If men aren't to be considered to be women for the purpose of sport...

[Pluvia]

If science has shown that men cannot be considered to be women for the purpose of sport, then for what purposes can they be considered to be women?

For the purpose of accessing women's lavatories and changing rooms? For the purpose of accessing women's prisons? For the purpose of getting a bed on a women-only NHS ward? For the purpose of accessing women-only and lesbian-only spaces?

Should women using women-only facilities not be consulted and asked if they wish to share their space with someone who, for sporting purposes at the very least, is male? If some people are deemed male for the purpose of sport, should not that definition of their sex carry over into other areas of life that are organised on the basis of sex?

Can you really be a man when it comes to competing in a swimming event but expect to be accepted as a woman when you want to go to the lesbian-only club night?

@Pluvia
I think the crucial factor here is that the FINA's policy is based on the physical advantage retained by TW from male puberty, rather than the simple fact of them being male (CAIS "women" though technically male, would still be eligible for inclusion in women's sports categories). If this is widely/generally accepted (physical advantage), it's harder for TRAs to argue that TW should be treated as women in all circumstances because the point of single sex spaces is in large part because of women's vulnerability to males' superior strength.

I'm probably not explaining my point very well, but I've got brain fog!

Good question!
I would also like to know how all the trans-supporters feel about poster-girl Caitlyn Jenner's view that transwomen should not be allowed in women's sports.
I remember years ago someone saying that it would take sport rather than women's safety to turn the tide. How depressing that they were right, sport is more important than women's safety.

I think the reason we're making headway in sport is that it depends on saying how much better and stronger men are. The prison/refuge/changing rooms issue, in contrast, depends on saying how much worse men are, how much more likely to sexually offend and be generally predatory and rapey. Unsurprisingly, men - who, let's face it, are the ones with the power to stop all this - are less keen on that narrative than the one that harps on about how much more powerful their bodies are. Plus there's less of an appetite for actually gathering the evidence on what effect transition has on males' predatory behaviour. Not much going by a lot of stuff on social media.

And after I posted I saw several pp had made the same point as I did!
Anyway, the good thing is that the FINA reasoning takes the changing sex/gender issue out of the equation. Of course you cannot change sex, but the point is virtually moot.

Yes to this. People are amazed to find this stuff out.

Hence why I prefer MERF.

Except that the issue women have is that predatory men have gained access to women's wards, spas, cells and then used that unfair physical advantage to rape and attack women. So the element of 'competition' aka unfair physical advantage is extremely relevant here too.

There's always been exceptions re primogeniture so whenever it suits men it's ok. That's why sports has broken the taboo, men care about it so it's important. Toilets, prisons, safe spaces and lesbian rights don't matter to men so TWAW for all those unless the balance tips. All TW are biological men btw All.

Whole house of cards is collapsing as we speak. 💪

Maybe.

I'm wary that sport will become the sort of sacrificial lamb. Advocates of genderism can see very clearly this will never fly, the public will never accept males in women's sport.

But I can see a situation where transwoman are accepted as women in refuges, hospitals, and prisons, just so long as the sportsfield is kept sportingly fair.

Me too. But I am no longer convinced that the additional provision of facilities will be enough to solve any of this.

If you see here, Manchester airport has "gender-neutral" toilets and female-only toilets. Should solve everything right? Except we have two male people here whose posts imply they saw the gender-neutral toilet and went elsewhere in the airport to seek out the female-only toilets instead. To "make a point".

This decision puts it clearly, out in the public realm that transwomen are not identical to women. That there is a clash between inclusion and in this case, fairness. In other situations the clash is going to be around safety or privacy, etc.
This is a significant decision and makes it easier for the next organisation to calmly and rationally look at where the pinch points are and how to address them.
I'm glad FINA chose this path.

I hadn’t thought of this before but it certainly makes a lot of sense. It’s one thing for Seb Coe to stand up for biological women in sports but which man is going to do the same for female prisoners / rape or DV victims / boring old Jewish / Muslim / atheist women who want single sex sessions at their gym / pool. Seb Coe wouldn’t get hero coverage in any press for that…

The equality act is literally written to give sex based protections where there is a legitimate aim and proportionate purpose.

When you talk about competing rights, the law says you should consider the purpose and legitimate aims of a service.

Therefore if your service is domestic abuse and you have traumised women there is a legitimate purpose to excluding males who think they should be treated as women.

Also see single sex wards. Dignity and safeguarding is supposed to be protected.

The entire argument that TWAW is to break the legitimate aims and protections that exist for women.

That doesn't necessarily improve life for transpeople either, because a domestic abuse service with no understanding about the specific needs of a transperson isnt necessarily going to help them. A person treated as the opposite sex when for their health needs may not get the appropriate care they need.

But the validation of transpeople has to trump the purposes and aims of specialist services because thoughts and feelings of people who don't necessarily need to use those services are more important than those in dire need.

