Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
Neom: Saudi forces 'told to kill’ to clear land for eco-city
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68945445 Saudi authorities have permitted the use of lethal force to clear land for a futuristic desert city being built by dozens of Western companies, an ex-intelligence officer has told the BBC. Col Rabih Alenezi says he was ordered to evict villagers from a tribe in the Gulf state to make way for The Line, part of the Neom eco-project. One of them was subsequently shot and killed for protesting against eviction. The Saudi government and Neom management refused to comment...
..Displaced villagers were extremely reluctant to comment, fearing that speaking to foreign media could further endanger their detained relatives. But we spoke to those evicted elsewhere for another Saudi Vision 2030 scheme. More than a million people have been displaced for the Jeddah Central project in the western Saudi Arabian city - set to include an opera house, sporting district, and high-end retail and residential units. Nader Hijazi [not his real name] grew up in Aziziyah - one of approximately 63 neighbourhoods affected by those demolitions. His father's home was razed in 2021, for which he received less than a month's warning. Hijazi says the photos he had seen of his former neighbourhood were shocking, saying they evoked a warzone..
I can't say, unfortunately, that I'm particularly surprised.
More that, before the modern conception of minority* rights, it was assumed that The Interests Of The People were 100% paramount.
So if the State decided to build a dam and flood your valley, get walking. Or get drowning.
*Minority in the sense of any subgroup within the population.
Cofio Dryweryn, as they say in North Wales. The destruction of the Welsh-speaking community of Capel Celyn to slake the thirst of Liverpudlians has neither been forgotten nor forgiven.
I see that we are off topic on trans this morning.
If anyone wants a nice non-controversial 20 minute video with lunch, here's (a very good) one exploring "What is the "Correct" Speed Limit?" in cities !
I'm attracted by the approach of looking at systems safety through the lens of kinetic energy (0.5 * m * v-squared) carried by a vehicle as indicating the possible damage in a collision.
That is one angle. Another is how can we prevent accidents (or collisions) in the first place. There are four schools between me and the fish and chip shop. Three of them on roads with a 20mph limit and one on a dual carriageway (40 or 50mph, I think) yet I've not heard of any schoolchildren being hit, in part because they use subways, zebra crossings and lollipop men and women, not to mention the green cross code. In my experience as a pedestrian, it can be harder to cross the road when traffic is slower, because there are fewer large gaps between cars.
And the video maker is a little disingenuous when pointing to the dangers of larger and larger cars, and higher speed limits, and then explicitly excepts 100 tons of tram bombing along at faster speeds.
My suggestion would be to look at casualty and accident statistics and then take best practices from the safest countries, not cherrypick the Netherlands because they ride bikes.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
I sometimes wonder if people droned on about it as "man" changed from meaning "people of all kinds", or "girl" changed from meaning "any child". Or "wife" became "married woman". Or as we imported all the Norman French loan words. I bet they did.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
I would just say that as an 80 plus year old about to celebrate our diamond wedding anniversary to the most remarkable woman, and a Scot as it so happens , she will always be a fabulous woman, wife, mother, grandmother, sister, aunt and loving all things of nature and animals and that is all that needs to be said
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
No - because transform etymology comes from the idea of being far from (original) form...?
Neom: Saudi forces 'told to kill’ to clear land for eco-city
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68945445 Saudi authorities have permitted the use of lethal force to clear land for a futuristic desert city being built by dozens of Western companies, an ex-intelligence officer has told the BBC. Col Rabih Alenezi says he was ordered to evict villagers from a tribe in the Gulf state to make way for The Line, part of the Neom eco-project. One of them was subsequently shot and killed for protesting against eviction. The Saudi government and Neom management refused to comment...
..Displaced villagers were extremely reluctant to comment, fearing that speaking to foreign media could further endanger their detained relatives. But we spoke to those evicted elsewhere for another Saudi Vision 2030 scheme. More than a million people have been displaced for the Jeddah Central project in the western Saudi Arabian city - set to include an opera house, sporting district, and high-end retail and residential units. Nader Hijazi [not his real name] grew up in Aziziyah - one of approximately 63 neighbourhoods affected by those demolitions. His father's home was razed in 2021, for which he received less than a month's warning. Hijazi says the photos he had seen of his former neighbourhood were shocking, saying they evoked a warzone..
I can't say, unfortunately, that I'm particularly surprised.
More that, before the modern conception of minority* rights, it was assumed that The Interests Of The People were 100% paramount.
So if the State decided to build a dam and flood your valley, get walking. Or get drowning.
*Minority in the sense of any subgroup within the population.
Cofio Dryweryn, as they say in North Wales. The destruction of the Welsh-speaking community of Capel Celyn to slake the thirst of Liverpudlians has neither been forgotten nor forgiven.
A farm once owned by some of my ancestors is under the Elan Reservoir.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Just seen a sign outside a hotel saying 'Bike Friendly', with a picture of a bicycle and a smiley face
This does seem to imply a pleasing level of discrimination against bikewankers elsewhere
When we stayed in the rather bizarre settlement of Silloth in Cumbria on Hadrian's Cycleway, the guesthouse advertised that they had secure cycle storage, bike mechanic kit, and would welcome anyone doing the trail. As a result, the place was packed out with a bunch of ravenous cyclists desperate for food and beer.
The same goes for dozens of rural small businesses, cashing in on MAMILs and cycle tourers from the big cities. I've noted this in Scottish Borders, East Lothian and in N.Wales - all it takes is some cycle racks, pastries and coffee.
Given 93% of UK adults can ride a bike and the massive uptick in interest during and after COVID, your hotel is simply cashing in on a trend. If rural community councils are serious about encouraging economic growth in their areas, they should do all they can to get on the NCN or long distance footpaths like Offa's Dyke. Unlike drivers, people walking and cycling need something local to eat and somewhere local to stay.
These days it is likely to need charging for EAPCs, too.
The best accommodation network I have used is Cyclists Welcome from CyclingUK; another well known one is Warm Showers. I'd always put these ahead of places that just say "we care cyclist friendly" with no external certification.
The Cyclists Touring Club (now CyclingUK) started the first such accommodation network in 1887, and gave out these embems to be displayed which are still there in some places: https://eghammuseum.org/cyclists-touring-club/
In my long-ago cycle touring days I used Youth Hostels. Is there still a decent network?
OKC, would be premier inns nowadays I suspect
Premier Inns don’t, IIRC, have dormitories. Nor communal washing areas. Generally speaking, I’ve happy memories of my Youth Hostelling days, although one had to be a bit cautious when hitch-hiking. Some wardens took a dim view of the practice.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Do you think that the practice of assigning gender at birth should be abandoned?
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
A woman is a woman you don't need any pretend crap at the front to pretend there is more than one type.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
A woman is a woman you don't need any pretend crap at the front to pretend there is more than one type.
Couldn't agree more. Both cis women, and trans women, are women.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
A woman is a woman you don't need any pretend crap at the front to pretend there is more than one type.
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
I've gone for a croque madame in sunny Cambridge.
That bit under the egg looks like my nutsac after a shower !!!!
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
He forgot the first - cynical - rule of professional conduct: watch your back.
He indulged in a lot of legalistic arguments but simply refused - or failed - to see clearly that he had been presented with evidence of possible perjury and miscarriages of justice and that such evidence should have pointed him and his client to only one course of action, a course which his clients did their level best to avoid and which he enabled.
And now his reputation has been harmed, just like those of every other lawyer acting for the PO - whether in-house or external, whether solicitor or barrister and no matter what their experience or qualifications.
If you pour a tiny spoonful of raw sewage into a bottle of champagne, the entire bottle is contaminated.
The PO = the raw sewage.
I never heard lawyers compared to champagne before…
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
You do realise in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, Devastator's scrotum is a specific plot point and is focussed on in a scene in the movie?
