I find 'uke's assertion bizarre if not a lie.

If I say 'racism is bad' I don't have to specfically say 'racism against blacks is bad' for that to be captured in my statement.

uke keeps saying the Study makes no mention specifically about "Youth Sport" as if that means then Youth Sport is excluded when it is not.

The bodies who contributed to these guidelines manage ALL sport across the UK, including Youth sports.
If Youth Sport is excluded from the Study then it is a necessary burden to say so explicitly (such findings exclude the Youth Sport for the following reasons...) otherwise any proper application of the English language says it is for Sport (a catch all word for ALL SPORT) across the UK.

I read the report and all the sub reports linked and in each and everyone they reference this as guidelines for Sport across the UK. Not just adult, not just Youth.

cite

You are such a child that you think agreeing to disagree over interpretation is a clap out loud win for you but I do understand as you are obviously starved for anything you can label a win.

But I want everyone here to read uke's post and understand what he is calling a win.

he has stated he agrees with the findings of the Study and he is saying Trans women should no place to compete other then in a division that would allow men. The easiest way to accommodate this Study is simply to rename every Men's division 'Open' and ensure trans women and cis can compete there too.

He is ok keeping trans women out of the women's division if that is done.

He is so eager and desperate for anything he perceives as a win against me, even when it is not, that he jumps to accept a position that is far more hostile to trans women.

Good for you uke.

You really are clown. So vested in any perceived win that you complete lost the plot.


I won, but I died, but at least i FINALLY got a win against QP. I'm so happy, happy, happy..

Man that is some crazy level of desperate.

The national governing bodies are NOT in charge of school sports. The report says nothing about this. There is one mention of it here:

Even that statement is not about school sports if I understand it correctly, it would be about junior levels of a competition regulated by one of the national governing bodies. So from the perspective of our grade 9 girls school team, it says effectively nothing.

Ouch. This is so painful for you. You completely confused what the report said so badly and now want to chalk it down to agree to disagree on interpretation? Lol. Sorry buddy, there is no ambiguity at all about what the report means with "open" division. Nothing to interpret. It is plain as day, and you just ****ed it up.

How embarassing.

You misread my comment almost as badly as you misread the report. Nothing can beat how badly you misread the report, of course, that was hilariously inept, but this is a close second. Here's what I said again:
Now try to calm down, breathe deeply, read it again slowly, and maybe this time you won't **** up and confuse a "small symbolic shift that doesn't fix all the inclusion problems" with "He is ok keeping trans women out of the women's division if that is done". My goodness this is embarrassing for you.

I'm sorry, I'm just enjoying your screwup up too much because of how ****ing confident you were at the beginning despite being sky-is-green level wrong. It's too much

You are lying again.

I provided the link and you click thru to each of the 5 Sports governing Bodies.

They are 5 representative bodies meant to spanning ALL SPORT in the UK.

In no way do they suggest they are limited to adult sport and exclude Youth Sport in their considerations and in fact they specifically say they address any AGE issues and all SPORT in their considerations.

Read what is in the caption below as they state clearly their focus is infancy to the Olympics and everything in between, AKA more simply, 'Sport'.

Watch their video and it shows you infancy, school age, Olympic.


The below DOES NOT exclude Youth sport just because they say Sport.

There simply is no reason to say or suggest the bolded below excludes Youth Sport since it does explicitly say it. The comment as written includes ALL sport.

Again uke the fact that when data does not suit you, you so willingly spin and lie should be astounding but it no longer is.

There is no reason, NONE, to read all the statements and context to suggest these bodies exclude Youth sport and your argument 'they never say Youth sport explicitly so therefore..' is just hollow and lie.

This really isn't a discussion anymore. Stop with the back and forth. You're both right; you're both wrong.

Happy now?

Uke requested a reopening of this thread. QP said he would behave. I am not eager to see a rehash of serve and volley that proceeded the closing. Be good, fellows....er cis guys....uhhh CIS gierls.....dang, I'll never get this right.