Thats why its a mens rights movement. Its lead by a lot of people who aren't service users and arent vested stakeholders. More often than not they are simply straight, white and privileged. They have no real interest in improving the situation for transpeople who need specialist services. It's all very superficial and a PR stunt. Its to serve the egos of those who want to compete and beat women in sport unfairly (and hell we can actually say this now thanks to swimming). And its to remove the rights and protections of women who are especially vulnerable at their most difficult times of life.

It makes of mockery of those who say they understand and defend rights when they don't under how rights work in practice.

That sums up exactly what we're up against. They do it because they can, and because it validates them.

TWAW is such a wrong path - for Trans people as well as women. I guess TRAs saw a shortcut if they could steamroll it in. But I've said before how transphobic I think it is: Women and Transwomen are equally valid - just different. TWANW is only an insult if you think TW is an insult .

The better path to would be to recognise that

1. TWATW, and should be treated fairly.
2. Women are different to both men and TW - and should also be treated fairly - and due to human sexual dimorphism, we do sometimes need to treat men and women differently in order for women to be able to participate fairly and equally in society.
3. sometimes the needs and wants of different groups in society are in conflict, and our aim should be to resolve that in a way that is acceptable to all.

Then we could do the hard work of considering every situation where we treat men and women differently: figuring out whether that different treatment is truly necessary; the reason why the different treatment is fair/necessary, and what's the most inclusive boundary that still fulfils that fairness.

But that will be long, boring, hard work, and it's much more fun to shout slogans

@JustWaking how very well put.

The young never do, until it affects them in a negative way. There was OP recently who was called a Terf by her daughter as she was GC and her daughter was mimicking the TWAW nonsense.

She then came home from school really upset as she had come second to a trans girl on sports day, and was asking her mum (the dreaded Terf) if this was ‘fair’.

Young women have bought into trans ideology, as they are attracted to groups where they think they are changing the world for the better. Right now they see it affecting their trans friends who are transitioning at a scary fast rate, and quite rightly want to protect them.

These same friends will grow up into mature adults and most of them will most likely drop the T and accept that they are LGB. They have no idea of what they are giving up as they have not had a lived experience of how as women, it is a constant struggle for equality.

They have no idea of what they are giving up as they have not had a lived experience of how as women, it is a constant struggle for equality

I think this is very true.

I have to admit that it's only as a mother in my 40s (the age/stage when discrimination really bites) that I've really understood how important legal protections are, rather than relying on 'fair play' from other people. It's exactly ,when you are vulnerable and need protection that people take advantage and don't play fair

Yes, that's a good point.

Men might spearhead change, due to them being bigger, stronger and more powerful. But not necessarily because they are predatory and violent. I mean, if it was as easy as that, they've done it by now, and we wouldn't live in a patriarchy.

And free to use legal loopholes to personal advantage.

Matilda Simon was this week given permission to contest the next by-election for one of the upper chamber’s remaining 92 hereditary seats.

If she wins, she will doubtless become the envy of peers’ daughters across the country, because the vast majority of titles may only be passed to a male heir.

However, because of a legal loophole, the candidate, born Matthew Simon in 1955, has inherited and retains the Barony of Wythenshawe, despite being in all other legal respects a woman...

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553555-first-trans-peer-a-step-closer-as-hereditary-candidate-claims-seat

This does establish that female and TW are not the same thing, and that there are times when biology matters. That's all we needed.

Once there are understood, set limits as to how far a transition can lead to access to female categories and spaces due to this being unfair and discriminatory towards females, then it's just a question of demanding that boundary in each context and being very clear that access to female spaces isn't a consolation prize that male people get to award.

The answer in sport is very clear: it is necessary and proportional to say no to one person's wishes because of the impact on the group as a whole. That's it. That's the reality corner stone. AND there is the 'we now need an open category'.

Yes, we do. Third spaces. TQ+ people welcomed, provision freely made for them, but female needed female only provision is not getting sacrificed in the process.

They don’t even have to extract DNA. Look at the pubic bones. Instant sexing.

I always clarify that it's not TW that I want to stop accessing women's space it is biological men

This makes zero sense at all.
A total contradiction.

I think this is why the activists have pushed for inclusion in sport, despite the massive risk of backlash, because if they concede that trans women aren’t women for the purposes of sports, it opens the question to what else they might not be women for the purposes of. And the answer is - everything. The whole house of cards/“logic” crumbles.

I'm wary that sport will become the sort of sacrificial lamb. Advocates of genderism can see very clearly this will never fly, the public will never accept males in women's sport.

I think they're incapable of accepting any kind of limit. Anything that reminds them that men aren't women will always a target. So they won't give up on this issue.

But the think type movers and shakers are most certainly capable of tactical cunning. You could see the outline of a retreat plan re women's spaces in that recent More In Common report - they are going to once again hide the blatant, shameless types behind men who've "had the surgery" so they can argue for "case by case" - which keeps the door ajar so they can continue nudging at it.

It's going to take some massive cultural change that nukes the whole memeplex from orbit, for this bullshit to really, truly stop. I vote for embodiment. Or maybe teens will bring back kinkshaming.