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
I've gone for a croque madame in sunny Cambridge.
That bit under the egg looks like my nutsac after a shower !!!!
Neom: Saudi forces 'told to kill’ to clear land for eco-city
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68945445 Saudi authorities have permitted the use of lethal force to clear land for a futuristic desert city being built by dozens of Western companies, an ex-intelligence officer has told the BBC. Col Rabih Alenezi says he was ordered to evict villagers from a tribe in the Gulf state to make way for The Line, part of the Neom eco-project. One of them was subsequently shot and killed for protesting against eviction. The Saudi government and Neom management refused to comment...
..Displaced villagers were extremely reluctant to comment, fearing that speaking to foreign media could further endanger their detained relatives. But we spoke to those evicted elsewhere for another Saudi Vision 2030 scheme. More than a million people have been displaced for the Jeddah Central project in the western Saudi Arabian city - set to include an opera house, sporting district, and high-end retail and residential units. Nader Hijazi [not his real name] grew up in Aziziyah - one of approximately 63 neighbourhoods affected by those demolitions. His father's home was razed in 2021, for which he received less than a month's warning. Hijazi says the photos he had seen of his former neighbourhood were shocking, saying they evoked a warzone..
I can't say, unfortunately, that I'm particularly surprised.
More that, before the modern conception of minority* rights, it was assumed that The Interests Of The People were 100% paramount.
So if the State decided to build a dam and flood your valley, get walking. Or get drowning.
*Minority in the sense of any subgroup within the population.
Cofio Dryweryn, as they say in North Wales. The destruction of the Welsh-speaking community of Capel Celyn to slake the thirst of Liverpudlians has neither been forgotten nor forgiven.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Do you think that the practice of assigning gender at birth should be abandoned?
I don't know. I think it's fine to note it - but enforcing it is what I think I have an issue with. Like - I don't see why what your doctor says on the day you're born is more important than your understanding later in life and why you have to seemingly disprove the assigned gender as if that is inherently more likely that your own sense of self. I just think less gender gate keeping and more acceptance of gender experimentation should be allowed - both at a de facto level and a de jure level.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
You do realise in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, Devastator's scrotum is a specific plot point and is focussed on in a scene in the movie?
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
I did, in fact, know this. I also think one of the Transformers urinates on one of the people in the first or second films?
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
You do realise in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, Devastator's scrotum is a specific plot point and is focussed on in a scene in the movie?
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
The Scottish Greens have been accused of prioritising ideology over protecting children after the party again refused to endorse an expert report into gender healthcare.
Patrick Harvie, who until last month was a Scottish government minister, claimed that a Holyrood motion welcoming the Cass Review and recognising it as a “valid scientific document” was not “supportable” by his party....
All other parties, including the SNP, endorsed Hilary Cass’s report at Holyrood. However, all seven Green MSPs voted against the motion, with Mr Harvie claiming that transgender people were having their “very existence refuted”....
Oh look! Another day, another meaningless fringe post about something which doesn’t really matter to the vast majority of people.
When will the older generation realise that this country is moving on and this issue, like so many of the culture wars, are irrelevant to our needs?
Well you’ll have a long time in the political wilderness to answer that one.
Have a nice day everyone.
xx
“Fringe issue”?
The one that saw off Sturgeon, the Bute House Agreement, the Greens from the Scottish government and Humzah Yousuf.
That “fringe issue”?
None so blind.
You’ve been wrong on this from the beginning and one day will have to work out how to row back as the smarter politicians are doing daily…
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
I've gone for a croque madame in sunny Cambridge.
That bit under the egg looks like my nutsac after a shower !!!!
Fckn hell, you’ve broken the TMI matrix..
It's an astute observation. I mean, I haven't seen Taz's nutsack but some things are universal.
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
I've gone for a croque madame in sunny Cambridge.
That bit under the egg looks like my nutsac after a shower !!!!
The Scottish Greens have been accused of prioritising ideology over protecting children after the party again refused to endorse an expert report into gender healthcare.
Patrick Harvie, who until last month was a Scottish government minister, claimed that a Holyrood motion welcoming the Cass Review and recognising it as a “valid scientific document” was not “supportable” by his party....
All other parties, including the SNP, endorsed Hilary Cass’s report at Holyrood. However, all seven Green MSPs voted against the motion, with Mr Harvie claiming that transgender people were having their “very existence refuted”....
Oh look! Another day, another meaningless fringe post about something which doesn’t really matter to the vast majority of people.
When will the older generation realise that this country is moving on and this issue, like so many of the culture wars, are irrelevant to our needs?
Well you’ll have a long time in the political wilderness to answer that one.
Have a nice day everyone.
xx
“Fringe issue”?
The one that saw off Sturgeon, the Bute House Agreement, the Greens from the Scottish government and Humzah Yousuf.
That “fringe issue”?
None so blind.
You’ve been wrong on this from the beginning and one day will have to work out how to row back as the smarter politicians are doing daily…
Do you think that maybe the investigation into embezzlement and the desire to drop climate change targets may have had more to play in those two things?
On topic, this is very interesting as it strongly implies we should expect proportional swing not UNS at the general election:
This table compares the notional 2019 election result with the May 2024 local elections and averages the constituency-level swing depending on the Con/ Lab lead in 2019...
I'd like to see similar analysis for swing to Labour in Lib Dem contested seats as that would give some clues on tactical voting propensity.
Yes and the small amount of regional polling reflects this. We also know Reform poll strongest in areas of Conservative strength so the swings in some of the safest Conservative seats are going to be amplified by the twin effects of the splintering to Labour AND the splintering to Reform (as we saw for example in the Clacton constituency polling earlier this year).
The YouGov England sub sample will be entertaining...
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
And of course, it's America - so when they're a few years older these students will be taking $150000 college althetic scholarships away from women.
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Italians still have a very lunch focused culture and breakfast isn't really seem as a meal. Commonly they just start the day with a cappuccino and even a pastry is an indulgence enjoyed maybe at the weekend. A milky coffee gets you through to the main event at lunchtime; and coffees thereafter are black, or mostly so. Talking of lunch...
I've gone for a croque madame in sunny Cambridge.
That bit under the egg looks like my nutsac after a shower !!!!
On topic, this is very interesting as it strongly implies we should expect proportional swing not UNS at the general election:
This table compares the notional 2019 election result with the May 2024 local elections and averages the constituency-level swing depending on the Con/ Lab lead in 2019...
I'd like to see similar analysis for swing to Labour in Lib Dem contested seats as that would give some clues on tactical voting propensity.
Yes and the small amount of regional polling reflects this. We also know Reform poll strongest in areas of Conservative strength so the swings in some of the safest Conservative seats are going to be amplified by the twin effects of the splintering to Labour AND the splintering to Reform (as we saw for example in the Clacton constituency polling earlier this year).
The YouGov England sub sample will be entertaining...
Just speaking to a Tory activist colleague (#accidentalheathener) who had been up in London from his Somerset base supporting the campaigning for the assembly, and he told me he had been terrified that Susan Hall would somehow scrape a win. The upshot being that the whole party would point at her election tactics and appeal to the Tory base as the secret to winning the next election.
He also said he was very unhappy with the change to FPTP for the mayorals because it encourages parties to focus on getting out the base vote rather than widening their appeal.
And finally he was highly irritated with the Greens for their NIMBY opposition to a solar farm on his patch.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
On topic, this is very interesting as it strongly implies we should expect proportional swing not UNS at the general election:
This table compares the notional 2019 election result with the May 2024 local elections and averages the constituency-level swing depending on the Con/ Lab lead in 2019...
I'd like to see similar analysis for swing to Labour in Lib Dem contested seats as that would give some clues on tactical voting propensity.
