Brave reporter undergoes inhumane sex test for sports. Brace yourselves.

[singthing]

Here's a blow-by-blow first-person account of what it is like to have the new sports sex test that is being decried as invasive and dehumanising and (in a rather extravagant bending of the facts) a genital inspection etc.

After such a big build-up, prepare to be.... underwhelmed. But please do stop scrolling now if you don't want to read the distressing details:

"I open my mouth and feel the swab brushing the inside of my cheeks for about 20 seconds. The practitioner carefully places the sample in a small plastic bag and then pops it into a sealed envelope. I sign the back of it."

https://archive.ph/kITV9

yeah, I’ve had some failures of politeness - easy to get defensive when you’re one person arguing against lots and lots of people I think, but you’re right - I’m sorry!

As a whole, I think I’ve tried to provide my views, tried to provide basis for my thinking like the above when asked, admitted when I don’t know or I’m uncertain…. and I think I’ve been on average more respectful than people have been to me in return.

I do think some of the ways people have talked about an individual on this thread (CS) is cruel, and that bit I won’t apologise for.

One person said my posts have given them a bit of hope, and that’s enough for me.

This is the way I read the post. I would love to be shown that I supposed wrong. But the reality is that too often women and girls have to allow some male people. who some people think should be treated especially different, access to harm those women and girls.

Or if the people says that they support female single sex sports, women have to discuss the issues in a way that suits the person judging, even if the point is accurate.

this is the status still.

Maybe you can explain exactly how a ‘kind’ and ‘accepting’ discussion will flow please?

Is it using inaccurate but kind language that confuses some people or that give a false sense of hope that sports federations will allow male people to compete in female sports categories for whatever reason?

Is it support that male people should be treated as female in special circumstances even though all the evidence shows this is not fair for female athletes even from the age of 6-7 yrs old?

What is the ‘kind’ and ‘accepting’ position that you wish to see on MN?

What is the ‘kind’ and ‘accepting’ position that you wish to see on MN?
That when men say 'jump', women say 'how high?' And they damned well better use a submissive and respectful tone too.

”One person said my posts have given them a bit of hope, and that’s enough for me.”

What hope do you think you have given that poster though?

This is the crux of the issue.

Have you given hope that someway, somehow a group of male people should get to compete in female sports when they have male pubertal advantages?

When I doubt that science will ever show that to be a fair decision, and you admit you cannot provide evidence to support that decision.

Has it been hope that some people, such as yourself, will continue to use inaccurate language demanded by some people as being kind and respectful, when it is based on that very language that the first campaigns argued that a group of male people should have their human rights prioritised over female people’s human rights?

genuinely, what is this ‘hope’ that you think you have delivered to a poster and why is that hope more important than science based and evidence based discussion about the harms that female people have experienced since the late 90s by allowing a group of male people with male pubertal advantage to compete in female sports and take opportunities and recognition of exceptionality away from women and girls?

You can read their post.

All I see is sexism.

That all women should expect is the crumbs after all men have been served in the ways that they wish, and they had better be respectful about it.

Just stuff that, we fought this battle a century ago. Make new categories. Stop mugging women. And when you read sexist post after sexist post, it gets hard to deny that its the getting to oppress and take stuff away from women that is the main excitement behind it.

I noticed again the purely emotional reasoning that supported claims of kindness and acceptance and not one shred of evidence.

I would hope that gives anyone reading this thread pause.

If these pleas for kindness and acceptance were fair and equitable for female people, where is the countering evidence based on science and not on fallacious and false arguments?

and if the majority of the population of male people competing in female single sex sport, this thread has been in trending all afternoon hasn’t it? So where are the posters with evidence that supports male people’s inclusion ?

What does ‘kind’ and ‘accepting’ mean to you?

what do YOU think you said that gives them hope? And hope for what exactly?

or is it enough that someone just accepted your posts without challenge and that makes you feel you achieved something? If so, what?

I believe this phenomenon may colloquially be known as a "circle jerk"...

Perhaps we should be calling him Caster Eggya, to be properly kind.

Together with your user name we pretty much have a Victoria Sponge.

Why are some of you so relentlessly creepy please?

Yep.

