Across the Red Line Radio 4

[Everyoneesleistheproblem]

Sharon - fucking amazing.

That's all. Just on now (possibly a reoeat , recorded before Paris)

Yes she was. And I almost spat my drink out when the other guest said that Sharron’s use of Transidentified Male was confusing!

I found it to be a frustrating format. Being asked to reflect back what the other person is saying when what was said was based on a false premise is not particularly helpful.

Just listened to this and found it very frustrating, but I am always in awe of Sharron and others who can argue logically when faced with bs.

I thought the racing driver didn't really have any arguments that could be backed up with facts.

Incidentally, why a racing driver? Why not someone from a sport where male advantage has much more effect on performance outcomes?

Also Sharon got the timing right. Ended on ; the focus is always feelings of trans athletes, what about the women and girls.
And she was very clear that she gets as much hate as any trans person.
Came across so well, especially that pointing out swimming has always very supportive of the gay community at top level and she gets the diversity is hard argument having married and had a family with a black athlete pre woke.
Not some shrill bigot

Shes defo on here. Thank you, utterly brilliant.

Sharron found the format difficult but then they both did and that was illuminating. It’s an artificial conflict resolution technique and in any event, the problem here isn’t one of perception.

Sharron was brilliant. The only two issues I would’ve liked Sharron to push back more on was a) Charlie (no idea who this person is) kept referring to the science but never provided any factual studies and b) when asked to put themselves in Sharron’s shoes, Charlie actually said they could only speak from their own lived experience.

That’s absolutely right. I would’ve liked Sharron to point out that experience was not growing up as a woman or having the physiology of a woman.

The format is meant to foster compromise. The trans driver did indeed have to admit biology couldn't be changed ( after much wittering on about science) and Sharon didn't need to compromise because she wasn't chatting bollocks.

She did though. The footballers kick, the effect periods have in performance.. She also pointed out testosterone performance differences. Stuck to biology, not hurt feelings ( which she pointed out weren't relevant)

I don't think it's possible to foster a compromise if one person takes the position that transwomen are women and therefore should be treated in exactly the same way as any other women

They said chromosomes and genes can't be changed but I think they still believe that you can change sex.

The exchange just highlighted how the obfuscation of language makes this so hard to follow. Sharron said the problem was trans-identified males not feeling welcome in men's sports, and therefore the problem lies with men, not women - Charlie replied "but there are loads of trans men in men's sports" but they're not the same bloody thing! We know that, but the casual listener probably doesn't.

This might earn me my first deletion, but it would all be a lot clearer if they just said "males who wish they were female" and vice-versa.

When Charlie said () TWAW and TMAM, it sounded so dated. I thought is that all you've got. Apparently, yes.

Ithink the format* *is a problem if you have to treat seriously and respectfully whatever nonsense the other person comes out with.

But fair play to Charlie for showing up <cough-GraceLavery-cough> I do respect them for thatl

Also, no disrespect to Charlie, I'm just showing my age

I meant that she might have pushed Charlie more to name this specific ‘research’ they kept generically referring to re no difference in TW and women’s physiology.

However, Sharron did a brilliant job of presenting the actual science eg talking about Q (?) angles and I think that stumped Charlie. Hopefully listeners will take note of Sharron’s detailed reference to how sex difference leads to male advantage in sports vs Charlie’s ‘but science’ …

Thank you for link.

Incidentally, why a racing driver? Why not someone from a sport where male advantage has much more effect on performance outcomes?

Weeeeelll, I think that actually in F1 racing, male strength and lung power is essential. It's not an obvious thing, but if you watch the in-car race cams, you'll see the extraordinary forces the bodies of drivers are subject to. Men's greater strength, muscle mass, and bone density gives them a clear advantage.

You have a point. I'd assumed that it was due to the BBC needing a trans person and only one was available!

Yes that's the weird thing isn't it, that the male physiology gives them an advantage in all kinds of competitions, not just those based on strength or speed or where physical performance is required. Even chess - something to do with risk taking etc. Maybe due to hormones? So even if you matched a male with a female in height, weight, arm reach etc the male would still have a natural advantage, even outside of the stronger more effective muscle performance.
Thanks for the link I'll listen - definitely seems like the TWAW idea is losing ground these days- just need to make sure the idea of puberty making the difference gets totally scrapped. The male advantage is visible at all ages pre puberty as well.

That's probably also the case. And the transwoman they have picked is not a rabid TRA in manner (although his ideas are a different story).

I'll give it a listen, thank you.

Did Charlie say whether F1 actually has sex divisions? I didn't think it did? Though I can imagine women's events elsewhere in motorsport to encourage more female participants.

I’ haven’t heard that episode but have heard that programme on another topic and find it a really frustrating format. It didn’t teach me much about conflict resolution and it’s a hindrance to airing the issues. Anti social programme is much better.

Even shooting! Acc to shooting Olympic champion couple Nathan Hales and Charlotte Kerwood - he beats her 95% of the time in practice shoot offs. You'd think calm and steady aim would be less affected but I guess it needs muscle control to hold still.

I've found the program annoying to listen to. But thanks for the heads up.
As others have said , it really doesn't work when one side is patently nonsense.

I would think that choosing a person who is not competing in a sport which is physically affected by the sex of the competitor, might have been deliberate. Otherwise, every point that this person, made could have been countered by "well I hear X trying to justify the unfairness of X competing in the female category despite all the physical advantages they have gained through male puberty."

Yes. All This.

I have a friend who races cars and as a 50 year old he has to be in peak fitness to even have a chance to compete with those in their 20s and 30s. He knows he will not win. He says his twitch muscles are not as fast so his reaction speed is not up to theirs. But also he talks about the toll on his body from the speed. He has to be fitter and very strong than the young ones to cope, particularly his neck and chest muscles.

That is formula four. Not formula one.

I have read that the disparity with female bodies are even more noticeable with F1 conditions. With weaker necks, arms etc and our circulation needs support to ensure the blood circulates and we don’t have as rich an oxygen level. So rather some significant differences.

Off to listen

Oh even used sex observed at birth