Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11569058)

As I said it's a very complex issue. I do understand your point, but also in another respect, why is it up to trans people to disavow the activity on criminals using their identity as a gateway to be a criminal? If I pretended to be a Republican before attacking a Democrat, is it up to Republicans specifically to speak about it? Or if I attacked someone and claimed it was a religious-led attack despite being atheist? I am not sure.

Secondly, shining a spotlight that is not a widespread issue creates a very real threat to legitimate trans people, so I do understand. Some people will very much blur the lines between the two.

There are many times bigots use negative association with a certain demographic as a bargaining chip to try and prove their own prejudice as truth. For instance, if a gay man is caught being a paedophile, there will be many, many people using one incident to say "See... I told you so". It happens all the time. Hell, I have literally read it on here. And so it's very risky for a marginalised minority to shine a spotlight on something that many people will associate with their identity even if it is unrelated.

I hope I explained that okay.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 11569086)

Fine. Just wondered by you wouldn't use examples of UK legislation. Nothing about this story us connected to the USA. Not the boxers and not the Olympics in question.

For the record, I have no problem with trans people. I have a problem with self-identification. It was always going to cause problems and give an advantage to abusers and at the same time make the lives of genuine trans people much harder.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 11569086)

Fine. Just wondered by you wouldn't use examples of UK legislation. Nothing about this story us connected to the USA. Not the boxers and not the Olympics in question.

For the record, I have no problem with trans people. I have a problem with self-identification. It was always going to cause problems and give an advantage to abusers and at the same time make the lives of genuine trans people much harder.

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11569398)

They were just examples that came to mind, probably because I read more about US politics than I do UK stuff.

I am sure you do, and I do think your worry is legitimate, but I also worry about giving ammunition to bigots for issues that aren't as big as they're made out to be because I see it happen time and time again. It's a very nuanced subject and I respect the opinion on everyone I have discussed this with here today. It's too complicated and difficult to not.

Originally Posted by Crimson Dynamo (Post 11569406)

The First Minister of Scotland lost her job over this "issues that aren't as big as they're made out to be "

and it was a big feature in Harris losing so Hugely in the USA

“Crazy liberal Kamala is for they/them, president Trump is for you,” declares
one Harris-Walz attack ad airing in the battleground states. Another simply
proclaims: “No men in girls’ sports.”

USA voters agreed

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11569058)

As I said it's a very complex issue. I do understand your point, but also in another respect, why is it up to trans people to disavow the activity on criminals using their identity as a gateway to be a criminal? If I pretended to be a Republican before attacking a Democrat, is it up to Republicans specifically to speak about it? Or if I attacked someone and claimed it was a religious-led attack despite being atheist? I am not sure.

Secondly, shining a spotlight that is not a widespread issue creates a very real threat to legitimate trans people, so I do understand. Some people will very much blur the lines between the two.

There are many times bigots use negative association with a certain demographic as a bargaining chip to try and prove their own prejudice as truth. For instance, if a gay man is caught being a paedophile, there will be many, many people using one incident to say "See... I told you so". It happens all the time. Hell, I have literally read it on here. And so it's very risky for a marginalised minority to shine a spotlight on something that many people will associate with their identity even if it is unrelated.

I hope I explained that okay.

Originally Posted by Nicky91 (Post 11569149)

she just is one of those women who looks more masculine than others, so i'd also place her into the category of women's boxing, with more women who also look very masculine, who got a lot of muscle, like that it would be a lot fairer for everyone i think


but Imane Khelif is and always has been female




i mean Navratilova also always has been female, while also looking questionably masculine, and not very feminine at all



in my nation you also got a couple

Lucia Rijker, Nouchka Fontijn, Sherida Spitse


whom got very masculine traits, lots of muscle, the former two of which who also were boxers, and the latter who has been a international at our women's football team


to name a couple of examples, sooo to say Imane Khelif is trans is a insult


not every woman looks like a disney princess or social media influencer honestly


no offense of course

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653081)

What happens if the test proves that she's Intersex?

Originally Posted by Zizu (Post 11653089)

Loads of people are into sex …

[emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653081)

What happens if the test proves that she's Intersex?

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 11653123)

Intersex people are still either male or female

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653166)

I mean what would happen if she's an Intersex female Biologically, does she still compete in the women's side of the Sport?

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 11653174)

I assume so although that seems unlikely considering according to AIBA Imane already failed one of these tests and had been stopped from competing in the female category

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653322)

If that happens again then her Olympic gold needs to be given to the second place person.

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11653467)

She won that through a competition in which she was allowed to enter and play as a woman because she the Olympic rules stated at the time you can enter as your gender identity, so really anything that comes after bears no relation to her Olympic win.

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 11653481)

Shameful decision

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11653467)

She won that through a competition in which she was allowed to enter and play as a woman because she the Olympic rules stated at the time you can enter as your gender identity, so really anything that comes after bears no relation to her Olympic win.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653544)

Tbf she might pass the test yet.

Originally Posted by Zizu (Post 11653515)

The whole thing is disgraceful


All the young women who have devoted their lives to sport then a few young guys come along and win all the events as the girls simply cant compete .

The guys are also setting new records that no young women will EVER get close to

Its madness


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Zizu (Post 11653591)

https://x.com/riley_gaines_/status/1...249547754?s=46
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...b312584c31.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11653544)

Tbf she might pass the test yet.

Originally Posted by Crimson Dynamo (Post 11653592)

saw that today

:clap1:

Originally Posted by Crimson Dynamo (Post 11653618)

What am I supposed to do? Go and play with the men? Because I don't feel safe playing there. And all of my team-mates want me here."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football...s/cx2e0l5gr27o

The BBC ladies and gentlemen..

This boxing decision is important

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11653467)

She won that through a competition in which she was allowed to enter and play as a woman because she the Olympic rules stated at the time you can enter as your gender identity, so really anything that comes after bears no relation to her Olympic win.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 11653721)

The whole reason for seperate categories in Sport is because of sex based differences though so allowing someone to compete based on how they identify is unfair and dangerous to biological women. Whether it was allowed or not women lost out unfairly and that should be rectified

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 11653724)

I agree 100%. The Olympic committee was wrong to allow this in order to make themselves appear all cuddly and inclusive... except to women, of course. I see the next Olympics being very different, or at least I hope so.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 11653727)

I still feel so bad for that Italian boxer, she couldn't even point out the unfairness of it without being shamed and forced to pretend she was wrong

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 11653721)

The whole reason for seperate categories in Sport is because of sex based differences though so allowing someone to compete based on how they identify is unfair and dangerous to biological women. Whether it was allowed or not women lost out unfairly and that should be rectified

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11653742)

I understand that and the reasons, I'm just pointing out she competed in line with rules and so the Gold medal should stand regardless. She didn't mislead anyone or lie, she competed in the way the Olympics allowed her to.

Originally Posted by BBXX (Post 11653742)

I understand that and the reasons, I'm just pointing out she competed in line with rules and so the Gold medal should stand regardless. She didn't mislead anyone or lie, she competed in the way the Olympics allowed her to.