed to achieve fairness – not just in sporting competition but between competing demands? When should rules and laws be challenged and when does a person’s sense of their natural rights go too far? With Dr Dafydd Mills Daniel, Joanna Harper, Debbie Hayton and Adam Wagner.

But still disgraceful not to have a female voice from either the scientific or the sporting community, when the science and the sport is the basis for the discussion of fairness in the first place.

The item on women in West Uganda is also beautifully placed to show the reality for women globally - away from the trans debate which is a western and privileged one in so many ways. A comparison with ‘identifying’ vs the lives of billions that can’t magical think their way into a new gender.

Joanna Harper sounds worried. The more responsible end of the trans activism spectrum realise they could be looking at a disaster of public awareness suddenly increasing enormously and not liking what it sees.

JH is hoping that the numbers of trans competitors are going to be very low, in the order of a handful, meaning that the public continues to be unaware. The goal is to have the low numbers for several Olympics so that a hugely significant change happens in a boiled frog kind of way. But they know that this could easily tip over into a great deal of awareness and anger.

Again, this is the kind of thing that will have certain people at Dentons pulling out their hair in vexation.

Yes where are the women?

“The mind boggles at how bloody idiotic the IOC are to get taken in by this bullshit.” @TedImgoingmad They aren’t idiotic at all. Just cowards. They probably thought the backlash from women would be easier to handle than that from TRAs. They must know that allowing a biological male to compete against females is inherently unfair.

“Opponents think that allowing trans girls, who were assigned male at birth, to compete with cisgender girls is unfair.”

Are they talking about children?

@MrsBunHat

Wow go Emma! She’s found her mojo. She sounds like someone who’s realised that facts and logical argument are key in this issue and the more she asks, the less it makes sense.

Next week, guest presenter Jenni Murray :o

I wonder if this sudden bravery we are seeing is off the back of Maya's judgment. Jenni Murray was treated shabbily. Emma Barnet has the protection that Maya's judgment will have afforded us all.

The IOC cannot possibly be unaware of the implications for the future, if males can compete in women’s categories. There are plenty of countries and individuals who absolutely will take advantage of that to the point where it will be pointless being a female athlete at all.

Hubbard's selection is going down very badly in some African nations where it is being contrasted to the ban on Caister Semenya competing in her favoured event.

www.timeslive.co.za/amp/sport/2021-06-22-why-cant-caster-compete-social-media-questions-transgender-athlete-competing-in-olympics/

Ted agreed it's about fairness, maybe they should have Sharron Davies on. If anyone knows about fairness in sport, it's her - she lost out to countries who were unfairly doping women athletes and can give a very valuable insight on this topic

JH is hoping that the numbers of trans competitors are going to be very low, in the order of a handful, meaning that the public continues to be unaware. The goal is to have the low numbers for several Olympics so that a hugely significant change happens in a boiled frog kind of way. But they know that this could easily tip over into a great deal of awareness and anger

Yes they will want a very low number of very mediocre athletes and then they can say "see if there was an advantage they would have won"

I was expecting Russia and China to have a few trans competitors. Does anyone know if trans athletes are required to be "out" or are they able to compete without publicly disclosing their trans status? I can imagine a really negative consequence for women's sports will be constant speculation about whether or not people are actually male or female.

Emma Smith and Katy Jon were both listed as interviewed guests for Women’s Hour this morning, I assume on the Laurel Hubbard story.

Did anyone hear their interviews? I didn’t manage to catch the whole programme.

@DaisiesandButtercups

“Opponents think that allowing trans girls, who were assigned male at birth, to compete with cisgender girls is unfair.”

Are they talking about children?

Yes, I thought that was odd wording too. If they are using "woman" and "girl" interchangeably, they are sexist twats. However, they may focus on sporting excellence starting at school level, and how girls will be/are being pushed out of trying to get into elite sport from a young age. This really needs to be focused on, I think, even more than the Hubbards of this world. By the time we have a Hubbard, it's far too late for those girls who gave up years ago.

It was only Joanna Harper who was interviewed DaisiesandButtercups. Unless I was sleepwalking through part of it.