Paid Members BomberPat Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 there is definitely something uniquely rotten about transphobia, isn't there? Outside of your full-blown C18 nutters, most racists and homophobes and bigots of other stripes seem to at least have other interests, whereas TERFs just do nothing but Tweet about trans people and pretend that they care about women's sports while never expressing a single opinion about them when there isn't a trans woman involved, and just get involved in these little mutual appreciation societies where they reinforce each other's bullshit until they fall increasingly down far-right rabbit holes while still being utterly convinced that they represent the views of the majority of people, and that they're the rational, sensible ones. That's Linehan and Rowling that have both allowed transphobia to lead them into Holocaust denial. Full-on "are we the baddies?" behaviour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Danger Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 24 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: If I was a billionaire, I promise you, you would never ever hear from me ever again. What are these people thinking? Too busy over on Bacon Island I bet. âWhatâs that Mr Jenas, you wonât call Arteta a cunt on live tv? Well, remember that âappropriately agedâ lady you had an encounter with over in the Gary Mabbutt suiteâŚ.â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 Just now, Mr_Danger said: Too busy over on Bacon Island I bet. âWhatâs that Mr Jenas, you wonât call Arteta a cunt on live tv? Well, remember that âappropriately agedâ lady you had an encounter with over in the Gary Mabbutt suiteâŚ.â "No need to make this public. How does a 1988 Holland shirt sound to keep you quiet?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ronnie Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 3 minutes ago, BomberPat said: they care about women's sports while never expressing a single opinion about them when there isn't a trans woman involved I don't think you have to be some sort of participant in something to believe that something isn't right. I have no interest at all in beauty pageants or frisbee competitions but I've no doubt I'd find it very wrong if news broke that people with a certain melanin content per cell were excluded. I'd have an opinion on that irrespective of my customary lack of interest. Given that most sports are single-sex presumably because of biological advantages that come with male bodies in certain environments, it shouldn't be hard to credit why plenty of people think it unfair if cis women are competing with trans women. "This woman trained with dedication for this event but was denied her gold medal because a [man/trans woman who would've been unimpressive against cis men] was allowed to compete" is an opinion which would be easy to have even if you wouldn't normally be found on your settee watching the boxing or a marathon, regardless of which part of the the parenthesised text you'd strike out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westlondonmist Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 She really seems to have gone past the point where she can claim she is just supporting women's rights (I'm not saying some women's concerns about things about understanding the difference of growing up female in a male dominated society aren't reasonable), but it seems like a cover up excuse a lot of the time. I often wonder why a lot of celebrities seem to view themselves as the voice of reason. A confidence or arrogance from being successful and wealthy possibly. I can understand if they are making jokes about society, as with a comedian, but in general celebrities should just shut their cake hole especially if they know their views will be divisive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted March 14 Moderators Share Posted March 14 (edited) I agree with what you're saying but it does feel like the likes of Linehan are using it as a stick to beat trans people with rather than giving a shit about how fair or unfair it is for the women. I think what pat meant was that they wouldn't give a shit about any other injustices in womens' sport that are unrelated to trans issues.  Edit: in response to Ronnie Edited March 14 by Chest Rockwell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Danger Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) Itâs not that thereâs not a valid points and discussions about trans people in sports to be had itâs that itâs one of the only points mostly blokes ever voice concern with. Along with shared spaces too. Itâs a bit like how every internet discussion used to end in comparing things to Nazism as a get out of jail free card when your back was against the wall. Something old J.K has managed to knit together nicely. Edited March 14 by Mr_Danger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Lion_of_the_Midlands Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 2 hours ago, deathrey said: I'd really looked forward to reading the Harry Potter books to my kids but her comments make me want to burn the books. Many of her supporters are right behind you. Nothing beats a good old fashioned book burning to scorch away the evilness of trans.  I am of course joking, she should as suggested shut the fuck up. I don't think thst just applies to billionaires though, that applies to a lot of folks. People are not willing to admit that they don't know something these days. I am fully willing to admit I don't know enough about trans issues to comment. How could I as a middle aged (hopefully) white straight man from the shires know what dealing with trans issues is like. I try and learn enough to be respectful of people's rights but mostly I try and be as kind as I can. It's difficult and a lot of the time I don't succeed but I do try. The rest of the time I just shut the fuck up because people have enough going on without me making it worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathrey Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Lion_of_the_Midlands said: Many of her supporters are right behind you. Nothing beats a good old fashioned book burning to scorch away the evilness of trans. Especially because the books are essentially about inclusiveness and acceptance of others that are different to you!  