Yes and the small amount of regional polling reflects this. We also know Reform poll strongest in areas of Conservative strength so the swings in some of the safest Conservative seats are going to be amplified by the twin effects of the splintering to Labour AND the splintering to Reform (as we saw for example in the Clacton constituency polling earlier this year).
The YouGov England sub sample will be entertaining...
Reforms strongest polling in regional polls is in the Red wall and Wales, their strongest showing in the locals was Sunderland, an area of Labour strength. Their best performances as BXP were in Labour seats. I think it's a leap say they are strongest in areas of Conservative strength (although no doubt they are damaging them there)
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
You do realise in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, Devastator's scrotum is a specific plot point and is focussed on in a scene in the movie?
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
I did, in fact, know this. I also think one of the Transformers urinates on one of the people in the first or second films?
In what might be the wokest post in the history of PB, please enjoy Lindsay Ellis's critique of the Transformers movies, in this case interpreting it thru the lens of queer theory
I'm sure you will all enjoy it. I will now construct a giant statue of Dr Cass out of the bodies of all Scottish trans people and erect it in Trafalgar Square in an attempt to bring balance back to the force. Sensible policies for a happier Britain.
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
He forgot the first - cynical - rule of professional conduct: watch your back.
He indulged in a lot of legalistic arguments but simply refused - or failed - to see clearly that he had been presented with evidence of possible perjury and miscarriages of justice and that such evidence should have pointed him and his client to only one course of action, a course which his clients did their level best to avoid and which he enabled.
And now his reputation has been harmed, just like those of every other lawyer acting for the PO - whether in-house or external, whether solicitor or barrister and no matter what their experience or qualifications.
If you pour a tiny spoonful of raw sewage into a bottle of champagne, the entire bottle is contaminated.
The PO = the raw sewage.
I never heard lawyers compared to champagne before…
Both overpriced, full of air and likely to leave you with a headache.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
He forgot the first - cynical - rule of professional conduct: watch your back.
He indulged in a lot of legalistic arguments but simply refused - or failed - to see clearly that he had been presented with evidence of possible perjury and miscarriages of justice and that such evidence should have pointed him and his client to only one course of action, a course which his clients did their level best to avoid and which he enabled.
And now his reputation has been harmed, just like those of every other lawyer acting for the PO - whether in-house or external, whether solicitor or barrister and no matter what their experience or qualifications.
If you pour a tiny spoonful of raw sewage into a bottle of champagne, the entire bottle is contaminated.
The PO = the raw sewage.
I never heard lawyers compared to champagne before…
Both overpriced, full of air and likely to leave you with a headache.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Are Transformers (Robots in Disguise) transphobic?
You do realise in Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, Devastator's scrotum is a specific plot point and is focussed on in a scene in the movie?
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
I did, in fact, know this. I also think one of the Transformers urinates on one of the people in the first or second films?
In what might be the wokest post in the history of PB, please enjoy Lindsay Ellis's critique of the Transformers movies, in this case interpreting it thru the lens of queer theory
I'm sure you will all enjoy it. I will now construct a giant statue of Dr Cass out of the bodies of all Scottish trans people and erect it in Trafalgar Square in an attempt to bring balance back to the force. Sensible policies for a happier Britain.
😀😀😀😀
I have been watching Lindsay Ellis for more than a decade... and is the reason I know these things about the Transformers films 😀
Whatever Elphicke's issues, she isn't an explicit racist like Abbott.
Diane Abbott is not a racist, either explicit or implicit. Her imperfectly chosen words about blue eyes were in an imputation of racism to NHS officials. The point she was making was absolutely sound.
"Explicit" means a person admits the characterisation that follows. Here is an example of an explicit racist who was involved in British politics in the 1970s:
That guy was a leading figure in the National Front.
A black explicit racist would say things like "the white man is the devil". One example of a black racist was Idi Amin, who said that Ugandan Asians should put boot polish on their faces to make themselves darker if they wanted to be considered Ugandan.
Diane Abbott receives a huge amount of racist abuse, perhaps much more than you can imagine. I wonder whether you have ever received any?
The Scottish Greens have been accused of prioritising ideology over protecting children after the party again refused to endorse an expert report into gender healthcare.
Patrick Harvie, who until last month was a Scottish government minister, claimed that a Holyrood motion welcoming the Cass Review and recognising it as a “valid scientific document” was not “supportable” by his party....
All other parties, including the SNP, endorsed Hilary Cass’s report at Holyrood. However, all seven Green MSPs voted against the motion, with Mr Harvie claiming that transgender people were having their “very existence refuted”....
Oh look! Another day, another meaningless fringe post about something which doesn’t really matter to the vast majority of people.
When will the older generation realise that this country is moving on and this issue, like so many of the culture wars, are irrelevant to our needs?
Well you’ll have a long time in the political wilderness to answer that one.
Have a nice day everyone.
xx
“Fringe issue”?
The one that saw off Sturgeon, the Bute House Agreement, the Greens from the Scottish government and Humzah Yousuf.
That “fringe issue”?
None so blind.
You’ve been wrong on this from the beginning and one day will have to work out how to row back as the smarter politicians are doing daily…
Do you think that maybe the investigation into embezzlement and the desire to drop climate change targets may have had more to play in those two things?
Nonsense, it’s an issue that has the nation gripped by its..er..bawsack
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
Whatever Elphicke's issues, she isn't an explicit racist like Abbott.
Diane Abbott is not a racist, either explicit or implicit. Her imperfectly chosen words about blue eyes were in an imputation of racism to NHS officials. The point she was making was absolutely sound.
"Explicit" means a person admits the characterisation that follows. Here is an example of an explicit racist who was involved in British politics in the 1970s:
That guy was a leading figure in the National Front.
A black explicit racist would say things like "the white man is the devil". One example of a black racist was Idi Amin, who said that Ugandan Asians should put boot polish on their faces to make themselves darker if they wanted to be considered Ugandan.
Diane Abbott receives a huge amount of racist abuse, perhaps much more than you can imagine. I wonder whether you have ever received any?
I think she is a bit racist. Her comments about Black Mothers would be seen as racist if reversed (White Mothers would do anything for their kids - what does that imply about others?) As she is a person of colour herself, I think she may think its ok, but I just don't think it is. Its cuts all ways, like equality (hence my derision for the claims of the WASPI women).
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
Apologies for lack of clarity! I was quoting back from the original message. And yes, agreed.
The Scottish Greens have been accused of prioritising ideology over protecting children after the party again refused to endorse an expert report into gender healthcare.
Patrick Harvie, who until last month was a Scottish government minister, claimed that a Holyrood motion welcoming the Cass Review and recognising it as a “valid scientific document” was not “supportable” by his party....
All other parties, including the SNP, endorsed Hilary Cass’s report at Holyrood. However, all seven Green MSPs voted against the motion, with Mr Harvie claiming that transgender people were having their “very existence refuted”....
Oh look! Another day, another meaningless fringe post about something which doesn’t really matter to the vast majority of people.
When will the older generation realise that this country is moving on and this issue, like so many of the culture wars, are irrelevant to our needs?
Well you’ll have a long time in the political wilderness to answer that one.
Have a nice day everyone.
xx
“Fringe issue”?
The one that saw off Sturgeon, the Bute House Agreement, the Greens from the Scottish government and Humzah Yousuf.
That “fringe issue”?
None so blind.
You’ve been wrong on this from the beginning and one day will have to work out how to row back as the smarter politicians are doing daily…
It's a bit inconsistent to criticise the SNP for GRR and then claim that a rift with the Greens on Trans felled the Yousaf ministry.
The SNP have been as pro Trans as the Greens for years - 2016 and 2021 manifesto commitments, GRR was introduced by an SNP minister, Sturgeon spent months defending it and so on.
