• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
And why do we need to stop calling mothers, mothers anyways?

Because trans activists don't like it.

Women don't generally like being called "birthing parent", but their preferences are less important.
 
Ziggurat said:
And why do we need to stop calling mothers, mothers anyways?
Click to expand...
We don't. As I suggested above, the form could say "mother/birthing parent" but that would just piss off everyone who was hoping to "win" this pointless little culture war skirmish by enforcing their norms on the other side.
 
Ziggurat said:
And why do we need to stop calling mothers, mothers anyways?

Because trans activists don't like it.

Women don't generally like being called "birthing parent", but their preferences are less important.
Click to expand...
Maybe we could go with guaranteed X-Chromosome contributor?
 
Is mother a gendered word now? Should it be? Only one sex can give birth. It doesn’t worry me if transmen who give birth call themselves mothers (or tick whatever box they want), but it does worry me that other women are now termed “birthing parent”. Again women are asked to call themselves cis women by TRAs so as not to upset the trans community, and now the term mother is under attack for the same reason.
 
lionking said:
Are you not seeing an attempt to erase the word “mother”? It’s served us pretty well for a long time.
Click to expand...

Serious question - and when there are two mothers to a child?

(I'm not for nor against this example it just made me think about the above scenario.)
 
Matthew Best said:
Getting things back to the subject of the thread, transgender women will no longer be allowed to play in female contact rugby competitions in England due to safety and fairness concerns, under new recommendations from the Rugby Football Union to be voted on next Friday.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...n-banning-transgender-women-from-womens-rugby
Click to expand...

"In 2020 World Rugby became the first international sports body to ban transgender women from the women’s game after an eight-month review. It concluded that it was not possible to balance inclusivity with safety and fairness given that those who had gone through male puberty are “stronger by 25% to 50%, are 30% more powerful, 40% heavier, and about 15% faster than biological females” and warned of a greater risk of injuries if transgender women were not banned."

Exactly! Transgender women should be barred from competing against women in ALL sports where strength or power or body mass or speed confer competitive advantages. That is pretty much all ball-field team sports, all ball-court team and individual sports, track & field, swimming & diving, cycling, ring sports such as boxing and wrestling as well as weightlifting.
 
Darat said:
Sounds sensible.
Click to expand...


Yes, it absolutely does. And it's been formulated (and will almost certainly be implemented) following an evidence-based review - precisely as should have happened.

I hope and expect other sports administration bodies to be going through a similar exercise right now. And my hoped-for & expected outcome is that in those sports (such as rugby of both codes) where the safety of participants is determined to be at significant and proximate-causal risk, there will be a blanket ban on transwomen/transgirls in the women's category; but for those sports in which there are no safety concerns (e.g. track and field sports) I expect transwomen/transgirls to be allowed to compete in the women's category at all levels of the sport except the elite and sub-elite levels.

As has been my position for a long time now.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Yes, it absolutely does. And it's been formulated (and will almost certainly be implemented) following an evidence-based review - precisely as should have happened.

I hope and expect other sports administration bodies to be going through a similar exercise right now. And my hoped-for & expected outcome is that in those sports (such as rugby of both codes) where the safety of participants is determined to be at risk, there will be a blanket ban on transwomen/transgirls in the women's category; but for those sports in which there are no safety concerns (e.g. track and field sports) I expect transwomen/transgirls to be allowed to compete in the women's category at all levels of the sport except the elite and sub-elite levels.

As has been my position for a long time now.
Click to expand...

I see you fail to note the inclusion of the word "fairness" as well as "safety" as has specifically been included in the RFU . Increased strength mass etc etc confers greater ability in track and field sports as well as contact sport. Clearly you feel the transwomen should be able to use that extra strength etc to beat non transwomen in every circumstance not including contact. What a bizarre point of view.
 
Last edited:
Lplus said:
I see you fail to note the inclusion of the word "fairness" as well as "safety" as has specifically been included in the RFU . Increased strength mass etc etc confers greater ability in track and field sports as well as contact sport. Clearly you feel the transwomen should be able to use that extra strength etc to beat non transwomen in every circumstance not including contact. What a bizarre point of view.
Click to expand...
Tall athletes have a huge advantage over short ones in basketball. Kenyans have advantages in distance running. That some people have natural physical advantages that mean they are almost always going to win is nothing new. If "fairness" is going to be the key thing, it needs to be a notion of fairness that isn't about subsets of the population not having big advantages.
 
Last edited:
LondonJohn said:
Yes, it absolutely does. And it's been formulated (and will almost certainly be implemented) following an evidence-based review - precisely as should have happened.

I hope and expect other sports administration bodies to be going through a similar exercise right now. And my hoped-for & expected outcome is that in those sports (such as rugby of both codes) where the safety of participants is determined to be at significant and proximate-causal risk, there will be a blanket ban on transwomen/transgirls in the women's category; but for those sports in which there are no safety concerns (e.g. track and field sports) I expect transwomen/transgirls to be allowed to compete in the women's category at all levels of the sport except the elite and sub-elite levels.

As has been my position for a long time now.
Click to expand...

Take away the safety issue, and there's still a fairness issue.

Why do you think transwomen have the right to compete with women at any level of sport?

Why do you not extend that right to "elite" and "sub-elite" levels of sport?
 
theprestige said:
Take away the safety issue, and there's still a fairness issue.

Why do you think transwomen have the right to compete with women at any level of sport?

Why do you not extend that right to "elite" and "sub-elite" levels of sport?
Click to expand...
If they are "women", why is it any more unfair for them to win than for girls who are naturally stronger, faster etc... than others? If you look at your average class at school, you've got something like 15 girls. You are going to get two or three of them who beat the others almost every time at almost everything. Is that unfair? What do we mean by "fair"?
 
shuttlt said:
Tall athletes have a huge advantage over short ones in basketball. Kenyans have advantages in distance running. That some people have natural physical advantages that mean they are almost always going to win is nothing new. If "fairness" is going to be the key thing, it needs to be a notion of fairness that isn't about subsets of the population not having big advantages.
Click to expand...

shuttlt said:
If they are "women", why is it any more unfair for them to win than for girls who are naturally stronger, faster etc... than others? If you look at your average class at school, you've got something like 15 girls. You are going to get two or three of them who beat the others almost every time at almost everything. Is that unfair? What do we mean by "fair"?
Click to expand...

Interesting take. On that basis, for track and field events where contact is not a factor, males are generally likely to be more successful than females, and if fairness is irrelevant why should it matter if the males win all the time? so why shouldn't they all compete together?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom