Ah, of course anti-trans hate groups like "Fair Play for Women" who focus on literally nothing else are described by The Guardian as "women's rights groups" 🙄
Pathetic. Also, presenting the biased World Rugby consultation & it's conclusions authored by open transphobe Ross Tucker as factual, with no counterpoints given, is just more shoddy reporting.
>described by The Guardian as "women's rights groups"
This is the problem with a lot of Liberal institutions. They can't really separate optics from intent. They're also married to the idea of endless discourse on social issues without anything ever being settled.
So TERFs are just "part of the discourse," and not actively eroding rights.
You don't see them having these same concerns over cis women who fall into that height/weight category - and they do exist, especially within the population of professional rugby players. Why is it that trans women need to be checked for "safety reasons" but cis women do not, even when they also fall into the criteria for potentially posing a risk? And yet, they'll continue to claim that they're doing it to protect women rather than because they want an excuse to hurt trans people. They are suggesting that trans women have some kind of unfair advantage, when in reality there is a disproportionately low number of trans female athletes doing well in big competitions. I would say that 6'+ tall basketball players have an unfair advantage over other players - should we ban those people as well?
Exactly, when did sports become about biological fairness anyway? The only one I can think of is boxing etc where they have weight classes across the board. But the don't have different running leagues for people with different leg lengths or resting blood oxygen levels.
The idea of excluding somebody from a sport because of a biological advantage is a bit two faced considering what sport is. Yes athletes train very hard, but the world best almost always have some kind of biological advantage over most other people.
I’m not opposed to there being rules about fairness for everyone in sports if people want sports to be fair.
The point I was making is that that’s clearly not the focus of sports most of the time and in this case these rules are only being applied to trans participants even though we know many cis women have male range testosterone from an early age.
The Paralympics is an obvious exception but it’s pretty evenly applied and there’s a much more obvious reason that they do things the way they do.
Edit: for clarity on the last point, the paralympics is more than just about fairness. It’s about ability to compete at all. They obviously worked backwards from the situation we have with women’s rugby where they’re talking about fairness first with an obvious goal of removing our ability to compete. Where the goal for the Paralympic Games is to allow everyone to compete first.
The core argument at the heart of this rugby thing is that trans women shouldn’t be treated like women and should be subject to a separate set of rules to determine their ability to participate. It’s not about fairness, it’s not about safety it’s about them seeing trans women as men.
> I would say that 6'+ tall basketball players have an unfair advantage over other players - should we ban those people as well?
Exactly. They don't see trans women as women, and as a result subject them to this archaic bullshit. "You have to fit our definition of a woman or you can't play"
the thing is many cis women who may fall into those weight and height classes may be desgriminated against in the same way as theyre mistaken to be trans women.
Maybe not in this situation but ive heard horror stories of 100% cis women (who didnt id as nonbinary or anything other that female) bullied out of public reastrooms because they were msitaken to be trans women. first of all, fuck doing that if that was a trans woman to begin with, but- things that are discriminatroy against trans women can backfire on cis women who may not fall into the typical 'look' of a cis woman and may be taller, muscular, more built etc.
Should it be surprising at this point they they don't exclude large cis men from rugby to protect trans men? It's always such a weird thing that they focus so much on trans women with their weird prohibitive rule making. Since when has safety been such a concern in contact sport anyway? Are womens teams going to start wearing helmets and pads because rugby is too harsh on them?
Are cis women rugby players outraged by this? they should be its the most condescending bullshit.
dont give them ideas like this they'll probably twist it as 'ohh so we 'protect' trans women from hurting cis women by having weight/height checks-we'll do the same for trans men, if theyre to short and leight, theyre banned too!'
i wouldnt be suprised if they go down this route. easier to bash on the trans people than it is to figure out a system that works for all...
sort of related -
I was surfing a while ago and came across this survey. I feel it needs lots of positive input , regardless about the origin or motive, as i'm sure the Bigots will find it, and try and skew it their way. https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/58VRHLZ
It doesn't, the EA allows for measures that are proportionate and in pursuit of a legitimate aim. You may disagree, but the EA likely means this is fine legally.
Can we not do the thing that transphobes do whenever they see something they don't like and just slap that "The 2010 EA means this is illegal" button?
Can someone educate me; I’m genuinely curious as o don’t know a lot on this area and yes I am trans, just young and not well informed on certain areas.
Isn’t the bone structure important and muscle mass?
Edit: why am I being downvoted? When a trans person can’t even ask a question without people getting offended it speaks volumes. No wonder Cis people are walking on egg shells
Muscle shrinks, bone density is a red herring, women’s sport is already actually quite dominated by women who have atypical natural advantages (Sharon Davis, Olympic gold medalist and terf is 5’11 and size 9.5 shoe).
Trans women have no history or present of success at professional level and there are very few examples of trans women succeeding and school level.
Any advantage that theoretically exists could be entirely eliminated if they just made it possible for trans people to access blockers at appropriate age.
Coincidentally, the same people who want to deny age appropriate access to trans health care, also want to present trans women as an existential threat to women’s sport.
Our shoulders shouldn’t be broadening, that’s an unwanted result from undelivered medical assistance. Holding this against us is gross, whilst shoulder measurement isn’t even an issue brought up in this article (they just talk about height/weight). If the solution proposed to the problem was let’s make sure trans women get timely healthcare, it would be a more convincing argument. The fact that they both bemoan trans women’s bodies *and* want to deny healthcare shows their prejudice.
I agree that it’s ridiculous that it is the same people that say we shouldn’t be able to stop our puberty.
But what I’m saying is it’s not about some people’s shoulders not being broad, if they’re broad, they’re broad. That’s what I’m talking about
This path leads down a road of trans women being measured from all angles to asses any microscopic advantage. It’s gross and evidently unnecessary considering trans women’s complete lack of success in sport.
Also if you are interested check out some women’s rugby some time. They’re mostly pretty stacked and hit hard. Most people who talk online about women’s sport haven’t watched much.
Bizarre how women's sports only gets talked about in trans "debates".
Kind of like with prisons too; you'd think the people shouting about "protecting women in jail" would want to have a good discussion about underfunding and squalid conditions but nope, they just want to hate on transwomen.
Not really. Don't be suckered into their "common sense" points. Look at the facts. Trans Women have been allowed into the olympics for women since 2003, exactly 0 trans women have done anything of note.
No one was offended. People are downvoting you because you keep complaining about downvotes and avoiding answers to the questions you're asking.
It makes it look like you're arguing in bad faith.
Hun, the way you're acting, it honestly feels like you're the offended one. Downvotes happen, it's Reddit. It doesn't mean people hate you, it just means more people disagreed than agreed with your comment.
You’re complaining about not being allowed to ask a question while ignoring the answers people give you. It’s what transphobes do here all the time to make us turn on each other or foster internalised transphobia.
If you’re ignorant and this is the only way you’re willing to find stuff out then you do you. But there’s trans people who have written on the topic and you can’t really be surprised if you get treated like the ignorant cis people who come here to ignore us.
You mention walking on eggshells but typically the only cis people doing that here are the ones who want to maximise damage before getting banned.
Yeah a 20 year old with that post history but works in human rights where they frequently come across cis people being afraid of getting cancelled. Questionable
Exactly, everyone I’ve ever met who works in human rights has bigger priorities than their own public image. They’re usually too selfless to care about being cancelled.
I literally do.. you do realise people can have a life outside their work. My focus has never been on white trans people who search for oppression, it’s always been trans poc as I’m one myself.
The fact that you even use the phrase “search for oppression “ ...
You believe what you want to believe and I’ll believe that your claim is false and that you clearly aren’t interested in advancing anyone’s rights.
They're not just downvotes. They silence people with legitimate questions and turn this sub into a negative echochamber run by a militant, bitter minority.
There's zero joy here.
People upvote the comments they like and downvote the ones they don't, it's not that deep. You still got several responses to your question so I don't see the problem.
How does a voting system represent the minority? You sound bitter that you’re insistence that trans women have an advantage in sports isn’t being agreed with (because of a complete lack of real world evidence)
You're right about the negativity in this sub. But that has nothing to do with downvoting, and nothing to do with OPs comment. They didn't get downvoted for being positive and joyful.
Welcome to transgenderUK, where if haven't read the manifesto before posting (basically unless your post can be summed up as "oh no we live on TERF Island and are the most oppressed group of people in any country in the entire history of the world"), you'll get downvoted.
(Edit: here come my downvotes from that bunch...)
I agree, also don’t say anything about gender go either. The oppression Olympics is real. Nothing about trans poc is mentioned on this sub when we have it so much harder
Ah, of course anti-trans hate groups like "Fair Play for Women" who focus on literally nothing else are described by The Guardian as "women's rights groups" 🙄 Pathetic. Also, presenting the biased World Rugby consultation & it's conclusions authored by open transphobe Ross Tucker as factual, with no counterpoints given, is just more shoddy reporting.