I do agree with you though, it seems shutting up and learning or just not having an opinion on something is no longer an option for most people. I get that inclusive spaces is a complex issue. I believe trans women are women and have no issues in sharing a bathroom, changing room etc with them but I am not a victim of domestic abuse, serious sexual assault etc so I know I can not speak for those women and can understand that they may not feel comfortable in those situations. Its complex. You can acknowledge that without being anti-trans. I know I am not best placed to voice an opinion or make decisions about this kind of thing so I shut up and let those who know more do the talking. Edited March 14 by deathrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 For an example of the type of hysteria that is completely unwarranted, see the shitstorm around park runs. Fucking PARK RUNS. The funniest was when one of the news channels went down to get opinions on it, and everyone was just "Yeah, no one actually gives a shit" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 4 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said: I agree with what you're saying but it does feel like the likes of Linehan are using it as a stick to beat trans people with rather than giving a shit about how fair or unfair it is for the women. I think what pat meant was that they wouldn't give a shit about any other injustices in womens' sport that are unrelated to trans issues. Very much so. You can have legitimate discussions or debates on trans athletes in sport, but I'm not inclined to take it very seriously when you never express any other interest in women's sports that isn't an excuse to further attack trans people, particularly when every other Tweet on your timeline is about attacking trans women too. Similar to how JK Rowling as a supposed champion of "women's rights" never finds the time to publicly express a statement on, for example, abortion rights being under threat in America, but Tweets multiple times a week on transphobia, which makes you think that her priorities are probably more about attacking trans people than they are about defending women in general. If you are setting yourself up as someone who cares about the sanctity of women's sports but have nothing to say about, for example, Gymnasts for Change, the abuse of young women in Indian wrestling by men at the highest levels of government, and never showing any interest in any individual games or matches, but losing your shit every time a trans women comes 138th in a marathon, I'm going to come to the quite reasonable conclusion that it's not about women's sports.  On top of that, there was a Canadian meta-study last year looking at data from between 2011 and 2021 that showed that either trans athletes on average have no biomedical advantage over cisgender athletes, or that the data isn't conclusive enough to show that they do, that many of the justifications for excluding trans athletes are unscientific and inconsistent, and that trans athletes are sufficiently under-represented in the higher echelons of sport that the idea that people are "pretending" to transition just in order to win at women's sports is a complete fallacy. One of the big talking points from people opposed to trans women in sport was Laurel Hubbard, the weightlifter who competed in the 2020 Tokyo Olympics - she finished last in her category, with 13 (presumably) cisgender women outscoring her, but she's still held up as a scare story robbing a spot from other women. She's not used as an example because she's winning, but because as a weightlifter she has a physique and look that can be easily shared on social media as "mannish" and "unfeminine" and get people riled up about "men in women's sports" - the victims of that aren't just trans women, but any woman who doesn't fit a narrow category of what a woman "should" look like, and long predates the present moral panic about trans women in sports; Caster Semenya and Dutee Chand most recently for how intersex athletes have been caught up in all this, but there were female sprinters in the 1936 Olympics accused of being secretly men, and jokes about young female Soviet gymnasts actually being older men were everywhere in the '80s and '90s, to a far greater degree than anyone expressing concerns over those gymnasts being subjected to physical and sexual abuse. We're wrestling fans, we all saw how much Chyna was ridiculed as a "man" when she debuted in the WWF, or how Joey Styles called a low blow on Nicole Bass as being hit "in the balls". If a female athlete reaches any prominence at all, while not looking like a narrow, stereotypical ideal of what a female athlete should look like, or if they achieve at a higher level than their male counterparts are comfortable with, they're attacked as men, and there's a long and horrible history of them being subject to invasive and insulting tests to "prove" that they're women, and being abused and insulted in the press too. Outside of sports, it's the bathroom policing thing - I know of at least two cis women who have mentioned to me that a woman in the bathroom had complimented them on how well they were "passing", because they were over six feet tall, so had been read as a trans woman. But they weren't trans, and being over six feet tall might be unusual for a woman but still falls well within normal cis female biology, so it was just a judgement based on policing what a woman is supposed to look like - and it's just a matter of luck that, having been read as trans, that interaction was a positive one and not something worse. It's the flip side of the coin to policing trans women based on unclear data, prejudice and incomplete and inconclusive ideals of what constitutes a biomedical signifier of "sex" - to use one simple example, the primary method of deciding in which gender category someone should compete at the Olympics is checking testosterone levels, but that's not a cut and dry deciding factor - there's not insignificant crossover between a woman with high testosterone and a man with low testosterone, yet high testosterone doesn't make that woman a man any more than low testosterone makes that man a woman; especially when you would expect a peak athlete to have different levels of testosterone than an average woman. And, of course, men are never tested for their testosterone levels as a matter of interrogating gender, and there's no restrictions on allowing trans men to compete as men in the Olympics, it's only trans women who are policed on those grounds. So apparently the integrity of sex-based competition only matters in one direction, and that direction just happens to be in correlation with the direction that most anti-trans policy in all other walks of life is pointing. I'm also just generally uncomfortable with the idea of policing this vague category of "biological" or "genetic" advantages in sport. If a male athlete naturally produces more testosterone than his opponents, we're not policing that, but by the logic used against trans athletes, is that not a biological advantage? If a basketball player stands over 7' tall, should they be restricted from playing the sport because their height is a "biological advantage" that might give them an advantage over shorter players? There are athletes like Michael Phelps, whose body produces less lactic acid than the average person, which is by definition a biological advantage, yet no one tried to police him out of the sport for it. Almost every peak athlete has a "biological advantage" of some kind or another, because that's how you end up being a peak athlete, yet it's a phrase we only use when wanting to restrict trans women's access to sports. The real disadvantages women face in sports are economic, social and cultural, not biological, yet I don't recall seeing JK Rowling or any of her followers express concern over the comparative lack of funding received by women's sports, lack of coverage in women's sports in the media, socio-cultural barriers to entry, nor about any of the abuse that happens to girls and young women in sports at the hands of cisgender men and women, which can't be blamed on those dastardly transes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 53 minutes ago, deathrey said: get that inclusive spaces is a complex issue. I believe trans women are women and have no issues in sharing a bathroom, changing room etc with them but I am not a victim of domestic abuse, serious sexual assault etc so I know I can not speak for those women and can understand that they may not feel comfortable in those situations. Its complex. You can acknowledge that without being anti-trans. I know I am not best placed to voice an opinion or make decisions about this kind of thing so I shut up and let those who know more do the talking. You're better placed than the rest of us, I'd argue! There seems to be a lot of fallacious "slippery slope" arguments around the subject, where if you discuss a theoretical you can have one opinion but reality is more complex.  Asking the (cis) women in my life about the impact of trans women is interesting because when pushed there's definitely an opinion that some of the victories of feminism over the years might be under threat, by the theoretical incursion of those they consider "men" into female spaces.  But it's not actually something any of them have ever experienced in real life so outside of the conversation it's not like trans women have any actual impact on their rights. Similarly with sports, if you could show that a particular sport was being changed noticeably by the participation of trans women then that might be an argument to exclude trans women from those sports on the basis of fairness.  But that really hasn't happened yet at a high level.  I've read some things about college sports in the US but not seen any actual concrete examples. We are still somewhat at the beginning of this change to be fair - identifying as trans seems a lot more common amongst the current teenage population than it was even 10 years ago so maybe those people will mature and go into sports in enough numbers to make the argument less theoretical.  I doubt it though.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Lion_of_the_Midlands Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 I am probably wrong but this is my take on the trans women in sport argument. Through the history of women's sport cheating has usually been defined as taking drugs to make you more like a man. For example, the women's 400 metre world record was set in 1985 by Marita Koch, an athlete with many accusations and some evidence of steroid use. The second fastest time is Jarmila Kratochvilova set in 1983, again similar allegations. So consciously or unconsciously people who want to think in this way consider trans athletes as somehow cheating because they were men who are now women and the way to cheat as a woman is to be more like a man so trans athletes must be cheating. I hope I have explained that in a way thst makes sense. Until we define drug cheats in women's sports better it will continue to be difficult to get past the wrong headed thinking that trans women are somehow at an advantage in sports.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 Slightly off topic, but I still think there should be a "drugs" Olympics just for those on juice. Imagine seeing someone run the 100m in under 7 seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted March 14 Paid Members Share Posted March 14 There is an "Enhanced Games" being touted already. You can probably guess by the language it's being marketed with the kind of person who advocates it. https://enhanced.org/ Quote Backed by the worldâs top venture capitalists, the Enhanced Games is the Olympics of the future. When 44% of athletes already use performance enhancements, it is time to safely celebrate science.  One of the backers is Peter Thiel, which should tell you everything you need to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.