The coalition ended because the SNP backtracked on climate change targets and Greens threatened to pull the plug. I don't think this is the last time climate change and other environmental issues will cause issues for mainstream parties either - they remain a high priority for many and, despite lots of whining in Facebook groups, Oxford's LTNs and London's ULEZ have yet another democratic mandate.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
Poor Brian Altman KC - someone should have reminded him of how Robert Maxwell used his advisors. He used their good reputation to cloak his own rather less good one.
It is a difficult issue for lawyers: even bad actors are entitled to good lawyers. And acting for a bad guy does not imply approval of their misbehaviour.
But his two mistakes were that he did not sufficiently question or think about what he was being asked to opine on by the Post Office and perhaps over-indulged in overly clever legal comments as if he were involved in an academic exercise. He was the victim of what barristers often do in cross-examination to witnesses: he was funnelled into giving the answer the PO wanted to hear.
His other mistake was in giving an opinion on matters he was not qualified to assess. He had no real basis for assessing how good the PO's internal investigations team was. And he didn't even ask the most basic questions. This failing was pretty brutally exposed by Jason Beer yesterday.
What flattery and large fees will get you ....
Just because you are an expert in X does not make you an expert on Y. A lesson for us all.
It might well, if you have been brought in specifically for the purpose of reviewing the property of their past behaviour. He was brought in for independent advice, not to advocate for them.
And he was, at the time, aware of the risk he was taking - though note his concern was of "exposure to criticism" rather than the possibility perpetuating a possible miscarriage of justice.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cld0rewpy01o ...he avoided meeting Mr Jenkins and did not advise the Post Office to investigate his evidence. Mr Clarke’s advice was not shown to defendants until 2021. The inquiry saw evidence that Mr Altman re-wrote the terms of reference of his review to remove issues of Gareth Jenkins’ evidence and avoided meeting him. He wrote to fellow lawyers for the Post Office at Bond Dickenson that he knew that not meeting Gareth Jenkins "risks exposing the final report [of his review of convictions] to criticism".
"This is something I shall need to think about carefully. At this very early stage I am not unnaturally undecided," he wrote. "For now it may be better for the Terms of Reference to remain silent about him." "Why did you consider it best for the terms of reference to remain silent on Mr Jenkins?" asked Jason Beer, counsel to the inquiry. “My view was if the terms if I had yet not yet resolved to see him, that there was no point sticking it in the terms of reference,” Mr Altman said..
He forgot the first - cynical - rule of professional conduct: watch your back.
He indulged in a lot of legalistic arguments but simply refused - or failed - to see clearly that he had been presented with evidence of possible perjury and miscarriages of justice and that such evidence should have pointed him and his client to only one course of action, a course which his clients did their level best to avoid and which he enabled.
And now his reputation has been harmed, just like those of every other lawyer acting for the PO - whether in-house or external, whether solicitor or barrister and no matter what their experience or qualifications.
If you pour a tiny spoonful of raw sewage into a bottle of champagne, the entire bottle is contaminated.
The PO = the raw sewage.
I never heard lawyers compared to champagne before…
Both overpriced, full of air and likely to leave you with a headache.
I was charged for a 1st class stamp by a solicitor a while ago.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
And then there is the legal definition in the Equality Act: A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
I mean - is observation of secondary sexual characteristics at birth the only criteria for sex? Because many young children have secondary sexual characteristics at birth that change (such as those with internal gonads) and in the past doctors used to give unconsented to surgeries to children with atypical secondary sex characteristics to make them fit more into their understanding of typical sex characteristics. Assigning them a sex, you might say.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
This is why I said yesterday Starmer had made a mistake with Ms Dover:
"David Cameron, the foreign secretary and former prime minister, has claimed that Keir Starmer’s decision to Natalie Elphicke join his party shows Labour doesn’t have any core beliefs."
Guardian blog
IMHO the decision plays into the idea that Starmer stands for nothing and has no plan and any plans he had he waters down.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
And then there is the legal definition in the Equality Act: A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
The problem with the 2010 act is that, at the time, “sex” and “gender” were virtual synonyms - and greater clarity would be helpful as the EHRC have pointed out.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Thanks for an actual citation! So she actually said to her high school paper last year that she would like to start HRT - and the NYP links to that article - and does not comment on her current level of medical transition; but it does at least tell us she is unlikely to have been on HRT for a long time, if at all.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
I mean - is observation of secondary sexual characteristics at birth the only criteria for sex? Because many young children have secondary sexual characteristics at birth that change (such as those with internal gonads) and in the past doctors used to give unconsented to surgeries to children with atypical secondary sex characteristics to make them fit more into their understanding of typical sex characteristics. Assigning them a sex, you might say.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
You cannot change large gametes into small gametes, or vice versa. Your sex is fixed throughout life. You may modify some secondary characteristics, but that’s all.
As Cass points out, we simply do not know the rate of desistance because, scandalously, almost all the NHS Adult Gender clinics refused to cooperate with York University - and if their record keeping is as poor as Tavi’s they won’t know either.
In any case, desisters are unlikely to remain in contact with clinicians who they may think have harmed them.
This is why I said yesterday Starmer had made a mistake with Ms Dover:
"David Cameron, the foreign secretary and former prime minister, has claimed that Keir Starmer’s decision to Natalie Elphicke join his party shows Labour doesn’t have any core beliefs."
Guardian blog
IMHO the decision plays into the idea that Starmer stands for nothing and has no plan and any plans he had he waters down.
I'd agree with that if Elphicke were given any position of power in Labour, but there's no sign of that. She won't be a Labour MP. After the next GE I suspect she'll disappear completely from view. And Labour will win Dover (though it probably would have anyway).
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
And then there is the legal definition in the Equality Act: A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
The problem with the 2010 act is that, at the time, “sex” and “gender” were virtual synonyms - and greater clarity would be helpful as the EHRC have pointed out.
Which is odd, considering 'gender' (originally a grammatical term) was appropriated by anthropologists in the 1970s for that exact purpose - to distinguish from a person's 'sex'.
This is why I said yesterday Starmer had made a mistake with Ms Dover:
"David Cameron, the foreign secretary and former prime minister, has claimed that Keir Starmer’s decision to Natalie Elphicke join his party shows Labour doesn’t have any core beliefs."
Guardian blog
IMHO the decision plays into the idea that Starmer stands for nothing and has no plan and any plans he had he waters down.
Is that the same David Cameron, who staked his reputation on the country voting Remain, and is now holding one of the great offices of state in a Brexit-loving government?
This is why I said yesterday Starmer had made a mistake with Ms Dover:
"David Cameron, the foreign secretary and former prime minister, has claimed that Keir Starmer’s decision to Natalie Elphicke join his party shows Labour doesn’t have any core beliefs."
Guardian blog
IMHO the decision plays into the idea that Starmer stands for nothing and has no plan and any plans he had he waters down.
Re: Cameron, Mandy Rice-Davies applies.
On the other hand it might be nice if Starmer reached out to another Kent MP Rosie Duffield.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
I mean - is observation of secondary sexual characteristics at birth the only criteria for sex? Because many young children have secondary sexual characteristics at birth that change (such as those with internal gonads) and in the past doctors used to give unconsented to surgeries to children with atypical secondary sex characteristics to make them fit more into their understanding of typical sex characteristics. Assigning them a sex, you might say.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
You cannot change large gametes into small gametes, or vice versa. Your sex is fixed throughout life. You may modify some secondary characteristics, but that’s all.
As Cass points out, we simply do not know the rate of desistance because, scandalously, almost all the NHS Adult Gender clinics refused to cooperate with York University - and if their record keeping is as poor as Tavi’s they won’t know either.
In any case, desisters are unlikely to remain in contact with clinicians who they may think have harmed them.
So your definition of sex is only based on the size of gametes the body produces? Because that isn't what doctors test for when they assign a sex at birth, is it?
On topic, this is very interesting as it strongly implies we should expect proportional swing not UNS at the general election:
This table compares the notional 2019 election result with the May 2024 local elections and averages the constituency-level swing depending on the Con/ Lab lead in 2019...
I'd like to see similar analysis for swing to Labour in Lib Dem contested seats as that would give some clues on tactical voting propensity.
One thing about that is that it maximises the number of seats that are won with a relatively narrow margin. It means there could be a much smaller difference between the Tories being reduced to below 100 seats, and Labour falling just short of a majority, than we are used to thinking.
A very efficient vote distribution is not far away from being a very inefficient vote distribution, and the next election may see Labour close to the line between the two.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Thanks for an actual citation! So she actually said to her high school paper last year that she would like to start HRT - and the NYP links to that article - and does not comment on her current level of medical transition; but it does at least tell us she is unlikely to have been on HRT for a long time, if at all.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
What a terrible attempt at a point. If the fastest woman in history won 200m gold, and a man pretending to be a woman finished 2nd, his participation would be an injustice on all the real women who finished 3rd or worse
I wonder why Ben Houchen accepted a peerage. He's super young (37) to be starting his third term and already has a pretty remarkable political record. If he transferred to the Commons he'd be a shoo-in for a senior position or even leader. But the peerage blocks that. Curious, as he's surely not lacking in ambition. FWIW I think the Heseltine model of active interventionism could be political gold for the Tories. Houchen and Street exemplify this, as did Boris before he imploded.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Thanks for an actual citation! So she actually said to her high school paper last year that she would like to start HRT - and the NYP links to that article - and does not comment on her current level of medical transition; but it does at least tell us she is unlikely to have been on HRT for a long time, if at all.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
I don't think Gallagher cheats. She identifies as female and competes legally. It's just a fact that she'll be faster and stronger than the vast majority of biological girls of the same age. That she was beaten by one competitor in the 200 doesn't negate that fact. Whilst respecting the right of Gallagher to be who she wants to be, in this case it's also reasonable to understand the other competitors concern that physically, Gallagher is still a young man. There's no easy answer to this that will please both sides, and I think this is the first time I've dipped my toe in the trans debate. As a mid 50s bloke, someone being trans has zero effect on me, so I tend to just keep out of it!
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
I mean - is observation of secondary sexual characteristics at birth the only criteria for sex? Because many young children have secondary sexual characteristics at birth that change (such as those with internal gonads) and in the past doctors used to give unconsented to surgeries to children with atypical secondary sex characteristics to make them fit more into their understanding of typical sex characteristics. Assigning them a sex, you might say.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
On the subject of young people receiving gender affirming care, this 2024 paper is fairly interesting.
As you might expect, it makes the usual arguments about improved mental health outcomes for adolescents, citing 10 papers published in the past decade that have provided evidence that this is the case, along with some interesting discussion on the validity of said studies. But this is available elsewhere.
Why this paper is interesting is that it goes on to discuss the question from the question of biomedical ethics, concluding that while adolescents have varying degrees of autonomy, this is an argument for medical supervision and informed consent rather than outright restriction of gender affirming care to adolescents.
Indeed, it may be *unethical* by our common understanding of medical ethics to deny treatment to adolescents. Cruel and unusual punishment, so to speak. I have read comparatively few papers that come at the question from a philosophical angle rather than a purely biological one.
I personally see the trans issue as an ongoing debate between cartesian dualists and those who believe biology is destiny. The mind is not the body, and vice versa. Not to get Leon all excited, but I expect we'll see similar arguments in AI ethics in the next few years. Assuming we develop "thinking machines", do they have rights and autonomy because of this or do we deny them those rights because of their (lack of) biology?
One side of the argument in this thread reminds me of the Shakers: "The United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, more commonly known as the Shakers, are a millenarian restorationist Christian sect founded c. 1747 in England and then organized in the United States in the 1780s. They were initially known as "Shaking Quakers" because of their ecstatic behavior during worship services.
Espousing egalitarian ideals, women took on spiritual leadership roles alongside men, including founding leaders such as Jane Wardley, Ann Lee, and Lucy Wright. The Shakers emigrated from England and settled in Revolutionary colonial America, with an initial settlement at Watervliet, New York (present-day Colonie), in 1774. They practice a celibate and communal utopian lifestyle, pacifism, uniform charismatic worship, and their model of equality of the sexes, which they institutionalized in their society in the 1780s. They are also known for their simple living, architecture, technological innovation, music, and furniture." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers
(Except for the "architecture, technological innovation, music, and furniture", which seem to be missing.)
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
I mean - is observation of secondary sexual characteristics at birth the only criteria for sex? Because many young children have secondary sexual characteristics at birth that change (such as those with internal gonads) and in the past doctors used to give unconsented to surgeries to children with atypical secondary sex characteristics to make them fit more into their understanding of typical sex characteristics. Assigning them a sex, you might say.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
You cannot change large gametes into small gametes, or vice versa. Your sex is fixed throughout life. You may modify some secondary characteristics, but that’s all.
As Cass points out, we simply do not know the rate of desistance because, scandalously, almost all the NHS Adult Gender clinics refused to cooperate with York University - and if their record keeping is as poor as Tavi’s they won’t know either.
In any case, desisters are unlikely to remain in contact with clinicians who they may think have harmed them.
So your definition of sex is only based on the size of gametes the body produces? Because that isn't what doctors test for when they assign a sex at birth, is it?
Pretty sure the test is winkle vs no winkle, as per Blackadder...
The issue at hand is that not everyone accepts the concept of gender and assigning of sex. Its a complicated old story for a small percentage of humans. For the vast, vast majority its really easy.
Sport, refuges, healthcare and prisons are the sticking points for a lot of people. Sport is the one I feel strongly about. Its about fairness. You can argue that genetic advantage within a sex (or gender if you must) is unfair. It is. Michael Phelps is almost designed to be an incredible swimmer, most fast bowlers in cricket are tall, as are basketballers, marathon runners tend to be slight of frame and you can go on and on. The issue is for sports where physique is important (i.e. almost all) a transwoman will have some legacy of the time that their body was behaving as a man. If you decide age 18 to transition the 'damage' damage is mostly done. That cannot all be reversed by hormone treatment.
And you know what, thats a bit harsh on transwomen who also want to do sport. But its massively more unfair on ciswomen (and I loathe that term with a passion) to let transwomen who have the attributes of male puberty then compete against them.
Actually Lipton's tea and Tabasco sauce (the smokier kind)
But well spotted. The Tabasco is because I take Tabasco EVERYWHERE (along with Kikkoman's soy, sriracha and salt and pepper mills). To rescue really bland meals. Italian breakfasts are often incredibly dull - either really poor versions of German breakfasts - limp slices of cheese and sad ham - with no condiments, or just a stale pastry. Terrible (and I'm in a glam new 4 star eco-lodge with an excellent chef). Moreover, there is no lunch to be had here, I'm in the middle of a massive forest, so I wanted to liven up my tragic breakfast - therefore I took Tabasco down to eat with me. And it has ended up on my desk. I'm not actually putting it in my tea
I don't get it. I understand that many Italians don't linger over breakfast, and often just grab a pastry. A cannolo or a piece of tart. But they love and understand food, so you'd think that pastry would be really GOOD - like a fine croissant. Often it is not. Stale and awful, and this is in 4 star hotels
Chiz
Do you like tabasco? It's quite bland.
Have you tried stale Italian bread with processed ham? Tabasco improves it
This is the best Tabasco brand for breakfasts (and pizzas). Habanero
That might be better than the basic vinegar with homeopathic quantities of heat variety. I'm about to enjoy a South Indian dinner in Tokyo, with a Kingfisher.
