‘World’s Strongest Woman’ Has Crown Torn Away After Organizers Discover She Was Born Male
Victory was short-lived for Jammie Booker after the title of the World’s Strongest Woman was taken away from her.
The winner was stripped of the coveted title on Tuesday, November 25, after organizers claimed she violated the rules regarding the gender of competing athletes.
Victory was short-lived for Jammie Booker after the title of the World’s Strongest Woman was taken away from her
Person with curly hair wearing a black shirt and making a peace sign, linked to world’s strongest woman controversy.
Image credits: Jammie Booker
Jammie Booker was initially crowned the World’s Strongest Woman at the Official Strongman Games World Championship in Arlington, Texas, which took place last weekend.
- Jammie Booker was initially crowned as the World’s Strongest Woman at the Official Strongman Games World Championship in Arlington, Texas.
- But she enjoyed the title for a matter of days before the organizers disqualified her, saying she violated contest rules.
- “Official Strongman officials were unaware of this fact ahead of the competition,” the organizers said.
However, she enjoyed the title for a matter of days before the organizers disqualified her, saying she violated contest rules.
Strongwoman lifting heavy weights in a gym, showcasing power and determination in a competitive strongwoman event.
Image credits: GoFundMe
The rules clearly stipulate that all participating athletes must compete in the category that aligns with the biological s*x they were assigned at birth.
Jammie competed in the women’s category, but organizers claimed they weren’t told she was “biologically male.”
The Philadelphia athlete was eventually disqualified after organizers said they were not “aware” of her history.
Organizers claimed they were not “aware” that the Philadelphia athlete was assigned male at birth
Woman holding trophy and celebrating on stage at strongwoman competition, highlighting world’s strongest woman controversy.
Image credits: officialstrongman_
“It appears that an athlete who is biologically male and who now identifies as female competed in the Women’s Open category,” read a statement shared by the organizers.
“Official Strongman officials were unaware of this fact ahead of the competition,” the statement continued.
Strong woman with muscular arms wearing headphones and workout clothes, taking a gym selfie sitting on a bench.
Image credits: strong_jammie_booker
ADVERTISEMENTTweet expressing concern about fairness and trans rights after world’s strongest woman crown was revoked due to birth gender discovery.
Image credits: SJWinfoot
Organizers noted that they have been “urgently investigating” the matter after being informed.
“Had we been aware, or had this been declared at any point before or during the competition, this athlete would not have been permitted to compete in the Women’s Open category,” they added.
“Official Strongman officials were unaware of this fact ahead of the competition,” read the organizers’ statement
Tweet from user Yanah discussing competitive sports with mention of world’s strongest woman and controversy over gender identity.
Image credits: YanaSn0w1
The organizers asserted that they were “clear” on the rules, which stipulate that “competitors can only compete in the category for the biological s*x recorded at birth.”
“Official Strongman is inclusive and proud to run events which do not discriminate against athletes based on personal characteristics,” they said.
“Any athlete is welcome,” they continued. “But it is our responsibility to ensure fairness and ensure athletes are assigned to men’s or women’s categories based on whether they are recorded as male or female at birth.”
Person sitting on a couch beside a strongman trophy, discussing the world's strongest woman and related controversy.
Image credits: strong_jammie_booker
ADVERTISEMENTTweet discussing controversy over crown removal from World’s Strongest Woman after organizers find she was born male.
Image credits: tminnzy
After Jammie’s disqualification, UK lifter Andrea Thompson was crowned the winner of the World’s Strongest Woman competition.
Andrea was the initial runner-up and expressed outrage over Jammie’s victory, calling the decision to reward her with the title “bullsh**.”
UK lifter Andrea Thompson was crowned the winner after Jammie’s disqualification
Winner at Rainier Classic strongwoman event holding trophy, highlighting world’s strongest woman competition controversy.
Image credits: GoFundMe
Tweet text criticizing the winner after the World’s Strongest Woman crown was revoked over gender controversy.
Image credits: redheadhardie
When Andrea received the first-place title, she shared a message online and said the entire ordeal was “the most exhausting experience of [her] career.”
“What should be a momentous occasion has sadly been overshadowed by scandal and dishonesty from someone who was welcomed into our crazy sport,” she wrote.
ADVERTISEMENTShe said she was “frustrated” over not being able to “celebrate a win” and also for the ladies who “had their time to shine on the podium or reach the final day, taken away from them.”
Andrea said the incident was “the most exhausting experience of [her] career”
Female athlete celebrating with arms raised in front of Union Jack flag at World's Strongest Woman competition.
Image credits: andreathompson_strongwoman
Tweet discussing the world’s strongest woman losing her crown after organizers discover she was born male.
Image credits: WiseCorgi23
Three-time champ Rebecca Roberts also slammed the initial crowning of Jammie as the winner.
She shared a statement ahead of the athlete’s disqualification and said, “Transgender women, people born male, should not be competing in the women’s category.”
She said the events that transpired over the weekend were not “transparent.”
Podium scene with strongwoman athletes celebrating at official strongman games event with trophies and medals.
Image credits: blackjack.images
ADVERTISEMENT“None of us knew. Not even the organizers knew. And when fairness is taken by surprise, trust in the sport begins to crack,” she said.
While she expressed support for trans athletes, she still showed support for the competition’s rules regarding gender.
“My message is simple,” she added. “Trans people belong in sport, but women’s divisions must remain biologically born female-only.”
Many lifters joined the discussion about the participation of trans athletes in the competition
Image credits: Mitchell Hooper
Meanwhile, Australian strongwoman Allira-Joy Cowley, who initially placed third, was promoted to second in the category after Jammie was stripped of her title.
“I didn’t expect this podium,” she said in an Instagram post. “I stood beside some of the strongest women in the world and felt completely overwhelmed in the best way.”
Jammie has so far not addressed the controversy following her disqualification.
Netizens had mixed opinions after the events transpired
Comment by Mike Yearsley questioning testosterone levels and advantage in World's Strongest Woman competition controversy.
Comment on social media post saying Literally a South Park episode with a laughing emoji and thumbs up reaction.
Comment by Cleveland Brown questioning the time taken to discover the world's strongest woman's birth gender.
Comment by Manny Rios displayed on social media, expressing a sarcastic opinion about event organizers.
Comment stating belief about worlds strongest woman with emphasis on woman in casual online discussion.
Comment by Tracey Walton discussing giving trans women and men their own competition category in a social media post.
Comment by Libby Smith expressing support for fairness in relation to the world’s strongest woman controversy.
