President Biden

[king canary 7,562]

2 minutes ago, YellowYawner said:

My answer to the question was leaning to "yes' so it's going to be the same answer to male or female sports specifically.

I guess I think where we are going is the fact that people are not going to be referred to as a "trans person" but rather their chosen gender. So it won't be seen as a trans woman setting the new 100m record - It will be seen as a woman. Many won't like that for many reasons, but thats where I see this going. The points you put out in your rugby example are the valid criticisms and part of why this is so complicated. Ultimately I think women's sport in the future won't be destroyed but will have many participants who were born male, or as they would genuinely feel and have lived with until transition "in the wrong body" To be clear though I don't actually know what the 'right' answer is. I just think this is where it's heading, changing attitudes in society will eclipse anything else now. You've only got to look at how JK Rowling was shut down. It will happen in sport I feel.

On a separate note I do think that the forced lowering of testosterone is going to be looked on poorly by future attitudes. Not to mention the fact that it was even put to someone who is actually female.

The thing is though, the affect won't be the same on mens and womens sports- very few transmen are going to suddenly have more chances by their change of gender ID. Take the example of CeCe Telfer who went from 390th ranked mens hurdler in the US college circuit to the NCAA champion when she started running in the womens competitions. This isn't going to happen in reverse- there is no sport in the world where an average woman can suddenly become world class in the male field. So unfortunatley the question remains exclusive to women's sports.

I think this is partly what pisses so many women off- well meaning men happy to write off women's sports in the name of 'progress' when they don't actually have to face the consequences, with a nice side dish of being dismissed as a bigot if you complain.

[king canary 7,562]

9 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

You are missing what I'm getting at. You've set the rules and like them the way they are but in truth there have always been overlaps in gender even at physical levels. Who was that SA girl?

That said women do have more stamina - thats to do with the demands of pregnancy and childbirth. They should eventually make better long distance runners. The 100m is explosive strength not stamina.

 

That might be true if stamina was the only factor involves in running a marathon but it isn't. 

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

That might be true if stamina was the only factor involves in running a marathon but it isn't. 

Yes I know I'm stirring it up but trying to make people think out of the box. Bald simplistic definitions of male and female or even handicapped (Blades?) will become less defensible or awkward in todays society and increasing 'sport' and medical technology. Dont die on a hill of your own making.

[YellowYawner 6]

8 minutes ago, king canary said:

The thing is though, the affect won't be the same on mens and womens sports- very few transmen are going to suddenly have more chances by their change of gender ID. Take the example of CeCe Telfer who went from 390th ranked mens hurdler in the US college circuit to the NCAA champion when she started running in the womens competitions. This isn't going to happen in reverse- there is no sport in the world where an average woman can suddenly become world class in the male field. So unfortunatley the question remains exclusive to women's sports.

I think this is partly what pisses so many women off- well meaning men happy to write off women's sports in the name of 'progress' when they don't actually have to face the consequences, with a nice side dish of being dismissed as a bigot if you complain.

Careful. I've not written anything off and repeated the fact that I don't have the answer - nor do I think there is one. We also don't have to face the consequences of the difficulties transgender people face. 

I think it will be seen as women winning womens sport. Rightly or wrongly the constant referrals to them as 'transmen' and 'transwoman' will fade.

[king canary 7,562]

2 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes I know I'm stirring it up but trying to make people think out of the box. Bald simplistic definitions of male and female or even handicapped (Blades?) will become less defensible or awkward in todays society and increasing 'sport' and medical technology. Dont die on a hill of your own making.

You make the mistake of thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stuck in a box. I'm not. I've looked at evidence on both sides. As a left wing person it would be the much easier thing to go along with the current orthodoxy that suggests a trans woman is a woman in all ways and thus should be free to play in womens sports.

The hill is not of my making- as I said before I'd really recommend looking at Ross Tucker and his research on the issue. He's great at breaking down the data we have an what it indicates, rather than just making random claims about 'stamina' and the suchlike based on nothing as far as I can tell.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

You make the mistake of thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stuck in a box. I'm not. I've looked at evidence on both sides. As a left wing person it would be the much easier thing to go along with the current orthodoxy that suggests a trans woman is a woman in all ways and thus should be free to play in womens sports.