I had a rather pleasant biryani in Indore last night
David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump
The Blair and Brown administration managed to work with the George W Bush administration.
If US voters elect Trump again then a new Starmer government would have to learn to work with it too and even if Biden is re elected the GOP are likely to keep and have control of at least the House in Congress so they would still need to work with the GOP to some degree.
Lammy clearly agrees 'David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump.'
Now Elphicke is in Starmer's 'big tent' seems there is even room for Trumpites too!
I wonder why Ben Houchen accepted a peerage. He's super young (37) to be starting his third term and already has a pretty remarkable political record. If he transferred to the Commons he'd be a shoo-in for a senior position or even leader. But the peerage blocks that. Curious, as he's surely not lacking in ambition. FWIW I think the Heseltine model of active interventionism could be political gold for the Tories. Houchen and Street exemplify this, as did Boris before he imploded.
He's the Ron DeSantis of the UK in this sense: the personification of a strong regional realignment in party affiliation. Being there at the right time helps, but can also hide your vulnerabilities.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Thanks for an actual citation! So she actually said to her high school paper last year that she would like to start HRT - and the NYP links to that article - and does not comment on her current level of medical transition; but it does at least tell us she is unlikely to have been on HRT for a long time, if at all.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
I don't think Gallagher cheats. She identifies as female and competes legally. It's just a fact that she'll be faster and stronger than the vast majority of biological girls of the same age. That she was beaten by one competitor in the 200 doesn't negate that fact. Whilst respecting the right of Gallagher to be who she wants to be, in this case it's also reasonable to understand the other competitors concern that physically, Gallagher is still a young man. There's no easy answer to this that will please both sides, and I think this is the first time I've dipped my toe in the trans debate. As a mid 50s bloke, someone being trans has zero effect on me, so I tend to just keep out of it!
One issue is that athletics, and indeed many sports, isn't fair; no matter how much an 'average' person puts in, they will never be able to win the 100m at the Olympics, or beat Michael Phelps in his prime. As a uni friend - a rather good Ironman triathlete - said: "Professional athletes are freaks." By dint of biological fate, they have an advantage over me, however hard I was to train. There is no fairness; however much effort someone puts in, however diligently they work, the chances of success are remote, and become remoter the higher you go in a sport.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Isn’t it “crossing” not “distance” ie as in transparent, transport, etc
So “crossing” between two genders (and I’m aware that cross-gender can have a specific meaning but can never keep the precise details of the lingo straight*)
* obvious I didn’t mean “straight” in a non-binary sense…
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
And there are indeed some people who don't like the term because they don't feel the "gender assigned at birth" context is well-understood.
“Sex” is observed at birth from secondary sexual characteristics and “recorded” -not “assigned”.
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
And then there is the legal definition in the Equality Act: A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
The problem with the 2010 act is that, at the time, “sex” and “gender” were virtual synonyms - and greater clarity would be helpful as the EHRC have pointed out.
I suspect for a lot of people the problem is that the Act speaks of both gender and sex being reassigned, and therefore mutable, whereas many want to define sex as something immutable. The snag is that if it's immutable, it can't be what the Act is talking about.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
I don't know how anyone can watch that race and think that is acceptable. The biological girls may as well just quit, because they're only ever competing for the places behind transgender athletes. Gallagher must know it's wrong, and can't seriously believe they deserve the titles and records.
Back in the day you would have heard the same thing about ending racial segregation in sports - that the black athletes would have "unfair biological advantages" and this would be unfair to their white girls.
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Gallagher gave an interview to the New York Post and openly states it is their intention to start hormone therapy soon as they don't want to get anymore masculine. The school she's at immediately treats trans athletes as the gender they want to be identified as. It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
Thanks for an actual citation! So she actually said to her high school paper last year that she would like to start HRT - and the NYP links to that article - and does not comment on her current level of medical transition; but it does at least tell us she is unlikely to have been on HRT for a long time, if at all.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
I don't think Gallagher cheats. She identifies as female and competes legally. It's just a fact that she'll be faster and stronger than the vast majority of biological girls of the same age. That she was beaten by one competitor in the 200 doesn't negate that fact. Whilst respecting the right of Gallagher to be who she wants to be, in this case it's also reasonable to understand the other competitors concern that physically, Gallagher is still a young man. There's no easy answer to this that will please both sides, and I think this is the first time I've dipped my toe in the trans debate. As a mid 50s bloke, someone being trans has zero effect on me, so I tend to just keep out of it!
One issue is that athletics, and indeed many sports, isn't fair; no matter how much an 'average' person puts in, they will never be able to win the 100m at the Olympics, or beat Michael Phelps in his prime. As a uni friend - a rather good Ironman triathlete - said: "Professional athletes are freaks." By dint of biological fate, they have an advantage over me, however hard I was to train. There is no fairness; however much effort someone puts in, however diligently they work, the chances of success are remote, and become remoter the higher you go in a sport.
But there are ways in which it can be made fairer: and sex- and age-categories are two of the obvious ways in which that's done.
Ultimately though, that's reflective of life overall. Different people have different characteristics and abilities which make them more suited to some things than others - and more suited than other people. (And that's before we get to the unfairness of opportunity, networks and social structures). We can try and level out the playing field but those base differences won't go away, and there's an ethical question as to the extent that we should even try to make them go away.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Isn’t it “crossing” not “distance” ie as in transparent, transport, etc
So “crossing” between two genders (and I’m aware that cross-gender can have a specific meaning but can never keep the precise details of the lingo straight*)
* obvious I didn’t mean “straight” in a non-binary sense…
I guess that is another translation - I was always told it was far and near
I've just been to a talk by Prof Harold Thimbleby about parallels between NHS digital health and the Post Office scandal. Much of the talk is in his free book at https://www.harold.thimbleby.net/booklet/
He was involved in investigating a miscarriage of justice at the Princess of Wales Hospital in Bridgend where >70 nurses were accused of misconduct when paper records disagreed with the IT record. Turned out that the IT record had deleted a bunch of data. There are obvious parallels with the Post Office scandal and he's now involved in the campaigns over the presumption in common law that computer systems are accurate.
David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump
It is the governments job to try and find cause with the US government, even a Trumpian one. The difference with Trump is we must also make expensive and difficult contingencies in case Trump sides with the global dictators.
Watching this race, it came to me that you could remake every Competitive Dad sketch from The Fast Show with a trans ‘woman’ as the Dad, and an actual woman as the kids, and it would work perfectly
🚨BREAKING🚨
A trans-identified male dominated the Girls Varsity 400m at the Portland Interscholastic League Championship Semi-Finals yesterday.
Aayden Gallagher will now compete in the finals as a “girl.”
And? The record for under 18 400m for girls is like 50 seconds; for men it's closer to 45 seconds. That this girl runs 400 m in 56-57 seconds makes her, like, a good amateur?
I assume that OR, like many places that allow trans athletes to compete, have rules around when students can participate (from what I can find students have to have been transitioning consistently and cannot participate in the same year they started their transition). I have no idea how old this girl is - but this is a tenth grade competition, so she is likely 15-16. If she's on HRT muscle mass and strength typically is one of the first things to fall in line with new hormones (3-6months).
He’s not on HRT, so it’s literally a boy competing in the girls race
I couldn't find any information on if she was on HRT or not (that's why I said if) - can you give me a citation for that assertion?
His calves.
Can you see how this could be seen as just straight up misogyny and why people like me say that this policing of women's bodies is bad for cis and trans women? Are you saying any woman who has calf definition similar to this athlete is actually a man? You can "just tell" who is a trans or cis woman by looking at them?
