You wouldn't let an under 16 vote, get married or have a tattoo as they are too young to decide. Madness you would let them do irreversible changes to their bodyQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
Printable View
You wouldn't let an under 16 vote, get married or have a tattoo as they are too young to decide. Madness you would let them do irreversible changes to their bodyQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
It's interesting because the law decides when we can do certain things with our life and health. It sets the age to legally drink based on the body of evidence from health research that those who start drinking earlier are more likely to endure medical consequences for beginning to consume alcohol before their body is physically mature. They're statistically more likely to end up with alcohol related health conditions. However, when the courts tried to assign an age of capacity to give meaningful consent to chemical intervention around puberty and gender, it was overturned on appeal. The outcome of the original Keira Bell case was that children under the age of 13 could not understand the implications of puberty blocking. Indeed, it said that until they were 16 there was still doubt that they'd fully understand what they were signing up to. Keira Bell reported she was signed up to puberty blockers after a 3 hour assessment. It was part of her case against Tavistock that this was inadequate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
The Bell case is heart breaking 💔
If that's true she's an even bigger bampot than I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Article written yesterday by a trans non-binary author who feels they cannot tolerate people getting their pronouns wrong now.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/misge...APPLENEWS00001
One misspeak away from setting up a compound in the woods and giving fire and brimstone sermons about the outside world. Crazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
:confused:I’d like to see a link to that claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Totally bonkers.
https://twitter.com/lornaslater/stat...hNVV0UT9g&s=19Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
"Puberty blockers do exactly that. Allow kids the chance to think and mature before making a life altering choice either way"
Dangerous person to have been handed a ministerial role in exchange for propping up the SNP. She and Harvie are a crack(pot) pair.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
Half wit. It doesn't just pause things, it irreversibly changes many different thingsQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
Your with the ideologically driven loons, who want to indoctrinate children into believing this garbage. Biological sex is real it's been with us from time immemorial. The idea that kids can take puberty blockers without there being any long term consequence is nonsense. There is a court order against kids taking them because they can't possibly understand what the long term consequences are.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
You know that's what Lorna Slater said, not me?Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
Why quote her when what she says goes against a court order?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
If you mean the Keira Bell case, that was overturned by the Appeals Court. It's an English case, that is going to the Supreme Court,.Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
Edit. The Supreme Court have refused to hear the case.
https://www.scottishlegal.com/articles/supreme-court-refuses-application-for-appeal-in-puberty-blockers-case
BREAKING⎜ Transgender swimmers in elite women's competition effectively banned by governing body - as new 'open' category created: Swimming's world governing body has voted to effectively ban transgender athletes from competing in women's elite races. VIA
@SkyNews
The governing body deserve a lot of credit for this. At last, some grown-up decisions being made to ensure women's sport isn't rendered redundant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
This is good news for sporty females, they must have been thinking what is the point of putting in all the hard work if a man can self identify as a women and take the gold medals.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
http://youtu.be/e9SSh4D-nkQ
My understanding was that it wasn't a simple case of a man going "right, I'm a girl now" and rocking up to the qualification tournaments etc the next day to compete against other girls.Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
They had to have been going through official change for a significant period of time, impacting their everyday life. It wasn't something they could only be/say for sake of sporting advantage.
Apologies if that's not what you meant anyway, but it's how it sounded in your post.
None of that is to say that it's the wrong decision. It feels correct on balance.
They could have went through puberty as a male which was the problem. They then always had a physical advantage regardless of further hormones ect after that.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
Obviously the correct decision. Hopefully that will be the end of it as it is such a small issue to the hundreds of other problems trans people face
Yep - that's why I ultimately agree with the decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
My comment was around the phrasing used by the OP which made it sound like the current/old system was a lot more open to manipulation than I believe it to be.
It doesn't matter about surgery or what you identify as, it's all about hormone level. Their testosterone has to be bellow a certain level for 12 months before an event. Of course like taking steroids or other substances this could technically be abused, I'd think it'd be unlikelyQuote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
If you check out the you tube attached in the OP bud, you will see that Lia Thomas went from ranked 462 in the male category to being the number 1 female, this is not because he/she became a better swimmer its because he/she entered a different category.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
Obviously the checks and balances were not in place, because to count back as far as ranked 462 to becoming number 1 is unheard of in elite sport, this case is so clear cut that even trans people are questioning if it was all a plant to discredit transwomen in woman's sport.
If you look at him/her on the podium it really is like something out of a South Park episode.
Him?Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
Good decision and surprised it’s taken them so long. I expect other sports bodies to follow suit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok I'll edit this part no offence to anyone meantQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It's more than simply about hormone levels. Women aren't small men with less testosterone. The benefits of male puberty are never negated regardless of adult hormones being suppressed. The female skeleton, weight distribution, lung capacity, muscle density and biological functions associated with reproduction all impede ability to perform and train.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
The length of time of waiting 24 months isn't necessarily an issue if you can compete at the Olympics in your 40s like Laurel Hubbard - twice the age of most of the field. The length of the career of a Trans Identifying athlete can be extended significantly because the advantages of male puberty allow it if competing in a female category. And, of course, they don't face the prospect of careers being paused for pregnancy and childbirth.
FINA's decision seems wise and fair. Sebastian Coe implied today IAAF will likely follow suit.
I was answering the question of what it takes to complete in the Olympics and it simply comes down to the testosterone level. I agree with you and said on another post that that is unfair as if they have gone through puberty they will always have an advantage, regardless of testosterone levelQuote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
Women's hearts are also different to men's.
A pregnant woman can increase their heart and blood volumes by up to 50%. That's some advantage 😉
:aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Generally speaking then, it's not something people can just enter into lightly and claim on a whim they are a woman in order to gain a competitive advantage is all I was getting at. It's part of a wider lifestyle change they'd be fairly committed to.
The competitive advantage that is gained is a separate argument, one that has now been addressed by the authorities (at least within swimming).
Rachel Boyle is missing a trick...Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61958346
A tricky issue for sure.
Very complex. I'm sure there's a discussion to be had about how these things work - it's really just a continuation of the typical discussion around public spaces - but I'm not sure how suing them is the answer in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Would it be in the press if she just filed a complaint. Surely there is a line and coming to a female rape group still presenting as a man in male clothing is past thatQuote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
Male clothing? Not being deliberately obtuse but if we're talking trousers & shirt/jumper then I'm sure most women would wear such garments, maybe not every day, but at some point. Unsure what the dress code for a rape support group would be?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Not all women have their hair or make-up "done" 24/7 either.
Going by the article, it sounds like this woman has had a very traumatic life, and being "forced" to discuss it candidly in front of people that make her uncomfortable isn't going to make her feel any better.
But, the other party in the story clearly has had a traumatic situation also (why else would they be there), where is their safe space, in a group of CIS men?
Unsure what the answer is but sounds like things could have been handled a lot better, starting with permission & agreement from those within the group.
No question there are an increasing number of folk (the majority of them teenagers/young adults in my experience) who present as what I'd say is gender neutral in the way they dress/hairstyle etc. The impression I get from this case though it that the transgender woman presented to almost all intents and purposes as a man, an understandably unsettling experience for the others in attendance to deal with in a meeting of this nature . As you say, based on the facts presented, this was not well handled.Quote:
Originally Posted by speedy_gonzales
People with a ***** should not be part of a safe space or safe group for female victims of sexual abuse or sexual assault. I don’t care what they self identify as, it’s deeply wrong.
i think it's understandable why "Sarah" could have felt uncomfortable, but my first thought is what is the point in suing, will winning money make her feel a lot better, will suing them help them support others if having to pay out seriously affects the charity
apologies if misunderstood bbc article
Could suing the charity not enable the decision to be used as a legal precedent in future cases if she is successful?Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
If her heart is in the right place, it's not about the money. And I would hope that a decent judge would set any damages at a minimal amount.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Indeed. I'm making an assumption that's what's at the heart of her taking the legal route.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
https://news.sky.com/story/tom-daley...tions-12641281
Tom Daley is missing the point here IMHO.