The hill is not of my making- as I said before I'd really recommend looking at Ross Tucker and his research on the issue. He's great at breaking down the data we have an what it indicates, rather than just making random claims about 'stamina' and the suchlike based on nothing as far as I can tell.

I will defer to your knowledge why a certain type of woman can only compete with similar certain types of women. Ditto for men. It seems to me a question of definition not of ability and self interest.

 

[king canary 7,562]

7 minutes ago, YellowYawner said:

Careful. I've not written anything off and repeated the fact that I don't have the answer - nor do I think there is one. We also don't have to face the consequences of the difficulties transgender people face. 

I think it will be seen as women winning womens sport. Rightly or wrongly the constant referrals to them as 'transmen' and 'transwoman' will fade.

I don't mean you specifically- just it is a fairly common element of the debate.

I personally don't agree with your reading of what will happen but we will see.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

24 minutes ago, king canary said:

You make the mistake of thinking anyone who disagrees with you is stuck in a box. I'm not. I've looked at evidence on both sides. As a left wing person it would be the much easier thing to go along with the current orthodoxy that suggests a trans woman is a woman in all ways and thus should be free to play in womens sports.

The hill is not of my making- as I said before I'd really recommend looking at Ross Tucker and his research on the issue. He's great at breaking down the data we have an what it indicates, rather than just making random claims about 'stamina' and the suchlike based on nothing as far as I can tell.

My thoughts on female endurance or stamina being greater than men came from medical conversations in the 1980s but it appears at a very quick glance there are many articles on exactly this subject  - women winning ultra endurance races vs men in 2017 to 2019 etc.. FT, Independent, BBC. So not baseless. Its an open academic discussion.

[YellowYawner 6]

4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

My thoughts on female endurance or stamina being greater than men came from medical conversations in the 1980s but it appears at a very quick glance there are many articles on exactly this subject  - women winning ultra endurance races vs men in 2017 to 2019 etc.. FT, Independent, BBC. So not baseless. Its an open academic discussion.

Yes. Fiona Kolbringer won the 2019 Transcontinental.

But that doesn't prove any gender is better, especially as all the previous 6 were won by males (with faster times) Although yes, the gap does close at the ultra endurance level.

But the companies you mention do get carried away and push their luck with the attention grabbing headlines

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

15 minutes ago, YellowYawner said:

Yes. Fiona Kolbringer won the 2019 Transcontinental.

But that doesn't prove any gender is better, especially as all the previous 6 were won by males (with faster times) Although yes, the gap does close at the ultra endurance level.

But the companies you mention do get carried away and push their luck with the attention grabbing headlines

I know KC seemed get upset with my blue-sky thoughts (surprised it gained as much traction as it did) but really I'm just trying to point out the fundamental flaws with all these genetic definitions. Where do we start, where do we stop? We must ban the Kenyans from long distance as they seem to have a genetic advantage and so on.  It's a cess pit best avoided.

Some individual athletics sports are now their own worst enemies with the ends seemingly to justify the means. Sport surely should be fun and for all.

There was also 'Paris' by the way etc.

Edited January 24, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[YellowYawner 6]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I know KC seemed get upset with my blue-sky thoughts (surprised it gained as much traction as it did) but really I'm just trying to point out the fundamental flaws with all these genetic definitions. Where do we start, where do we stop? We must ban the Kenyans from long distance as they seem to have a genetic advantage and so on.  It's a cess pit best avoided.

Some individual athletics sports are now their own worst enemies with the ends seemingly to justify the means. Sport surely should be fun and for all.

There was also 'Paris' by the way etc.

I understand what you are getting at. But surely you can see that the female / male difference is a pretty necessary separation. Female sport would barely exist without it.

You could look at tennis and divide them up into categories based on serve power to try to get a competition based on technical ability. But you wouldn't - it would be rubbish and that extra power is very much a valid part of the game. there are so many things you could create categories for (power, endurance) it becomes stupid - but gender isn't one of them.

