Gender again. Sorry!

[Deleted member 159]

Maybe you can answer the questions asked, which means having to provide clear examples, instead of diverting the subject to the piece I quoted.

There's no male anglers demanding that trans men be excluded from their sport.

For the reasons Aurora mentioned.

Plus if the transmam is good looking, the fellas might think they've hooked one

 

[Bromptonaut]

For the reasons Aurora mentioned.

Plus if the transmam is good looking, the fellas might think they've hooked one

While you're being deliberately and offensively objectionable there is a grain of truth. If this person still looked female then, unless they insisted on being put in room with the fellers, a risk assessment should have identified an issue with high consequence and at least moderate probability.

Mitigation would have been a room of his own.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Which is fair enough - though it's like a Christian saying they come to a debate about the existence of God from the position that God exists. An assertion of it is not in itself a valid argument for the existence of God.

Your differing premise wouldn't matter if accepting it didn't entail important and detrimental consequences for women and girls. But it does, so your 'I come at it from a different premise' and a 'birth certificate makes you a woman' is a bit lame quite honestly.

If, as you clearly are, you are one of those people like my late Mother or my partner who always have to have the last word I'll concede it to you.

Long experience says that's better than an undignified scramble...

 

[Deleted member 159]

Men will want to nail the ugly ones too


View: https://youtu.be/iEV_pQIf3Og?si=vjqrZOMHC2HwBHvd

 

[monkers]

Because they are stronger than any transman. Transmen are not relevant to them. Female anglers cannot compete in strength with men which therefore limits the size of fish that they can physically land. Transwomen have a competitive advantage by being born male. Hence transwomen are not part of the women's sport.

Standardised tests for strength are by way of measurements for grip strength. Baseline measurements at the beginning of hormone therapy show what we should expect, that homological men have a grip strength higher than that of homological women. In the early months of hormone therapy, there are small but detectable changes - the trans women become weaker while trans men grow stronger.

In one major study taking measurements over a 12 month period, the greatest changes occurred in the 9 to 12 month period.

At the 12 month period the crossover point was found, ie trans women had a similar grip strength to trans men. It should be obvious that if the testing had been continuing for a longer period that the differences would become more pronounced, as this would follow the trend line, and be supported by the data.

I am unable to support with data the inevitable question concerning when averagely the strength of trans women may be reduced to that of homological women; or similarly when the strength of trans men averagely becomes that of average homological men. Some extrapolation of the data of the trend line suggest that a value of 18 months seems a realistic approximation from what I have read.

Conclusion. It seems likely that (averagely) trans men have similar strength to homological men after a period of approximately 18 months of hormone regime.

 

[classic33]

Why is that? Why would a men's rugby team not be at all worried about the opposing team having a woman on it, but a women's team might be worried about playing a women's team with a man on it? Or a male jujitsu fighter not object to fighting a transman but a female fighter might object to a bout with a transwoman? It's a mystery only Scooby and the gang could solve ...

Why would a male prisoner not care about being banged up with a female born prisoner on their wing but a woman prisoner might object to a transwoman one?

Including transmen in male spaces comes at a low cost to men in terms of safety, dignity, and of fairness in sports. That's why it's less of an issue for men than it is for women.
That's why men might be more accepting (if they in fact are) of transmen. They can afford to be.
 Funny though that transmen who say they are gay seem to find it very hard to find gay men willing to date them so perhaps men aren't as accepting as you imagine.



... your own quote explains why men don't much care if women are in their class for sports ffs.

Iszac Henig is a transman who switched from competing as a female swimmer to competing as a male. After being recognised as an All American outstanding swimmer as a female they are now finishing last, despite being on testosterone.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...henig-struggling-against-new-competition/amp/

Iszac was beaten by a guy with an arm missing. This is why men don't care about transmen in their sports or spaces. It doesn't much affect them.

Back on ignore you go. Must remember to log in so I don't have to see your posts.

Decline to answer a very simple question, again. Divert the subject, your M.O. still the same.

You'll have noticed, and ignored the "without exception" piece. But you consider trans men to be women. Yet here you are, showing yet again, that you're glad that men and women get to mix in the same areas.

Still awaiting your reply with a number of trans women "demanding access" to women's spaces and sports. Out of that figure of 5,000 you stated earlier.

 

[monkers]

A correction.

Earlier in the thread I made an error. I said that Kathleen Stock at been disinvited by Women's Place UK.

