[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Maybe, I don't think it's hugely realistic, and also it's an irrelevant followup comment if the first premise is accepted?

You can JUST argue "it's not appropriate because of the physical advantage" which is true. If that argument is accepted then the result is that transwomen shouldnt be in the sport. Whether or not it could be "used to cheat" is irrelevant... Because it can ONLY be accepted that it could be used to cheat if the first argument that there is an unfair advantage is already accepted.

So why bother throwing that in there? It comes from an emotive place of incredulity and point-scoring. It's not necessary and it's inflammatory, so why do it?

And again; the story is that she's been removed as an LGBT ambassador. Surely no one can be arguing that she should remain as one?

Back to me being transphobic then for raising my concerns, you're not going to Police how I speak.