Transitioned male cricket player from India cleared to play elite women’s cricket in Australia

[legalalien]

More Australian madness. Australia looks to become a destination of choice for men who want to make a career in women’s sport.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/news/incredibly-emotional-anaya-bangar-gets-cricket-australia-nod-for-elite-womens-cricket-eyes-wbbl/articleshow/133518179.cms

of course, 100%, and I do try not to humanise AI! I actually forced myself to do a six week short course to work out how it worked, and I certainly don't trust results and always push back and check the primary sources - I can see that I sounded particularly credulous in that post, though. I've been reading some of the Australian sports guidelines and actually it seems as though they are a lot looser than the UK ones in some key respects - if I have it correct (need to check the underlying legislation rather than sports body guidance), the SDA doesn't apply to non-profit grass roots sports clubs that don't sell alcohol in relation to membership decisions (as opposed to other activities) (this seems odd), and also the sports exemption generally seems to apply once it's shown that strength, stamina and physique are relevant in the sport, but there's no subsequent proportionality type test covering exactly how you discriminate. Which seems to mean that CA can say that (i) OK for trans woman to play in WBBL (exemption is engaged, we decide guideline will be based on testosterone etc as set out in our guidance) but (ii) not OK for trans woman to play for Australia (exemption is engaged, even though same players will be involved and similar standard, we're going to apply a different test that takes into account the fact that the international comp may (or may not - it could just be to avoid publicity rather than to comply with rules) not allow trans women to participate. This seems odd. I will try and look at it further but if anyone can she any light then would be great!

Australia’s Sex Discrimination Act currently does not include a definition of man or woman.

Unbelievably bad!

You appear to suggest that other countries did not have the concepts of competitiveness, excellence or expertise, nor misogyny and patriarchy until these were imported and imposed by British imperialism. What racist nonsense.

Well, if you're a supporter of, say, the England women's cricket team, this is surely good news.

The ICC doesn't allow trans identifying men to play in women's international competitions. So every time a TIM takes an actual woman's place in elite cricket in Australia, it weakens the pool of players available to play for the country at international level.

What I'm actually suggesting is the historical fact that the British colonial system was inherently racist and classist, functioning through the subjugation of indigenous populations as second- and third-class citizens while reinforcing strict social hierarchies not to mention the classist abuse suffered by their colonised convicts.

Park Life!

😂
"the British colonial system was inherently racist and classist"

Wow thanks, how insightful. Never would have known that. Thanks for coming and educating us right wing bigots. Nothing to do with the OP at all, but thanks.

My quoting of this disappeared but it made me laugh, thank you!

@Gretel346 'civilised' Victorian British overlords

At least they knew humans couldn’t change sex!!

Oooh - so much derailing when the issue of cheating in women's sport comes up. Never changes.

I'm reminded of the Kent cricketer - a TIM called Maxine Blythin who in the same season performed as a mediocre man in the men's league while cheating his way to the top of the women's game. The useful idiots in Kent cricket awarded him the women's "player of the season /year?" award.

He of course was the perfect example of how a mediocre sportsman can cheat his way to the top of women's sport taking places and awards away from women as he goes.

Well in UK we now finally have clear guidelined on gender identity

Yes - that's a good point. Certain self centred men will always try to wreck women's sport but as the international and olympic organisations are returning to fairness, safety and the inclusion of women in our own sports, few governing bodies will waste precious elite resources on players who are banned from completing.

..few governing bodies will waste precious elite resources on players who are banned from competing.

But Australia will have one of those few governing bodies - I will bet folding money on it.

So presumably they'll showcase what FAFO in cricket looks like when he's barred from competing in international women's competitions. 😂

Couldn't happen to a better country

@Chersfrozenface “But Australia will have one of those few governing bodies - I will bet folding money on it.”

Until Australia's Sex Discrimination Act includes a definition of biological sex, you’re probably right!

As he is Indian, they swerve that particular issue. And as noted above, in the case of domestic players in a similar situation, the law here seems at first blush to allow them enough flexibility to apply different tests to different competitions so that they don't fall foul of the law by indirectly discriminating on a ground such as "you can only play for Australia if you are eligible to play in the international competition and sorry you aren't because other countries are not as [enlightened/ egalitarian/insert adjective of choice] as us." Maybe that was a pragmatic compromise at the time the legislation was done and they hoped it wouldn't need to be considered forensically in practice?

Cow tailed?

Gretel's grasp of the English language is as good as their grasp of biology.

Quite literally play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

What’s this got to do with a man from India playing in Australian women’s cricket?

Did the Victorian British make this happen?

Wait - is this not a reference to the "cow knows not the use of her tail until she uses it" saying?

@Gretel346 Living people did not make decisions centuries ago. Past societies operated under different social and moral rules.

Gretel is one of those who believe that biological sex was imposed by the British on societies as imperial rule, those societies previously in a state of gender-based peace and harmony.
Alongside that, trans IDing individuals even in Britain were accepted and held up by us just a few scant decades ago, but second wave feminism went rogue in punching down in imperially dominating sex > gender.
I mean, we can see the evidence in the developing world...all those "third gender" individuals so valued by their indigenous...oh, sorry, just why are they almost all bullied in their countries, so many come to the West to be chewed up in the sex industry?
The truth is, there is no imperial colonial "plot" to impose biological sex as a genocidal factor to wipe out gender as the "correct" way to mark differences between individuals.
This is one of the latest, saddest, faddy attempts to find a framework to pan realists as bigots.
Part of the gender euphoria re-writing of history for the hard of critical thinking on trans/Reddit.
People object to this individual in women's cricket not because they're colonialist imperialist, but because they know he's a man permitted into women's sport.
Quite how the simplest of simple facts became a schism at the heart of the liberal West is a question for the ages.

Well we can only give the same advice to all club cricket girls - just boycott - the clubs will get it in the end! Australia just seem to be a few years behind!

How do women who object to the gender scam feel playing alongside him? How do they feel playing against him?
What will be fascinating is comparing his performance stats.
Let's see the basic data for when he (correctly) played in men's trans versus when he now (incorrectly) plays in women's teams.
There was a British male cricketer a few years back, bang average over his career, who went from a batting average of below 20, to well over 100 when he was invited into women's cricket.