Breaking news - Emily won't compete

[Doyoumind]

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/60934099

Interesting tweets from Times reporter Matt Lawton @Lawton_Times

Responding to this twitter.com/sullivansa1/status/1510261494310658070?s=21&t=Zw9r0Vq-3bYi6i1a2u67Hg

So Matt Lawton thought it would be far more useful to talk to EB than waste his time going to derby to cover boring old woman’s cycling

I’m also unimpressed by his comment about how he’s written about but mostly from a DSD point of view & is interested in the impact on individuals - but obviously not the impact on boring old individual women 🙄

@Theeyeballsinthefuckingsky

So Matt Lawton thought it would be far more useful to talk to EB than waste his time going to derby to cover boring old woman’s cycling

I’m also unimpressed by his comment about how he’s written about but mostly from a DSD point of view & is interested in the impact on individuals - but obviously not the impact on boring old individual women 🙄

TBF, it’s similar T requirements for the World Athletics DSD athletes and for Bridges, and another Times sports reporter could have been sent to cover Derby.

I don’t think writing about the impact on women would cut any ice with Bridge’s mother, do you?

But maybe we could give him a nudge in that direction?

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with him trying to get an interview with Emily. I do think there’s something off about Emily’s mum publishing his perfectly polite messages. The apple sometimes lands quite close to the tree.

He sent a message, she published them and blocked him. Piece of work.

I can see where Emily gets Emily’s winning personality and social skills from

The Times opinion piece by Pippa York / Robert Millar (you might need to read through gritted teeth) is reporting that Bridges won’t be able to accumulate sufficient UCI accredited competition points to be eligible for the Commonwealth Games.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/63c22896-b27f-11ec-9af1-7ee554784c95?shareToken=3c835bc12e74cd59c49c0f0f3a5abf9b

A piece in the Mail on Sunday online:

"Female cyclists had considered BOYCOTTING National Omnium Championships if trans rider Emily Bridges was allowed to race in the row that has rocked the sport... and she could still be banned indefinitely
•Female cyclists wanted to boycott Omnium Championships if trans rider Emily Bridges was allowed to participate
•Bridges was banned from the competition despite lowering testosterone levels
•She could still receive an indefinite ban if a UCI deem her inclusion is unfair
•Sophie Lewis won the Championships, with Neah Evans finishing second "

www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10679985/Female-cyclists-considered-BOYCOTTING-Omnium-Championships-Emily-Bridges-allowed-race.html

I think these female journalists (and it's nearly always females) just tow the line on trans stuff to get into print. No level headed person can believe that competitors who were men do not have an inbuilt advantage over women when it comes to sport.
So it says more about the state of the journalist's career than about the actual facts of the matter, transwomen in women's sport.

Matt Lawton has published a piece today:

The transgender cyclist prevented from participating in a national track event this weekend could be the subject of an indefinite ban under rules introduced by the Union Cycliste Internationale, the world governing body.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c8e9de4a-b2a6-11ec-9af1-7ee554784c95?shareToken=a5ae64ea3655fae12144c922f13942a2

Plus he interviewed women spectators at Derby holding “Save Women’s Sport” banners.

Good to see women being able to voice their opinions on the negative impact of males muscling into women’s sport.

Maybe Bridges should have taken the opportunity of an interview with Lawton to “put their side of the story” after all.

Wow Paula Radcliffe has chipped in...

twitter.com/paulajradcliffe/status/1510625781881491457

So if it was a countable number of women who miss out it wouldn't matter? One woman negatively affected is one too many! Why do these people think men's feelings are so bloody important and women's are so worthless? I can kind of understand men who think like this but why do women line up to hurl other women under the bus? Well done Nicole and Paula.

Absolutely agree that one woman affected is one too many. That’s one woman with many people supporting her over many years and spending COUNTLESS hours training.

Thank you, Paula.

They are only pronouns, just be kind., doesn't hurt you...

If males wanting to participate in women's sports were reported accurately as "he could receive an indefinite ban from women's sports if his inclusion is deemed unfair" then it would be clear what is happening here.

If everyone would just admit that men have a physical advantage over women (which we all know is true) and that therefore former men cannot compete in women's sports competitions then much of the 'anti-trans', terf wars etc etc bollox would disappear.

But transwomen want to compete however unfair it is.

If a transwoman wins a race/event, every other biological female gets pushed back 1 space. In the first instance, the woman in 2nd misses out on the title (potential) prize money, and opportunities and sponsorship that might come from winning. The woman in 4th place has now missed a medal placing (and the potential prize/opportunities that come with that). That's 2 women already. Why are their training and career prospects less important?

Fizbosshoes if a man enters a heat in a women''s sport then he is taking a place from a woman. Even if he comes eighth out of eight he has denied a woman a chance of competing, of possible going through to the next round. If he got his place in the heat because he won his school trials then all the girls taking part will see no point in progressing as they know clearly they cannot win against men even if this fairly mediocre male athlete only just beat them. They will drop out of sport.

Women at Derby supporting women.

@Fizbosshoes there is also the woman who didn't qualify for the event because there are X number of spaces and she was in X+1 place. Or the women who dropped out because they weren't prepared to make all the sacrifices and do all the training only to see a man take the title. Or the ones that stopped competing because they are unwilling to share are changing room with a penis. One TW in one race or event impacts multiple women every single time.

Or the woman who got a serious injury in a contact sports that she wouldn't have sustained against another woman and all the women who see that and decide the game they love to play is not worth their health.

@Fizbosshoes

If a transwoman wins a race/event, every other biological female gets pushed back 1 space. In the first instance, the woman in 2nd misses out on the title (potential) prize money, and opportunities and sponsorship that might come from winning. The woman in 4th place has now missed a medal placing (and the potential prize/opportunities that come with that). That's 2 women already. Why are their training and career prospects less important?

Word.

You can only believe in this being ok if you believe, deep down, that male people's choices, feelings and self expression matter more than the equality of females.

It's male supremacism, and those pushing this need to own it and be ready to explain and defend it if they seriously want a world where being born female means being a subhuman servant class to male born people (regardless of how that person chooses to identify.)

The sex based thinking always, always underpins the loudly protested spiel about sex not being a thing (except to sort the mummies, nannies, carers and social workers from the service users), no one knows what sex anyone is (but I know who wins and why, and who has to enable or else) and TWAW (except a special kind of women who get to be listened to and prioritised instead of told to shut up, serve, smile and here's a rape threat.

Girls participate in sport more when it is segregated by sex than when it is mixed. As it stands, fewer girls engage in sport in primary school than boys and more more girls drop out of sport in their teens than boys. If we remove sex segregation from sport at all levels, fewer girls will participate, it has the potential to have a catastrophic impact on participation at all levels.

Helen Joyce talking a lot of sense.