The loss of freedom of speech, of sidelining women and biology

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/swimming/61853450
I'm pleased that males will be kept out of women's swimming, it's the only fair decision. I am alarmed though that as long as transition has been completed by age 12 then transwomen may compete against women. Surely this could encourage the transitioning of children? No child should have their puberty blocked, unless it's to delay precocious puberty, which is only ever done in extreme circumstances for the shortest time. I really feel they needed to say that nobody born male could ever compete against females. They need to address the open category immediately. There's a simple solution, two categories, female and open. Everybody gets to compete, and those allies who despite being female want to be fully inclusive can also enter the open category. Win win.

Rosie for Sports Minister .

That is by far the most sensible solution, and would protect children from abuse - more and more is coming out about the extent of child abuse in sport, and IMO allowing anyone under 12 to transition very definitely comes under that category.

Doodledog

Rosie for Sports Minister .

That is by far the most sensible solution, and would protect children from abuse - more and more is coming out about the extent of child abuse in sport, and IMO allowing anyone under 12 to transition very definitely comes under that category.

Why thank you

I first typed 'terrified' but moderated it down to alarmed, but actually it's a horrifying concept to transition children.
There are young people in the USA who already show signs of osteoporosis from the blockers and cross sex hormones. The latest about the abuse suffered by young gymnasts is so worrying, and I'm sure that won't be the last sport to be exposed. There are obviously coaches who would stop at nothing on their glory hunt for success, and would happily encourage transition if they felt it would work.

Rosie51^No child should have their puberty blocked^
We do right to be concerned.
There are varying opinions about when a dog should be spayed because of the potential damage to their development. Strange they get more consideration than some children.

The castration of boy singers to preserve their high voices was stopped long ago.

Though it was late enough for a recording to exist of Alessandro Moreschi singing Ave Maria in 1902.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=14MH2E94um4

Better sound in this version.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjvfqnD0ws

That recording is hauntingly beautiful and quite horrific at the same time Elegran. I had very little knowledge about the Castrati other than the absolute basic they were castrated at a very early age to conserve their vocal range. Having read more on the internet the history of it is both fascinating (in a horrible sense) and repellent. Poor, poor boys

Smileless2012

^Not just men becoming women but women becoming men^ but men can't become women, and women can't become men which is why there are so many problems when it comes to services which are segregated by sex, not gender.

Ok, segregated by sex then.

I think you knew perfectly well what I meant though

And yes we know men and women can't genetically change - but if they have transitioned to the other sex we should treat them as that sex.

Although I recognise this would entail unfair advantage in physical sports in the men transitioned to women group so I agree with not allowing that.

Looking at the film clips on this DM link, can anyone seriously think these "protestors" are genuine TW's?

They are just an anarchist organisation, determined to disrupt and bully people into "their" way of thinking.?

The "cause" could be anything.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10931901/Bristol-Womens-rights-activists-silenced-balaclava-clad-trans-rights-mob.html

They are misogynists looking for a way to attack women. They have found the perfect cause.

Galaxy

They are misogynists looking for a way to attack women. They have found the perfect cause.

I think you’re right.

If they aren't DiamondLily and I think you've made a good point, then trans activists should denounce them as they are damaging their cause and unless they do, they'll be seen as representing them.

But to what extent should we treat them as that sex AussieNanna? Isn't that the problem, when treating them as the sex they have chosen gives them access to women only spaces and has enabled them to unfairly compete against natal women in sport.

And if they look, sound,move, act and think exactly like the sex they once were, how do we know to treat them as the other sex?

What does that even mean? "Treat them as the other sex" ? It involves different things in different circumstances - employed for their intellect, they are the same as the other sex, but in a physical contest they are at a distinct advantage, in a bed in a maternity ward one biological sex will be completely absent, and in situations where the cultural norm is for the biological sexes to be separate, including them overturns the wishes of 99.9% of the population so that less than 1% can fulfil a fantasy.

Baroness Nicholson, who has been championing the rights of biological women, has given an interview, to the DM, about her struggles and run ins with the activists:

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10932167/Grown-men-pretending-dont-know-woman-wife-children-absurd.html

Interesting but the Baroness is inaccurate and misleading on at least one of her statements
two nurses who told her they had lost their jobs because they had refused to say that trans women were the same as biological women.
For Emma, it was her call to arms.
'These young women did not have the funding or the contacts to go to an employment tribunal.
From Citizens Advice
You don't have to pay any fees to make an employment tribunal claim.
If you win, your employer won’t automatically have to pay your costs. If you lose, you don’t automatically have to pay your employer’s costs.

No objection to anyone campaigning for free speech but basing your claim on inaccuracies is never a good start.
And no one needs "contacts" anyone can Google it.

Glorianny

Interesting but the Baroness is inaccurate and misleading on at least one of her statements
two nurses who told her they had lost their jobs because they had refused to say that trans women were the same as biological women.
For Emma, it was her call to arms.
'These young women did not have the funding or the contacts to go to an employment tribunal.
From Citizens Advice
You don't have to pay any fees to make an employment tribunal claim.
If you win, your employer won’t automatically have to pay your costs. If you lose, you don’t automatically have to pay your employer’s costs.

No objection to anyone campaigning for free speech but basing your claim on inaccuracies is never a good start.
And no one needs "contacts" anyone can Google it.

Perhaps they meant legal advice, expert advice, loss of earnings etc?

AussieNana wrote -
And yes we know men and women can't genetically change - but if they have transitioned to the other sex we should treat them as that sex.

Although I recognise this would entail unfair advantage in physical sports in the men transitioned to women group so I agree with not allowing that.

No-one transitions to the other sex. They may make changes to their body or they may not. Either way, they are still the same sex.

Why are you more concerned about sport than about women losing privacy and dignity, and being at risk of harm in hospital wards or prison cells?

"'These young women did not have the funding or the contacts to go to an employment tribunal." Perhaps they meant they didn't have the accurate information about getting a tribunal and funding it, the confidence to take on the stablishment, and the hope that their HR would back them and not the trans people who claimed they were "abused" when she said trans women were not the same as biological women.

"From Citizens Advice
You don't have to pay any fees to make an employment tribunal claim.
If you win, your employer won’t automatically have to pay your costs. If you lose, you don’t automatically have to pay your employer’s costs."

Does that mean you may end up paying costs, even if you win?

Doesn't alter the fact that they were faced with losing their jobs for stating the obvious, and a biological fact that trans women are not the same as biological women, which surely is the singular important focus of this case.

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Interesting but the Baroness is inaccurate and misleading on at least one of her statements
two nurses who told her they had lost their jobs because they had refused to say that trans women were the same as biological women.
For Emma, it was her call to arms.
'These young women did not have the funding or the contacts to go to an employment tribunal.
From Citizens Advice
You don't have to pay any fees to make an employment tribunal claim.
If you win, your employer won’t automatically have to pay your costs. If you lose, you don’t automatically have to pay your employer’s costs.

No objection to anyone campaigning for free speech but basing your claim on inaccuracies is never a good start.
And no one needs "contacts" anyone can Google it.

Perhaps they meant legal advice, expert advice, loss of earnings etc?

If that's what she meant she should have said so.
It isn't a good idea to start a campaign for free speech with misleading statements

FINA the governing body for elite swimming has just ruled that no-one who transitioned from male to female after puberty may compete in women's races

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10932219/Elite-swimming-rules-transgender-athletes-went-male-puberty-compete-races.html

I hope they go further to remove the 'records' and 'achievements' of transwomen so that future women aren't challenging unrealistic results.
And that steps are taken to compensate women who lost out to men.

Glorianny

DiamondLily

Glorianny

Interesting but the Baroness is inaccurate and misleading on at least one of her statements
two nurses who told her they had lost their jobs because they had refused to say that trans women were the same as biological women.
For Emma, it was her call to arms.
'These young women did not have the funding or the contacts to go to an employment tribunal.
From Citizens Advice
You don't have to pay any fees to make an employment tribunal claim.
If you win, your employer won’t automatically have to pay your costs. If you lose, you don’t automatically have to pay your employer’s costs.

No objection to anyone campaigning for free speech but basing your claim on inaccuracies is never a good start.
And no one needs "contacts" anyone can Google it.

Perhaps they meant legal advice, expert advice, loss of earnings etc?

If that's what she meant she should have said so.
It isn't a good idea to start a campaign for free speech with misleading statements

I do t know what she meant. The CAB site is a bit ambiguous.

It says that you may have to pay costs, win or lose. And that you may not be required to pay costs, win or lose.

But, the article was about her work, not about costs with tribunals.