That doesn't sound likely.

What does sound likely in a country that rejects anything other than sex at birth, is that this person was born biologically male but with ambiguous genitalia (not particularly uncommon) and was declared female on their birth certificate, but in fact is biologically male and then underwent male puberty, whilst still being legally classed as female in their country - as that country likely has no legal framework that would allow for changing it, even on discovery that they were actually born male. "The paperwork says female and that's that", I imagine may be the stance.

Spexulation of course, but I think a likely scenario IF it is true that genetic testing has indeed shown them to be biologically male.

In theory; she may not even have known.

You're talking generally about natural born women. I am a natural born woman. I don't have to identify as anything nor watch while you shove women into a pigeonhole to suit your own agenda.

I recall posting some decent evidence and agreement that said had he been born in Europe he wouod have been correctly assigned male at birth, but he was born in Algeria..

It's not going to be confirmed easily if it involves anything medical

I haven't met a single woman that has ever used the term personally, much less in this thread. I've never heard the term from other professionals or even in the medical field... it's clearly a minority view (or term).

I don’t go around calling myself a cis man generally, but if I am having a conversation about trans men and cis men I will say “cis men” and “trans men” to distinguish between which of the men I am talking about.

If I’m having a conversation about men and am discussing the differences in life between straight men and gay men I will refer to them as straight men and gay men, not “men” and “gay men”.

If I am having a conversation about men and am referring to the differences in life between white men and black men, I will say “white men” and “black men” not “men” and “black men”.

If I am having a conversation about men and the differences of views between Conservative men and Liberal Men I will say Conservative men and Liberal men not “Men” and “Conservative Men”

It really is just that simple and really isn’t that deep.

I prefer the old ways / days tbh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i'm just stating facts, hun


transitioning from male to female, or vice versa is forbidden, it says so in the Quran


same how those terrorists are also against their own religion kinda, since terrorism is a sin




you say christian catholics are a strict religion, but the Islam is also quite strict honestly

The reason for the loses are probably due to them facing another trans competitor.

The examples above are like comparing apples and oranges, we were born women, not cis women, transwomen were born men hence the prefix trans to denote they were born men, now that to me is pretty simple, women do not need the prefix cis just to soothe the brows of trans women which is essentially what adding the prefix is, if you are talking about women and transwomen its pretty evident who is who to everyone.

I disagree, but I'll stop saying cis woman on this forum.

While we are doing a sweep of language that's annoying/can be seen as offensive, please can we start saying "trans woman" instead of "transwoman" as the latter isn't correct and infers a type of othering that removes them as women.

If we could also refrain from calling Imane Khelif a man that would also be great. Regardless of any test results (of which we have no actual evidence) she was born a female, raised a female and identifies as such and it would be great to respect that.

True.

I still think that the Media is muddying the waters with all of the speculation.

Agreed thank you

What if I told you they weren't tho?

Olympic champion Imane Khelif is skipping the Eindhoven Box Cup in the Netherlands less than a week after World Boxing announced mandatory sex testing for all athletes.

I wouldn't believe you.. you are 2, one dimensional, on this subject.

…when Imane was being discussed during the Olympics, I looked at some of her fight losses, which is something that conflicted me a lot because it seemed to contradict ‘advantaged’…I’m not someone who is hugely familiar with boxing but I recall someone saying that they personally felt that Imane’s win against Angela Carini, was it…?..didn’t to them feel as though it displayed any fighting technique as such but just more ‘force and power’, that they wouldn’t have said that she excelled in her sport other than a physical power…which is interesting for me because she was assigned female at birth and has lived her childhood and life as female so therefore has not had ‘the privilege’ of male in her home country in terms of training…as a female, she wasn’t able to train as a boxer until she was much older…16yrs old, I think…which is very late for an Olympic athlete/competitor…and in that training that many female competing boxers would have had from a much younger age, is that not where techniques and refinements and the skills of competing in general are learned…?…so it could be said, that her development in the sport is/has been late because of her country restrictions of being female…?…and maybe explain convincing losses of the past to those who have honed and finessed their techniques as well as any physical power they have…I don’t know what her recent fights/history have been other than the Olympics so I don’t know what win/loss results there have been in recent years but I think the Kellie Harrington loss was a few years ago so it would be interesting to know in recent years, whether the wins are the dominating results now…I guess that there is no way of knowing that without risking the physical safety of a competitor with a potential power advantage in a combat arena…

