Gender Discussion #105

[Vanelope]

This will be in place for the next games which affects sponsorship and funding. Team GB will not not be funding cyclists for example who can’t be part of the Olympic team.

I still think Laura Kenny raised hell about it for British Cycling, she used to train with the men to improve her speeds and men with no gold medals were faster than her.

 

[devonport123]

No idea who the hole in pink is, but he keeps taking over the woman who is making a perfectly sensible, reasonable argument. He keeps on about it being “sad” and being “only children”. I cannot stand men like him who try and tell us how we should feel. There are many, many reasons why women and girls don’t want biological males around. These men who are So dismissive of the feelings of women are nothing but misogynistic bullies.
Edit. Says he’s Phil Jones- none the wiser.

Oh look at that. A man trying to dominate & tell a woman that she’s wrong, he knows best etc. Quelle surprise.
duck off mate. You might not have a problem with your 11 year old daughter sharing a tent with a 17 year old boy in a frock, but I bleeping do.

 

[IndominusRex]

If absolutely love it to become a trend for female athletes to post taking their cheek swabs. Part of the online outrage is still the idea that sex tests mean genital inspections or other intrusive/demeaning exams rather than something simple and harmless.

 

[Mismatched Pegs]

Oh duck off you pathetic hand maiden. How can you not see that allowing anyone to pretend to be a woman and we should all blindly accept it is damaging for women’s rights. They keep banging on about how terrible it is to reduce being a woman to biology, but surely that’s exactly what it is. It’s not a feeling, it’s not wanting to dress a certain way and it’s certainly not celebrating and accepting male sexual fetishes being inflicted on us without consent. Do these stupid handmaidens have any idea how much many TIM hate us? That they have the male mindset, male physical strength and retain their male anatomy? However much they may dress up in a grotesque parody of being a woman, they retain their male physical strength and mindset. Whatever they claim to “identify” as they have all the characteristics of MEN.

She's an absolute wick.
She hasn't got the bleeping brains of a stained mattress

 

[Notworthy]

I might be in the minority here but I don't think athletes with CAIS should be allowed to compete in the Female category either. They may not have the advantage of testosterone but they do tend to be taller courtesy of being xy giving them an advantage in plenty of sports.
I read somewhere that 1 in 500 people with CAIS are professional athletes. Somehow that statistic was used to prove they didn't have an advantage but that's way higher than the % of Women in pro sport.

 

[Weebles Wobble]

I might be in the minority here but I don't think athletes with CAIS should be allowed to compete in the Female category either. They may not have the advantage of testosterone but they do tend to be taller courtesy of being xy giving them an advantage in plenty of sports.
I read somewhere that 1 in 500 people with CAIS are professional athletes. Somehow that statistic was used to prove they didn't have an advantage but that's way higher than the % of Women in pro sport.

I've been leaning towards the view that no athlete with a Y chromosome should be allowed to compete with women. I understand that people with CAIS are a special case but a better solution would be to find a fair way for them to compete rather than including them with XX women.

I'm still very uneasy about Lin Yu-Ting being included in the women's team. It's been confirmed he has XY chromosomes but I've not head that he has CAIS.

 

[VeniVidiVicki]

I’ve just listened to the headlines on BBC radio 4. They DID NOT mention the decision by the Olympics. They did cover the number of children who are repeatedly absent from school and the discovery of a rare fungus in Wales.

But men being banned from the biggest and most prestigious sporting event in the world doesn’t merit a mention.

So bleeping angry

 

[klarakluckbag]

They can't go camping with Girl Guides and now they're not free to batter female athletes and potentially give them brain damage. It's been a bad week for the loons.

It's been a great week for Terfs though. I've already told several men on FB to "pipe down", and I responded to one bloke who was foaming at the mouth about the Olympic decision, telling him "It's got nothing to do with you, we don't need to hear from men on this issue, so shush"
Ohhhh, it's fantastic to watch them having tantrums and meltdowns, what a day to be a woman!

 

[TheMiceInTheShed]

No idea who the hole in pink is, but he keeps taking over the woman who is making a perfectly sensible, reasonable argument. He keeps on about it being “sad” and being “only children”. I cannot stand men like him who try and tell us how we should feel. There are many, many reasons why women and girls don’t want biological males around. These men who are So dismissive of the feelings of women are nothing but misogynistic bullies.
Edit. Says he’s Phil Jones- none the wiser.

"Oh, I think it's so saaaad"
"Oh, I think it's so intoleraaaaant"
"They're chiliiiidren. What do you think is going to haaaapen?"
"Oh there's so many issuuuuues"

I believe these children may be up to 17 years of age. What do YOU think might happen you patronising wick!?

As the woman rightly says "Do you think that we should wait for something terrible to happen before we take action?"

It is a single-sex charitable organisation. If they want boys in - fine - but they have to change their ethos and that will affect their charitable status. I don't think most girls - or their parents - want to change. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that the ones who do want both sexes involved can, with the boys, form their own, "inclusive" organisation. After all - the Girl Guides set themselves up from nothing, so I'm sure the "Gender Guides" (for want of a better term) could too.

Every organisation has to start somewhere, after all, and if it's as popular as they claim they'll be swamped with applicants.

 

[Notworthy]

I've been leaning towards the view that no athlete with a Y chromosome should be allowed to compete with women. I understand that people with CAIS are a special case but a better solution would be to find a fair way for them to compete rather than including them with XX women.

I'm still very uneasy about Lin Yu-Ting being included in the women's team. It's been confirmed he has XY chromosomes but I've not head that he has CAIS.

Nobody has a right to compete in professional sport.
I will concede that someone with CAIS could play with and against Women at amateur level but at the very pinnacle of sport, fine margins mean the difference between gold and nothing, or a place in the team or in a final so, on that basis, no to CAIS.

 

[Peachsquish]

"Oh, I think it's so saaaad"
"Oh, I think it's so intoleraaaaant"
"They're chiliiiidren. What do you think is going to haaaapen?"
"Oh there's so many issuuuuues"

I believe these children may be up to 17 years of age. What do YOU think might happen you patronising wick!?

As the woman rightly says "Do you think that we should wait for something terrible to happen before we take action?"

It is a single-sex charitable organisation. If they want boys in - fine - but they have to change their ethos and that will affect their charitable status. I don't think most girls - or their parents - want to change. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that the ones who do want both sexes involved can, with the boys, form their own, "inclusive" organisation. After all - the Girl Guides set themselves up from nothing, so I'm sure the "Gender Guides" (for want of a better term) could too.

Every organisation has to start somewhere, after all, and if it's as popular as they claim they'll be swamped with applicants.

Up to 18years and 364 days.

 

[Mugglewump]

Our lovely GATE friends.

 

[LloydsBoosters]

I’m currently on thread #71 which is August 2024 (slowly been making my way through all the threads) and it’s mostly about Imane Khelif. I can’t believe I’m reading about this issue from two years ago yet it’s taken until now for them to actually do the right thing!

 

[minimaz]

Just reading the NYT article about the IOC new policy and this quote jumped out at me. Am I misstaken or doesn't this do the opposite, if someones passed the test then there is no suspicion.

" Payoshni Mitra, executive director at Humans of Sport, a group that has focused on the issue, was critical of the new Olympic policy. “This kind of brutal language doesn’t protect sports — it polices women’s bodies,” she said in a statement to The New York Times. “It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk.”" https://archive.ph/WRmUo

 

[JAR21]

Just reading the NYT article about the IOC new policy and this quote jumped out at me. Am I misstaken or doesn't this do the opposite, if someones passed the test then there is no suspicion.

" Payoshni Mitra, executive director at Humans of Sport, a group that has focused on the issue, was critical of the new Olympic policy. “This kind of brutal language doesn’t protect sports — it polices women’s bodies,” she said in a statement to The New York Times. “It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk.”" https://archive.ph/WRmUo

How does it fuel suspicion if everyone has to do it?

 

[Weebles Wobble]

Just reading the NYT article about the IOC new policy and this quote jumped out at me. Am I misstaken or doesn't this do the opposite, if someones passed the test then there is no suspicion.

" Payoshni Mitra, executive director at Humans of Sport, a group that has focused on the issue, was critical of the new Olympic policy. “This kind of brutal language doesn’t protect sports — it polices women’s bodies,” she said in a statement to The New York Times. “It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk.”" https://archive.ph/WRmUo

Does she also object to dope testing, which - by her logic - must also police women's bodies? I believe this test is far more intrusive and restrictive - athletes must be readily available and are subjected to random testing, even at home. By comparison, a once-in-a-lifetime cheek swab is nothing.

It removes both suspicion and public scrutiny, because we no longer doubt if any of the females are really male. And it ensures that women aren't vulnerable when they participate in their sport, because they're not at risk of being injured by a man.

I wonder if she's actually referring to the men who will be excluded?

 

[Nelly's mum]

Just reading the NYT article about the IOC new policy and this quote jumped out at me. Am I misstaken or doesn't this do the opposite, if someones passed the test then there is no suspicion.

" Payoshni Mitra, executive director at Humans of Sport, a group that has focused on the issue, was critical of the new Olympic policy. “This kind of brutal language doesn’t protect sports — it polices women’s bodies,” she said in a statement to The New York Times. “It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk.”" https://archive.ph/WRmUo

You are right.
I suppose it depends on who you are counting as women - this comment is made by someone with the view that TWAW, that a woman is anyone who says he's a woman

 

[IngressUK]

I’m actually sickened at how this is trying to creep in the back door (excuse the term). How can anyone with common sense and decency think this is ok? And to try and get it passed as a bill to make it legal is sickening!! LGB and duck the T and whatever else comes after it.

Expect people to take to the streets en-mass if anyone tried to get a similar bill through here!

The 'be kind' of some is getting a bit creepy and weird now, if they think Pedophiles are a group worthy of 'be kind' and anti discrimination laws.

 

[Lynn’ssnazzycardigan]

"Oh, I think it's so saaaad"
"Oh, I think it's so intoleraaaaant"
"They're chiliiiidren. What do you think is going to haaaapen?"
"Oh there's so many issuuuuues"

I believe these children may be up to 17 years of age. What do YOU think might happen you patronising wick!?

As the woman rightly says "Do you think that we should wait for something terrible to happen before we take action?"

It is a single-sex charitable organisation. If they want boys in - fine - but they have to change their ethos and that will affect their charitable status. I don't think most girls - or their parents - want to change. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that the ones who do want both sexes involved can, with the boys, form their own, "inclusive" organisation. After all - the Girl Guides set themselves up from nothing, so I'm sure the "Gender Guides" (for want of a better term) could too.

Every organisation has to start somewhere, after all, and if it's as popular as they claim they'll be swamped with applicants.

I shuddered a bit at BIB, I can just imagine the troupes being run by militant handmaidens, transhausen parents and perverts. Colouring in Progress flags and crocheting “TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS” flags.

 

[Lynn’ssnazzycardigan]

Our lovely GATE friends.

They’re so petty, spiteful and immature. “Oh, how do we show them up as hypocritical bigots? We’ll get trans boys to join en masse. That’ll show them ” Good luck finding enough trans boys to do that who would actually want to join guides and then prepare to be underwhelmed when nobody cares, because they are actual females. Then planning how to “legitimately” shoehorn in as many males as possible, it’s absolutely disgusting how much they hate girls having something exclusive to them only. Sorry for my inarticulate rant but it’s given me incoherent rage.