Or if women have succeeded in protecting female sports, that they have to stop using accurate language and again revert to complying with the demands of male people to be referred to as female.

Even when they make absurd statement such as ‘Being born without a uterus or with internal testicles. Those don't make me less of a woman,"

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/67336536
.

Women are still being shamed into using in accurate language when it was that same language being used to convince policy makers to create harmful policies to female athletes.

Once you see the assymetry, how can you ever unsee the damage to female people.

Oh. Hang on .. it is only a few so no harm done …

Maybe instead of jumping to defend it, you could answer thw question?

what hope do you think you have given that poster?

I rarely post on these boards mainly because I am in so much awe of the knowledge, research and scientific evidence demonstrated by the women who do post here, and who dedicate significant amounts of time to following threads, challenging criticism and always grounding arguments in fact.

I’ve come across scientists, published authors, anthropologists, health care professionals, writers, academics, trans men, women with DSD’s, politicians and many more serious, considered thinkers in this forum.

Keeptoiletssafe deserves a special mention. I’ve learnt so much from her, a true national expert in her field. If this is a bubble, I’m glad to be in it. I’ve learnt so much from these remarkable, educated, wise and often funny women. Thank you.

That post wasn’t jumping to defend anything. It was pointing out the phenomenon which has happened three times on this thread of gender critical people making weird wink wink sexual comments or insinuations, despite the fact that being fetishistic or over sexed or something is one of the accusations they throw at the trans community all the time. Three times in this thread someone gender critical has said a weird sex thing! It’s weird!

Deadlifter
One person said my posts have given them a bit of hope, and that’s enough for me.

Ah. You haven't encountered that particular poster before? I wouldn't feel too encouraged really.

And I think that "circle jerk" was being used in a derogatory way about Mumsnet, rather than being anyone getting at you. I might be wrong, but the meaning of the phrase makes it seem likely since you are more or less a solo effort;

• Circle jerk is a vulgar slang phrase often used figuratively to describe a group where people only agree with, praise, or validate each other.
• It is usually negative and suggests that a discussion lacks critical thinking, fresh ideas, or opposing viewpoints.
• In online slang, it is similar to echo chamber, groupthink, or mutual admiration society.

ah ok, thanks for clarifying.
TWO people have said weird sex things in that case! (Although this third person IS being vulgar, right?)

It is just a few…

AN ANALYSIS ON HOW JUST A FEW MALE PEOPLE CAN CAUSE HARM TO MANY FEMALE ATHLETES - THE FALSITY OF 'JUST ONE'

@hecheateddotorg
18th March 2025

To analyze performance differences between "trans"-identified male and actual female participants in girls' sport, we need look no further than girls' high school track and field.

Track and field provides the clearest data as it is an individual sport and has had the highest number of recorded male participants to date at the high school level.

There are a total of 37 male athletes on record who have participated in girls' high school track and field in the United States.

Of these 37, one athlete participated in only one race due to the cancellation of the season during the COVID 19 pandemic. Another athlete participated in a tech/private school league that did not participate in a state championship. These two athletes will be excluded from the data.

Out of 1,276 completed events, male athletes finished as follows:

1st place: 440 (34%)
2nd place: 188 (15%)
3rd place: 123 (10%)
Other: 485 (41%)

Male athletes came in 1st 34% of the time, only 7% less often than they did than any other place outside the top 3.
They finished in the top three in 59% of their events and outside the top eight in only 19% of their events.

24 of the 35 male athletes (68%) qualified for their respective State Championship meet in a total of 136 events.

When looking at athletes competing against same-sex peers, depending on the state and division of competition, anywhere from 5 to 15% of athletes are expected to qualify.

For example in states that use regional-sectional qualification, the top 4 finishers at a regional meet (often with 2 heats of 8 runners each) qualify for the sectional meet where the top 4 finishers at the sectional then advance to State. This means that out of 32 runners at regionals, only 4 (12.5%) will advance to State.

This number also does not take into account the fact that only the best runners on a team will be entered in a regional meet and often the same runner will qualify in multiple events. A runner may also have a higher chance of qualifying in a relay as 8 runners (top 2 teams) advance to state rather than 4 in this type of qualification.

In other types of qualification or less competitive, smaller regions, it may be easier to qualify.