The thing is, whilst I think for linguistic/conversational simplicity, It think it would be useful to have a word that can be used in this distinguishing way (when discussing trans issues, specifically) HOWEVER what I do find completely disingenuous is pretending that there isn't a very good reason that women have taken against it even when used in good faith. It was used pointedly/as a slur for years. You understand this, the people doing it understand this, they MUST, given the number of words that have become slurs against them. Using a word pointedly (or knowing it has been used this way) and then insisting "you shouldn't have a problem with this word when it's not being used as a slur :)" is gaslight. You might as well be saying "Well, breeders is accurate for people with kids, it only means people who have offspring :)".

The irony here of course is that it kind of falls under the same thing. There is no meaningful difference between "trans woman" and "transwoman" other than the inference but you can clearly see why that is a problem whilst denying that "cis" is a problem. I get a bit stuck on my answer here because it is used pointedly but it's hard to say that the "space" makes an objective difference beyond intent. But it is -- you have to accept, I'm afraid -- a perfectly legitimate opinion to believe that biologically male trans individuals are not women. You cannot legally discriminate against them for that... but as an individual opinion, yes you are allowed to believe that trans women are not women. Thought-policing is not the vibe. I'm (largely) fine with restrictions on actions and behaviour, but not opinions.

Similar to the above, I think "a man" is pointed however even if you think it's respectful to avoid saying "male" (if proven) or "potentially male" (speculative) I think it does cobble the discussion. How else would you say it if you believe that this individual may actually be biologically male?

Yes people tend to forget that boxing is not UFC - fights usually don't end in knockouts, it's a points-based sport an so skill will also factor in massively in the lighter weight categories. The physical strength and reach advantage is the reason she won most of her fights, often against higher-skilled and better trained fighters, and is really exactly WHY it's such an unfair advantage.

I watched the fight against Kellie Harrington and Kellie was a far better boxer, imane barely landed a punch, they were in different weight classes though last Olympics so there was no rematch between them to see if it would have had a different outcome

He / she / they have not one single feminine trait .. like Sharon Davies said … after ever victory her coach lifted him/her up onto his shoulders … that is only something they do with MALE boxers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

…that’s what I mean, in terms of Imane because her situation is more unique…she could be seen as a ‘late developer’ in terms of not having been able to train in boxing competition because of the restrictions of her home country …so a lack of techniques and finesse and competing in general could have meant losses at the beginning of her career but any ‘advantaged power and strength’ etc might now becoming more and more to the fore…in terms of safety for all athletes, that has to be a huge consideration…I mean, I don’t know…these are things that I’ve considered and I feel have to be considered because they’re too important and potentially dangerous not to in a combat sport/arena…

Stop calling everything gaslighting. Context matters to whether the word is an insult or not. Gay is used an insult, still, yet it's also used an an accurate adjective for a man who loves another man. Nobody gay would have any issue with someone calling someone gay unless the context was insulting or othering. I've never used cis in a derogatory way, and that should be taken into consideration when my usage of the word is being discussed.

Agreed, it's perfectly legitimate, which is why I haven't mentioned it until now despite it being used constantly, because I was giving the benefit of the doubt it was being used in a non-derogatory way. I was being extremely pedantic and petty because of the reaction to the usage of the word cis.

Saying "he" when that person identifies as a woman, was assigned female and raised as one their entire life is just disrespectful... it just is.

I am under no illusion that trans women are not biological women. That of course is undeniable. However, even though I know that, I still refer to them as she out of respect for them and how they want to be known. It doesn't really matter that I know in science they are biological men. It would be crass of me to call them he out of simple manners.

