ChatterBank3 mins ago
Lia Thomas - Again. Are Sports Bodies Tying Themselves In Knots In Not Wanting To Offend The Tg Minority?
https:/
NCAA Ranking as a man - 554th.
NCAA Ranking as a 'woman' - 1st.
'She' beat Emma Weyant, a silver medalist in Tokyo, by 1.75 seconds, and if the report I read at the weekend is true, 'she' appeared to be holding-back, presumably to avoid the gap being even greater as it would make the absurdity of the situation even more absurd.
The gold in Tokyo was won by 0.68 seconds ahead of Weyant, so if Thomas had gone to the Olympics, 'she' would most likely be the Olympic champion.
Lia Thomas is taking the place of a proper woman.
Sharon Davis has commented:
"She has greater upper-body strength and significantly more muscle mass than a woman of the same weight and height. She has a greater lung capacity, better VO2 uptake, different bone density, she is nearly 6ft 4in tall and has large hands and feet that act like paddles."
And a teammate has commented:
"...that they feel ‘awkward’ sharing a locker room with her because ‘Lia still has male body parts [by which I take they mean a penis] and is still attracted to women".
Why are sporting bodies allowing this absurdity to continue at the expense of women athletes?
NCAA Ranking as a man - 554th.
NCAA Ranking as a 'woman' - 1st.
'She' beat Emma Weyant, a silver medalist in Tokyo, by 1.75 seconds, and if the report I read at the weekend is true, 'she' appeared to be holding-back, presumably to avoid the gap being even greater as it would make the absurdity of the situation even more absurd.
The gold in Tokyo was won by 0.68 seconds ahead of Weyant, so if Thomas had gone to the Olympics, 'she' would most likely be the Olympic champion.
Lia Thomas is taking the place of a proper woman.
Sharon Davis has commented:
"She has greater upper-body strength and significantly more muscle mass than a woman of the same weight and height. She has a greater lung capacity, better VO2 uptake, different bone density, she is nearly 6ft 4in tall and has large hands and feet that act like paddles."
And a teammate has commented:
"...that they feel ‘awkward’ sharing a locker room with her because ‘Lia still has male body parts [by which I take they mean a penis] and is still attracted to women".
Why are sporting bodies allowing this absurdity to continue at the expense of women athletes?
Answers
I do not even know where to start with this. Naomi is doing brilliantly at stating that women are women (I am one myself)- that this can possibly be considered controversia
21:33 Wed 23rd Mar 2022
And so it goes on. Now cycling:
https:/
Cycling is undoubtedly a sport where men have a strong advantage over women. The one hour record for men is fully 13% better than the women's best effort. Most world records show a similar disparity. But here we see an (unnamed) cyclist who has previously competed in men's competitions being allowed to compete against women.
A Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) spokesman, said: “The CGF will work in close partnership with the relevant International Federations to establish qualification and eligibility criteria for athlete participation at the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games.
A Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) spokesman, said:
“We embrace all Commonwealth athletes, citizens, communities and nations and promote **fairness**, non-discrimination and inclusion.”
More fiction disguised as fact which, because it's been said, people are expected to swallow. In the words of "Lina Lamont" (played by Jean Hagen in the film "Singing in the Rain): "What d'ya think, I'm dumb or something"? Obviously they do.
https:/
Cycling is undoubtedly a sport where men have a strong advantage over women. The one hour record for men is fully 13% better than the women's best effort. Most world records show a similar disparity. But here we see an (unnamed) cyclist who has previously competed in men's competitions being allowed to compete against women.
A Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) spokesman, said: “The CGF will work in close partnership with the relevant International Federations to establish qualification and eligibility criteria for athlete participation at the Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games.
A Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) spokesman, said:
“We embrace all Commonwealth athletes, citizens, communities and nations and promote **fairness**, non-discrimination and inclusion.”
More fiction disguised as fact which, because it's been said, people are expected to swallow. In the words of "Lina Lamont" (played by Jean Hagen in the film "Singing in the Rain): "What d'ya think, I'm dumb or something"? Obviously they do.
The thing that I struggle with, is that some people defend this absurdity, and try to argue how it is not unfair, and they they deserve to compete against women.
Just simply looking at the pictures of Lia Thomas, or Rachel McKinnon, or Hannah Mouncey, should be evidence enough to anybody with any sense of fair play that it is just simply not right.
Just simply looking at the pictures of Lia Thomas, or Rachel McKinnon, or Hannah Mouncey, should be evidence enough to anybody with any sense of fair play that it is just simply not right.
Since the lunatics are clearly now running the asylum, the only people who can do anything about this are the (genuinely) female competitors. I simply don't believe that they all think this is all fine and dandy. They may say they do (for fear of being castigated) but I doubt they really do. The solution to this is in their hands - they should simply refuse to compete against men claiming to be women. If they don't take a stand it will be the end of effective women's sport.