Comment discussing rules for female athletes in competition related to the world's strongest woman controversy.
Comment by Jane Harper Jones on a social media platform, humorously comparing a situation to a Southpark episode.
Comment by Pauline Taylor-Mcilwraith discussing fairness in splitting categories by having a woman's category and others.
ADVERTISEMENTComment discussing views on gender transition and women’s spaces, mentioning support and concerns about authenticity.
Comment on controversy surrounding world’s strongest woman title and gender identity in strength competitions.
Comment expressing sympathy for true winner after world’s strongest woman crown reversed due to gender discovery
Comment by Debi Mitchell expressing views on transgender participation in female sports competitions.
ADVERTISEMENTPoll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
Anyone can write on Bored Panda. Start writing!
Follow Bored Panda on Google News!
Follow us on Flipboard.com/@boredpanda!
At Bored Panda, I dive into breaking celebrity news, Hollywood updates, and viral pop culture stories that spark global conversations. My background as a reporter at International Business Times and Latin Times gave me experience covering fast-moving entertainment stories for international audiences. Today, my work regularly appears on Google News, AOL, and MSN, reaching millions of readers. What excites me most is capturing the pop culture moments that people can’t stop talking about.
Read less »
Binitha Jacob
Writer, Entertainment News Writer
At Bored Panda, I dive into breaking celebrity news, Hollywood updates, and viral pop culture stories that spark global conversations. My background as a reporter at International Business Times and Latin Times gave me experience covering fast-moving entertainment stories for international audiences. Today, my work regularly appears on Google News, AOL, and MSN, reaching millions of readers. What excites me most is capturing the pop culture moments that people can’t stop talking about.
If they circumvented the rules that are already in place, deliberately, then it's cheating, regardless of any ideology, and they were correctly disqualified. I suspect their only title now will be "Jammie Dodger".
If the rules state that biological men can't participate in a biological women's only event, I don't see the issue here. I will happily call a trans person by their preferred pronoun, but to deny the existence of science and biology is not something to which I will adhere. You may identify as a woman, for example, so I will call you a woman. That's basic respect. But if you were born as a male, you're biologically male. This isn't transphobia; it's basic science. Taking hormones does not change your chromosomes from XX to XY or vice versa.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I agree with you except “identifying” as something you’re not is bizarre.
Load More Replies...I can't speak to that as I'm not trans. I can certainly see how some people could find it odd, though. However, I think that discourse on that is best left to trans people.
@Timothy I'm not criticising your opinion. I simply don't feel educated enough on the subject to debate it with you. I'm not trans. I know people that are, but our conversations don't veer in that direction, so I can't give examples, etc. I also don't want to speak for a minority of which I am not a part. It'd be like, say, a Caucasian person telling POC how they should respond to racist comments when they aren't a POC and (broad assumption maybe, however) have likely not experienced the level of racism a POC has. I agree with you that anyone can have a discourse on anything, but I don't personally feel comfortable speaking on behalf of trans people when I'm not trans.
*She. *Her. We can still respect someone's right to self-identity while agreeing that someone born male, with the inherent physical advantages that brings, should not be competing in a women's event.
Load More Replies...Why? He/She/Whatever cheated and clearly has no respect for the women who worked so hard to have their achievements belittled. You can't demand respect whilst giving none.
People have the right to call themselves whatever they want to call themselves. What they don't have is the right to expect everybody else to validate their personal feelings.
Sorry, but I disagree with you on this. They do have a right to expect people to call them by their chosen pronoun; one should treat people how they wish to be treated. That doesn't give them automatic rights to enter sports contests or safe spaces that are separated by s3x; but I'm sure you'd get narked if people referred to you as "doddery old Brit" all the time if that were not how you'd chosen to call yourself. There's nothing wrong with showing a bit of respect for others when it costs you nothing.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
But I have the right to freedom of conscience and that includes not being compelled to say things that I know to not be true. Why should I be forced to pretend to believe that a man is a woman just to 'be nice'? That's a game I refuse to play and I make no apologies for that. EDIT: At least four people have downvoted this, which means that at least four people here are in favour of compelled speech.
UK, if we were new co-workers and you knew my name is Antoinette, but I asked you, kindly, please call me Sally, I'm not crazy about my given name, would you call me Antoinette or Sally?
It's not a "game", Grandad. It's very, very serious, and very important to the people who feel that their physical bodies and genitalia do not reflect the person that they actually are inside. By dismissing it as a "game", you are being facetious and dismissing not only the identities of trans people, but all of the suffering, hatred, and ábuse/ássáult that they have endured as well. If one of your grandchildren wished to transition, would you tell them to their face "I do not play the pronoun game"?
What should be very important - but clearly isn't - is treating the cause, not validating the effect. Nobody stops to ask why a trans person feels that he/she is in the 'wrong' body, let alone spell out the simple truth that there is no such thing as a 'wrong' body; it's just their body. Validating their ideas might sound as though it's being kind but it isn't; it's simply playing along with their delusion and preventing them from getting the help they need to help them understand and come to terms with the fact that the problem is in the mind, not the body.
I'm afraid this argument is pretty similar to the reaction to homosexuality 100 years ago, when they thought electric shock treatment or castration could "cure" the problem. I think it's more complicated than just saying "No you're not".
I'm pretty sure a lot of trans people see therapists and psychologists and those people *do* actually ask the trans people why they feel that they are in a body that doesn't match the gender they are. But I think you're implying "why they feel that way" in the sense of "so we can find a cure" - being trans doesn't need to be "cured" or "medicated" the way that schizophrenia or bipolar does. Body dysmorphia/gender dysmorphia needs to be TREATED, but allowing the trans person to identify and live as the gender they actually are (rather than what is between their legs) is the "treatment" ;) Trans people aren't deluded. They know very well that they are not the same gender as what their genitalia says. That's not a "delusion". Delusion is thinking your dog is talking to you or that you can flap your arms and you'll fly. Trans people aren't deluded, and transgender isn't a "delusion".
Who are you to decide if it is a delusion? Do you feel that gay people are suffering from delusion and shouldn't be validated because of their sèxuality?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
There you go, acting like a bigoted piece of s**t again. You've already proven time and time again how much you hate transgender people, why do you even bother to comment on this? Why do you expose your irrational prejudices to everyone?
They shouldn't have to expect to be treated like a person and be called by their preferred identity. You've already proven how much you hate transgender people. Why do you hate transgender people so much?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I disagree. But following your own principle, please call me "You are Absolutely Right" because that's how I identify :D
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
She IS a woman, not a "he", April. Trans women ARE women. Before y'all bring out the pitchforks and torches, however, I do believe that, in the realm of sports, we may need to consider WHEN in life the person transitioned, or at least when they began hormone replacement therapy. Those who are assigned male at birth and go through puberty while still physically male/haven't started HRT absolutely have a physical advantage over athletes who were assigned female at birth or who transitioned/started HRT before puberty. Bones and muscle structures tend to be stronger/larger in athletes who go through puberty while still physically male/with testosterone. I have a friend who transitioned in her 40s, and while not an athlete, she is definitely taller and is probably far stronger than me (a cisgender female.) But those assigned male at birth who begin transitioning/HRT BEFORE puberty would be less distinguishable, in physical size, capability, and strength, than their cisgender counterparts.
But you must have noticed that it is only the ones who have gone through puberty and built up the male advantage prior to transition who 'succeed' in women's sports.
I'm not disputing or even arguing about those things, though. I literally said in my comment that athletes who are assigned male at birth and go through puberty while still physically male DO have a physical advantage in sports. You're calling me out on something I didn't even dispute. And I personally DO agree that Jammie Booker should be disqualified and stripped of her title, since she broke the competition's rules (it doesn't matter how I FEEL about those rules, the rules are the rules and Booker broke them.)
But how can you genuinely believe that trans women *are* women AND say that in certain circumstances they must be treated as if they aren't women? Either they really are women, in which case why would you want them disqualified from competing against women, or they aren't women, in which case the disqualification is fair, but they are either women or they aren't.
@Grandad You wouldn't have so many trans people killing themselves if it didn't matter to them that people see them as how they genuinely feel that they are. I doubt anyone has offed themselves because people didn't see them as a plane. (Happy to be proven wrong here, though.) Basically, you can feel like/see yourself as a woman, but you're still biologically male. However, if you feel like/see yourself as a woman, then you identify as a woman. This has nothing to do with biological sex. I hope that makes sense. It's stupid o'clock here and I couldn't sleep, so if this is incoherent I apologise. (#2)
@Grandad I normally agree with you, but I think you have it wrong here. The post clearly states that people need to compete in the category of their biological sex. Jammie is a biological male. She identifies as a woman, calls herself a woman etc... and that's fine, but she was born as a male with XY chromosomes. See my comments below on how I differentiate the two if you need. I think this bit where we're crossing wires -- you (and Timothy, seemingly) seem to believe that someone born biologically, say, male, can't call themselves a woman. I (and others here, I think, though I don't want to speak for anyone) think that a 'woman' is a social construct and a 'female' is someone born with XX chromosomes. I think you're seeing it more in the light of a kid sticking their arms out to the sides, running around shouting "I'm a plane!". I mean, obviously; kid ain't a plane. Your genuine identity is different though. (#1)
Emilu, I'm not saying that they can't call themselves women, people can call themselves anything they wish. What I'm saying is that they cannot expect other people to agree that they are women. As for 'woman' being a social construct, I cannot agree with that at all; it's a very recent corruption of a word that simply describes an adult female human in order to make it compatible with the new ideology that enforces the old gender norms in a muddle-headed way. I'll try to explain what I mean. The entire concept of 'gender' is an artificial social construct based around the notions of masculine and feminine. The 'traditional' ideas about gender are centred on the notion that boys and men, and girls and women, have different ways of thinking, acting, and being. The 'thinking' goes that girls and women think, act, etc. in feminine ways, and so they are taught, trained, coerced and even forced to follow the feminine gender rules. Essentially, if you are a girl or a woman (objectively factual states of being female) then you must follow the (entirely subjective) gender rules. That is pretty much how gender roles have been enforced since biblical times, and of course it's bullshít. However, the new ideology has turned this around. The new thinking goes that if you think, feel, etc. in the ways that are traditionally associated with being a girl or a woman then it follows that you are indeed a girl or a woman. It has turned the subjective social construct of gender into the objective fact, and the objective fact of being a girl or woman because you are a female into a subjective construct that applies regardless of your séx. So, for example, if a boy shows signs of 'feminine' ways, the 'traditional' gender enforcers tell him to 'grow a pair' and stop acting like a girl, while the new enforcers tell him that he's acting like a girl because he *is* a girl, just one in a boy's body. Both those ways of responding to the boy's nature are wrong. Unfortunately, those of us who would tell the boy that it's absolutely fine to be a boy who does 'girl things' because the rules around gender itself are nonsensical are called raging bigots and transphobes. On top of that, reassuring the boy that he's perfectly normal; that he isn't a girl in the wrong body, he's just a boy in his own body who acts and thinks as he does simply because that *is* how he acts and thinks; doing that will see one called a monster for forcing 'conversion therapy' on the boy.
@Grandad It's fine, I understand what you mean. Language does evolve, however. I mean, look at the word 'gay'. Once upon a time it just meant happy or merry, and now it refers to a homosexual person. I respect your opinion and see where you're coming from but I don't think we'll agree on this one, and that's okay.
Emilu, you posted that as I was editing my comment so I could fit it all into one rather than making a disjointed multiple post. I only hope that I have at the very least made it clear that my objections are far from those of an old geezer shouting at traffic because I don't like words changing 😉 Oh, and I will add that the respect is mutual. I appreciate you greatly for being one of the rare ones here who understand that differences of opinion can be discussed without getting angry and slinging insults, and I thank you for that .
@Grandad I'm not wholly sure I agree with you here, because eg: someone else seeing you as a woman doesn't make you a woman. But I do still see where you're coming from. I'm not picturing you as a stereotypical old man in a rocking chair on your porch yelling "get off my lawn!", I promise 😆 And you are very welcome. I also love that we can agree to disagree in a respectful manner, which a few people on here would do well to understand.
Emilu, here's another way of looking at it. When a boy says that he's really a girl (or a man says he's a woman, a girl says...etc.) because he 'feels' that he's a girl, what does he actually mean? What does 'feeling like a girl' even feel like? He can't know because he only knows what it feels like to be himself, in the same way that I, a man, cannot say what being a man feels like because I only know what it feels like to be me. So what measure is the boy using to come to the conclusion that he's a girl? There can only be one thing that he can compare his feelings with and that is the social construct of gender which has laid out a set of standards that are expected of people depending on their séx. Now, when those gendered attributes are presented not as subjective and non-binding (as we know they are) but as objective truths that are innate, then what the boy is really saying is that his feelings relate more to the 'feminine' gender characteristics. So, because those characteristics have in recent years been presented as objectively true markers of what one really is, while biological reality has been demoted to a subjective role, an irrelevant accident of birth that has no bearing on whether one is a boy or girl, he has come to believe that he really is a girl because that's what his 'gender' is most aligned to. This is despite the fact that nobody actually 'has' a gender at all because 'gender' is nothing but an arbitrary set of rules, and not even a universal set but one that differs greatly not only between cultures but between religions, social groups and classes, and so-on. Basically, the boy can only believe himself to be a girl because he has been conditioned to believe that the gender rules are objectively true, and so because his nature tends towards the 'feminine' side then it must follow that he really is a girl. The only real difference between 'traditional' and 'modern' gender extremists is that the traditionalists say that if your gendered behaviour doesn't match your séx, you must change your behaviour; the modernists say that if your gender doesn't align with your body then you're in the wrong body. Two ideologies, both of which can be psychologically and physically harmful, and yet the safe middle ground - saying that it doesn't matter where you think you are on the gender 'spectrum' (which is just more bullshít to muddy the water), you are you, you are in YOUR body and you don't need to change a thing - is the one that is deemed dangerous and harmful by adherents of both of the extreme gender ideologies.
@Grandad Okay, yep, that completely makes sense. This is leaning more into "I can't guarantee I'll respond appropriately as I'm not trans" but I'll respond because it's you and I know you won't hold that against me. From what I've gathered from the trans/non binary people I know, it's not so much as identifying with stereotypical characteristics of gender (or not, in the case of NB people). It's more that they don't feel as though they were born into the correct body. I agree with regarding your discussions regarding gender ideology, absolutely, and also how it can be harmful. Honestly, I agree with your summary that you are YOU and, frankly, in my opinion that should be enough, but it's an individual thing and if someone feels born into the wrong body then I believe that they should a) have the right to change that and b) people should acknowledge this out of respect to another human being, eg: using the person's preferred pronouns, even if it's not something about which you... (#1)
(#2 - I forgot your tip about making longer posts 😔) ... agree -- 'you' being general 'you', not you specifically. I mean, I'm atheist. It doesn't mean I go around telling anyone that believes in, say, Christianity is wrong and needs help. That's disrespectful, even though I don't believe in Christianity. Back onto the trans subject, if someone was to, say, tell people they identify as a Boeing 747 I'd call them out on their bull, and I know some people would therefore say "well, what's the difference?" The difference is that a) there's no plane social construct (as far as I'm aware, lol), and b) trans people obviously identify with the masculine/feminine social constructs so much that they are willing to go beyond that and say "no, I am not enough as I am right now, I don't feel comfortable; I want the world to see me as I see myself" which is okay. (Damn this running out of space thing...)
(#3 - I think this is the longest post I've written, lol) Someone defining themselves as fitting into a social construct (and I agree with you most words are social constructs, eg: family, friend, etc etc) that doesn't align with their biological s*x doesn't mean that they suddenly turn into the biological sex that they wish they were. I just believe it's respectful to call someone by their preferred pronouns re. gender, even if they differ from their biological sex. I still think we're going to have to agree to disagree here, but please know I do agree with a lot of what you mentioned in your most recent post directed to me and thank you as always for being willing to have a nuanced yet civil discussion with me.
The character limits are a pain where the sun don't shine! Just to make my position absolutely clear, my problem is not with trans people, it's with the muddled, illogical ideology that is fuelling the movement, just as I have no problem with Christians while recognising the glaring inconsistencies in the theology they follow. If I have a problem with individual trans or Christians (or anybody) it's a problem with the person, not with any group they are a part of. You mentioned people feeling they are in the 'wrong' body; that is an idea that the trans ideology strongly promotes but when one thinks about it it becomes clear that it's nonsensical magical thinking bordering on the religious notion of a soul separate from the body, and it does loop back to people internalising gendered stereotypes. Why do they think they're in the wrong body? Because the way they see themselves is the opposite of what their body says they are. And why do they think that? Because the way they see themselves does not align with the gender stereotypes that they have come to believe a person with their particular body should conform to. That can only happen when the stereotypes are believed to be real and inherent and that the body and the person are separate entities. That 'body vs. gendered soul' idea that is at the root of the trans ideology is a very shaky foundation on which to build an entire narrative that takes people down the road to a lifetime of medicalisation and surgeries, sterility and health issues caused by the very medications they are told will help them be their 'true' selves, when instead coming to terms with the fact that there is no gendered 'soul' that is 'born into' a body, and that it is perfectly natural to not feel aligned with gender stereotypes because the stereotypes are complete inventions will allow them to express their 'true' selves in any way they wish without the need of medicines and surgeries. That is essentially what gender critical thought is - getting rid of the gender stereotypes to allow people to be themselves without having to believe that they are in the wrong bodies and that they really are a member of the opposite s*x, and by extension removing the very causes of all the conflict between trans rights and womens' rights.
I probably shouldn't comment right now as I've just woken up and may not be able to formulate a worthy reply, but I completely agree with everyone you've said in this post. I think it boils down to the only main difference in our beliefs is that I'm happy to use someone's preferred pronouns. Sidenote: I wonder how many kids who, eg: were labeled as children as a 'tomboy' etc actually grow up to be trans versus children who grew up saying "I'm a woman that doesn't like stereotypically woman-ish things, get over it"?
Good question, and I think that it would have had a very different answer 15 years ago. Today, the more relevant question would be more like 'why has there been an exponential rise in kids identifying as trans, and are they any different from the tomboys and their male equivalents of the past who grew up to be happy adults without feeling the need to change? I've no time right now to give my answer, but it's something that resonates with me for personal reasons so I will come back to it later.
