Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

No, I'm seeing a situation where Parkrun had vague rules where you and others thought you knew what the rules were, but actually didn't.

How can you STILL not understand that the rules have always been what mattered, not the labels? You say this as if it contradicts my point, but it doesn't. It proves how pointless you idea of relabelling things always was.

You're moaning about something that was in the rules.

I'm not moaning about anything except your inability to connect the dots.

I get the point you are trying to make,

Do you? Do you really?

I see no indication of that.

but i still think that getting rid of gender labels and just referring them as sex labels is better.

Why on earth would you think that, when everything indicates it makes zero difference?

 

[Rolfe]

No, I'm seeing a situation where Parkrun had vague rules where you and others thought you knew what the rules were, but actually didn't.
You're moaning about something that was in the rules.
I get the point you are trying to make, but i still think that getting rid of gender labels and just referring them as sex labels is better.

The labels in Parkrun are "male" and "female". That makes no difference to the intent of men to enter the female category. It's not about the labels, which is what we've been trying to tell you for about ten pages now. The thing which does make the difference is the intent (or otherwise) of the organisers to keep men, males, out of the women's, female category.

I think sports have been making a mistake for a long time, they've been calling them man sports or woman sports, when really they should have been calling them female or male sports in the first place...none of this confusion would be happening if that had happened.

Here we go again. Parkrun call them female and male categories. Men still enter the female category, because Parkrun lets them do it. That's the important thing. Not what the categories are called.

 

[Rolfe]

Speaking about the law as it stands in this country, what has to be understood is that "gender identity" is not a protected characteristic. You can't have a category which is restricted to people of one or the other "gender identity" - even if you assume that all women who do not claim a trans identity have a female gender identity, which is not a given. You cannot legally have a category of "women and transwomen".

The reason for this is that the two relevant protected characteristics are "sex" and "gender reassignment". Also that while you can have a category that restricts on more than one protected characteristic, you can't mix and match. You can have a category for male people if you exclude all female people, and one for female people if you exclude all male people. You can have a category for people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and you can have categories for male people who also have gender reassignment, and for female people who also have gender reassignment. But to do that, the first of these categories must exclude all people who do not have gender reassignment, the second must exclude all female people and all male people who do not have gender reassigment, and the third must exclude all male people and all people who do bot have gender reassignment.

You can add more and more protected characteristics, but you can't split them. You can't have a category that includes all females but only some males, which is what some people seem to think they can do. Parkrun and others like them are going to find this out when they get the lawyers' letters.

 

[p0lka]

1. Of course women can say they're men and be counted in the male statistics if they want to. Inexplicably, they never do.

How do you know that, got any data? You act as if transmen aren't a thing.

Women with the trans mental illness register as female, or other, or "not prepared to say". Surely you can work out why.

No, what's a trans mental illness? Is it something that can be officially diagnosed?

2. The women who don't like the rules are people.

3. The rules are not vague at all. The categories labelled male and female are both, explicitly, open to anyone at all. That's not vague, it's simply dishonest.

Yeah women and men are people.

3 Yeah you are correct, I take back calling the rules vague as they aren't vague at all, it's people not reading the rules that introduces the vagueness.

 

[p0lka]

The labels in Parkrun are "male" and "female". That makes no difference to the intent of men to enter the female category. It's not about the labels, which is what we've been trying to tell you for about ten pages now. The thing which does make the difference is the intent (or otherwise) of the organisers to keep men, males, out of the women's, female category.



Here we go again. Parkrun call them female and male categories. Men still enter the female category, because Parkrun lets them do it. That's the important thing. Not what the categories are called.

Yeah, make rules that are clearly defined as sex based only. None of this confusion would have occurred if they had done so.

 

[p0lka]

How can you STILL not understand that the rules have always been what mattered, not the labels? You say this as if it contradicts my point, but it doesn't. It proves how pointless you idea of relabelling things always was.

I'm not moaning about anything except your inability to connect the dots.

Do you? Do you really?

I see no indication of that.

Why on earth would you think that, when everything indicates it makes zero difference?

You keep saying that, but nothing I've seen indicates that what you're saying is correct. It's in the realms of 'because I said so'.

 

[Ziggurat]

You keep saying that, but nothing I've seen indicates that what you're saying is correct. It's in the realms of 'because I said so'.

You just presented the evidence. Park Run did exactly what you said, labelling the categories by sex. Did it help? No.

The evidence is right in front of you, and you keep ignoring it. It's becoming harder and harder for me to believe that this is an innocent mistake.

 

[Ziggurat]

Yeah, make rules that are clearly defined as sex based only. None of this confusion would have occurred if they had done so.

Exactly: change the RULES, not the labels. The labels don't matter.

How long will it take you to understand even your own posts?

 

[p0lka]

You just presented the evidence. Park Run did exactly what you said, labelling the categories by sex. Did it help? No.

The evidence is right in front of you, and you keep ignoring it. It's becoming harder and harder for me to believe that this is an innocent mistake.

