Discussion
pquinn said:
ZedLeg said:
Of course it’s not about being trans, she was a superficial attention seeker before she transitioned.
You are such a massive hypocrite.If someone else had suggested someone trans had done something because they were an attention seeker you'd be all over them.
Guess that's how the black hoodie crew justify things to themselves.
When I’ve argued with people in the past it’s because they’ve called trans people attention seeking for just living their lives and asking people for some basic respect.
I think calling someone who at one point was a core part of one of the most successful reality tv shows of all time attention seeking is fair.
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.I haven’t called anyone names or insulted anyone, I’m literally asking to see the science that FINA are basing their ban on.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
pquinn said:
8.4L 154 said:
Meanwhile from today, Shooting at LGBT bar marked as terrorism and cancelling pride.
Extrapolating from what some Iranian loon did at a gay bar is a bit of a stretch.Edited by andyA700 on Saturday 25th June 13:58
Google [bot] said:
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to bes for not being activist enough.
Agreed.Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.8.4L 154 said:
pquinn said:
8.4L 154 said:
Meanwhile from today, Shooting at LGBT bar marked as terrorism and cancelling pride.
Extrapolating from what some Iranian loon did at a gay bar is a bit of a stretch.On the other hand the events in Idaho targeting pride just over a week ago has been a factor in what I'm doing today, the above reinforces that. Terrorism targeting LGBT people does have an effect on trans people, after all that is what the T stands for.
Google [bot] said:
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to bes for not being activist enough.
Well said.Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.ZedLeg said:
I haven’t called anyone names or insulted anyone, I’m literally asking to see the science that FINA are basing their ban on.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
This is the FINA rport, which clearly set out how they came to their decisions. They convened a Working Group which contained three sub-groups - Athletes Group, Science Group and Legal and Human Rights Group.Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2022/06/1...
andyA700 said:
8.4L 154 said:
pquinn said:
8.4L 154 said:
Meanwhile from today, Shooting at LGBT bar marked as terrorism and cancelling pride.
Extrapolating from what some Iranian loon did at a gay bar is a bit of a stretch.On the other hand the events in Idaho targeting pride just over a week ago has been a factor in what I'm doing today, the above reinforces that. Terrorism targeting LGBT people does have an effect on trans people, after all that is what the T stands for.
anyway i've been told to shut up again and have a long drive ahead of me anyway so, Freeze peach
andyA700 said:
ZedLeg said:
I haven’t called anyone names or insulted anyone, I’m literally asking to see the science that FINA are basing their ban on.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
This is the FINA rport, which clearly set out how they came to their decisions. They convened a Working Group which contained three sub-groups - Athletes Group, Science Group and Legal and Human Rights Group.Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2022/06/1...
Google [bot] said:
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to bes for not being activist enough.
Agreed. Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.They obviously do not realise, despite the fact that it has been pointed out a number of times.
Google [bot] said:
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to bes for not being activist enough.
They don't have a clue, as someone who comes under the (increasingly divided) LGBT umbrella the extreme TRA's are reversing decades of progress. As I said earlier in the thread, it's a push too far to try and make people believe and accept that you can simply change sex because of how you feel. Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.There's a huge difference between accepting someone born male who wishes to live their life as a woman and accepting that person who was born male is now female. I'll afford every courtesy to anyone who wishes to live their life as the opposite sex but don't for a second think I actually believe they are the opposite sex.
You can't deny biology and the differences between male and female are many. It's not for society to accept the denial of this biology in order to appease a minority but for that minority to accept that they're biologically not the person they feel they are. Yes, that comes with it's challenges for those people but to expect so much of the rest of society is a massive over reach.
Edited by bobbo89 on Saturday 25th June 14:24
ZedLeg said:
andyA700 said:
ZedLeg said:
I haven’t called anyone names or insulted anyone, I’m literally asking to see the science that FINA are basing their ban on.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
This is the FINA rport, which clearly set out how they came to their decisions. They convened a Working Group which contained three sub-groups - Athletes Group, Science Group and Legal and Human Rights Group.Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2022/06/1...
I suspect everyone agrees in general males are far physically stronger than females?
Therefore if someone who has gone through puberty and has the characteristics of a male goes to being a female, why is the assumption that they will lose these characteristics? Why is the assumption that they will lose this, unless proven otherwise? Is it not up to the scientific community to prove that they lose all the benefits of being male (not possible with height for example) to be allowed to compete with females?