It's like if my name was Benjamin and I said "I hate it though so please call me Luke" and you continued to call me Benjamin. My actual name isn't Luke, it's not on my birth certificate and it's not how I was Christened or whatever, but I'm asking you to do the grace and humour me despite you knowing it's not actually my name.

At the very least it's not asking you to believe they're women, it's just asking you to do the good mannered thing and humour them. You can believe what you want.

If someone doesn't want to do that, fine. Call them he if you can't bring yourself to humour someone. But don't complain if someone tells you that you're being a dick. :shrug:

You're asking us to do the good-mannered thing lol.... And if we don't comply WE'RE being a dick.

I'm done with men telling me how I should think and behave. DONE.

Nobody is stopping you from thinking what you want and saying what you want, but freedom of speech isn't freedom of consequence and if you do something that someone considers rude, prepare to be called rude.

You are happy to risk insulting someone by sticking by your beliefs and principals, why are you surprised when they do the same to you?

The part that's gaslighting is the pretending not to know why people are pissed off with the word/that it's only been used neutrally and what it "technically means". I see where you're coming from in principle but the general sense of "why on earth would anyone have an issue with ye olde latin word cis" whilst knowing that it's been frequently used in a pointed way in a contentious issue. It's also not the same as the precursor gay/straight, because no one is disputing the noun when those words are used. If you say "gay man" or "straight man" neutrally... no one is disputing in either case that noun subject (man). When you use the differentiation of "cis woman" and "trans woman" the premise is that both parties accept the noun "woman" to refer to both, when that will often not be the case. This is actually the same issue when it comes to "trans woman" (adjective+noun) vs "transwoman" (singular noun). These linguistics are baked right into the debate, whether that's ideologically or subconsciously.




I agree with that in general and would do exactly that. I'm happy to say "she" when I believe that the person in question is genuine and the situation is uncomplicated. However that's a large caveat ("uncomplicated") -- for example, I am extremely hesitant to refer to an apparent trans-identifying male offender who has sexually assaulted women as "she" -- in that situation agreeing to "she" is at the point of being grossly offensive to the victims of that individual. They were not assaulted by a "she". They were assaulted by a predatory male. And even more importantly - the statistics of that offense MUST be recorded as a male perpetrator / female victim. The same applies to trans men (especially teenage females identifying as male) being assaulted by men. They MUST be recorded as female victims. This data is extremely important.

Worth noting: I entirely recognise that of the above two scenarios, young biologically female trans-identifying "boys" being assaulted by men, i.e. the trans person being the victim, is FAR more common, simply because biological females are the #1 victims of sexual violence by a massive margin. Considering them to be "boys" assaulted by men (in any sort of statistic) is frankly insane.

Extreme examples I know, but part of illustrating that language is important, in all sorts of scenarios, and can't just be a matter of the individual preference of "the listener".

not at all


i am just having my own opinion, and you guys are having your own opinions


this is called a good debate, hun


where more people having different opinions, i wouldn't go telling you how you should think

Olympic Boxer Imane Khelif Withdraws from Women’s Eindhoven Tournament After Mandatory Sex Testing Policy Announced

"The decision of Imane's exclusion is not ours. We regret it," tournament media
director Dirk Renders told The Associated Press.

:whistle:

She supposed ruptured her bollox in training

Ouch !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they are intersex then they may not have that part. It's entirely possible they didn't know about their condition until later on in their life/career. It's also not fun to be picked on for medical conditions one can't help and especially if it is invisible. It doesn't mean I think their participation was correct, but I have sympathy they were seemingly allowed despite this only to have the rug pulled later on.

Yes intersex athletes are very different to trans ones, and even the trans ones..it's the fault of the organisers for allowing it in the first place

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...fd83c750d4.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/for...&postcount=295

I don't "identify" as a cis woman, I AM a cis women. I identify as female.

I am not a cis anything. I am a woman. I don't need defining.

I identify as a Bin man.

After all I sort the rubbish out more than the actual bin men do.:hehe: