Endometriosis charity appoints trans woman as the new head of the organisation.

Glorianny, if an adult identified as a five year old would you let them compete in a primary school sports day race? If not, why not?

Glorianny says . . .

* Equality means not putting one section of people above another.*
So why does she persist in putting TW above women?

Who knows?

No, patriarchy is very easy to grasp, as is the concept of internalised misogyny. Patriarchy means that male-born people have privilege over others, and internalised misogyny makes some women believe that this is as it should be.

Glorianny

Oh Mollygo I do pity your prejudice.
You must be feeling really threatened.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

O Glorianny
I certainly pity your prejudice. It shows so clearly and so intently against females that you must be feeling really threatened. Unless you’re hiding something about yourself that explains your prejudice against females?

Your patronising posts don’t appear to persuade anyone to join you in the moral high ground Glorianny

Doodledog

Glorianny

Doodledog

If it is only black women who have suffered ignominious treatment then there has been a failing on the part of their representatives if this hasn't been investigated and exposed.

If, OTOH, there have been white women who have been similarly treated, or if the only women with DSDs who have applied to compete in the female category are black, then I don't see how it is racism, however desperately Glorianny wants to make it so.

I don't think that is at all logical Doodledog If one or two white women suffered that is regrettable. But the numbers of black women now involved, the criticism of the appearance of black women and the insistence that they must comply with a ruling which causes them ill health, all constitute racism.
It isn't me who thinks so but the American Civil Liberties Union.

It is perfectly logical. If only black women suffer ignominy then yes, it is probably racist (very much so if white women with DSDs also compete as male but are not tested. If white women are tested by different standards from those applied to black women then it would also be racist. But of the same rules apply to both, then you may consider it unnecessary, but it is not racist.

Upthread (on this page, so no need for 'trawling') when I asked whether white women had suffered the ignominious treatment you said
Oh yes in the past. Doodledog there were huge outcries about it. One of the tests involved women parading naked.
. . . (edited to remove an example of a Spanish woman)
The inaccuracies have been many over the years but it is black women who suffer most now.

So not 'one or two' white women, but 'many over the years'?

Rosie asked upthread about why a swab test to take DNA isn't enough - did you answer that? And piggy-backing on Rosie's point above, do you have any empathy for the female women who lose out on careers, education and achievement because they are pushed aside by male-bodied competitors in their sports, or are you putting the wants of transwomen and those of people with DSDs who have male bodies but identify as women ahead of the needs of women yet again?

I'm not putting the wants of anyone above anyone else. That's what equality means. Nor am I ignoring the problems in women's sport because they don't fit my preconceived ideas. I'm not egotistical enough to think I know more about what is happening than those who are the activists in promoting equality in the US. I rely on them to inform my opinion.

I'm afraid I have no idea why a swab test is unacceptable but it is, the present system being to use an unproven theory about testosterone to limit black women's involvement. I don't see any point in theorising about what could be used.

Equality means not putting one section of people above another. I realise this is a difficult concept for some. Our society is patriarchal and the concept of equality is difficult to grasp, the acceptable idea being that one group always has (and must have) privilege over others.

Glorianny

Doodledog

If it is only black women who have suffered ignominious treatment then there has been a failing on the part of their representatives if this hasn't been investigated and exposed.

If, OTOH, there have been white women who have been similarly treated, or if the only women with DSDs who have applied to compete in the female category are black, then I don't see how it is racism, however desperately Glorianny wants to make it so.

I don't think that is at all logical Doodledog If one or two white women suffered that is regrettable. But the numbers of black women now involved, the criticism of the appearance of black women and the insistence that they must comply with a ruling which causes them ill health, all constitute racism.
It isn't me who thinks so but the American Civil Liberties Union.

It is perfectly logical. If only black women suffer ignominy then yes, it is probably racist (very much so if white women with DSDs also compete as male but are not tested. If white women are tested by different standards from those applied to black women then it would also be racist. But of the same rules apply to both, then you may consider it unnecessary, but it is not racist.

Upthread (on this page, so no need for 'trawling') when I asked whether white women had suffered the ignominious treatment you said
Oh yes in the past. Doodledog there were huge outcries about it. One of the tests involved women parading naked.
. . . (edited to remove an example of a Spanish woman)
The inaccuracies have been many over the years but it is black women who suffer most now.

So not 'one or two' white women, but 'many over the years'?

Rosie asked upthread about why a swab test to take DNA isn't enough - did you answer that? And piggy-backing on Rosie's point above, do you have any empathy for the female women who lose out on careers, education and achievement because they are pushed aside by male-bodied competitors in their sports, or are you putting the wants of transwomen and those of people with DSDs who have male bodies but identify as women ahead of the needs of women yet again?

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny I don't think there is any basis for equality in women's sport and there is a great deal of evidence for that. I don't understand what you're saying. If it's women's sports shouldn't be restricted to biological women, then any males whether or not they identify as women would be allowed and no female will stand a chance of winning. Biological females bottom of the list once again.

I think if you choose to ignore the ignominities CS had to go through, and which many other black athletes have undergone that is up to you. But there is no doubt that many see what is happening as racist and discriminatory. Claiming it isn't or you don't see it really doesn't make things equal.
You can read more about it here www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/simone-biles-shacarri-richardson-and-how-the-olympics-failed-black-women
And more from the ACLU www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/four-myths-about-trans-athletes-debunked

One day you might actually address the points made, and not resort to insinuation and insult.

Simone Biles is a biological woman, Caster Semenya is not. I do not want Caster Semenya banned from female races because of black skin, but because Caster has enjoyed a male puberty. ACLU can spout as much as it wants, but male puberty develops longer, denser bones, a larger heart, increased lung capacity, and more twitch muscles. These advantages are not eliminated by magic words. I don't want anybody to suffer ignominies and now with DNA testing available from a simple cheek swab nobody needs to. Historical acts should not be a reason to let males compete in the female class.

The ACLU link states that trans athletes are "banned" from participating in sports in USA. That's not the case at all, they are quite welcome to participate in the correct sex class events. Of course non of the transwomen are good enough to challenge for medals, scholarships etc in the male sex class. As for non-binary individuals, do they want non-binary races, as they don't identify with either male or female, although every last one of them is one or the other. Interestingly there was a road race recently that awarded prizes to the fastest men, fastest women and fastest non-binary. All 3 non-binary prizes went to males, what a huge surprise! I'm still waiting for a male athlete to be beaten out of a medal place by a transman. It hasn't happened yet and you have to wonder why, if there really is no male body advantage.

I don't believe in a Christian God, but when people say there is one I don't brand them liars. so you say 'yes I agree" on pain of being called a bigot if you don't? When was the last time anyone tried to force you to believe in their Christian God, and act in accordance with their beliefs?

If you choose not to care about the heartbreak of female athletes who have trained hard for years and years, only to be beaten to a place or medal by a newly transgendered male, then that's up to you. Of course in the USA college scholarships are often awarded on the basis of sporting success. If you are happy with females being unfairly disadvantaged in their education prospects by a male then you have different ideas of fairness to me.

As far as your post about inequality goes Rosie51 I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt that your statement about biological females being "bottom of the list" was based in ignorance and not on prejudice. However if after reading the two links you are still of the same opinion, it has to be prejudice. Because what is patently obvious from those links is that black women are substantially more bottom of the list.
That appears to be an area you are quite content to ignore simply to target transwomen.
There is little equality in women's sport. There are many papers about this, about how things are run mainly by white men, and how black women in particular suffer from preconceptions of what is acceptable as a woman.
If including transwomen stirs up women's sport and brings this discrimination into the limelight it is surely a good thing.

And as is so obvious you have to insult. So be it.

The ACLU? That one that decided on the anniversary of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death they would "honour" her by using her quote on abortion
The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman's life, to her well-being and dignity. When the government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”

but couldn't bring themselves to use woman, she, her etc so butchered the quote to use

“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity. When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”

When there was outrage at this they eventually apologised. Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew exactly what a woman was, and the problems women face at the hands of men.

Have you ever read any studies about the human body and the differences between the adult male body and the adult female body? I actually think testosterone levels are a distraction, lowering them in transwomen or other males does not shorten or reduce density of their bones, shrink their hearts and lungs, and any muscle loss is minimal. That's why it can never be fair for males to compete against females in those sports that have traditionally been segregated. Can you perhaps guess why males and females have had separate events until these last few years?

Your total disregard for female athletes whose chance of a college education is stolen from them by males who transition after the benefits of male puberty is saddening, but even worse it's disgusting that you use black women to justify white men stealing prizes from them. The inequality of sport run mainly by white men won't be rectified by introducing more inequalities and deliberately and cynically harming women.
I assume by white men you mean white adult males? With your varied use of men it can be hard to know.

Doodledog

If it is only black women who have suffered ignominious treatment then there has been a failing on the part of their representatives if this hasn't been investigated and exposed.

If, OTOH, there have been white women who have been similarly treated, or if the only women with DSDs who have applied to compete in the female category are black, then I don't see how it is racism, however desperately Glorianny wants to make it so.

I don't think that is at all logical Doodledog If one or two white women suffered that is regrettable. But the numbers of black women now involved, the criticism of the appearance of black women and the insistence that they must comply with a ruling which causes them ill health, all constitute racism.
It isn't me who thinks so but the American Civil Liberties Union.

So this applied to women of all ethnicities, it was 35 years ago, and the chromosomal verification tests have been eliminated?

In what way is this racism?

Doodledog

Are there instances where white women have been subjected to ignominious treatment, Glorianny? It seems strange that there has not been an inquiry if so.

Oh yes in the past. Doodledog there were huge outcries about it. One of the tests involved women parading naked.
A Spanish woman was the first to be excluded when chromosome testing was introduced. She was reinstated and the test abandoned because of her appeal.
Finnish geneticist Albert de la Chapelle worked alongside Martínez-Patiño to appeal the decision to the IAAF. De la Chapelle protested sex testing in sports for years, arguing that the Barr body test incorrectly identified intersex women. Furthermore, he pointed out that the finding of the abnormal sex chromatin and exclusion of these athletes from women's sporting events violated their rights and caused psychological damage. With de la Chapelle's support, the IAAF reinstated Martínez-Patiño in 1988. Martínez-Patiño's case, and later advocacy, led to the elimination of chromosomal sex verification tests
The inaccuracies have been many over the years but it is black women who suffer most now.

If it is only black women who have suffered ignominious treatment then there has been a failing on the part of their representatives if this hasn't been investigated and exposed.

If, OTOH, there have been white women who have been similarly treated, or if the only women with DSDs who have applied to compete in the female category are black, then I don't see how it is racism, however desperately Glorianny wants to make it so.

Oh glory - reading these ‘discussions’ is like banging the head on the wall. The majority, almost all, of those who contribute share broadly similar and imo sensible views on the issues around trans rights.
Then there’s the loan voice, banging on about those posters not knowing anything about feminism/sex/gender/oppression of women.
They’re racist bigots -whoops sorry, I must include myself firmly in that category

Oh Mollygo I do pity your prejudice.
You must be feeling really threatened.

Are there instances where white women have been subjected to ignominious treatment, Glorianny? It seems strange that there has not been an inquiry if so.

Rosie51

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny I don't think there is any basis for equality in women's sport and there is a great deal of evidence for that. I don't understand what you're saying. If it's women's sports shouldn't be restricted to biological women, then any males whether or not they identify as women would be allowed and no female will stand a chance of winning. Biological females bottom of the list once again.

I think if you choose to ignore the ignominities CS had to go through, and which many other black athletes have undergone that is up to you. But there is no doubt that many see what is happening as racist and discriminatory. Claiming it isn't or you don't see it really doesn't make things equal.
You can read more about it here www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/simone-biles-shacarri-richardson-and-how-the-olympics-failed-black-women
And more from the ACLU www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/four-myths-about-trans-athletes-debunked

One day you might actually address the points made, and not resort to insinuation and insult.

Simone Biles is a biological woman, Caster Semenya is not. I do not want Caster Semenya banned from female races because of black skin, but because Caster has enjoyed a male puberty. ACLU can spout as much as it wants, but male puberty develops longer, denser bones, a larger heart, increased lung capacity, and more twitch muscles. These advantages are not eliminated by magic words. I don't want anybody to suffer ignominies and now with DNA testing available from a simple cheek swab nobody needs to. Historical acts should not be a reason to let males compete in the female class.

The ACLU link states that trans athletes are "banned" from participating in sports in USA. That's not the case at all, they are quite welcome to participate in the correct sex class events. Of course non of the transwomen are good enough to challenge for medals, scholarships etc in the male sex class. As for non-binary individuals, do they want non-binary races, as they don't identify with either male or female, although every last one of them is one or the other. Interestingly there was a road race recently that awarded prizes to the fastest men, fastest women and fastest non-binary. All 3 non-binary prizes went to males, what a huge surprise! I'm still waiting for a male athlete to be beaten out of a medal place by a transman. It hasn't happened yet and you have to wonder why, if there really is no male body advantage.

I don't believe in a Christian God, but when people say there is one I don't brand them liars. so you say 'yes I agree" on pain of being called a bigot if you don't? When was the last time anyone tried to force you to believe in their Christian God, and act in accordance with their beliefs?

If you choose not to care about the heartbreak of female athletes who have trained hard for years and years, only to be beaten to a place or medal by a newly transgendered male, then that's up to you. Of course in the USA college scholarships are often awarded on the basis of sporting success. If you are happy with females being unfairly disadvantaged in their education prospects by a male then you have different ideas of fairness to me.

As far as your post about inequality goes Rosie51 I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt that your statement about biological females being "bottom of the list" was based in ignorance and not on prejudice. However if after reading the two links you are still of the same opinion, it has to be prejudice. Because what is patently obvious from those links is that black women are substantially more bottom of the list.
That appears to be an area you are quite content to ignore simply to target transwomen.
There is little equality in women's sport. There are many papers about this, about how things are run mainly by white men, and how black women in particular suffer from preconceptions of what is acceptable as a woman.
If including transwomen stirs up women's sport and brings this discrimination into the limelight it is surely a good thing.

Quite possibly Doodledog, but Glorianny wrote it in her post. 😁

Transwomen are not women.

Trans Women Are Transwomen.

I think Glorianny was telling you what you think, rather than saying what she thinks with that statement, Molly

It's pretty clear to me that Glorianny does believe that TWAW - apologies if not.

Hurray! Glorianny has said it at last!!!
I read it here at 14:33

Transwomen are not women. 👏👏👏

Well done Glorianny! 👏👏👏

But, Glorianny, don’t twist what I say though you will, because that’s your modus operandi.
I have repeatedly said that TW can live as they wish. Many of them do/did unnoticed until the actions of TRA and some TW impacted on their lives.
BUT
*As soon as they say they have
changed sex, i.e. say they are women,*
(Women are AHF and even you said Transwomen are not women.
(Glorianny posted that at 14:33 today)

it’s a lie, and if they then use that lie to cheat their way into female sports and spaces then they impact negatively on the lives of women and often offer violence to those who challenge them.
If you don’t condemn that behaviour then you endorse it, demonstrating your prejudice against females.

Galaxy

Sex segregated spaces are not hatred. Again my beliefs arent really relevent, they have no impact on a mans sex.

Agreed. I'm not sure what definition of 'hatred' is being used here, but the OED defines it as : A feeling of intense dislike or aversion towards a person or thing; an emotion in which such a feeling is experienced; loathing; hostility; malevolence. Also: an instance of this. Frequently with of, for, between, against.

How this applies to wanting single sex spaces, and how this is 'peddled' by those wanting to stop the language changing so that we know whether we are talking about males or females I don't know, particularly as we all keep saying that we have nothing against transpeople per se, just against the way the trans lobby want to eradicate women.

I think if you choose to ignore the ignominities CS had to go through, and which many other black athletes have undergone that is up to you. But there is no doubt that many see what is happening as racist and discriminatory. Claiming it isn't or you don't see it really doesn't make things equal.

Are you suggesting that if CS had been white there wouldn't have been ignominies? Do you have evidence for that claim? Have white athletes with DSDs been treated differently? If there is evidence then there is a case to be made against those who carried out ignominious testing on black athletes and non-invasive ones on white ones, and I would absolutely support that (without supporting male-bodied athletes being able to compete against female ones). Without it though, it sounds like clutching at straws, and a way of firing insults (eg 'worthy of the KKK') to anyone who questions male-bodied athletes in female sport.

Sex segregated spaces are not hatred. Again my beliefs arent really relevent, they have no impact on a mans sex.

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny I don't think there is any basis for equality in women's sport and there is a great deal of evidence for that. I don't understand what you're saying. If it's women's sports shouldn't be restricted to biological women, then any males whether or not they identify as women would be allowed and no female will stand a chance of winning. Biological females bottom of the list once again.

I think if you choose to ignore the ignominities CS had to go through, and which many other black athletes have undergone that is up to you. But there is no doubt that many see what is happening as racist and discriminatory. Claiming it isn't or you don't see it really doesn't make things equal.
You can read more about it here www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/simone-biles-shacarri-richardson-and-how-the-olympics-failed-black-women
And more from the ACLU www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/four-myths-about-trans-athletes-debunked

One day you might actually address the points made, and not resort to insinuation and insult.

Simone Biles is a biological woman, Caster Semenya is not. I do not want Caster Semenya banned from female races because of black skin, but because Caster has enjoyed a male puberty. ACLU can spout as much as it wants, but male puberty develops longer, denser bones, a larger heart, increased lung capacity, and more twitch muscles. These advantages are not eliminated by magic words. I don't want anybody to suffer ignominies and now with DNA testing available from a simple cheek swab nobody needs to. Historical acts should not be a reason to let males compete in the female class.

The ACLU link states that trans athletes are "banned" from participating in sports in USA. That's not the case at all, they are quite welcome to participate in the correct sex class events. Of course non of the transwomen are good enough to challenge for medals, scholarships etc in the male sex class. As for non-binary individuals, do they want non-binary races, as they don't identify with either male or female, although every last one of them is one or the other. Interestingly there was a road race recently that awarded prizes to the fastest men, fastest women and fastest non-binary. All 3 non-binary prizes went to males, what a huge surprise! I'm still waiting for a male athlete to be beaten out of a medal place by a transman. It hasn't happened yet and you have to wonder why, if there really is no male body advantage.

I don't believe in a Christian God, but when people say there is one I don't brand them liars. so you say 'yes I agree" on pain of being called a bigot if you don't? When was the last time anyone tried to force you to believe in their Christian God, and act in accordance with their beliefs?

If you choose not to care about the heartbreak of female athletes who have trained hard for years and years, only to be beaten to a place or medal by a newly transgendered male, then that's up to you. Of course in the USA college scholarships are often awarded on the basis of sporting success. If you are happy with females being unfairly disadvantaged in their education prospects by a male then you have different ideas of fairness to me.

Mollygo

Argue as you want Glorianny. Your condoning if the ill-intentioned actions of some TW against women is here for all to see.

I haven't condoned anything Mollygo I have asked for evidence of what you claim. It mostly seems to be based on your own prejudices- Transwomen are not women. And your belief that because they believe they are women and you do not they are liars.
I don't believe in a Christian God, but when people say there is one I don't brand them liars.
There may be ill intentioned transwomen, unfortunately there are also ill intentioned natal women. No problems are solved through hatred.

Argue as you want Glorianny. Your condoning if the ill-intentioned actions of some TW against women is here for all to see.