I'll start with the personal bit - if this site stops glitching for long enough for me to get it down before I get the 'Oh, Snap! Something went wrong' and lose it alll because the page needs to reload. I have three daughters and one of them was the quintessential tomboy. If you made a comparison list of 'boy' and 'girl' things, be it clothing, toys, sports, and anything else that can be considered 'gendered', everything she did from the minute she could speak would fall firmly in the 'boy' column. Nothing about that bothered my wife and me, we didn't make the mistake of trying to 'guide' her towards acting more like a girl, but more importantly, she was happy as she was and, despite us as a family being able to talk openly about personal things, regardless of what they may be, not once did she so much as suggest that she should have been a boy. On the contrary, she used to get frustrated with people who couldn't quite understand that she was just a girl who didn't like the 'girly' things and not a boy trapped in a girls body. As she got into the stage of developing crushes she made no secret of the fact that it was girls she was attracted to, and because we took this in our stride there was no need for a 'coming out' announcement; she knew, we knew, her sisters knew, no fuss required. Basically, we simply let her be herself. She is know a grown woman, approaching 40, happily married to a wonderful woman who is as much our daughter as the other three. BUT! She is horrified by the current situation with the gender movement because she is seeing girls who are just as she was but who are being and have been enticed into groups focussing on the gender aspect, and these girls are following an eerily similar pattern. Instead of being allowed to embrace themselves, they are 'coming out' first as 'non-binary' and then as trans 'boys'. She has told me that what frightens her the most is that she knows that had she been a child in today's climate where there are so many LGBT youths groups (that didn't really exist in their current form 30 years ago) she could have easily gone down the same path, because no matter how strong the family bond is, for kids peer pressure is stronger. OK, more later.
@Grandad Okay, I did not get a message that you had replied, so my apologies for the delayed response. Good on both you and your wife for taking your daughter 'as she is'; I know that sounds like it should be a given but as so many people don't, I do like to thank the ones that do. I can imagine that if your daughter has similar ideologies to you it'd be distressing; "you don't have to fit the stereotype to be a man/woman" etc. She sounds like a wise woman, though. Peer pressure is what wins a lot of kids over, and -- as awful as this may sound, and I don't mean to diminish anybody's experience -- it seems that LGBTQIA+ is the new fashion nowadays for teenagers. I have a few colleagues who have teenage children who have never shown any hint of anything aside from absolute cis heterosexuality, but apparently they're gay/bi/trans/etc. If that's actually the case, then I obviously have no issues with this and any issues I did have would be a 'me' problem, but... (dammit, #1)
Grandad - again, you're cherry-picking my words to support YOUR beliefs and YOUR narrative (which you've set in stone; I know I'll never convince you with logic and reality.) I said that trans women are women. That is absolute. That is all-encompassing. What I said is that for ATHLETES, we need to consider whether or not it is FAIR to the other athletes to allow a trans woman to compete if she went through her transition post-puberty: as in, her body was shaped by the testosterone levels of a biological male. It doesn't mean she ISN'T a woman, it just means we must consider the situation and decide if it is fair to allow her to compete, since her physical body was shaped by different hormones and may be larger/stronger because of that.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
"Woman" is a psychological and social gender construct and chosen identity
“Woman” is the everyday conversational word, that you use in place of female, the biological/medical term. Outside of a doctor’s office, you say woman instead of female. It’s about language, it has nothing to do with gender or “personal identity”. “Girl” for a human female child.
Emilu, they are only constructs in the sense that all words are constructs, but what 'girl' and 'woman' describe are females in different stages of development, the former being an immature female and the latter a mature female. There are no 'male' girls or women and no 'female' boys or men.
@Grandad Yes, but they're female or male as in XX or XY. They don't suddenly change chromosomes because they age sufficiently to go from being a 'girl' to a 'woman'. And there is a scientific difference between a biological woman and a transgender one, as I mentioned above -- I was simply stating how I would separate the two.
@Timothy I respectfully disagree with you... to a certain degree. One certainly wouldn't say "hello females and males" as we both know that's weird. From the other comments you've made here you're obviously transphobic and, well, I doubt some net rando will change your mind, so you do you. Taking that into account, I was stating above that I would say 'trans woman' indicates someone born male that identifies as female, but they're biologically male. You and I both agree that there is a difference between someone born as a woman and someone who says they're a woman. The above is how I would personally differentiate the two. I hope that makes more sense. And if you downvoted me because you disagree with me, please grow up. We can have a civilised discussion without that. I'm more than happy to return the favour if you want to play downvote city, but I'd rather not stoop to that level.
@Rick Fitz I deleted my previous comment because it was attacking you directly, which I try not to do. However, I agree with Don here -- even if you may not agree with their 'delusions' as you call them, it's plain respect to call someone by their preferred pronouns. I'll use this as a simplistic and crude example, would you like it if someone in your life addressed you as "stupid c**t" every time they spoke to you? If you say yes, then, well... I'm happy to contribute! But seriously. Treat others the way you'd like to be treated. It's not that difficult, and people appreciate it when you do.
While I agree with her right to be who she is, there are going to be some physical differences due to her growing up male. She is clearly still built like a man and that gave her the leg up in competition. I think perhaps it's time we start another group of competitions where we allow people who are self-identifying of a gender to compete without it resulting in unfair advantages. Just because they changed the gender to what they feel is more correct does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to compete it just means we should be accommodating that
We can tell the s*x of a person who died thousands of years ago just by looking at their skeleton. So yeah, males have an advantage.
Load More Replies...The problem that keeps coming up is not if people can identify and act how they want. But what that then in turn implies for society. If you say transwomen are real women why can't they compete in sports? Are they real women or not? Can they change in female dressing rooms. And if they go to prison can they go to a prison for females? Some people say yes for their safety transwomen should be in female prison, but what about the safety of biological women in prison? There is a whole lot of evidence out there that transwomen in prison r**e other women. If they are real women can they go on lesbian dating apps? Most lesbians don't want to date a woman with a p***s. On normal dating apps, if they are real women , does that mean they don't need to disclose they are trans? Could be quite the shocker for a man to go on a date with a woman and later find out she has a p***s. Most guys are not into this. So the problem is more where is the line? Most people are not
Part 2: I fully support people should live their best live and be whatever sexuality they want and act and dress however they want. Transition if it makes you feel better and more happy in your body. I just think we should be able to say that there are certain things that should still be considered off limits like competition in (biological) to women's sports. Being solidary with one group should not infringe on another groups comfort and safety.
Load More Replies...This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
What's your solution for people who are born interséx or have chromosomal abnormalities? "Sorry, but you can't compete at all"?
Load More Replies...Yes. It's such a vanishingly small percentage of people that it will almost never even be a problem. Those rare individuals can simply do something else. They can lift weights/do sports for fun, just not at the awarded competitive levels.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People with DSDs are still biologically one séx with some secondary characteristics of the other, so they can still compete in the relevant séx category. EDIT: I just love the way that basic facts get downvoted so they are hidden.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That's lovely dear. Now go and do your research and find a method of séx testing that neatky separates 100% of the human race into male and female, because there literally isn't one. This case should never have arisen because the organisers didn't do basic research, not because intrusive tests were required.
If they circumvented the rules that are already in place, deliberately, then it's cheating, regardless of any ideology, and they were correctly disqualified. I suspect their only title now will be "Jammie Dodger".
