This is a step with you realizing this is not an area of objective fact, so well done.


Now step 2 is you realizing that percent of society and also absolute numbers are both legit ways to consider this.

What type of activities in Society gets more participation generally than Recreational Sport? I can think of few other than something like voting that gets people out en masse and participating in the same activities.

When one of the first hits you get on google says"...Recreational sports are the most popular type of athletic activity undertaken throughout the world...." you choosing to nitpick and make an issue of my opinion, while ignoring that or trying to dissect it so you can continue to critique is just silly. But I cannot stop the hills you choose to die on, or the non issues you feel to need to make issues of.

So sure I can provide support that recreational sport is 'massive' and I have shown when you go any of the UK orgs that run recreational sport that about 80% of them are co-ed, and you can nitpick that is not 'massive'. Would you say 'substantial'? 'Significant percent'? or 'other'?

What is your need to nitpick to TRY to assert you are correct, in this area of opinion, instead of just agreeing to disagree as I offered?

(Inb4 people again accuse me of being the argumentative one when typically the majority of stuff I deal with is just like this)

The alleged attacker apparently shouted 'homophobic slurs', so it wasn't 'because trans'. Homophobia is very much a thing but 'transphobia' not really.

That is not why women's sports categories were created, though. Obviously not. It is a bizarre academic theory that has only been cooked up in the past year or so.

It's not nit picking to point out the FACT that basically no one does something you claim is MASSIVE.

Also stop conflating recreational sport with mixed gender team sports.

The debate is are mixed gender team sports massive in the UK, since basically no one does it, the answer is clearly no.

Most women who report doing recreational sport are cycling, swimming etc, activities that dont require Orgs.

You are pissing into the gale of objective data and its just weird.

All im conceding with opinions is that you can have a ridiculous opinion that is factually wrong and nonsensical in any reasonable interpretation of the word massive.

If you want to have that opinion fine, but in this case its an objectively incorrect one.

There is no conflation when 'recreational sport is clearly massive world wide',

...and in site after site you can click on them and SEE that 80% of the offerings are mixed gender. Maybe you can find sites in the UK where that is not the case but I did not see them.

You can call that anecdotal, as it is, and you can say my experience in Canada is anecdotal, as it is. But I am more than comfortable in basing an OPINION in anecdotal evidence that seems clear and that i invite you to counter.

it is not a theory. It is a rationalization that was required to counter the fact that the reason men and women's sport was separated was do to biological sex.

If that reasoning is allowed to stand and not challenged it makes it harder to justify trans women competing with cis women. So Trolly and others will push a false narrative. They will use isolated examples of poor sportsmanship to say 'men cannot handle losing to women' is the reason why sports were first segregated, which is BS. It is proven BS by the MASSIVE number of men who willingly play co ed recreational sport when they have options not to.

[QUOTE=Cuepee;57801543]

...and in site after site you can click on them and SEE that 80% of the offerings are mixed gender. Maybe you can find sites in the UK where that is not the case but I did not see them.

/QUOTE]

Sport participation is a matter of public health.

Therefore we can look at actual numbers of people playing sport or swimming and cycling because it is extensively researched and data is routinely gathered and aggregated.

There is no need for guess work.

Barely anyone plays team sports in man/women teams in the UK.

FACT. Not opinion FACT.

BTW you are looking at orgs at Universities in the UK.

About 2.5 million adults attend UK universities at anyone time in the UK.

You are never going to pull in enough adults from that already small pool to make something "massive."

FWIW I spent about 10 mins looking for a mixed gender team for any sport in my region and could not find one.

FACT

OPINION

OAFK is correct. I'm also in the UK. I've played various sports, football being the main one, and there has never been mixed teams. There are various leagues of different sports and the only one I know of where there is a mix of sexes is badminton and that's not an actual league, it's just a club where people get together to play, they don't actually play any other clubs.

I thought it was just Americans who would aggressively, arrogantly and stubbornly assume things must be the same in the rest of the world to the point they wont accept otherwise from actual residents of said countries, but Canadians doing work itt.

something this site will never get right.

He says 'barely anyone' and then calls it 'fact' without understanding we would need to define thresholds for 'massive', 'significant', 'barely anyone' and AGREE first before the word can be applied.

O.A.F.K will argue against this (as he has to) but two different people can suggest differing thresholds for the definitions from 'massive' to 'barely anyone' and that is fine. That is the very nature of opinion.

Is a 'massive' turn out for a General Election 80% or 60%? Is it 40% or 50% in a City Election? Is it 30% or 40% in a school board election?


If you do not define the terms and agree it is pointless to tell the other person you are the definitive holder of the facts.

Nothing wrong with a school board election getting 45% turnout and someone saying that is massive but people like O.A.F.K do not understand that and as such argue it is fact it is not massive as they think they are the sole arbiter of the truth and the only true number that matters.


O.A.F.K i challenge you to give me your numbers and how you justify it as to what qualifies as 'massive' in recreational sport generally and more specifically than co ed participation.

I know you will not, as you can see the flaw in trying to do so and that is it would be subjective. So you will try and justify your position in other round about ways.

Yes massive is a word that is open to interpretation, one mans massive might not be another mans massive.

However when you are calling something that is basically almost non existent massive.

Only 4% of Women play football in the UK, 5% play netball but that is irrelevant as men do not play netball. Numbers playing other team sports are even smaller.

So if only 4% of Women play football in the UK as I have cited from two sources, then the number of those women playing mixed gender football will be less than 4%.

If you think less than 4% is massive, jog on.

No one else does however you are welcome to your highly idiosyncratic interpretation of the word massive, one that renders the word redundant but QP gonna QP instead of just admitting he was wrong.

Putting aside my point was WorldWide and not UK specific and i only said I 'doubt' the UK stands near alone as the exception, these facts that pop up on the first page of a google search of 'UK recreational sports leagues' suggests your anecodatal expeirences might be countered by others in the UK who play in these leagues.

I mean, would you concede people playing in these leagues would not deny that mixed participation is a thing?


7 of 9 sports listed and offered as Mixed.




30 offerings here and only 2 are women only and the 28 others all Mixed

https://www.kingston.ac.uk/sport/rec...nalactivities/



I invite you (challenge you) to find an sporting organization in the UK that offers up a good selection of varying sporting activities that are not dominated by mixed participation? I am not suggesting they do not exist, as I have no looked. But I am willing to bet they do not and that you won't find any.

QP: I dont drag threads out.

ALSO QP: Multi post semantics to try and obfuscate that he made a pure assumption about another country that turned out to be wrong and doing everything in his power not to concede that the use of the word MASSIVE when talking about the UK in this context is obviously a bad qualifier.

I asked you prior, and you did not answer.

What in society do you think gets bigger voluntary regular turnout than Recreational Sport? I can only think of something like voting.

And then ask 2 is the challenge to you as well. Find me a City, or Province Recreational Club with numerous sporting options in the UK that is not dominated by MIXED participation?

What part of we looked at actual numbers of people playing team sports are you not getting?

We are not arguing that is a thing, we are arguing that it is "MASSIVE".

I do drag out threads WHEN someone is trying to say in a matter of opinion they hold an objective truth. I have never denied that and acknowledged up thread it leads to most drag outs here.

I offered you the 'agree to disagree' and move on a long time ago, but you continue instead to try and make your case I am wrong. So I will continue to counter it.

I am fine with this being the last words in this line if you want to agree to disagree. I doubt you take it as you are intent in sticking to me being wrong.

Dude its Kingston University.

Yes and I took your offer to disagree with your plainly and obviously absurd and ridiculous opinion which you wont accept is ridiculous because link to Kingston University.

Its an objective truth that mixed gender team sports (not recreational sports which include swimming etc,) are not massive in the UK unless you are using massive in a way that renders the term massive redundant, because massive should not be used to describe really small phenomenon.

I never suggested that it was why women's divisions in sport were created. I wasn't aware that that there was an academic theory to that effect. It doesn't sound like a persuasive theory to me.

So your next post you should cite that I "drag thread out" as you dismiss my offer to move on and continue to make points.

You can pretend, for those who want to buy it that it is me, who always drags these types of silly arguments out.

Anyone time for the circular part of this as we now just start rehashing prior made points instead of moving on.


I again assert 'my substantiation that Recreational Sport is enormously popular worldwide'

I continue to assert it is 'enormously popular in the UK'

I show anecdotally that in the UK that in site after site googled of Recreational Organizations that the VAST majority of sports (80%) are MIXED.

I continue to challenge you (and you are looking but cannot find them, I would bet on that) to show Organizations that are not dominated by MIXED.

That last one should be a gimmie too as you would think there would be some pure ladies ones, but i did not find them. But you probably know that unless you can also show a significant percent are 'sole' sex focused it only substantiates my point that MOST are mixed.



Back to you!

All I see here is links to universities sports clubs, nothing to do with any sort of competitive sport or even full sized sports teams. I don't know if the confusion here is that you don't understand these aren't sports teams within the university, it's more of a social/ fitness activity. I do see that the Rugby section in that link actually involves a league, but it isn't mixed there are seperate male and female leagues. Looking at the football section it mentions it's 45 minutes of physical activity and then a 15 minute wellbeing session (lol). Basically just be folk kicking a ball about for a bit, not a proper game in anyway.

Just as anyone else, trans people have an obligation to participate in the 'general interest' of the sport they play. That obligation is of any participants in any non-competitive sport. In many places, a default for trans people participating in any type of competitive sport or competition is that they should just stick with what they know and compete as trans. But as we have explained many times, competitive SPORT is hardly likely to be the best environment for trans people. As we have explained in past threads, when competing with other trans people one is potentially creating the conditions for them to struggle for playing time, etc, because there are less people of the same ilk in that competitive setting.

So as a general approach to this debate, the more people you can get (even in a recreational sport setting) the better. More trans people in the recreation sport setting does no harm to trans people in the Competitive SPORT setting. If more trans people find a recreational sport they can participate in, it does no harm to the competitive SPORT setting.

In fact, it would likely have some benefit for the Competitive SPORT setting to have more trans people to compete against in order to work out the actual consequences of where trans people may fall in that Competitive SPORT setting.

There are so many very valid reasons to be in support of allowing trans women to compete competitively in Competitive SPORT, the amount of this thread that is to do with what Competitive SPORT is NOT like, and what it SHOULD be like (and do we really need to enumerate those) is a LOT.

I know there have been several threads specifically to point out this, but let me try to do that here:

It is NOT about inclusiveness and its exclusion of people that are not cis

Most of what we have been seeing discussed in the Gender issues thread is about defining what Competitive SPORT SHOULD be, and this tends to make the topic of Competitive SPORT become very narrow and singular focused. It is in this sort of narrow focus where we lose sight of what Competitive SPORT, with it's many different sub-sections, actually is and can be. We should spend far more time figuring out what kinds of sports that fall under Competitive SPORT will best suit all who wish to participate in competitive SPORT.

The challenge is not, and never has been, in having everyone compete in a competitive setting. It is in figuring out what sort of competitions are best for all who wish to participate in competitive SPORT. And the challenge is in making those competitions available in a way that everyone can access.

There is no contest, sport, activity that should or can be exclusive. If there were, it would be a game of rules designed to discriminate against individuals. So yes, competition must have rules and a set of agreed upon criteria. It must have competition levels and rules to separate different classes of athletes (as happens all the time in all sports). The competition level may have certain requirements, but it does not have to be exclusive.

But the point that has been missed (and no doubt, it will be missed by people who have never really looked into competitive SPORT at all) is that there are multiple categories of SPORTs,

yeah he tried to defend against homophobic slurs, whatever that means. probably just some anti lgtb folks at the parade. transphobia is a thing I think or there wouldn't be so many trans victims around the world. they have really statistics of being attacked even murdered. maybe not yet a thing that's established in the west well enough but it happens too often unfortunately. I looked it up once and it definitely happens out of ignorance and stupidity, A lot.

why is trolly typing so much?? that's persuasive essay length.