This isn't policing women's bodies. It's straight up fairness. You cannot have a fair competition between men and women in sports that involve the deployment of muscle mass. There is a lot of generalisation but splitting sports between the sexes, while by no-means perfect, is the best way we have to create something of a level playing field (pun intended).
I'm someone who competed at a reasonably high level in sprint events when I was a teenager, trained with boys and girls my own age, and my lived experience (which is all that counts these days apparently) is that it would have been unfair for us to compete with one another in events that mattered.
We do not know if this young athlete is on HRT and, if so, for how long she has been. For all I know she could have never had a testosterone based puberty - she may have been on puberty blockers and got straight onto HRT. To say that you can tell this girl is "really a boy" just by looking at her is completely misogynist - in the same way that those who call Michelle Obama "secretly a man" is. Many cis women who do not conform to feminine beauty standards will be insulted by calling them men; many cis women have been harassed, in toilets and other public spaces, because they were considered too manish and people thought they were trans. It's all the same thing - policing women's bodies based on expectations of femininity.
We don't need to go into observed physical attributes. The original report notes that s/he is a biological male. The what-iffery is beside the point. Men should not be in women's races, and boys - post about 11 - should not be in girls' ones. Or, at least, should not be allowed to compete to win or to set records.
Transphobes call women who have been on HRT most of their life and have had gender affirming surgeries "biological males" - it doesn't mean anything. Again - we have no idea if this athlete even had a testosterone based puberty. She may have been on HRT for years, and it is known that muscle mass is one of the first things to fall within a typical cis women's range when trans women start HRT (as noted, 3 - 6 months). Calling her a "biological male" in reporting (reporting from right wing / "independent" news orgs) is, again, just transphobia
148grss, you have repeatedly made this point that maybe she’s been on HRT for years and not experienced a testosterone-based puberty. So, are you saying that these things matter? If she had only started HRT the day before, would it then be unfair for her to compete against ciswomen?
Are you (implicitly) proposing that transwomen should only be able to compete against ciswomen under certain circumstances relating to their transition and hormone use?
what is this ciswoman mince, can you not just say it as it is "woman". rather than using the bollox ( pun not intended ) PC crap.
A cis woman is a woman who isn't a trans woman; it's pretty simple. Cis and trans are Latin prefixes used to denote closeness to and farness away from (the usage for cisalpine Gaul in the Roman period to mean those Gauls on the Roman side of the Alpines, and transalpine Gaul for those Gauls on the far side of the Alpines from Rome, for example).
When you put it like that, isn’t the term transwoman transphobic because it implies distance from womanhood?
Language is weird - but the trans in this context is farness from assigned gender at birth.
Isn’t it “crossing” not “distance” ie as in transparent, transport, etc
So “crossing” between two genders (and I’m aware that cross-gender can have a specific meaning but can never keep the precise details of the lingo straight*)
* obvious I didn’t mean “straight” in a non-binary sense…
I guess that is another translation - I was always told it was far and near
Maybe you should be more careful about your sources.
Cis has traditionally been used as a prefix, the same as trans has, and comes from the Latin meaning “on the same side as”, which sits opposite trans, from the Latin “on the opposite side as”.
Comments
And the video maker is a little disingenuous when pointing to the dangers of larger and larger cars, and higher speed limits, and then explicitly excepts 100 tons of tram bombing along at faster speeds.
My suggestion would be to look at casualty and accident statistics and then take best practices from the safest countries, not cherrypick the Netherlands because they ride bikes.
My lunch had Alpacas roaming free. Not sure British food standards inspectors would approve.
Food was mediocre though.
And why are you apparently in a masked Japanese gangster Covid themed restaurant in the Andes?’
https://theculturetrip.com/asia/taiwan/articles/have-a-cup-of-tea-with-an-alpaca-at-taiwans-cutest-cafe
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/may/09/labour-natalie-elphicke-keir-starmer-latest-politics-news-updates
I feel you are all better people for knowing this point. Please carry on with your lives... 😀
The one that saw off Sturgeon, the Bute House Agreement, the Greens from the Scottish government and Humzah Yousuf.
That “fringe issue”?
None so blind.
You’ve been wrong on this from the beginning and one day will have to work out how to row back as the smarter politicians are doing daily…
The YouGov England sub sample will be entertaining...
Private Eye will be apoplectic!
He also said he was very unhappy with the change to FPTP for the mayorals because it encourages parties to focus on getting out the base vote rather than widening their appeal.
And finally he was highly irritated with the Greens for their NIMBY opposition to a solar farm on his patch.
I think it's a leap say they are strongest in areas of Conservative strength (although no doubt they are damaging them there)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=btbAxY6P3Oc&list=PLJGOq3JclTH8J73o2Z4VMaSYZDNG3xeZ7&index=8&pp=iAQB
I'm sure you will all enjoy it. I will now construct a giant statue of Dr Cass out of the bodies of all Scottish trans people and erect it in Trafalgar Square in an attempt to bring balance back to the force. Sensible policies for a happier Britain.
😀😀😀😀
https://twitter.com/PrivateEyeNews/status/1788505772378185826
As I have said multiple times in this thread - if that was a cis girl, no one would care - it would just be an example of a young athlete who is better than her immediate peers - and we do not know anything about this girls transition (medical or otherwise) so it seems unreasonable to jump to saying she has a "biological advantage" when her running times are more in line with U18 women athletes then U18 male athletes.
Champagne bad breath is the worst bad breath.
"Explicit" means a person admits the characterisation that follows. Here is an example of an explicit racist who was involved in British politics in the 1970s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUNAr4Uj1xM#t=4m11s
That guy was a leading figure in the National Front.
A black explicit racist would say things like "the white man is the devil". One example of a black racist was Idi Amin, who said that Ugandan Asians should put boot polish on their faces to make themselves darker if they wanted to be considered Ugandan.
Diane Abbott receives a huge amount of racist abuse, perhaps much more than you can imagine. I wonder whether you have ever received any?
“Gender” is a social construct which some people believe in, some people don’t. Gender identity belief is a belief system recognised in U.K. law - as is the obverse “that it’s made up nonsense.”
“Gender” says boys should be masculine and girls feminine.
So some feminine boys and masculine girls have had medical intervention to “fix” that - which as Cass has pointed out for many may be a terrible mistake.
Some will persist in a “gender identity” at variance with their biological sex (which cannot be changed, you will die the sex you were born) and transition is beneficial.
Clinicians simply do not know which children will persist and which will not - many turn out to be same sex attracted and have internalised homophobia.
The SNP have been as pro Trans as the Greens for years - 2016 and 2021 manifesto commitments, GRR was introduced by an SNP minister, Sturgeon spent months defending it and so on.
The coalition ended because the SNP backtracked on climate change targets and Greens threatened to pull the plug. I don't think this is the last time climate change and other environmental issues will cause issues for mainstream parties either - they remain a high priority for many and, despite lots of whining in Facebook groups, Oxford's LTNs and London's ULEZ have yet another democratic mandate.
Dance for us, puppet
Scotland's new First Minister John Swinney takes just 50 seconds to blame Westminster as he refuses to stick to SNP teachers pledge at his first FMQs
https://x.com/ChrisMusson/status/1788546002351235323
It's not unreasonable for the biological girls to be concerned that they are in reality competing against a boy at this point in Gallagher's transition.
A person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment if the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person's sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.
Gender in no way says boys should be masculine and girls feminine - that's patriarchy. Gender can mean multiple things, depending on the context (you can perform gender, you can feel and understand your gender, your gender can be policed) - but when it comes to an individual it generally means their own understanding of self in relation to their assigned gender at birth. Many trans women are not feminine; many trans men are not masculine. They are not not trans because of that.
Biological sex can, to a degree, be changed. We have discussed this previously, so I won't go on at length, but much of what we consider "biological sex" is just the way the body processes and exhibits characteristics based on the hormones the body is processing. If you give someone assigned male at birth feminising hormones, it does not take that long for their body to start acting like the body of someone assigned female at birth, and visa versa. Transwomen start growing breast tissue more like cis women, have fat redistribution more like cis women, have hair and skin more like cis women, have hormonal cycles more like cis women, etc etc. Transmen start having acne more like cis men did through their puberty, they will get "bottom growth" and hair will start growing in areas that are less common in cis women and more common in cis men (the online joke is "no one warned my I'd get hair growing out of my ass"), their voices crack, etc. etc. Sure - your chromosomes don't change, and your sex organs don't change completely (but they do change) - but a lot of "biological" change happens.
We have a good understanding of young people and desistance - the vast majority of young people who take puberty blockers wish to continue on to cross sex hormones and the vast majority of trans people who take cross sex hormones or have gender affirming surgery say the experience was a positive one. The rate of regret amongst people who take these routes is typically recorded as between 2-5%. This is remarkably positive in medicine and, if anything, suggests to me that we gate keep trans healthcare too much because, if we were giving out trans healthcare willy nilly, the regret rates would be much higher (we can compare this regret rate to abortion, pregnancy, knee operations and see that these things have much higher regret rates and no serious people out there demanding we limit access to those things because of that).
"David Cameron, the foreign secretary and former prime minister, has claimed that Keir Starmer’s decision to Natalie Elphicke join his party shows Labour doesn’t have any core beliefs."
Guardian blog
IMHO the decision plays into the idea that Starmer stands for nothing and has no plan and any plans he had he waters down.
It also notes that in the 200m race she came second. So... did the girl who come first also cheat? Is she not a real girl because she beat a "biological male" who must surely have only won the 400m race due to unfair advantage? Or does that one not count as evidence of the supremacy of trans women in sports?
As Cass points out, we simply do not know the rate of desistance because, scandalously, almost all the NHS Adult Gender clinics refused to cooperate with York University - and if their record keeping is as poor as Tavi’s they won’t know either.
In any case, desisters are unlikely to remain in contact with clinicians who they may think have harmed them.
And Labour will win Dover (though it probably would have anyway).
A shining example of someone with core beliefs.
On the other hand it might be nice if Starmer reached out to another Kent MP Rosie Duffield.
A very efficient vote distribution is not far away from being a very inefficient vote distribution, and the next election may see Labour close to the line between the two.
If he transferred to the Commons he'd be a shoo-in for a senior position or even leader. But the peerage blocks that. Curious, as he's surely not lacking in ambition.
FWIW I think the Heseltine model of active interventionism could be political gold for the Tories. Houchen and Street exemplify this, as did Boris before he imploded.
Whilst respecting the right of Gallagher to be who she wants to be, in this case it's also reasonable to understand the other competitors concern that physically, Gallagher is still a young man.
There's no easy answer to this that will please both sides, and I think this is the first time I've dipped my toe in the trans debate. As a mid 50s bloke, someone being trans has zero effect on me, so I tend to just keep out of it!
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11673-023-10313-z
As you might expect, it makes the usual arguments about improved mental health outcomes for adolescents, citing 10 papers published in the past decade that have provided evidence that this is the case, along with some interesting discussion on the validity of said studies. But this is available elsewhere.
Why this paper is interesting is that it goes on to discuss the question from the question of biomedical ethics, concluding that while adolescents have varying degrees of autonomy, this is an argument for medical supervision and informed consent rather than outright restriction of gender affirming care to adolescents.
Indeed, it may be *unethical* by our common understanding of medical ethics to deny treatment to adolescents. Cruel and unusual punishment, so to speak. I have read comparatively few papers that come at the question from a philosophical angle rather than a purely biological one.
I personally see the trans issue as an ongoing debate between cartesian dualists and those who believe biology is destiny. The mind is not the body, and vice versa. Not to get Leon all excited, but I expect we'll see similar arguments in AI ethics in the next few years. Assuming we develop "thinking machines", do they have rights and autonomy because of this or do we deny them those rights because of their (lack of) biology?
"The United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, more commonly known as the Shakers, are a millenarian restorationist Christian sect founded c. 1747 in England and then organized in the United States in the 1780s. They were initially known as "Shaking Quakers" because of their ecstatic behavior during worship services.
Espousing egalitarian ideals, women took on spiritual leadership roles alongside men, including founding leaders such as Jane Wardley, Ann Lee, and Lucy Wright. The Shakers emigrated from England and settled in Revolutionary colonial America, with an initial settlement at Watervliet, New York (present-day Colonie), in 1774. They practice a celibate and communal utopian lifestyle, pacifism, uniform charismatic worship, and their model of equality of the sexes, which they institutionalized in their society in the 1780s. They are also known for their simple living, architecture, technological innovation, music, and furniture."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakers
(Except for the "architecture, technological innovation, music, and furniture", which seem to be missing.)
The issue at hand is that not everyone accepts the concept of gender and assigning of sex. Its a complicated old story for a small percentage of humans. For the vast, vast majority its really easy.
Sport, refuges, healthcare and prisons are the sticking points for a lot of people. Sport is the one I feel strongly about. Its about fairness. You can argue that genetic advantage within a sex (or gender if you must) is unfair. It is. Michael Phelps is almost designed to be an incredible swimmer, most fast bowlers in cricket are tall, as are basketballers, marathon runners tend to be slight of frame and you can go on and on. The issue is for sports where physique is important (i.e. almost all) a transwoman will have some legacy of the time that their body was behaving as a man. If you decide age 18 to transition the 'damage' damage is mostly done. That cannot all be reversed by hormone treatment.
And you know what, thats a bit harsh on transwomen who also want to do sport. But its massively more unfair on ciswomen (and I loathe that term with a passion) to let transwomen who have the attributes of male puberty then compete against them.
https://x.com/gdnpolitics/status/1788257449977504115
David Lammy tells US Republicans he can find ‘common cause’ with Trump
If US voters elect Trump again then a new Starmer government would have to learn to work with it too and even if Biden is re elected the GOP are likely to keep and have control of at least the House in Congress so they would still need to work with the GOP to some degree.
Lammy clearly agrees 'David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, has set out in a Washington DC speech his credentials as a British foreign secretary capable of working with a Trump presidency, saying he “gets the agenda that drives America First”, and insisting he would seek to find “common cause” with Donald Trump.'
Now Elphicke is in Starmer's 'big tent' seems there is even room for Trumpites too!
So “crossing” between two genders (and I’m aware that cross-gender can have a specific meaning but can never keep the precise details of the lingo straight*)
* obvious I didn’t mean “straight” in a non-binary sense…
https://x.com/bbcarchive/status/1788463919113339230?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Ultimately though, that's reflective of life overall. Different people have different characteristics and abilities which make them more suited to some things than others - and more suited than other people. (And that's before we get to the unfairness of opportunity, networks and social structures). We can try and level out the playing field but those base differences won't go away, and there's an ethical question as to the extent that we should even try to make them go away.
I've just been to a talk by Prof Harold Thimbleby about parallels between NHS digital health and the Post Office scandal. Much of the talk is in his free book at https://www.harold.thimbleby.net/booklet/
He was involved in investigating a miscarriage of justice at the Princess of Wales Hospital in Bridgend where >70 nurses were accused of misconduct when paper records disagreed with the IT record. Turned out that the IT record had deleted a bunch of data. There are obvious parallels with the Post Office scandal and he's now involved in the campaigns over the presumption in common law that computer systems are accurate.
https://www.transhub.org.au/101/cis
Cis has traditionally been used as a prefix, the same as trans has, and comes from the Latin meaning “on the same side as”, which sits opposite trans, from the Latin “on the opposite side as”.