Public want trans women kept out of female sport (Times, 16/6/22)

[BettyFilous]

The Times is reporting on research undertaken by the More in Common think tank. The article covers multiple domains, not just sport.

^Only 19 per cent of Britons supported allowing trans athletes in women’s sport against 57 per cent who did not. The report found consistent opposition to biological males in women’s sport in every group surveyed, even among groups who backed transgender inclusion in other parts of
public life.^

(snip)

Support for trans women using women’s lavatories and changing rooms depended on whether they had undergone gender reassignment surgery. Those who had were twice as welcome in single-sex spaces as biological males who identified as women. But it was the question of sport that proved to be the “red line”.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4d010462-ece3-11ec-8821-d2e916a7eab3?shareToken=3725b577b2d58b381a2773f04ce1f860

How do we address this

attack first with biological females are being discriminated against, we need separate events/spaces for biological females, we need to be able to have our own sports/areas and our own events just like other categories get theirs

over and over again females by their nature don't attack

So it’s written by an ex Stonewall person, who oddly ignored the questions on trans identified males in women’s prisons and women’s hospital wards. Why do you think the author ignored them?

A think tank called 'more in common' seems to declare a bias up front.

I don’t know - you could ask Luke directly perhaps?

I did think it was interesting that he left Stonewall exactly as it changed from being under the leadership of Ben Summerskill to Ruth Hunt in July 2014 though.

It’s from Jo Cox’s maiden speech in the HoC - and set up by her husband. It’s quite clear in its aims about building a more cohesive society.

I did think it was interesting that he left Stonewall exactly as it changed from being under the leadership of Ben Summerskill to Ruth Hunt in July 2014 though.

I thought the same thing.

I do think that the author is on to something.

Luke Tryl, the report author who worked as head of education at the lobby group Stonewall, said: “From the toxic debate across social media you’d assume the country is split into trans activists and transphobes. But when you speak to ordinary people across the country you realise that nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, most Britons take a nuanced, compassionate approach that is rooted in society doing what it can to make trans people feel accepted but which also balances inclusion with fairness.” Others could learn from ordinary Britons, he added.

Instead, most Britons take a nuanced, compassionate approach that is rooted in society doing what it can to make trans people feel accepted but which also balances inclusion with fairness.

So Luke is clearly saying that the majority not supporting any male in female sports category is still 'a nuanced, compassionate approach'.

So, if Luke with their history working with Stonewall can say this, why is there so much hatred displayed when males are excluded from female sport categories or hatred and abuse directed towards anyone who says it is not ok.

Is Luke actually arguing that those calling the exclusion 'hateful' are not the compassionate ones? Seems like it.

On the sixth anniversary of her death too, what a disgusting comment from @Lovelyricepudding

So, if Luke with their history working with Stonewall can say this, why is there so much hatred displayed when males are excluded from female sport categories or hatred and abuse directed towards anyone who says it is not ok.

I saw this well characterised on Twitter as:

“While the online discourse has had transphobes argue that transwomen in women’s sport would be unfair on women; the rather more reasonable take from the public is that it would be unfair on women”

“While the online discourse has had transphobes argue that transwomen in women’s sport would be unfair on women; the rather more reasonable take from the public is that it would be unfair on women”

That has shades of, well when we said born In the wrong body, we didn't actually mean born in the wrong body.

To be clear, that was someone taking the piss out of what the article seemed to be saying.

But that is very much the way this is going to be won. Basically adopting all these "reasonable positions" without recognition that they're pretty much the reasonable positions all the transphobes like JKR have been calling for, and are already enshrined in law.

Unsurprisingly, it turns out the British public side with the gender critical position. Transing children, self ID, transwomen in female sports, transwomen with penises in female spaces, are all unpopular. Despite years and years of campaigning from Stonewall, the public still haven't accepted the new message that being trans is a matter of self identification, that penises can be female, and that being a woman is literally anyone who says they are a woman with no further qualifications. The vast majority of people believe in the old fashioned view of transsexuality, which is it concerns people with gender dysphoria who undergo surgical and hormonal transition. It never fails to amuse me every time these surveys come out and it shows that everyone is actually a massive TERF.

It will be interesting to see where the trans activist groups go with this. The reason gender critical feminists are so mad is because we know the real agenda, which is to have postmodern self-ID policies across the board. One option is for the trans activists to keep pushing for what they really want, which will ultimately result in a massive backlash when the public realise what is actually going on.

If I were in charge of the trans lobby, I would be smart about it and cut my losses. I would go back to the view that trans people have dysphoria and require medical treatment, and fully transition because there is a great deal of public sympathy. But after so many years of campaigning I'm not even sure if trans groups would be happy with that compromise - whereby transwomen are treated as women for some purposes but not all.

I think we all know that the women who speak out are not punished for their views (nearly everyone shares them or some of them), but for their assertiveness in articulating them and their tenacity in holding to them.

To be clear, that was someone taking the piss out of what the article seemed to be saying.

Yes, and they've nailed it.

But that is very much the way this is going to be won. Basically adopting all these "reasonable positions" without recognition that they're pretty much the reasonable positions all the transphobes like JKR have been calling for, and are already enshrined in law.

As further evidenced in the transcript of Maya Forstater's employer's evidence.

Paraphrased along the line of

Senior manager: 'it is not a transphobic position'
BC: 'what could she have said to state that position that was not transphobic'?
Senior manager: waffle, waffle... but amounted to 'nothing'. She could have said nothing to state her position that was not considered transphobic.

(as I said, this was paraphrasing)

I agree with previous posters that it is interesting and encouraging that many responses that the TRAs would characterise as transphobic, are being now described as "nuanced and compassionate". However, there are some survey responses which I do think could be fairly described as transphobic (and homophobic), and looking at these, the data seem to suggest that homophobia and transphobia are more prevalent among the younger generation, which certainly took me by surprise.

Not that this is mentioned in the report's analysis or in the newspaper articles, but if you look at the data tables www.moreincommon.org.uk/media/p5uln04a/britons-and-gender-identity-data-tables.pdf, you can see that among Gen-Z (18-24-year-olds), 7% would feel disgusted, and 6% would feel angry if a close family member came out as transgender, while 6% of them would feel disgusted and 5% would feel angry if a close family member came out as lesbian, gay or bisexual. The percentages are a bit lower among Millennials, and lower still for older generations, being lowest of all among the over-75s.

This is worrying because if people tend to retain their prejudices as they age, then these results suggest that transphobia and homophobia are on the increase. However, it could be that people tend to become less prejudiced as they mature, or possibly the numbers here are not even statistically significant. I'd be interested to hear other opinions on this, particularly from any sociologists or statisticians.

I can't compare results for Brighton and Bradford, but the report does split the data by region, showing that 25% of respondents in Yorkshire and the Humber said they know someone who is transgender, compared to 22% of those in the South East excluding London.

Yorkshire and Humber was also the the region with the largest percentage (29%) to strongly agree that TWAW.

There are some very good comments on the article.

However, it could be that people tend to become less prejudiced as they mature, or possibly the numbers here are not even statistically significant. I'd be interested to hear other opinions on this, particularly from any sociologists or statisticians.

That could be one factor.

You might be interested in this bit of research if you have not read it.

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/18/what-does-woke-mean-britons

And a follow up

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/22/cancel-culture-what-views-are-britons-afraid-expre

I don't think "nuance" is a word I'd be using if I were in SW because it's an open invitation to what about...

• males in female spaces
• prisons
• rape crisis, hospitals
• numbers of female minors suddenly wanting to transition
• etc

"Nuance" gives permission to debate IMO. And here, it seems to mean that the ever-expanding trans umbrella is roundly rejected by Joe Public, who are happier with nuance. With definitions. With boundaries. All the things that have been undermined and changed in the shadows.

A while ago I was trying to explain to my children how different newspapers report the same thing but put a different slant on it depending on what message they are trying to convey.

The Times and Guardian reporting on this 'survey' couldn't be more perfect in illustrating the point :)

Great summary, it really should be that simple.

I think what this survey shows is that the public do not actually think TWAW. If they did, they would want them in women's sports and women's spaces. But they don't. When they say TWAW they mean they should be treated as women at times when that does not conflict with women's privacy, dignity, safety or fairness. They accept transexuals who physically appear to be women, as they believe (and are probably right) that these people are not a threat to women, in the way that other males are. They believe (and are probably right) that transexuals are genuine in their motivations and intent.

They certainly don't understand TWAW in the way that Stonewall et al do, and would probably be horrified if they knew what it means to Stonewall et al.