This was incorrect, it was Kellie-Jay Keen Minshull that was disinvited.

I apologise for my error.

 

[multitool]

Aurora's favorite Nazi-magnet.

 

[AuroraSaab]

180 mentions. Got to be a record.

 

[classic33]

The question you asked was:-

Actually
"Maybe you can give a percentage, you seem quite happy to throw them in when it suits you, of the number of trans women "demanding" to be allowed into women's areas and activities. Relative to the actual number of trans women."

Aurora answered the question. She has considered it and it's not relevant as women and transmen present no competition to men in any physical sport.

She sidestepped the question.

Because they are stronger than any transman. Transmen are not relevant to them. Female anglers cannot compete in strength with men which therefore limits the size of fish that they can physically land. Transwomen have a competitive advantage by being born male. Hence transwomen are not part of the women's sport.

Are you saying a 5lb fish is too strong for a women to handle?

Staying with the angling theme. Clubs affected by the trans ban have to rewrite their club constitution, get it approved, then present it to all club members for their vote on it. They will also be required to review their club rules, with any amendments voted on by all members, before they can be passed.

Given that the people who help run these clubs are all volunteers, doing it in their own time. Is it fair on them? The chair of one local club is standing down, as is the majority of the "board". Rather than deal with the extra paperwork they now have to deal with.

Some local clubs are talking of withholding payments. Others are considering excluding women altogether*. They wish to carry on within the sport, they can form their own clubs.
Another leisure activity where help for those new to the activity will find it harder to get help starting out.


*As has been pointed out, more than once, exclusion is legal as it can be done on a case by case basis, when the application is made to join.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Totally unnecessary if men hadn't invaded women's sport

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Are you saying a 5lb fish is too strong for a women to handle?

Staying with the angling theme. Clubs affected by the trans ban have to rewrite their club constitution, get it approved, then present it to all club members for their vote on it. They will also be required to review their club rules, with any amendments voted on by all members, before they can be passed.

Given that the people who help run these clubs are all volunteers, doing it in their own time. Is it fair on them? The chair of one local club is standing down, as is the majority of the "board". Rather than deal with the extra paperwork they now have to deal with.

Some local clubs are talking of withholding payments. Others are considering excluding women altogether*. They wish to carry on within the sport, they can form their own clubs.
Another leisure activity where help for those new to the activity will find it harder to get help starting out.


*As has been pointed out, more than once, exclusion is legal as it can be done on a case by case basis, when the application is made to join.

A 5lb fish isn't too strong for a women to handle, it never was the point either. The point if from varios perspectives a biological men and biological born women are different.
The only point at which this becomes argument ally neglectable is with lower than 5% body fat regions. But there is an reason only a really really small percentage of athletes manages this level.

Basis off any sport is somekind of level competitiones that's why they are men and women classes in the first place. So yes an born biological female is less of problem in the mens class if he transitions, then the other way around as shown time and time again with mean transitioning and than competing in the women's class it throws the balance out. No matter how many hormone treatments you do.

 

[monkers]

A 5lb fish isn't too strong for a women to handle, it never was the point either. The point if from varios perspectives a biological men and biological born women are different.
The only point at which this becomes argument ally neglectable is with lower than 5% body fat regions. But there is an reason only a really really small percentage of athletes manages this level.

Basis off any sport is somekind of level competitiones that's why they are men and women classes in the first place. So yes an born biological female is less of problem in the mens class if he transitions, then the other way around as shown time and time again with mean transitioning and than competing in the women's class it throws the balance out. No matter how many hormone treatments you do.

Nope. All false assumption, no science, nor consideration of sense of any attempt at inclusion.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Nope. All false assumption, no science, nor consideration of sense of any attempt at inclusion.

considering this topic is already full of men who transitioned and then they joined the womens classes and dominated there, please share at least one example of men who transitioned and they joined a womens class and didn't dominate. You will find that they will all perform significantly higher then they would do in the mens class. Hence why the IOC amongst others based on evidence and science changed their position about allowing born biological born males to compete in womens classes after transition.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Sod inclusion, when it interferes with women's rights.

The science is there for all to see.
Nobody male in swimming, swaps to women's racing, thrashes all records first year

Weightlifting, male joins takes all records by country mile

Football, male plays on women's team, seriously injures woman

The list goes on and on.

Males are statistically taller, heavier, stronger, faster. Having them in womens sport destroys it