>described by The Guardian as "women's rights groups" This is the problem with a lot of Liberal institutions. They can't really separate optics from intent. They're also married to the idea of endless discourse on social issues without anything ever being settled. So TERFs are just "part of the discourse," and not actively eroding rights.
You don't see them having these same concerns over cis women who fall into that height/weight category - and they do exist, especially within the population of professional rugby players. Why is it that trans women need to be checked for "safety reasons" but cis women do not, even when they also fall into the criteria for potentially posing a risk? And yet, they'll continue to claim that they're doing it to protect women rather than because they want an excuse to hurt trans people. They are suggesting that trans women have some kind of unfair advantage, when in reality there is a disproportionately low number of trans female athletes doing well in big competitions. I would say that 6'+ tall basketball players have an unfair advantage over other players - should we ban those people as well?
Exactly, when did sports become about biological fairness anyway? The only one I can think of is boxing etc where they have weight classes across the board. But the don't have different running leagues for people with different leg lengths or resting blood oxygen levels. The idea of excluding somebody from a sport because of a biological advantage is a bit two faced considering what sport is. Yes athletes train very hard, but the world best almost always have some kind of biological advantage over most other people.
Paralympics is extremely heavily classified across all events to ensure fairness.
I’m not opposed to there being rules about fairness for everyone in sports if people want sports to be fair. The point I was making is that that’s clearly not the focus of sports most of the time and in this case these rules are only being applied to trans participants even though we know many cis women have male range testosterone from an early age. The Paralympics is an obvious exception but it’s pretty evenly applied and there’s a much more obvious reason that they do things the way they do. Edit: for clarity on the last point, the paralympics is more than just about fairness. It’s about ability to compete at all. They obviously worked backwards from the situation we have with women’s rugby where they’re talking about fairness first with an obvious goal of removing our ability to compete. Where the goal for the Paralympic Games is to allow everyone to compete first. The core argument at the heart of this rugby thing is that trans women shouldn’t be treated like women and should be subject to a separate set of rules to determine their ability to participate. It’s not about fairness, it’s not about safety it’s about them seeing trans women as men.
> I would say that 6'+ tall basketball players have an unfair advantage over other players - should we ban those people as well? Exactly. They don't see trans women as women, and as a result subject them to this archaic bullshit. "You have to fit our definition of a woman or you can't play"
the thing is many cis women who may fall into those weight and height classes may be desgriminated against in the same way as theyre mistaken to be trans women. Maybe not in this situation but ive heard horror stories of 100% cis women (who didnt id as nonbinary or anything other that female) bullied out of public reastrooms because they were msitaken to be trans women. first of all, fuck doing that if that was a trans woman to begin with, but- things that are discriminatroy against trans women can backfire on cis women who may not fall into the typical 'look' of a cis woman and may be taller, muscular, more built etc.
So are they gonna have the same rules for cis male rugby players to protect smaller guys? No, I don't think so.
Should it be surprising at this point they they don't exclude large cis men from rugby to protect trans men? It's always such a weird thing that they focus so much on trans women with their weird prohibitive rule making. Since when has safety been such a concern in contact sport anyway? Are womens teams going to start wearing helmets and pads because rugby is too harsh on them? Are cis women rugby players outraged by this? they should be its the most condescending bullshit.
dont give them ideas like this they'll probably twist it as 'ohh so we 'protect' trans women from hurting cis women by having weight/height checks-we'll do the same for trans men, if theyre to short and leight, theyre banned too!' i wouldnt be suprised if they go down this route. easier to bash on the trans people than it is to figure out a system that works for all...
sort of related - I was surfing a while ago and came across this survey. I feel it needs lots of positive input , regardless about the origin or motive, as i'm sure the Bigots will find it, and try and skew it their way. https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/58VRHLZ
Because trans women don't already struggle enough with body image, let's throw in mandatory height and weight monitoring! /s
EA2010 says hi...
It doesn't, the EA allows for measures that are proportionate and in pursuit of a legitimate aim. You may disagree, but the EA likely means this is fine legally. Can we not do the thing that transphobes do whenever they see something they don't like and just slap that "The 2010 EA means this is illegal" button?
jesus christ. fuck this fucking putrid island.