Therefore if someone who has gone through puberty and has the characteristics of a male goes to being a female, why is the assumption that they will lose these characteristics? Why is the assumption that they will lose this, unless proven otherwise? Is it not up to the scientific community to prove that they lose all the benefits of being male (not possible with height for example) to be allowed to compete with females?
WorldBoss said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
Do you think people born male should be allowed to compete in women's sport?
Expecting a long answer involving experts, studies, hormone levels, inclusion etc rather than a yes/no.
Basically you'll answer "I don't know" then go back to telling everyone who says 'no' that they are wrong. Am i right?
LOL, you throw out an over simplified question containing noticebly loaded language and then are preemptively getting upset with the inevitable "it's complicated" answer? Yet another zero sum game.Expecting a long answer involving experts, studies, hormone levels, inclusion etc rather than a yes/no.
Basically you'll answer "I don't know" then go back to telling everyone who says 'no' that they are wrong. Am i right?
I'm sure you'll not like this answer but:
"Yes, trans women should be allowed to compete in women's sport as there is no conclusive publicly available data that shows they have an unfair physical advantage after transitioning".
I think it's utterly insane but I respect you stating your opinion.
Basically, you think people born male should be allowed to fight females because of selected 'data' you've found rather than the obvious understanding of simple entry level biology.
It's mind-boggling (and extremely dangerous to women)that you have voiced this - but fair play!
ZedLeg said:
andyA700 said:
ZedLeg said:
I haven’t called anyone names or insulted anyone, I’m literally asking to see the science that FINA are basing their ban on.
Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
This is the FINA rport, which clearly set out how they came to their decisions. They convened a Working Group which contained three sub-groups - Athletes Group, Science Group and Legal and Human Rights Group.Ultimately I’m always going to push pack at mob mentality when it harms a community I’m a part of. If that makes you angry or think less of that community then it is what it is.
https://resources.fina.org/fina/document/2022/06/1...
I supply you with the information and you don't wish to read it The moral of the story is - "You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink".
bobbo89 said:
Google [bot] said:
I wonder if Zedleg, 8.4 et al realise how much damage they do to trans rights. The vast silent majority like me that read their crap that black is white but don’t want to be embroiled in internet arguments has to be 99.x%
Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to bes for not being activist enough.
They don't have a clue, as someone who comes under the (increasingly divided) LGBT umbrella the extreme TRA's are reversing decades of progress. As I said earlier in the thread, it's a push too far to try and make people believe and accept that you can simply change sex because of how you feel. Most folk want to live and let live, no one cares about their neighbour being and living however they like, but they do care when people try to change the world to bow to a tiny minority using anti-science as justification, especially when they’re made out to be
s for not being activist enough.There's a huge difference between accepting someone born male who wishes to live their life as a woman and accepting that person who was born male is now female. I'll afford every courtesy to anyone who wishes to live their life as the opposite sex but don't for a second think I actually believe they are the opposite sex.
You can't deny biology and the differences between male and female are many. It's not for society to accept the denial of this biology in order to appease a minority but for that minority to accept that they're biologically not the person they feel they are. Yes, that comes with it's challenges for those people but to expect so much of the rest of society is a massive over reach.
Edited by bobbo89 on Saturday 25th June 14:24
Excellent article from The Courier Mail, detailing the process behind the decision from the FINA President.
https://www.couriermail.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?s...
https://www.couriermail.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?s...
“Inside story: The truth about FINA’s transgender vote and what the critics got so wrong”
Swimming has made headlines around the world this week and not because of the action at the world championships in Budapest but for the historic decision handed down on Monday which banned transgender athletes from competing against women. Julian Linden sat down with FINA’s chief executive director Brent Nowicki for the full story.
Story:
Of all the misconceptions about FINA’s game-changing policy for transgender athletes, the most deceitful is why swimming’s leaders took the plunge while other sports were content to sit back and wait for someone else.
The popular narrative is that FINA panicked because of the storm that erupted when University of Pennsylvania trans swimmer Lia Thomas won a national title at the American College championships.
Because that happened just three months ago, and FINA’s bombshell new policy was only made public when delegates were asked to vote on it at the Congress in Budapest last weekend, the simple but wrong assumption was that it was a hit job aimed squarely at Thomas.
“The critics - and there’s plenty of them - accused FINA of rushing through with a half-baked policy just to block Thomas from competing at the next Olympics, taking place in Paris in 2024.
But the FINA executive who engineered and helped draft and oversee the development of the entire policy from start to finish, says that notion is a total fallacy.
“It’s easy to say Lia Thomas was the lightning rod but that’s not the case,” FINA’s chief executive director Brent Nowicki told News Corp.
“These issues, health and safety, welfare issues, competition, fairness issues, these are issues that have been in international sport for years now.”
In his one and only tell-all interview on the policy that has rocked the sporting world, Nowicki has lifted the lid on the true inside story on exactly how the policy that has divided the world came to fruition.”
“Critically, he reveals that it started much earlier than people think - in 2021, not 2022 - and, contrary to popular belief, there was never any intention to exclude anyone.
Rather, the starting point for the project was to find a way to include everyone in a fair way.
It was only after FINA received the detailed report it commissioned from independent scientists and medical experts that it felt compelled to come up with a policy that effectively banned transgender women from competing in elite female competitions.
“We didn’t start with the goal posts in front of us. We weren’t trying to kick that ball through those goalposts,” Nowicki said.
“We were trying to move the ball down the field methodically, correctly, and that was the approach we had always taken.“
The starting point for the policy actually stems from FINA’s dark past, and the current push to finally clean it all up.
For much of its 114 years, FINA has been run primarily by men, who spent millions of the sport’s fortune on their own lavish lifestyles instead of competitors struggling to make ends meet.
But that all changed last year after FINA elected a new president - Husain Al-Musallam - on a platform to reform the organisation after its dirty secrets were exposed by a two-year investigation by News Corp.
Nowicki, a top American lawyer who had worked for years at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and has a reputation for meticulous planning, got straight to work the first day he sat down at his new desk - June 8, 2021.”
Swimming has made headlines around the world this week and not because of the action at the world championships in Budapest but for the historic decision handed down on Monday which banned transgender athletes from competing against women. Julian Linden sat down with FINA’s chief executive director Brent Nowicki for the full story.
Story:
Of all the misconceptions about FINA’s game-changing policy for transgender athletes, the most deceitful is why swimming’s leaders took the plunge while other sports were content to sit back and wait for someone else.
The popular narrative is that FINA panicked because of the storm that erupted when University of Pennsylvania trans swimmer Lia Thomas won a national title at the American College championships.
Because that happened just three months ago, and FINA’s bombshell new policy was only made public when delegates were asked to vote on it at the Congress in Budapest last weekend, the simple but wrong assumption was that it was a hit job aimed squarely at Thomas.
“The critics - and there’s plenty of them - accused FINA of rushing through with a half-baked policy just to block Thomas from competing at the next Olympics, taking place in Paris in 2024.
But the FINA executive who engineered and helped draft and oversee the development of the entire policy from start to finish, says that notion is a total fallacy.
“It’s easy to say Lia Thomas was the lightning rod but that’s not the case,” FINA’s chief executive director Brent Nowicki told News Corp.
“These issues, health and safety, welfare issues, competition, fairness issues, these are issues that have been in international sport for years now.”
In his one and only tell-all interview on the policy that has rocked the sporting world, Nowicki has lifted the lid on the true inside story on exactly how the policy that has divided the world came to fruition.”
“Critically, he reveals that it started much earlier than people think - in 2021, not 2022 - and, contrary to popular belief, there was never any intention to exclude anyone.
Rather, the starting point for the project was to find a way to include everyone in a fair way.
It was only after FINA received the detailed report it commissioned from independent scientists and medical experts that it felt compelled to come up with a policy that effectively banned transgender women from competing in elite female competitions.
“We didn’t start with the goal posts in front of us. We weren’t trying to kick that ball through those goalposts,” Nowicki said.
“We were trying to move the ball down the field methodically, correctly, and that was the approach we had always taken.“
The starting point for the policy actually stems from FINA’s dark past, and the current push to finally clean it all up.
For much of its 114 years, FINA has been run primarily by men, who spent millions of the sport’s fortune on their own lavish lifestyles instead of competitors struggling to make ends meet.
But that all changed last year after FINA elected a new president - Husain Al-Musallam - on a platform to reform the organisation after its dirty secrets were exposed by a two-year investigation by News Corp.
Nowicki, a top American lawyer who had worked for years at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and has a reputation for meticulous planning, got straight to work the first day he sat down at his new desk - June 8, 2021.”
Edited by rover 623gsi on Saturday 25th June 15:12
“Overseeing the reforms - which promised to put the interests of athletes first - he soon discovered a whole range of issues that were not properly covered by the existing policies, including inclusion and fairness.
So he decided to take a deeper look, especially into the transgender debate, which had come up in other sports, so began assembling top international experts with no ties to the sport’s murky past.
