Just sharing a screenshot of this AIBU poll

[DdraigGoch]

Every so often, the trans issue is raised on AIBU and the thread contains a poll. Then the thread gets moved over here to the naughty corner, the poll disappears and we never get to see the statistics for what the wider Mumsnet population thinks about the issue. We can then be told by TRAs that our views are very much the minority without being able to contradict them.

So I thought that I would record the results of this AIBU poll (specifically on the subject of Laurel Hubbard) for posterity. Just in case it gets moved.

If any of you are unable to see the attachment, 1,978 Mumsnet users voted, with 98% taking the view that a male should not be competing against women.

Oops. Should have been 200:220 in the middle of that, so 47.6%. A 2.4% percentage point shift from 20% change in the vote totals.

Overall point stands though.

Another way to think of it is that polling/sampling error arises as error bounds on the count totals, it's not a constant error bound in percentage points.

This means that a 50% poll result might be +/-5% at a certain sample size. But given the same sample size, a 98% result will not be +/-5%. The error margin will be a lot smaller. (Fairly obviously, for the +5%, I hope).

So this poll locked onto what appears to be a 98% population figure quite fast, and maintained that as the sample size increased. Which further suggests no huge change in the population voting - no ballot stuffing.

(I think I meant brigading, rather than ballot stuffing)

It certainly would have been easy to drag the figure down from 98% by brigading, due to the low total. But that in turn would have been obvious, leading to a huge shift in the total proportions in different voting periods.

I wonder if the voting percentage goes in 2% increments, and therefore can't go any lower. Weird. Anyway, it's likely to be the biggest landslide of any AIBU poll which is very heartening.

If it shows even one or two more women what is going on out there, then it was very much worth it.

@SpringCrocus

It was at 98% when there were only a few hundred votes, though.

It was 97% early on.

@Mulletsaremisunderstood

I wonder if the voting percentage goes in 2% increments, and therefore can't go any lower. Weird. Anyway, it's likely to be the biggest landslide of any AIBU poll which is very heartening.

If it shows even one or two more women what is going on out there, then it was very much worth it.

I've seen 99% polls before. Incredibly rare though to see 100%.

Slight derail here, but thanks to those outlining the numbers. I am terrible with numbers, always have been. Really struggled with maths at school. Those posts might as well have been written in Russian, but I think I get the overall gist.

Has anyone seen this Bbc article about Hubbard today? www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/57989022.amp

Probably this detail has been discussed on another thread, but I was struck by this info:

According to NHS data, men's testosterone levels range between 10 and 30 nanomoles per litre dependant on factors including age and time of day, but a younger healthy male typically ranges between 20 and 30. Women's testosterone levels range between 0.7 and 2.8.

Yet, the IOC only needs transwomen’s testosterone levels to be under 10. Meaning that aside from all the advantages of going through male puberty, actually a transwomans testosterone at the time of competition could be way higher than a typical female. Its even more shocking every time I read more.

@Undersnatch

Hello, I've been directed to this board from a couple of the threads in AIBU. It is that fact about the testosterone that I wasn't aware of that has made me think I need to read more into this. That and I had no idea that there was no requirement to have had surgery. I feel like I've been a little naive about it all.

I saw in the Times that one of the GB male relay swimmers had picked up on the unfairness - I now can't find the link but he was commenting about whether he should identify as a woman as well next time to win the most golds ever.

At some point, politicians, the media, everyone, is going to have to start some truth telling. Until then, many more are going to feel as though they've been misled, once they begin to understand

We all started as naive about this clickychicky. Going along with the "be kind" instructions. But as the layers are peeled away the onslaught on women's rights and child safeguarding has become apparent.

So here we are with born males taking women's places in sport, refuges, hospital wards etc and gaslighting children into believing that their teenage angst about their bodies can be fixed with drugs, surgery and new pronouns.

We are over 50% of the population and we have to fix this - for our children's sake.

Pleased to see the votes are now waaay over 2000. And still the “visitors” cannot swing it.

I think most of us on this board have had those kind of wtf moments, clicky, that led us to read more. There are so many things to be concerned about than sport unfortunately - I think it is part of what will turn the tide eventually for the general public - unfairness in sport inspires more people than risk of sexual violence and loss of dignity for women.

I'm very glad that so many women are waking up to what happens when we pretend that humans can change sex.

Interestingly in survey after survey, men are far less likely to believe that TWAW than women. Certainly when you look at Times or Mail comments BTL, most of the people speaking out against gender ideology are male.

I hope politicians sit up and take notice that the vast majority of people in the UK don't believe that TWAW. A very vocal minority of men on Twitter do not represent the public at large.

The way we can get more light shed onto this insane women-hating rule from IOC is for a man to identify as a woman and be on a relay team, so there'd be three men and one woman. The men on the other teams would then be the first men to be negatively impacted by the trans rules. Then, I bet, everyone would be up in arms and predictably say "well feminists, you got what you hoped for!!"

I think it might be because sport is more easily visible? I've had the Olympics on in the TV but I haven't looked into crime.

@Mrsjamin I did think earlier, what's to stop a mixed team being 2 men and 2 transwomen.

@clickychicky exactly. And then it would absolutely demonstrate the difference between men and women as they couldn't just coordinate the women's laps and the men's laps. Plus men on the other teams could complain it wasn't fair and people would actually listen, because these are men's Olympic dreams you're talking about here, and not women's.

I remember a massive fuss when a male athlete with a prosthetic was allowed to run in the Olympics so you might be right there. When it affects the men they might change their tune. (Not that disability is anyway linked to this debate)

I did think earlier, what's to stop a mixed team being 2 men and 2 transwomen.

Absolutely nothing in the rules.

The main thing would be them having to face the opposing male athletes.

It's one thing for a male to enter a female-only competition and have women staring at him. What could they possibly do?

Or increasingly take over "female" team sports like roller derby. Again, only got to face off other women. (And transwomen, but increasingly it's a transwomen sport where they all get to role-play as women together. It's an interesting sport for transwomen to congregate in - it's not one where they have a particular advantage, unlike weightlifting or sprint cycling, but it is a specifically FEMALE sport, making it particularly validating, I think. More so than, say, playing football - a "male" sport - on a female team).

But to have the cheek to be male and wander up and take the female place on a squad when there are just as many opposing males there watching you? That would be ballsy.

Imagine if either of these illustrious male swimmers decided they were female!

I think they’d struggle to find women’s racing suits that would fit their feminine physique

And poll screenshot after 40 pages of replies.

Pretty consistent rate then.

Hopefully if this issue is highlighted, the prison situation can be next.

Do you know if an appeal is intended in the prisons decision?