If the rules state that biological men can't participate in a biological women's only event, I don't see the issue here. I will happily call a trans person by their preferred pronoun, but to deny the existence of science and biology is not something to which I will adhere. You may identify as a woman, for example, so I will call you a woman. That's basic respect. But if you were born as a male, you're biologically male. This isn't transphobia; it's basic science. Taking hormones does not change your chromosomes from XX to XY or vice versa.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I agree with you except “identifying” as something you’re not is bizarre.
Load More Replies...I can't speak to that as I'm not trans. I can certainly see how some people could find it odd, though. However, I think that discourse on that is best left to trans people.
@Timothy I'm not criticising your opinion. I simply don't feel educated enough on the subject to debate it with you. I'm not trans. I know people that are, but our conversations don't veer in that direction, so I can't give examples, etc. I also don't want to speak for a minority of which I am not a part. It'd be like, say, a Caucasian person telling POC how they should respond to racist comments when they aren't a POC and (broad assumption maybe, however) have likely not experienced the level of racism a POC has. I agree with you that anyone can have a discourse on anything, but I don't personally feel comfortable speaking on behalf of trans people when I'm not trans.
*She. *Her. We can still respect someone's right to self-identity while agreeing that someone born male, with the inherent physical advantages that brings, should not be competing in a women's event.
Load More Replies...Why? He/She/Whatever cheated and clearly has no respect for the women who worked so hard to have their achievements belittled. You can't demand respect whilst giving none.
People have the right to call themselves whatever they want to call themselves. What they don't have is the right to expect everybody else to validate their personal feelings.
Sorry, but I disagree with you on this. They do have a right to expect people to call them by their chosen pronoun; one should treat people how they wish to be treated. That doesn't give them automatic rights to enter sports contests or safe spaces that are separated by s3x; but I'm sure you'd get narked if people referred to you as "doddery old Brit" all the time if that were not how you'd chosen to call yourself. There's nothing wrong with showing a bit of respect for others when it costs you nothing.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
But I have the right to freedom of conscience and that includes not being compelled to say things that I know to not be true. Why should I be forced to pretend to believe that a man is a woman just to 'be nice'? That's a game I refuse to play and I make no apologies for that. EDIT: At least four people have downvoted this, which means that at least four people here are in favour of compelled speech.
UK, if we were new co-workers and you knew my name is Antoinette, but I asked you, kindly, please call me Sally, I'm not crazy about my given name, would you call me Antoinette or Sally?
It's not a "game", Grandad. It's very, very serious, and very important to the people who feel that their physical bodies and genitalia do not reflect the person that they actually are inside. By dismissing it as a "game", you are being facetious and dismissing not only the identities of trans people, but all of the suffering, hatred, and ábuse/ássáult that they have endured as well. If one of your grandchildren wished to transition, would you tell them to their face "I do not play the pronoun game"?
What should be very important - but clearly isn't - is treating the cause, not validating the effect. Nobody stops to ask why a trans person feels that he/she is in the 'wrong' body, let alone spell out the simple truth that there is no such thing as a 'wrong' body; it's just their body. Validating their ideas might sound as though it's being kind but it isn't; it's simply playing along with their delusion and preventing them from getting the help they need to help them understand and come to terms with the fact that the problem is in the mind, not the body.
I'm afraid this argument is pretty similar to the reaction to homosexuality 100 years ago, when they thought electric shock treatment or castration could "cure" the problem. I think it's more complicated than just saying "No you're not".
I'm pretty sure a lot of trans people see therapists and psychologists and those people *do* actually ask the trans people why they feel that they are in a body that doesn't match the gender they are. But I think you're implying "why they feel that way" in the sense of "so we can find a cure" - being trans doesn't need to be "cured" or "medicated" the way that schizophrenia or bipolar does. Body dysmorphia/gender dysmorphia needs to be TREATED, but allowing the trans person to identify and live as the gender they actually are (rather than what is between their legs) is the "treatment" ;) Trans people aren't deluded. They know very well that they are not the same gender as what their genitalia says. That's not a "delusion". Delusion is thinking your dog is talking to you or that you can flap your arms and you'll fly. Trans people aren't deluded, and transgender isn't a "delusion".
Who are you to decide if it is a delusion? Do you feel that gay people are suffering from delusion and shouldn't be validated because of their sèxuality?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
There you go, acting like a bigoted piece of s**t again. You've already proven time and time again how much you hate transgender people, why do you even bother to comment on this? Why do you expose your irrational prejudices to everyone?
They shouldn't have to expect to be treated like a person and be called by their preferred identity. You've already proven how much you hate transgender people. Why do you hate transgender people so much?
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
I disagree. But following your own principle, please call me "You are Absolutely Right" because that's how I identify :D
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
She IS a woman, not a "he", April. Trans women ARE women. Before y'all bring out the pitchforks and torches, however, I do believe that, in the realm of sports, we may need to consider WHEN in life the person transitioned, or at least when they began hormone replacement therapy. Those who are assigned male at birth and go through puberty while still physically male/haven't started HRT absolutely have a physical advantage over athletes who were assigned female at birth or who transitioned/started HRT before puberty. Bones and muscle structures tend to be stronger/larger in athletes who go through puberty while still physically male/with testosterone. I have a friend who transitioned in her 40s, and while not an athlete, she is definitely taller and is probably far stronger than me (a cisgender female.) But those assigned male at birth who begin transitioning/HRT BEFORE puberty would be less distinguishable, in physical size, capability, and strength, than their cisgender counterparts.
But you must have noticed that it is only the ones who have gone through puberty and built up the male advantage prior to transition who 'succeed' in women's sports.
I'm not disputing or even arguing about those things, though. I literally said in my comment that athletes who are assigned male at birth and go through puberty while still physically male DO have a physical advantage in sports. You're calling me out on something I didn't even dispute. And I personally DO agree that Jammie Booker should be disqualified and stripped of her title, since she broke the competition's rules (it doesn't matter how I FEEL about those rules, the rules are the rules and Booker broke them.)
But how can you genuinely believe that trans women *are* women AND say that in certain circumstances they must be treated as if they aren't women? Either they really are women, in which case why would you want them disqualified from competing against women, or they aren't women, in which case the disqualification is fair, but they are either women or they aren't.