“There was no preconceived notion. If anything, there was a desire to learn as much as we possibly could and figure out what does science say, what does it mean?” he said.
“I wanted an all star team where everybody’s a free agent.
“I wanted to know what it was. What is being transgender mean? What does it mean scientifically? What does it mean, chromosomally? What does it mean socially? What does it mean mentally?
“It’s not just being transgender that makes you transgender. There’s more to it than just the label you put on somebody. It was our duty to figure that out, educate ourselves.”
By November last year, the first group had already been chosen.
Comprising medical and science experts, it included Dr Sandra Hunter, an Australian-born professor at the Department of Athletic and Human Performance at Marquette University.
In early 2022, the science group had finished its report and handed it to Nowicki.
The full report has not been published but the architects addressed the Congress before the vote, explaining how competitions between male and female athletes are no longer fair once puberty kicks in because of the differences in testosterone values.
What’s more, the scientists showed how biological and physical changes can’t be undone, which was one of the decisive factors that convinced FINA to prevent transgender women from competiting in elite women’s events if they had gone through puberty - essential rejecting the idea that level playing fields can be created through testosterone reduction.
“In a very simplistic look on the street approach…where we drew the line was where the impact of testosterone meets between girls and boys,” Nowicki said.
“At that point, it’s arguable that the legacy effects of testosterone start to develop and you can’t undo that or you can’t undo all of that.”
Once it became clear what the science was saying, Nowicki set up a second working group, comprising legal and human rights experts, to look at how to frame the policy.
The five members included former Federal Court of Australia judge Annabelle Bennett and James Drake, an Australian barrister and CAS Arbitrator, now based in London.
Nowicki also began talking to athletes, sending out questionnaires to over 300 athletes around the world, to find out what they wanted.
The response was overwhelming.
More than 83% said eligibility for events should be decided by birth sex. And over 63% said they wanted to see an additional ‘open’ category created to ensure everyone can compete.
A separate taskforce, yet to be decided, will begin work on that soon, and is expected to report back at the end of the year.
Nowicki also held one-on-one interviews with a smaller number of elite athletes, whose identities remain confidential, other than Australia’s Cate Campbell and American Summer Sanders.”
So he decided to take a deeper look, especially into the transgender debate, which had come up in other sports, so began assembling top international experts with no ties to the sport’s murky past.
“There was no preconceived notion. If anything, there was a desire to learn as much as we possibly could and figure out what does science say, what does it mean?” he said.
“I wanted an all star team where everybody’s a free agent.
“I wanted to know what it was. What is being transgender mean? What does it mean scientifically? What does it mean, chromosomally? What does it mean socially? What does it mean mentally?
“It’s not just being transgender that makes you transgender. There’s more to it than just the label you put on somebody. It was our duty to figure that out, educate ourselves.”
By November last year, the first group had already been chosen.
Comprising medical and science experts, it included Dr Sandra Hunter, an Australian-born professor at the Department of Athletic and Human Performance at Marquette University.
In early 2022, the science group had finished its report and handed it to Nowicki.
The full report has not been published but the architects addressed the Congress before the vote, explaining how competitions between male and female athletes are no longer fair once puberty kicks in because of the differences in testosterone values.
What’s more, the scientists showed how biological and physical changes can’t be undone, which was one of the decisive factors that convinced FINA to prevent transgender women from competiting in elite women’s events if they had gone through puberty - essential rejecting the idea that level playing fields can be created through testosterone reduction.
“In a very simplistic look on the street approach…where we drew the line was where the impact of testosterone meets between girls and boys,” Nowicki said.
“At that point, it’s arguable that the legacy effects of testosterone start to develop and you can’t undo that or you can’t undo all of that.”
Once it became clear what the science was saying, Nowicki set up a second working group, comprising legal and human rights experts, to look at how to frame the policy.
The five members included former Federal Court of Australia judge Annabelle Bennett and James Drake, an Australian barrister and CAS Arbitrator, now based in London.
Nowicki also began talking to athletes, sending out questionnaires to over 300 athletes around the world, to find out what they wanted.
The response was overwhelming.
More than 83% said eligibility for events should be decided by birth sex. And over 63% said they wanted to see an additional ‘open’ category created to ensure everyone can compete.
A separate taskforce, yet to be decided, will begin work on that soon, and is expected to report back at the end of the year.
Nowicki also held one-on-one interviews with a smaller number of elite athletes, whose identities remain confidential, other than Australia’s Cate Campbell and American Summer Sanders.”
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff