Nadine Dorries to meet with sporting associations

[achillestoes]

Dorries has been making the right noises on the issue of male people in female sports for a while, but on Tuesday she is holding a meeting with Sport England and other bodies representing football, cricket, rugby, tennis and other sports. She intends to make it clear that she is expects sporting bodies to reserve female sports for people born female. I think the implicit message is that sporting bodies need to do this voluntarily or they will seek to legislate on it.

Does anyone know where Lucy Powell, the Shadow Minister for Culture and Sports, stands on this?

Why is supporting fairness for women stoking up cultural divisions?

Idk but the opposite - that we suffer unfairness in sport sounds awful to me

Why is it stoking up cultural divisions to highlight these injustices?

My guess is that by exposing this blatant injustice and it being remedied it will shine a brighter light on all the other injustices perpetrated against women in the name of Gender Ideology and those who want this injustice and all the others to continue are sensing the house of cards is starting to tumble. If TW are NW or as they so risibly declare female for sporting reasons, then they aren't for any other women only services and spaces, which they know and we know and was known all along.

Here's to the beginning of the end of this hate filled misogynistic agenda.

The stoking cultural divisions argument is irritating

How are we going to fix this without addressing the reality?

This. You're kidding yourselves if you think Tories are pro women's rights. If they agree with us on a particular issue, happy days. But keep your wits about you.

Are there a lot of frightened TRAs and labour supporters on this thread about women’s rights and sports, it’s a single issue, keep men out of women’s places and sports . If labour don’t like the Tories supporting women that’s their problem

The FINA decision was correct.

I think it’s ludicrous for anyone who calls themselves a feminist to totally ignore a politician’s attempts to restrict abortion because of what she says on another issue.

Her saying she’ll talk to sporting bodies means less than nothing. It’s just noise.

We need noise, conversation and action. All three.

Anyone who says no don’t move forward because it doesn’t fit well with the left etc I’m over.

We’d be stuck with Starmer female but including men

I’m also concerned all these small gains will be lost if Labour get in at next election

If the elite sports regain their single sex status, as they should, I would hope that it would filter down to the next level - as this should be the pool of competitor from whom the sports bodies will want to choose their future champions (who will have to be female to be eligible). And so on. So it may not be 100% but would help.

Sports lawyers will be working on challenging the FINA ruling already. They’re the reason that proven drug cheats can’t be banned for life. They’re the reason that so many intersex athletes have been allowed to compete in (and dominate) women’s track events in recent years.

That seems fair enough. Having the advice coming from an organisation which charges for abortions is a clear conflict of interest.

Once sporting bodies recognise that born biological males are not women and should stay in their own Lane or make their own third category for sporting events, we’ll be able to make the same arguments for women’s prisons and refuges and hospital wards and counselling services and employment. No wonder so many posters on here are trying to derail with whataboutism.

The party which has produced two female Prime Ministers isn’t pro women’s rights?

That’s an interesting view.

‘Whatever she is doing, it’s not because she has fairness or the best interests of women or anyone else in mind.’

I don’t think this is right. Dorries says what she thinks. She’s not shy.

I’ve been on this board for a while. It’s taken years of pushing to get here.

If Starmer gets in not convinced he wont reverse the lot. When people listen to him, his lack of clarity and biological reality, how can they be sure he wont?

So Bupa can’t give unbiased medical advice because they charge for it!

97% of the woman BPAS see have their treatment paid for by the NHS or other government departments. I do have the stats for Marie Stopes.

The idea was to open the field for pro life organisations to run counselling services.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/aug/02/abortion-pregnancy-counselling-found-wanting

‘When people listen to him, his lack of clarity and biological reality, how can they be sure he wont?’

We can’t. Starmer thinks TWAW. He says every time ‘the vast majority of women have female biology’, which means he thinks there are some women with male biology.

Don’t

What has this got to do with getting men out of women’s sports? Are you getting rattled? I’d there too much sunlight?

Get males out of women's sports and sports come up with a solution such as a third event, open, mixed whatever and then there is no reason why that cannot be extrapolated across all spaces and services, everyone catered for, no-one left out, nothing to argue or whinge about, everyone happy.

This was to Ncwinc, who doesn’t want us to think about Nadine Dories defending women’s rights. And women’s sports.

If they agree with us on a particular issue, happy days. But keep your wits about you.

Don't be so patronising, of course we will keep our wits about us we are not stupid we are well aware of how fragile women's rights are all the bloody time.

Get males out of women's sports and sports come up with a solution such as a third event, open, mixed whatever and then there is no reason why that cannot be extrapolated across all spaces and services, everyone catered for, no-one left out, nothing to argue or whinge about, everyone happy.

The only protected category is the female category and to be eligible you must have female physiology. The male category can easily become an open category and this would also solve the problem of female athletes who identify as men and take testosterone as part of their transition. They are the only athletes banned at the minute from competing in either category. If their testosterone taking is ruled therapeutic, they can then compete in the male/ open category. Neither transwoman nor non binary athletes who don't take testosterone are barred from the male/open category. Female bodied non binary athletes likethe footballer Quinn are also eligible to compete in the female category because they are female. Transwoman are not eligible because they have male physiology.

The only protected category is the female category and to be eligible you must have female physiology.

Yes.

The male category can easily become an open category and this would also solve the problem of female athletes who identify as men and take testosterone as part of their transition. They are the only athletes banned at the minute from competing in either category. If their testosterone taking is ruled therapeutic, they can then compete in the male/ open category. Neither transwoman nor non binary athletes who don't take testosterone are barred from the male/open category. Female bodied non binary athletes like the footballer Quinn are also eligible to compete in the female category because they are female. Transwoman are not eligible because they have male physiology.

Yes, again. All lovely and inclusive which is what they all say they want.

If they agree with us on a particular issue, happy days. But keep your wits about you.

I honestly think a potential leader saying female but meaning men too is the definition of keep your wits about you. But who will you vote for?