How awful for her and shows where there are very real conflicts in this whole thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Simply because it doesn’t and will never affect him. Trans men aren’t going to rob him of glory.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
fair point, i should have pointed out i wasn't thinking that she just wants a few ££ it's just i don't understand her actions here, i always think when someone is suing it normally relates to some monetary compensation, therefore if this is not about cash for whatever reason could she not maybe have just brought it to the publics attention and maybe it would have led to the charity taking her(and others) opinions about privacy in to consideration in future, start a petition etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
lets hope so and PB is correct that it will at least highlight how awkward the girl must have felt and lead to a different approach from the charity
Surely the point is that the reality of biological sex has to be acknowledged for woman's sport to exist and that it has to be a protected category, for biological woman only so that it can be a fair sport. There does seem to be a deep seated misogyny in all of this it's like he's saying, I don't care about what happens in woman's sport. Its only men's sport that counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
The world's best female swimmer is turning the trans debate into some kind of clown show, take a look at this
https://youtu.be/_sgjc29QCGo
Yes Sharon Davies, who has been a really strong voice on this issue, made that point about his misguided comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
I like satire and this hits the nail on the head.Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
What a mockery all of this is. It's part of a wider smokescreen that allows our "owners" to laugh as they rake it in as the ordinary pleb gets poorer and poorer.
9% inflation, 100% increases in energy prices, pathetic public sector pay rises, social housing crisis, deep rooted corruption in every walk of life, establishment paedophile cover ups, it's almost like the elite can do as they please. Meanwhile we are told that trans rights and self identification is a vital debate. It's taking the piss.
Cyclists claim trans riders still competing in British Cycling events - BBC Sport
Two female cyclists claim that transgender athletes are still competing in British Cycling women's events.
They say they have lost out on ranking points and prize money to trans women.
British Cycling said: "Existing licence holders remain unaffected by the suspension of the policy, provided the requirements in place at the time of application were met."
However, the female cyclists who spoke to the BBC claim there was no mention of this before they complained and it's not specified in the original suspension statement on the organisations' official website.
I thought this was a good article on the subject.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/03/o...hare&fs=e&s=cl
Interesting and potentially very significant ruling:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929
US Republican senator Josh Hawley is one of the lunatics who tried to stop the certification of Biden's win by Congress on January 6th 2021. He is also one of America's main advocates of the culture wars, including whipping up hysteria about transgender Americans. In a Senate hearing he crashed and burned as his insidious bigotry got shut down.
https://youtu.be/QzlczkYpX_w
Tavistock childhood gender identity clinic to shut down:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62335665
..to be replaced by 2 new centres.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
This is especially important in relation to the massive efforts that are going in to encouraging women to get involved in sport and to stick at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
Please tell me that is a spoof? PLEASE?Quote:
Originally Posted by 147lothian
Habitually outspoken stuff but much to agree with IMHO:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...the-tavistock#
Friend of mine works in mental health and says the Tavi was regarded as an utter sham. Mostly staffed by posh, chin stroking “therapists” with a sense of entitlement but dubious qualifications. It won’t be missed.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
https://twitter.com/JournalistJill/s...AOIy5fTrQ&s=19
This is from Ireland - self ID in women's sport.
The team is an inclusive LGBTQ+ team. It was not an all female match. The LGBTQ+ team won, but it was always known that the team was 'mixed'.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
https://reduxx.info/irish-lgbtq-incl...-junior-final/
In the Ladies Gaelic Football Junior J Shield...so women's sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Yes. The article from a 'pro-female' website that I linked has a broader article about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
If anything it's the ruling body that might be at fault for allowing the obviously adult person to play in a junior tournament
https://www.irishcentral.com/news/co...-gaeil-aeracha
Surely sport is about seeing you push yourself to the limits. What enjoyment can that big bald trans woman get from beating girls in a very physical sport. Thankfully more and more sports aren't allowing this, we'll look back and shake our heads at the fact this happened
Womens sport is about increasing participation for females in an environment where they feel safe, are not disheartened or discouraged. Increasing female participation in sport is good for their health and well-being and benefits in terms of long term health outcomes/impact on the health service. It's about more than the winning. But just being able to win at all will help encourage participation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Being safe is important too.