Uke's new NBC info: link http://"https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-...thl-rcna5775"]

Old man botches links ITT.

I think this is what you were looking for.

Lol chapelle nominated for a Grammy! Awesome sauce

This is a good decision and framework.

Over arching guidelines from the top that define what is an 'advantage' and how it is to be considered while allowing each sport then to consider if that advantage is meaningful and reason to act or exclude transwomen from general women's sport on a case by case basis.

Due to the very nature of 'Sport' and the role physicality plays in most sport, I think the list will be tiny where such advantage, and thus the exclusion, would not be required but a quick scan of the Olympic sports suggests to me that an argument that it other elements predominantly, and not physicality, which matter in the below listed sports that might pass the test.
(I say that not being an expert in any of them)


Gymnastics Rhythmic
Gymnastics Trampoline
Equestrian / Jumping
Equestrian / Eventing
Equestrian / Dressage
Equestrian / Vaulting
Archery
Sailing
Skateboarding
Sport climbing
Surfing

cite

Skeet and other shooting sports

Duck Duck Goose

There is no slippery slope. There is just the slope.

As more young people in their competitive prime years feel freer (a good thing) to explore their gender, you will get more who were 'good' but not great boys athletes crossing into women's sport.

A 'good' boys athlete transitioning destroys all but the top Olympian cis female athletes in most sports. A 'top' boys athlete transitioning destroys even the best cis women's Olympians. The Women's City, State, University circuits will see the records re-written and the other women in the events embarrassed as they find they have no place anymore to actually be competitive. Records will continually be set and reset, that no cis woman will ever have a chance to approach.


There is some tragic irony in the fact that women fought for so long to get their own spaces where they could compete on a fair playing field against their physical peers, and a person who was a man a year prior can cross into that space, enjoy such massive advantages and just destroy the competitive of that space and, for many women, decades of their prior work and achievement.

Again, society should both be able to recognize and support a person being trans while also saying 'you cannot bring that advantage in to sport, sorry'.

The level of denial and/or delusion that for political correctness requires people to accept there is no advantage that ruins the competitive playing field is crazy. It is an actual delusion.


This young person was a medal winner before transitioning.
And the worst part is that I think this will hurt trans inclusion in both the short and long term by radicalizing some people against them as sport becomes the defining issue when it does not need to be, if we just took a more rational approach to this.

I am not saying that is what should happen. I am saying though that is very predictable. That as families who have seen their daughters train, practice and play sports at the top level for decades suddenly see their daughters with no fair playing field to compete, this will only get worse.

Simply saying to those families 'for the sake of inclusion you should be willing to sacrifice this place for cis women as a place to compete' is just not a fair compromise to ask for IMO and you will get more of the below and worse, very predictably.

This 'NEW' way of thinking and addressing this issue with fairness, seems steeped in common sense and applies a logic and consistently fair standard. Oddly no one has thought of this prior





One could almost believe that the entirety of this emerging 'NEW' way of thinking comes from these professional organizations reading the posting of a certain 2+2 posters comments on what would make better sense if fairness and safety and inclusion are the goals.

Maybe the minority she needs to accept she can no longer compete. So sad for all the woman in the sport no chance to win again or set records.
Some of her times literally destroyed others

There are some mixed gender sports such as the 4x400 meter relay race.

The teams must all be two males and two females so it is balanced and fair.

What you see is both astonishing and yet not.

Some teams choose to run their two women in the first two legs and others their two men, or vice versa. What you see when a team runs their two women first against a team that runs their two men first, is that it looks like the race is over for the team that ran the women first. The two men in the first two legs build such a lead it looks insurmountable. As the baton is handed to the last woman sprinter, she almost looks like she should be able to jog and win. And yet the teams that saved their men for the last leg, are shown gaining. It looks like they don't have enough time but they are eating up the distance. They catch up and pass her and in some instances that woman ends up last. Every team with a man running last passes her.

It is as if they are not even participating in the same sport as the disparity is so massive and so clear it is both shocking and yet not. Shocking to see but, really, we all know that is how it is even if we don't always see it.

Edit : this is not even one of the most extreme examples of disparity.

I don't think a single person ITT has ever suggested that cis males in top level sport don't have a significant advantage over cis females? Why are you posting the above?

Maybe if you think about it for at least ten seconds you'll figure out the connection.

If you still can't figure it out, Cuepee and/or myself will gladly explain it to you.

Have a good day!

Because the argument you hear to date, including one on Michael Smerconish show this week in his interview with trans activist Veronica Ivy, who herself, after transition became a top medaling cyclists is that the transwomen DO NOT have an advantage and that is proven via them not dominating sports broadly and just having some isolated successes here and there. She made the case citing all sorts of transwomen in sport who are just having middling results.

That is a false argument. No one is saying a transition is an automatic win and if the least athletic male transitions she will then beat the most athletic females.

The issue is that the tiny percent of the populace thus far who have transitioned, have A) not been composed of any real prior male athletes who had any success or relevance in their sport, or B) if they did it was decades earlier and they are far outside their prime.

If someone like Hubbard, who was a relevant male athlete back in her pre transition prime had instead grown up today and transitioned in her prime, as she indicates now she would have, she would have destroyed Womens' power lifting in terms of anyone cis being even close to being able to compete. She would have set world record only now touched today with a Chinese phenom lifter only now surpassing that. And if any other top male lifter had transitioned in those 20 years, that record would have been pushed out and up such that the Chinese phenom would not even be close.

If Kaitlin Jenner had transitioned in her prior male athletic prime as Olympic gold medalist it is likely no cis women ever would get a result even close to approaching what she accomplished back then as a male. If a relevant and high level competitive male MMA fighter (or worse a boxer) transitions we WILL see many women's deaths in the cage until they are stopped. You can bet on that, unless they hold back.

So arguing that 'the women who have transitioned today have not had enough success to prove their is any advantage' is asinine given what we have seen with so a small pool of trans women who have switched over the overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of success they have had at the top ranks despite not even being very good athletes in their prior male lives.

Veronica Ivy has stated there is no advantage and cis women need to just stop complaining and focus on getting better and if that becomes the prevailing attitude as a Hubbard or a Jenner transitions in their prime that will be soul crushing for cis women who will understand they do not have the biology to simply 'get better' to compete and are now excluded from that top rank of their sport.

And we WILL see more and more, relevant and competitive medal level males transition in their primes like this story...



...and the rightful resentment and outrage it will create on behalf of cis women.

Many on the left want to cover their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears pretending they cannot foresee this problem as it even arrives now. Just ignore it until it really is an issue of some consequence. Pretend these are open questions and not yet certain to maintain the status quo of just letting them compete.

Nonsense. The deeper you let it go, the more you hurt both the cis woman athlete and the trans woman athlete. Letting some win medals now only to define it later as unfair will almost certainly have consequences for the transwomen many will then say they won by 'cheating' when the rules later exclude them from that same event.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words and in this case a video should then be worth 10,000 words in terms of what is crystal clear in that video.

But I think some are so vested in denial of any of the obvious truths they simply cannot recognize what is clearly portrayed in a video like that.

Order of magnitude guess, how many times are you going to post that same image over and over ITT?

I have a question that is a bit off the subject and would be dumb to ask thirty years ago but not so much now.

When a person transitions it is because they are trying to accomplish what?

Gender transitioning is the process of changing one's gender presentation or sex characteristics - for example, from male to female, or female to male. This may be done in order to bring one's outward appearance into line with one's internal sense of gender identity – the idea of what it means to be a man or a woman,[1] or to be non-binary or genderqueer.

Since i have not repeated any picture, which one are you guessing about?