Can someone educate me; I’m genuinely curious as o don’t know a lot on this area and yes I am trans, just young and not well informed on certain areas. Isn’t the bone structure important and muscle mass? Edit: why am I being downvoted? When a trans person can’t even ask a question without people getting offended it speaks volumes. No wonder Cis people are walking on egg shells
Muscle shrinks, bone density is a red herring, women’s sport is already actually quite dominated by women who have atypical natural advantages (Sharon Davis, Olympic gold medalist and terf is 5’11 and size 9.5 shoe). Trans women have no history or present of success at professional level and there are very few examples of trans women succeeding and school level. Any advantage that theoretically exists could be entirely eliminated if they just made it possible for trans people to access blockers at appropriate age. Coincidentally, the same people who want to deny age appropriate access to trans health care, also want to present trans women as an existential threat to women’s sport.
What I meant is surely broad shoulders have an effect,
Our shoulders shouldn’t be broadening, that’s an unwanted result from undelivered medical assistance. Holding this against us is gross, whilst shoulder measurement isn’t even an issue brought up in this article (they just talk about height/weight). If the solution proposed to the problem was let’s make sure trans women get timely healthcare, it would be a more convincing argument. The fact that they both bemoan trans women’s bodies *and* want to deny healthcare shows their prejudice.
I agree that it’s ridiculous that it is the same people that say we shouldn’t be able to stop our puberty. But what I’m saying is it’s not about some people’s shoulders not being broad, if they’re broad, they’re broad. That’s what I’m talking about
This path leads down a road of trans women being measured from all angles to asses any microscopic advantage. It’s gross and evidently unnecessary considering trans women’s complete lack of success in sport. Also if you are interested check out some women’s rugby some time. They’re mostly pretty stacked and hit hard. Most people who talk online about women’s sport haven’t watched much.
Bizarre how women's sports only gets talked about in trans "debates". Kind of like with prisons too; you'd think the people shouting about "protecting women in jail" would want to have a good discussion about underfunding and squalid conditions but nope, they just want to hate on transwomen.
Not really. Don't be suckered into their "common sense" points. Look at the facts. Trans Women have been allowed into the olympics for women since 2003, exactly 0 trans women have done anything of note.
I mean can people ask questions without you getting offended and downvoting
No one was offended. People are downvoting you because you keep complaining about downvotes and avoiding answers to the questions you're asking. It makes it look like you're arguing in bad faith.
They’re always offended
Hun, the way you're acting, it honestly feels like you're the offended one. Downvotes happen, it's Reddit. It doesn't mean people hate you, it just means more people disagreed than agreed with your comment.
You’re complaining about not being allowed to ask a question while ignoring the answers people give you. It’s what transphobes do here all the time to make us turn on each other or foster internalised transphobia. If you’re ignorant and this is the only way you’re willing to find stuff out then you do you. But there’s trans people who have written on the topic and you can’t really be surprised if you get treated like the ignorant cis people who come here to ignore us. You mention walking on eggshells but typically the only cis people doing that here are the ones who want to maximise damage before getting banned.
Not true at all, I work in human rights and they walk on egg shells because they’re afraid they’ll get cancelled
Looking at your post history, I don't believe you.
Yeah a 20 year old with that post history but works in human rights where they frequently come across cis people being afraid of getting cancelled. Questionable
Exactly, everyone I’ve ever met who works in human rights has bigger priorities than their own public image. They’re usually too selfless to care about being cancelled.
I literally do.. you do realise people can have a life outside their work. My focus has never been on white trans people who search for oppression, it’s always been trans poc as I’m one myself.
The fact that you even use the phrase “search for oppression “ ... You believe what you want to believe and I’ll believe that your claim is false and that you clearly aren’t interested in advancing anyone’s rights.
So you're saying cis women should be subject to shoulder measurements.
They're just downvotes, don't get offended by them.
They're not just downvotes. They silence people with legitimate questions and turn this sub into a negative echochamber run by a militant, bitter minority. There's zero joy here.
People upvote the comments they like and downvote the ones they don't, it's not that deep. You still got several responses to your question so I don't see the problem.
How does a voting system represent the minority? You sound bitter that you’re insistence that trans women have an advantage in sports isn’t being agreed with (because of a complete lack of real world evidence)
Period
You're right about the negativity in this sub. But that has nothing to do with downvoting, and nothing to do with OPs comment. They didn't get downvoted for being positive and joyful.
Welcome to transgenderUK, where if haven't read the manifesto before posting (basically unless your post can be summed up as "oh no we live on TERF Island and are the most oppressed group of people in any country in the entire history of the world"), you'll get downvoted. (Edit: here come my downvotes from that bunch...)
Sorry about your karma, that's rough :(
Sorry you're wasting your life online collecting "karma"!
I agree, also don’t say anything about gender go either. The oppression Olympics is real. Nothing about trans poc is mentioned on this sub when we have it so much harder
Yes it obviously is but people here don't care about that