This is exactly why both the rugby league and rugby union have banned transwomen, ie men who identify as woman from taking part in woman's rugby. A common sense approach to keep women safe and encourage more females take up the sportQuote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
Notice Putin picking up the Daily Mail and Telegraph’s obsession with ‘wokery’ and trans issues.
More likely, though, he has been feeding them their lines on these subjects for a couple of years!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/g...lobe-qn5thkz5n
Is rewriting Joan of Arc as not female really progress?!
https://archive.ph/jgRD7
Edinburgh University urged to review ‘dangerous’ policy on trans students
Given the source of that piece, I'd be more interested in a more balanced view. One that, for example, doesn't use "he/him" would be a good start 🙂Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
I've followed this story on Twitter this week, and it's really difficult to get that balance. Everything out there seems to be polarised.
https://mobile.twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1559612403498852354Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Joanna cherry shared the clip too and criticised the actions
Regardless of the source those quotes and actions attributed to someone in an office purportedly fighting for equality and equity seems at odds with concept of professionalism if nothing else…Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Ps I agree with you about the referring to her as a man. Also I noticed at the bottom they reference themselves as feminists which is fine. But also they say child protection. Out of order I think where's the link to changing gender and child molestation, shockingQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
What did you think of his threatening behaviour towards women. He’s a big guy behaving aggressively and is as ideologically motivated as the women who oppose his views.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I would urge anyone interested to look at what the article says and watch the footage. If that was directed at another group, it would surely be a “hate crime”? Appalling behaviour.
Yip.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
According to Wings, she has now been suspended by the SNP.
It's all very complex, but that's something that puts me off someone's opinions/thoughts from the get go. Deliberately giving someone the wrong pronoun in an attempt to make some sort of point. Adds nothing to the debate and shows the author up as classless.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I think that is the whole point. He is a man, end of.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
What was classless was the guy's intimidation tactics at a protest. Running up to someone, much smaller than yourself, and screaming witch in their face is appalling.
We have to also consider the language used in terms of hate crime, as well as aggression and intimidation. The very argument used by proponents of gender self identification should also apply here. Calling a woman a witch in this context is a very loaded comment in the context of feminist protest and is at the very least indicative of the guys underlying misogyny.
Women are getting a raw deal right now
@antibarbie
Fringe venue
@Gildedballoon
made one toilet “cubicles and urinals” and another “gender neutral”, so in effect doubling the male provision. I was faced with an actual man, not a trans identifying one, just an entitled one, coming out of cubicle the “GN” one. As victim of SA these facilities make me feel unsafe, but I’m expected to end my boundaries where male feelings begin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
I've left out the first part of your comment... as it's not for me to say one way or the other... but I totally agree with the rest of it.
If this person wants to reduce the amount of unacceptable and discriminatory behaviour, they might want to start by looking in a mirror.
On a slightly more political note: What were the SNP thinking when they employed this person?
:rolleyes:
Maybe I've mistaken something here, but I think she wishes to referred to as "she" - that's the point. Deliberately going against those wishes is unnecessary and poor behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfurryhibby
I'm not talking about the actual incident.
Bit silly from the GB. There are gender-neutral, or all-gender, toilets in the Queen's Hall, Summerhall, Pleasance and Burrell Collection. These are places I've been in recently, so can't say if this is widespread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Do these places also have male and female only toilets. It's OK having neutral toilets but not if it's at the price of female toiletsQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Most of them have those facilities as permanent, with no separate M/F ones. The only difference is that the Pleasance also has a temporary portaloo, with M/F. Presumably that will get removed after the Festival, leaving the permanent neutral ones for the students etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Edit. Actually, the Burrell has 3 separate facilities. Male, female and all-genders.
The Pleasance has male and female too. There is very few neutral toilets in the unis 800+ buildings. All new builds will be going with male female and neutral, which is probably rightQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It's a very loaded issue, particularly when you are an activist? Maybe less so when you are Joe or Jo Bloggs.Quote:
Originally Posted by danhibees1875
I wonder, if a white skinned person, started calling themselves black, whilst accusing others of discrimination because they see and point out the obvious (that they are not) is their view the only thing that matters?