// I simply don't believe that [women] all think this is all fine and dandy. They may say they do (for fear of being castigated) but I doubt they really do. //
I'm sure there's some opposition: opinion is clearly divided on the subject, and it's clear too that some worry that expressing their opinion at all is transphobic. It is, however, equally a mistake to suggest that all women are united against this. I cited several earlier, including two of the racers who came behind Thomas, but have been vocally extremely supportive in a way that doesn't at all smack of coerced support. It seems that a few others in the same event weren't so keen, so that Thomas's presence (and, by extension, the presence of any trans athlete) is clearly divisive. Likewise, it's not difficult to find transgender people who themselves don't agree that Lia Thomas should be allowed to race against women. Caitlyn Jenner is one such example, herself formerly an athlete; or Renee Richards, who played tennis briefly in the 1970s and 1980s, and has since expressed doubts that she should have been allowed to.
But as far as I can tell, despite NJ's protestations otherwise, there is more support for Lia Thomas among her fellow competitors than there is opposition.
I'm sure there's some opposition: opinion is clearly divided on the subject, and it's clear too that some worry that expressing their opinion at all is transphobic. It is, however, equally a mistake to suggest that all women are united against this. I cited several earlier, including two of the racers who came behind Thomas, but have been vocally extremely supportive in a way that doesn't at all smack of coerced support. It seems that a few others in the same event weren't so keen, so that Thomas's presence (and, by extension, the presence of any trans athlete) is clearly divisive. Likewise, it's not difficult to find transgender people who themselves don't agree that Lia Thomas should be allowed to race against women. Caitlyn Jenner is one such example, herself formerly an athlete; or Renee Richards, who played tennis briefly in the 1970s and 1980s, and has since expressed doubts that she should have been allowed to.
But as far as I can tell, despite NJ's protestations otherwise, there is more support for Lia Thomas among her fellow competitors than there is opposition.
On the question of how dramatically Thomas's ranking has improved, this too seems to vary according to source. I honestly am confused myself. But what at the very least is true is that, compared to her pre-transition performances, she's regressed rather, something like 15 seconds slower over 500 yards: for example, this article suggests that Thomas's times as a man were around second in the country.
https:/
It's a complicated question, and because sports links to biology then trans women would have to accept certain limits on their ability to participate in sport. But Lia has met those limits, and, as I've already stated, she has the support of many, and indeed most, of her rivals in the pool.
https:/
It's a complicated question, and because sports links to biology then trans women would have to accept certain limits on their ability to participate in sport. But Lia has met those limits, and, as I've already stated, she has the support of many, and indeed most, of her rivals in the pool.
Meanwhile back in the real world women are being denied the right to call themselves women. They are now ‘people who menstruate’, people who give birth’, and ‘people with a cervix’ - and they’re not expected to mind a bit - just as they’re not expected to mind when men who choose to call themselves women insist they should be welcome in women only spaces. Funny how the women aren’t supposed to mind but men do. Men with over-active imaginations have even come up with yet another label - this time for women who dare speak out against this affront to rationality … TERFs they call them - and guess what. It’s derogatory. Who would have thought it?
I do not even know where to start with this. Naomi is doing brilliantly at stating that women are women (I am one myself)- that this can possibly be considered controversial enters the realms of lunacy.
Regarding sport. I have a few credentials in that I was (need to renew) a fully qualified athletics coach, able to coach everything - including tug-of-war for some reason - up to County level. I qualified as a Club Coach which means that I can coach High Jump (+ jumps generally) and Combined Events to National Level. I have done so and one of my children represented UK.
It is ridiculous to suppose that anyone with the advantages of male birthing and adolescence has no advantage over female athletes.
Athletes generally are handicapped or supported by their natural physique. Training maximised their advantages. They have to accept this.
The daughter I referred to is a 6-footer and she trained d****d hard to make international status --- but she was no match for an equally sized male (we had one or two) who didn't train as hard - useful in competition training.
If your body is not suited to the job - you do something else.
I cite a really keen 12/16 yr old lad I trained. He was a wonderful high jumper - but only 5'6" tall. Eventually he realised that he wasn't growing any more and turned his attention to other sporting outlets. Until then, he was the best jumper around, every coach agreed that he was jumping so much over his head height that - if he'd been a 6-footer - he'd have smashed the world record.
The point is that normal people realise their physical limitations. This lad could have transitioned and beaten women - but he went to do something else, very successfully.
It is not normal or acceptable for medically physically advantaged people to use this against others who (no matter how hard they train) cannot equal or compete with them. By 'physically advantaged' I mean (in this case) trans males. Females should refuse to compete against them - it would cause a stir in sponsorship world, but would soon result in separate 'trans' competitions.