@Grandad You wouldn't have so many trans people killing themselves if it didn't matter to them that people see them as how they genuinely feel that they are. I doubt anyone has offed themselves because people didn't see them as a plane. (Happy to be proven wrong here, though.) Basically, you can feel like/see yourself as a woman, but you're still biologically male. However, if you feel like/see yourself as a woman, then you identify as a woman. This has nothing to do with biological sex. I hope that makes sense. It's stupid o'clock here and I couldn't sleep, so if this is incoherent I apologise. (#2)
@Grandad I normally agree with you, but I think you have it wrong here. The post clearly states that people need to compete in the category of their biological sex. Jammie is a biological male. She identifies as a woman, calls herself a woman etc... and that's fine, but she was born as a male with XY chromosomes. See my comments below on how I differentiate the two if you need. I think this bit where we're crossing wires -- you (and Timothy, seemingly) seem to believe that someone born biologically, say, male, can't call themselves a woman. I (and others here, I think, though I don't want to speak for anyone) think that a 'woman' is a social construct and a 'female' is someone born with XX chromosomes. I think you're seeing it more in the light of a kid sticking their arms out to the sides, running around shouting "I'm a plane!". I mean, obviously; kid ain't a plane. Your genuine identity is different though. (#1)
Emilu, I'm not saying that they can't call themselves women, people can call themselves anything they wish. What I'm saying is that they cannot expect other people to agree that they are women. As for 'woman' being a social construct, I cannot agree with that at all; it's a very recent corruption of a word that simply describes an adult female human in order to make it compatible with the new ideology that enforces the old gender norms in a muddle-headed way. I'll try to explain what I mean. The entire concept of 'gender' is an artificial social construct based around the notions of masculine and feminine. The 'traditional' ideas about gender are centred on the notion that boys and men, and girls and women, have different ways of thinking, acting, and being. The 'thinking' goes that girls and women think, act, etc. in feminine ways, and so they are taught, trained, coerced and even forced to follow the feminine gender rules. Essentially, if you are a girl or a woman (objectively factual states of being female) then you must follow the (entirely subjective) gender rules. That is pretty much how gender roles have been enforced since biblical times, and of course it's bullshít. However, the new ideology has turned this around. The new thinking goes that if you think, feel, etc. in the ways that are traditionally associated with being a girl or a woman then it follows that you are indeed a girl or a woman. It has turned the subjective social construct of gender into the objective fact, and the objective fact of being a girl or woman because you are a female into a subjective construct that applies regardless of your séx. So, for example, if a boy shows signs of 'feminine' ways, the 'traditional' gender enforcers tell him to 'grow a pair' and stop acting like a girl, while the new enforcers tell him that he's acting like a girl because he *is* a girl, just one in a boy's body. Both those ways of responding to the boy's nature are wrong. Unfortunately, those of us who would tell the boy that it's absolutely fine to be a boy who does 'girl things' because the rules around gender itself are nonsensical are called raging bigots and transphobes. On top of that, reassuring the boy that he's perfectly normal; that he isn't a girl in the wrong body, he's just a boy in his own body who acts and thinks as he does simply because that *is* how he acts and thinks; doing that will see one called a monster for forcing 'conversion therapy' on the boy.
@Grandad It's fine, I understand what you mean. Language does evolve, however. I mean, look at the word 'gay'. Once upon a time it just meant happy or merry, and now it refers to a homosexual person. I respect your opinion and see where you're coming from but I don't think we'll agree on this one, and that's okay.
Emilu, you posted that as I was editing my comment so I could fit it all into one rather than making a disjointed multiple post. I only hope that I have at the very least made it clear that my objections are far from those of an old geezer shouting at traffic because I don't like words changing 😉 Oh, and I will add that the respect is mutual. I appreciate you greatly for being one of the rare ones here who understand that differences of opinion can be discussed without getting angry and slinging insults, and I thank you for that .
@Grandad I'm not wholly sure I agree with you here, because eg: someone else seeing you as a woman doesn't make you a woman. But I do still see where you're coming from. I'm not picturing you as a stereotypical old man in a rocking chair on your porch yelling "get off my lawn!", I promise 😆 And you are very welcome. I also love that we can agree to disagree in a respectful manner, which a few people on here would do well to understand.
Emilu, here's another way of looking at it. When a boy says that he's really a girl (or a man says he's a woman, a girl says...etc.) because he 'feels' that he's a girl, what does he actually mean? What does 'feeling like a girl' even feel like? He can't know because he only knows what it feels like to be himself, in the same way that I, a man, cannot say what being a man feels like because I only know what it feels like to be me. So what measure is the boy using to come to the conclusion that he's a girl? There can only be one thing that he can compare his feelings with and that is the social construct of gender which has laid out a set of standards that are expected of people depending on their séx. Now, when those gendered attributes are presented not as subjective and non-binding (as we know they are) but as objective truths that are innate, then what the boy is really saying is that his feelings relate more to the 'feminine' gender characteristics. So, because those characteristics have in recent years been presented as objectively true markers of what one really is, while biological reality has been demoted to a subjective role, an irrelevant accident of birth that has no bearing on whether one is a boy or girl, he has come to believe that he really is a girl because that's what his 'gender' is most aligned to. This is despite the fact that nobody actually 'has' a gender at all because 'gender' is nothing but an arbitrary set of rules, and not even a universal set but one that differs greatly not only between cultures but between religions, social groups and classes, and so-on. Basically, the boy can only believe himself to be a girl because he has been conditioned to believe that the gender rules are objectively true, and so because his nature tends towards the 'feminine' side then it must follow that he really is a girl. The only real difference between 'traditional' and 'modern' gender extremists is that the traditionalists say that if your gendered behaviour doesn't match your séx, you must change your behaviour; the modernists say that if your gender doesn't align with your body then you're in the wrong body. Two ideologies, both of which can be psychologically and physically harmful, and yet the safe middle ground - saying that it doesn't matter where you think you are on the gender 'spectrum' (which is just more bullshít to muddy the water), you are you, you are in YOUR body and you don't need to change a thing - is the one that is deemed dangerous and harmful by adherents of both of the extreme gender ideologies.