Not sure if that's a useful analogy, but it springs to mind.
There's a lot at stake here. Earlier in this thread I posted about Edinburgh Rape Crisis and intrusion of a man (who self identifies as a woman) into that service, which is a protected safe space for women. That "safe space" issue takes precedence over an individuals right to assert their self identification in my view. It's close to my heart and has had a direct impact on someone I know.
I'm all for people being able to undergo gender reassignment surgery, with the appropriate provisos and checks etc. However, I'm intolerant of aggressive misogyny and the undermining of women's rights.
Can't say I saw any M/F ones. My weak bladder means I have been in a few different ones 😁..at least 3 locations in the Courtyard area. Happy to be corrected about the wider area, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Agreed about the new builds.
Sorry speaking about inside. There's alot of work retrofitting toilets to be unisex on campuses. They are really good. Each cubicle has toilet, sink handryer so safety isn't an issue, not that it probably ever was.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Good to hear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
I'm a big fan of cultural changes being slow and natural, so that society has a chance to adjust. That process often starts with younger people, and what you describe fits in with that.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/home-of-the-deranged/Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Adamson sounds like a bona fide nut job.
This is all very similar to the trans activists who formed a circle round the Emmeline Pankhurst statue in Manchester this year to prevent women from gathering there, when masked men who would claim to be on the 'right side of history' were screaming fascist **** and ****ing TERF's at the mainly middle aged women. Highlighting the deep misogyny that exists within the trans movement.Quote:
Originally Posted by LewysGot2
It is easy to see why the trans activists have real hatred towards women who stand up for women's sex based rights, it's because this highlights the fact that there are only two sexes men and women and that biological sex is real, so women's spaces needs to be protected so that men can't enter.
It seems like the only thing trans activists campaign for with the tired old manta transwomen are women is for the rights of men who identify as women to enter women's spaces this could be women's sport, women's changing rooms, women's prisons, rape crisis center's or women's toilets. This highlights the conflict between women's sex based rights and trans rights.
https://www.sportskeeda.com/tennis/n...lpga-tour-card
Judy Murray gets the JK Rowling treatment for expressing a perfectly reasonable view.
Ridiculous. Golf is up there with one of the sports that will clearly benefit from someone going through male puberty. A shame on the female that loses a tour card because of thisQuote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
I'm **** at golf, I'm sure JK would beat me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Well am sure she plays with magical balls... 😁Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Is golf not a game of skill rather than strength?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Quidditch anyone?Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
No. Hence although some have tried like Annika Sorenstamand Michelle wie, to make the cut in a few male tournaments they have never managed. Men drive much further due to obvious strength difference. Male tournaments are open so why don't trans athletes try to compete in that. Probably because they wouldn't be able to make it, so take a place of a female to be professionalQuote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
You do realise that Hailey Davidson also failed to get through the third round against women? She wasn't in the top 106!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Quote:
Davidson shot a +3 over three rounds at the Stage I qualifier at Mission Hills Country Club in Rancho Mirage, Calif. The cut was -2. 106 female golfers shot -2 or better, each of them at least 5 strokes better than Davidson.
Quote:
So while people are yelling about trans athletes taking spots away from other women, it was the cisgender women themselves who voted to allow trans athletes in the LPGA.
And it's not all about distance, all the advances in golf balls and clubs have made the game of golf rediculously easy to get distance, just as well skill is involved as well.
She's through to the qualifier tour and will get a tour place is she finishes high enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
And if you are saying you think males don't have an advantage playing golf, then I believe you are saying something you don't believe is true just to prove a point frankly.
Makes you wonder why top female golfers don't compete on the far more lucrative men's tour?Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
I think the answer is that they either aren't good enough or that a man's natural strength gives them a massive advantage.
Aye thats why there’s tees for men and tees for females…you’re thinking of dartsQuote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Along with ageism and sexism…after all she’s “only Andy’s old mum” what right has she to comment on this…Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!