Regarding sport. I have a few credentials in that I was (need to renew) a fully qualified athletics coach, able to coach everything - including tug-of-war for some reason - up to County level. I qualified as a Club Coach which means that I can coach High Jump (+ jumps generally) and Combined Events to National Level. I have done so and one of my children represented UK.
It is ridiculous to suppose that anyone with the advantages of male birthing and adolescence has no advantage over female athletes.
Athletes generally are handicapped or supported by their natural physique. Training maximised their advantages. They have to accept this.
The daughter I referred to is a 6-footer and she trained d****d hard to make international status --- but she was no match for an equally sized male (we had one or two) who didn't train as hard - useful in competition training.
If your body is not suited to the job - you do something else.
I cite a really keen 12/16 yr old lad I trained. He was a wonderful high jumper - but only 5'6" tall. Eventually he realised that he wasn't growing any more and turned his attention to other sporting outlets. Until then, he was the best jumper around, every coach agreed that he was jumping so much over his head height that - if he'd been a 6-footer - he'd have smashed the world record.
The point is that normal people realise their physical limitations. This lad could have transitioned and beaten women - but he went to do something else, very successfully.
It is not normal or acceptable for medically physically advantaged people to use this against others who (no matter how hard they train) cannot equal or compete with them. By 'physically advantaged' I mean (in this case) trans males. Females should refuse to compete against them - it would cause a stir in sponsorship world, but would soon result in separate 'trans' competitions.
I don’t know too much about “TERFs” or what basic rights they are seeking to deny to transgender people. But I do know those rights must be limited. They should not and must not extend to castigating people for refusing to accept fiction as fact. Men can call themselves women if they want. What they must not be permitted to do is to use that deceit when it matters. The sport thing I can tolerate – it’s up to the participants to deal with it as they are the only ones who can in the current climate. The spectators can also help by refusing to watch any competitions where men are pitched unfairly against women.
The other stuff I cannot and will not tolerate. Women are entitled to be referred to as “women”, “mothers” and not the other nonsensical terms people are urged to adopt. Young women playing sport are entitled to be sure they are playing with other young women and not men. Sex and gender must not be conflated when compiling data, especially when that data relates to health or crime. Women are entitled to women only spaces, where there is no likelihood of their encountering men. These places are many and various and are outlined in the Equality Act. Instead many companies and organisations are deliberately ignoring the exceptions to declared gender recognition that the Act provides. They must think it improves their standing in the world. Instead it makes them appear ridiculous. Among the worst of these is the NHS as I have outlined. Declaring that patients must be accepted as the gender they “present” – especially in many healthcare settings – is irresponsible and can be dangerous. I have no intention of subscribing to this nonsense and I urge everybody else to do likewise.
The other stuff I cannot and will not tolerate. Women are entitled to be referred to as “women”, “mothers” and not the other nonsensical terms people are urged to adopt. Young women playing sport are entitled to be sure they are playing with other young women and not men. Sex and gender must not be conflated when compiling data, especially when that data relates to health or crime. Women are entitled to women only spaces, where there is no likelihood of their encountering men. These places are many and various and are outlined in the Equality Act. Instead many companies and organisations are deliberately ignoring the exceptions to declared gender recognition that the Act provides. They must think it improves their standing in the world. Instead it makes them appear ridiculous. Among the worst of these is the NHS as I have outlined. Declaring that patients must be accepted as the gender they “present” – especially in many healthcare settings – is irresponsible and can be dangerous. I have no intention of subscribing to this nonsense and I urge everybody else to do likewise.
// Women are entitled to be referred to as “women”, “mothers” and not the other nonsensical terms people are urged to adopt. //
This is again a distortion of the original discussion. There is not, and never has been, any suggestion that words like "mother" shouldn't be used when referring to... well, mothers. Indeed, to do so would be to go against the very point, which is that language used should be respectful to the person being spoken to. It would be clearly disrespectful to refuse to call a woman a woman, to refuse to call a mother a mother, and so on, in order not to offend some hypothetical person that isn't in the room, and especially if not doing so offends the person you actually *are* talking to. So much of this whole discussion is misunderstood, in part even by its would-be advocates, but especially so by those who wish to misrepresent it.
This is again a distortion of the original discussion. There is not, and never has been, any suggestion that words like "mother" shouldn't be used when referring to... well, mothers. Indeed, to do so would be to go against the very point, which is that language used should be respectful to the person being spoken to. It would be clearly disrespectful to refuse to call a woman a woman, to refuse to call a mother a mother, and so on, in order not to offend some hypothetical person that isn't in the room, and especially if not doing so offends the person you actually *are* talking to. So much of this whole discussion is misunderstood, in part even by its would-be advocates, but especially so by those who wish to misrepresent it.
Latest Posts
Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News6 mins ago
Law7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.