Parkrun also made the rules so that the male female categories were irrelevant as they considered gender to be the deciding factor.

So no, that's not evidence of what I think would solve things, rather it's evidence of the confusion that occurs when people use gender labels and sex labels interchangeably.

 

[Rolfe]

How do you know that, got any data? You act as if transmen aren't a thing.

No, what's a trans mental illness? Is it something that can be officially diagnosed?

Yeah women and men are people.

3 Yeah you are correct, I take back calling the rules vague as they aren't vague at all, it's people not reading the rules that introduces the vagueness.

1. Women who pretend to be men are a thing. They do not attempt to enter male athletics categories, for obvious reasons. (Apart from Iszaak Henig, who did it to please his mate Lia Thomas, and got roundly thrashed for her trouble.)

2. Wanting to be the sex you are not, or (even worse) believing you are the sex you are not, is mental illness.

3. Yes. And?

4 (3). You make no sense. The rules say "male" and "female". That is not vague. Parkrun then fails to make these categories mean what they say. How do you explain this, if the labels "male" and "female" are all that is needed for perfect clarity?

 

[Rolfe]

Yeah, make rules that are clearly defined as sex based only. None of this confusion would have occurred if they had done so.

It appears that labelling the categories as "male" and "female" isn't sufficient. Doesn't this rather undermine your position?

 

[theprestige]

Gender roles annoy me and I wish people would just be themselves, but I know people that want to be referred to as a 'woman' whilst having a penis, and I know people who want to be referred to as a 'man' with a vagina.

Yes, and those people want a sexual identity, not a gender identity.

premise incorrect.....conclusion ignoreable.

What's incorrect about the premise?

 

[p0lka]

It appears that labelling the categories as "male" and "female" isn't sufficient. Doesn't this rather undermine your position?

Of course they aren't sufficient if in the parkrun rules it says gender overrides the male female categories, that's a problem with the rules.

My position is that labeling things as male female instead of gender labels (not as well as), would solve all this nonsense.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Of course they aren't sufficient if in the parkrun rules it says gender overrides the male female categories, that's a problem with the rules.

My position is that labeling things as male female instead of gender labels (not as well as), would solve all this nonsense.

I think, going back over this discussion as proof, that it would quite clearly make zero difference.

 

[Ziggurat]

Parkrun also made the rules so that the male female categories were irrelevant as they considered gender to be the deciding factor.

So no, that's not evidence of what I think would solve things, rather it's evidence of the confusion that occurs when people use gender labels and sex labels interchangeably.

It absolutely it. You have consistently advocated for changing labels, but none of your proposals included changing the rules. For you to now appeal to rules as if they support your position is beyond irony.

I'm done. I can't take your continued denial of reality.

 

[p0lka]

Yes, and those people want a sexual identity, not a gender identity.

Well, it's like the 1970's examples when I was growing up.
They aint saying they've changed their sex, it could be because they know i'll say 'no you haven't', possibly I don't know.
But they are saying they want to be treated as 'insert gender role here'.

What's incorrect about the premise?

If by woman you meant female, then the premise that males and females are treated equally?

 

[p0lka]

It absolutely it. You have consistently advocated for changing labels, but none of your proposals included changing the rules. For you to now appeal to rules as if they support your position is beyond irony.

I'm done. I can't take your continued denial of reality.

You're clutching at straws.

 

[Rolfe]

Of course they aren't sufficient if in the parkrun rules it says gender overrides the male female categories, that's a problem with the rules.

My position is that labeling things as male female instead of gender labels (not as well as), would solve all this nonsense.

It doesn't matter what the labels are, it matters what the rules are.

And the rules Parkrun is applying are illegal in Britain, so watch this space. Solicitor's letters are being prepared (known as letters before action - a warning shot across the bows if you like). The Hampstead ponds are on the list. So is Parkrun.

 

[Ziggurat]

It doesn't matter what the labels are, it matters what the rules are.

p0lka seems to think labels determine the rules, except when he wants to ignore the labels because of the rules. There's absolutely no internal consistency.

 

[p0lka]

1. Women who pretend to be men are a thing. They do not attempt to enter male athletics categories, for obvious reasons. (Apart from Iszaak Henig, who did it to please his mate Lia Thomas, and got roundly thrashed for her trouble.)

I guess you mean transmen? You say they do not do a thing then give an example of when they do?

2. Wanting to be the sex you are not, or (even worse) believing you are the sex you are not, is mental illness.

3. Yes. And?

4 (3). You make no sense. The rules say "male" and "female". That is not vague. Parkrun then fails to make these categories mean what they say. How do you explain this, if the labels "male" and "female" are all that is needed for perfect clarity?

I agree with you, the parkrun rules are ◊◊◊◊ and should be changed. The rules do say that male and female are irrelevant when it comes to gender though, not literally but i linked to the rules so go read for yourself.

It's not an example of what I proposed not working, as it says that gender overrides sex. My idea would be no rules about gender overriding sex, just the sex categories themselves if people want to do that. That way if you do enter a male or female category then you know everyone you are competing with, is the same sex as you.