Categorisation is needed in other sports though, think about most combat sports. If you didn't have weight categories just about every male competing would need to about 6 foot 4 minimum!

[king canary 7,562]

8 hours ago, YellowYawner said:

I understand what you are getting at. But surely you can see that the female / male difference is a pretty necessary separation. Female sport would barely exist without it.

You could look at tennis and divide them up into categories based on serve power to try to get a competition based on technical ability. But you wouldn't - it would be rubbish and that extra power is very much a valid part of the game. there are so many things you could create categories for (power, endurance) it becomes stupid - but gender isn't one of them.

Categorisation is needed in other sports though, think about most combat sports. If you didn't have weight categories just about every male competing would need to about 6 foot 4 minimum!

This is a great summary on why we seperate by sex in sport from the recent World Rugby consultation on the issue. 

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1314600663238742026?s=20

[Van wink 2,994]

9 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I know KC seemed get upset with my blue-sky thoughts (surprised it gained as much traction as it did) but really I'm just trying to point out the fundamental flaws with all these genetic definitions. Where do we start, where do we stop? We must ban the Kenyans from long distance as they seem to have a genetic advantage and so on.  It's a cess pit best avoided.

Some individual athletics sports are now their own worst enemies with the ends seemingly to justify the means. Sport surely should be fun and for all.

There was also 'Paris' by the way etc.

I’m not sure KC got upset, it was a reasonable discussion ( which is refreshing ) and putting a different perspective on things brings out the best arguments👍   I can’t say that you have persuaded me, far from it in fact, differences between the genders in the whole population are far greater than variations within a gender. There will always be exceptional individuals whose physiology enables them to compete, but these are rare exceptions.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Van wink

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

9 hours ago, YellowYawner said:

I understand what you are getting at. But surely you can see that the female / male difference is a pretty necessary separation. Female sport would barely exist without it.

You could look at tennis and divide them up into categories based on serve power to try to get a competition based on technical ability. But you wouldn't - it would be rubbish and that extra power is very much a valid part of the game. there are so many things you could create categories for (power, endurance) it becomes stupid - but gender isn't one of them.

Categorisation is needed in other sports though, think about most combat sports. If you didn't have weight categories just about every male competing would need to about 6 foot 4 minimum!

Of course I understand but I believe there is now a fatal flaw, a contradiction of terms  in professional athletic sports where it appears physical attributes dominate.

Currently we are on a sliding scale - the natural athlete, then some training, then lots of training, special diets, sports technology, high altitude training, drugs,/doping and so on and yes even genetics. The idea that anybody could compete as an amateur is gone. So in short what I'm calling out is the hypocrisy of allowing some enhancements or attributes but not others. None are normal (although oddly some of 'intersex' androgynous ones are!) 

These sports have lost their soul.  

I'll leave it there as I think in many way we agree. Pot stirred!

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

33 minutes ago, Van wink said:

I’m not sure KC got upset, it was a reasonable discussion ( which is refreshing ) and putting a different perspective on things brings out the best arguments👍   I can’t say that you have persuaded me, far from it in fact, differences between the genders in the whole population are far greater than variations within a gender. There will always be exceptional individuals whose physiology enables them to compete, but these are rare exceptions.

I don't disagree VW but as above I'm just playing devil's advocate and pointing out the inconsistencies in professional athletics. At the top level, they are now totally unnaturally technologically driven anyway! Where does the '6 million Dollar Man fit in' ?

That is in reality the future  - so such sports need to change their ethos and goals.

The London marathon is much more fun about the ordinary citizen runners than the so called elites!

Edited January 25, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[Van wink 2,994]

11 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I don't disagree VW but as above I'm just playing devil advocate and pointing out the inconsistencies in professional athletics. At the to top level, they are now totally unnatural technologically driven anyway! Where does the '6 million Dollar Man fit in' ?

That is in reality the future so such sport need to change their ethos and goals.

The London marathon is much more fun about the ordinary citizen runners than the so called elites!

You have highlighted a real problem in professional sport, add in the risks to fellow participants of collisions with super humans in rugby for example. But the issues you raise are surely something that could be addressed through proper evolution of regulation with enforcement.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

Just now, Van wink said:

You have highlighted a real problem in professional sport, add in the risks to fellow participants of collisions with super humans in rugby for example. But the issues you raise are surely something that could be addressed through proper evolution of regulation with enforcement.

Yes - I think I said somewhere late last night that problem is not these trans athletes but one of simple definition.

My own view is that you are either genetically (as in X and Y chromosomes)  male or female and beyond that if you are a 7 foot hairy Amazon with high testosterones that just tough on all the other little ladies (and some men 😉)

Sport isn't 'fair'

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

19 minutes ago, Van wink said:

You have highlighted a real problem in professional sport, add in the risks to fellow participants of collisions with super humans in rugby for example. But the issues you raise are surely something that could be addressed through proper evolution of regulation with enforcement.

Just FYI used to live in US. Many of my American colleagues even 20 to 30 years ago where preferring their kids to play soccer not NFL exactly because of that!

I believe the padding/helmets actually makes things worse!

Get sport back to it basics please. (Football I think is actually in a happier place at the moment - its still attached to its roots and pure athletic ability isn't everything - there's skill too - I was a fully paid up member of the left back alliance!)

[Van wink 2,994]

16 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes - I think I said somewhere late last night that problem is not these trans athletes but one of simple definition.

My own view is that you are either genetically (as in X and Y chromosomes)  male or female and beyond that if you are a 7 foot hairy Amazon with high testosterones that just tough on all the other little ladies (and some men 😉)

Sport isn't 'fair'

Good try😀 but IMO the more you reduce athletes ( generically speaking ) back to towards a less artificially enhanced physiology the more the genetic differences between men and women will become evident.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

The woman vs men was red herring for the deeper problem alluded too. The trans issue just brought it into focus. There will always be somebody or a technology that's better.

49 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Good try😀 but IMO the more you reduce athletes ( generically speaking ) back to towards a less artificially enhanced physiology the more the genetic differences between men and women will become evident.

 

However if I tell my wife I'm better in every physical attribute I'd better check my reactions are faster than hers  as I quickly duck. I'm amazed we let women drive given the above 😉

Edited January 25, 2021 by Yellow Fever

[Barbe bleu 809]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

However if I tell my wife I'm better in every physical attribute I'd better check my reactions are faster than hers  as I quickly duck. I'm amazed we let women drive given the above 😉

Guess that means the fighter jets will have to be parked near the crew room then.

[Speak3r 0]

14 hours ago, king canary said:

The thing is though, the affect won't be the same on mens and womens sports- very few transmen are going to suddenly have more chances by their change of gender ID. Take the example of CeCe Telfer who went from 390th ranked mens hurdler in the US college circuit to the NCAA champion when she started running in the womens competitions. This isn't going to happen in reverse- there is no sport in the world where an average woman can suddenly become world class in the male field. So unfortunatley the question remains exclusive to women's sports.

It won't for long. Eventually a footballer, starting in the US no doubt, will miss out on a pro contract to a transmale athlete and then questions about acceptable testosterone levels etc will surface. Maybe it will be an athlete missing out on the olympics.

There was a Louis Theroux documentary about transgender kids. In the future it won't be just the super strong transwomen you see. It will be people who to look at will look exactly as you expect someone of their chosen gender to look like.

Massive step forward from Biden. 

[TheGunnShow 5,910]

15 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

This seems a problem peculiar to sport

Why not do away with women and mens sport altogether? Same as in all other human endeavours. The best whatever win out. We are all born with certain genetic advantages and disadvantages let alone all the training and jiggery-pokery that now also goes on (cycling). The idea that even within any of the current disciplines all are equal is laughable.

And yes men may generally have more main strength but I beleive women have more stamina. Eventually they will outperform men in things such as marathons!

Not necessarily marathons. Ultra-marathons, probably.

[king canary 7,562]

21 minutes ago, Speak3r said:

It won't for long. Eventually a footballer, starting in the US no doubt, will miss out on a pro contract to a transmale athlete and then questions about acceptable testosterone levels etc will surface. Maybe it will be an athlete missing out on the olympics.

There was a Louis Theroux documentary about transgender kids. In the future it won't be just the super strong transwomen you see. It will be people who to look at will look exactly as you expect someone of their chosen gender to look like.

Massive step forward from Biden. 

I'm not sure I see that happening anytime soon- transmen are highly unlikely to be taking opportunities away from biological males in any sport I can think of due to the physiological differences. 

 

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

On 24/01/2021 at 18:34, Mr Angry said:

The Trump administration enacted over 180 anti-LGBTQ actions during its 4 years in office-and attempted many more.

I wager most of them were to do with the 'T' in that acronym?

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

On 25/01/2021 at 13:33, Speak3r said:

It won't for long. Eventually a footballer, starting in the US no doubt, will miss out on a pro contract to a transmale athlete and then questions about acceptable testosterone levels etc will surface. Maybe it will be an athlete missing out on the olympics.

There was a Louis Theroux documentary about transgender kids. In the future it won't be just the super strong transwomen you see. It will be people who to look at will look exactly as you expect someone of their chosen gender to look like.

Massive step forward from Biden. 

A transwoman athlete will change their looks through surgery, but will still have the muscle mass of a biological male and will win because of that. Changing one's jawline will have no effect on their athletic ability.

And most women do not agree with you that it is a massive step forward from Biden. It opens the door to women's refuges and other spaces to biological males. It opens women prisons to biological males. It means affirmative actions surrounding women are accessible to biological males. It's hardly surprising that the hashtag #BidencancelsWomen has appeared since his installation one week ago.

[Bill 1,788]

On 25/01/2021 at 13:43, TheGunnShow said:

Not necessarily marathons. Ultra-marathons, probably.

will they be required to wear a pair of (s)nickers

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

On 24/01/2021 at 20:34, kick it off said:

Never said there wasn't a debate to be had about it, I said it's a bunch of transphobes using the hashtag. Which if you look at the hashtag, it is. There's plenty of discourse around the topic which is reasoned and sensible. The people trying to claim Biden has "cancelled women" on that hashtag are almost exclusively the fringe elements and not the reasonable side of the discourse.

I didn't phrase it very well in the post when I said the whole issue, I meant the whole hashtag, rather than the wider issue of trans/women's rights.

I'm not sure if you have checked out the political position of everyone that has ever used the hashtag #BidenCancelsWomen but you seem to imply that you know exactly that. Of course you don't, but it helps your narrative to tuck away in a box those who don't fit into a particular profile that would support rather than undermine your line of reasoning. And if you were to really take a look at those claiming to have been cancelled by the Trans movement most of them don't fit into your idea of 'fringe elements', unless of course you wish to describe whole sections of the feminist movement as 'fringe'.

JK Rowling

Germaine Greer

Julie Bindel

Joe Phoenix

Kathleen Stock

Sarah Honeychurch

Anne Ruzlyo

Debbie Haynter

Heather Brunskell-Evans

Helen Steel

Robert Jensen

Meghan Murphy

Natasha Chart

Maya Fostater

Catherine Bennett

Claire Heuchan

Sheila Jeffreys

Mary Daly

Camille Paglia

This is a long and boring list of lefties who all share the characteristic of being both mainstream commentators of trans discourse and having been cancelled by the fringe elements of that movement. It's pretty clear that the real fringe elements are dictating presidential policy and Biden is nothing but a mouthpiece for the loons.

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

On 24/01/2021 at 11:46, keelansgrandad said:

But we are all equal in the eyes of the law. And Biden has entrenched that into law. There will be evangelical groups who condemn his actions. But that doesn't make it wrong. It is right. And he is Catholic, so for him, it is a decision that could conflict with his church.

There are millions of US citizens who will never agree with him but he has to do the right thing.

Sadly and mistakenly, Biden has evoked equality of outcome which is impossible and futile to achieve. He should be directing efforts towards equality of opportunity. 

[Rock The Boat 1,324]

On 25/01/2021 at 09:18, Yellow Fever said:

Of course I understand but I believe there is now a fatal flaw, a contradiction of terms  in professional athletic sports where it appears physical attributes dominate.

 

We'll leave that just there. No need to add more.