At the State Championship meet, there are typically 24 entries in each event. 1 of the 24 will win, meaning 4% of the 15% of athletes who have qualified for state will be a state champion, or 0.6%.
Of the 24 male athletes who qualified for state against girls, 11 of them (46%) have won a state championship title, or 31% of the total.

4 of the 35 male athletes (11%) have also achieved a top 10 national ranking.
The percentage of male athletes who have been in the top 10 of all track and field athletes in the female division in the entire nation is higher than the percentage of female athletes who have won a state title.

To find the percentage of female athletes who are in the top 10, we can take the 57 indoor and outdoor events ranked on milesplit. com multiplied by 10 (10 athletes in each) then divide by the total number of female athletes in high school track and field - 506,015 (according to nfhs. org).

This number does not take into account the fact that many athletes in the top 10 appear there in multiple events and several of the 57 events are less commonly run. (All 4 male athletes in the top 10 achieved that placement in a main event).

This means less than 0.11 percent of female athletes achieve a top 10 ranking.

"But not all states require hormone therapy!"

It is true that some states do not require males to undergo any sort of testosterone suppression or medical intervention in order to compete against girls.

We can therefore, look to the athletes who have reportedly begun "identifying" as the opposite sex and undergone "medical interventions" prior to puberty or in early middle school as it has been proposed that males who do so are in line with "average female performance."

There are 3 athletes who have reportedly "transitioned" prior to puberty. Based on their feminized appearances and high voices, we can infer this included puberty blockers.
All 3 athletes qualified for the state championship meet, 2 of the athletes were conference champions, and one athletes was not only a state champion and New England champion, but he was ranked in the national top 10.
None of these performances are in line with an "average" athlete. In fact, the national ranking out of three athletes is statistically unlikely to the point of being impossible without an athletic advantage.

"But you just know about the athletes who are good. There could be more you don't hear about because they don't win anything."

When we look at the expected percentages, we can see that about 6 out of 1,000 athletes win state and 1 out of 1,000 are in the top 10 national ranking.

In order to see the 24 males as state champions and 4 males in the top 10, there should be around 4,000 males who have competed in the girls' division in track and field. (3,965 additional athletes, none of whom can have won a state title).

There have been 37 on record.

Numerous state senators and legislators have come forward testifying to the number of "trans"-identifying males participating in their states.

When these legislators testify that there have "only been 2" in the state, or in the case of Ohio, 17 athletes in 8 years, and these numbers include all sports, and when male athletes have been banned from participating in girls' sports in about half of the states in the nation, it is not likely that there are an additional 3,963 male athletes that not only does nobody know about, but who also have not won a single state title.
In regards to the prepubescent "transitioners," there should be an additional 1,000 of them who have not won a state title or achieved a top 10 ranking. This is also highly unlikely, as we've seen multiple prepubescent "transitioners" in other sports also winning national and state championship titles.

Male participation in the female division is not just unfair, it is blatantly so.
These percentages do not reflect the cost to the female athletes behind them. Just 2 male athletes in cross country and track and field in Maine have negatively impacted over 2,000 female athletes.

If each male athlete negatively impacted 500 female on average, that means over 18,500 female high school track and field athletes in the United States have been forced to compete against and have been negatively impacted by these boys.

This includes loss of titles, loss of medals, loss of relay spots, loss of entries in large meets, loss of qualifications for championships, loss of records, loss of privacy, and loss of confidence.

*2 male athletes in Maine negatively impacted over 1,600 girls

3 boys in Washington, over 2,000

It may very well be weird sexual, because the origin of the phrase is what you very likely thought it is, but very possibly aimed the other way.

In any case, "some of you" is a fairly huge generalisation to take from two whole posts by two people: contrary to what is said by people who haven't bothered to look but condemned sight unseen, the women who post here are not some sort of collective mind, just a lot of individualists who may happen to agree about some thing or things but will be wildly divergent in other ways.

I think that’s sort of right, except that when someone upthread said people would be disappointed not to have their genitals checked, nobody except me challenged it at all. It’s a reprehensible thing to say, and maybe YOU wouldnt say it, but you’ve all taken the time to challenge me multiple times, and ALL of you let that slide.

Perfectly put!