@Grandad Okay, yep, that completely makes sense. This is leaning more into "I can't guarantee I'll respond appropriately as I'm not trans" but I'll respond because it's you and I know you won't hold that against me. From what I've gathered from the trans/non binary people I know, it's not so much as identifying with stereotypical characteristics of gender (or not, in the case of NB people). It's more that they don't feel as though they were born into the correct body. I agree with regarding your discussions regarding gender ideology, absolutely, and also how it can be harmful. Honestly, I agree with your summary that you are YOU and, frankly, in my opinion that should be enough, but it's an individual thing and if someone feels born into the wrong body then I believe that they should a) have the right to change that and b) people should acknowledge this out of respect to another human being, eg: using the person's preferred pronouns, even if it's not something about which you... (#1)
(#2 - I forgot your tip about making longer posts 😔) ... agree -- 'you' being general 'you', not you specifically. I mean, I'm atheist. It doesn't mean I go around telling anyone that believes in, say, Christianity is wrong and needs help. That's disrespectful, even though I don't believe in Christianity. Back onto the trans subject, if someone was to, say, tell people they identify as a Boeing 747 I'd call them out on their bull, and I know some people would therefore say "well, what's the difference?" The difference is that a) there's no plane social construct (as far as I'm aware, lol), and b) trans people obviously identify with the masculine/feminine social constructs so much that they are willing to go beyond that and say "no, I am not enough as I am right now, I don't feel comfortable; I want the world to see me as I see myself" which is okay. (Damn this running out of space thing...)
(#3 - I think this is the longest post I've written, lol) Someone defining themselves as fitting into a social construct (and I agree with you most words are social constructs, eg: family, friend, etc etc) that doesn't align with their biological s*x doesn't mean that they suddenly turn into the biological sex that they wish they were. I just believe it's respectful to call someone by their preferred pronouns re. gender, even if they differ from their biological sex. I still think we're going to have to agree to disagree here, but please know I do agree with a lot of what you mentioned in your most recent post directed to me and thank you as always for being willing to have a nuanced yet civil discussion with me.
The character limits are a pain where the sun don't shine! Just to make my position absolutely clear, my problem is not with trans people, it's with the muddled, illogical ideology that is fuelling the movement, just as I have no problem with Christians while recognising the glaring inconsistencies in the theology they follow. If I have a problem with individual trans or Christians (or anybody) it's a problem with the person, not with any group they are a part of. You mentioned people feeling they are in the 'wrong' body; that is an idea that the trans ideology strongly promotes but when one thinks about it it becomes clear that it's nonsensical magical thinking bordering on the religious notion of a soul separate from the body, and it does loop back to people internalising gendered stereotypes. Why do they think they're in the wrong body? Because the way they see themselves is the opposite of what their body says they are. And why do they think that? Because the way they see themselves does not align with the gender stereotypes that they have come to believe a person with their particular body should conform to. That can only happen when the stereotypes are believed to be real and inherent and that the body and the person are separate entities. That 'body vs. gendered soul' idea that is at the root of the trans ideology is a very shaky foundation on which to build an entire narrative that takes people down the road to a lifetime of medicalisation and surgeries, sterility and health issues caused by the very medications they are told will help them be their 'true' selves, when instead coming to terms with the fact that there is no gendered 'soul' that is 'born into' a body, and that it is perfectly natural to not feel aligned with gender stereotypes because the stereotypes are complete inventions will allow them to express their 'true' selves in any way they wish without the need of medicines and surgeries. That is essentially what gender critical thought is - getting rid of the gender stereotypes to allow people to be themselves without having to believe that they are in the wrong bodies and that they really are a member of the opposite s*x, and by extension removing the very causes of all the conflict between trans rights and womens' rights.
I probably shouldn't comment right now as I've just woken up and may not be able to formulate a worthy reply, but I completely agree with everyone you've said in this post. I think it boils down to the only main difference in our beliefs is that I'm happy to use someone's preferred pronouns. Sidenote: I wonder how many kids who, eg: were labeled as children as a 'tomboy' etc actually grow up to be trans versus children who grew up saying "I'm a woman that doesn't like stereotypically woman-ish things, get over it"?
Good question, and I think that it would have had a very different answer 15 years ago. Today, the more relevant question would be more like 'why has there been an exponential rise in kids identifying as trans, and are they any different from the tomboys and their male equivalents of the past who grew up to be happy adults without feeling the need to change? I've no time right now to give my answer, but it's something that resonates with me for personal reasons so I will come back to it later.
I'll start with the personal bit - if this site stops glitching for long enough for me to get it down before I get the 'Oh, Snap! Something went wrong' and lose it alll because the page needs to reload. I have three daughters and one of them was the quintessential tomboy. If you made a comparison list of 'boy' and 'girl' things, be it clothing, toys, sports, and anything else that can be considered 'gendered', everything she did from the minute she could speak would fall firmly in the 'boy' column. Nothing about that bothered my wife and me, we didn't make the mistake of trying to 'guide' her towards acting more like a girl, but more importantly, she was happy as she was and, despite us as a family being able to talk openly about personal things, regardless of what they may be, not once did she so much as suggest that she should have been a boy. On the contrary, she used to get frustrated with people who couldn't quite understand that she was just a girl who didn't like the 'girly' things and not a boy trapped in a girls body. As she got into the stage of developing crushes she made no secret of the fact that it was girls she was attracted to, and because we took this in our stride there was no need for a 'coming out' announcement; she knew, we knew, her sisters knew, no fuss required. Basically, we simply let her be herself. She is know a grown woman, approaching 40, happily married to a wonderful woman who is as much our daughter as the other three. BUT! She is horrified by the current situation with the gender movement because she is seeing girls who are just as she was but who are being and have been enticed into groups focussing on the gender aspect, and these girls are following an eerily similar pattern. Instead of being allowed to embrace themselves, they are 'coming out' first as 'non-binary' and then as trans 'boys'. She has told me that what frightens her the most is that she knows that had she been a child in today's climate where there are so many LGBT youths groups (that didn't really exist in their current form 30 years ago) she could have easily gone down the same path, because no matter how strong the family bond is, for kids peer pressure is stronger. OK, more later.
@Grandad Okay, I did not get a message that you had replied, so my apologies for the delayed response. Good on both you and your wife for taking your daughter 'as she is'; I know that sounds like it should be a given but as so many people don't, I do like to thank the ones that do. I can imagine that if your daughter has similar ideologies to you it'd be distressing; "you don't have to fit the stereotype to be a man/woman" etc. She sounds like a wise woman, though. Peer pressure is what wins a lot of kids over, and -- as awful as this may sound, and I don't mean to diminish anybody's experience -- it seems that LGBTQIA+ is the new fashion nowadays for teenagers. I have a few colleagues who have teenage children who have never shown any hint of anything aside from absolute cis heterosexuality, but apparently they're gay/bi/trans/etc. If that's actually the case, then I obviously have no issues with this and any issues I did have would be a 'me' problem, but... (dammit, #1)
Grandad - again, you're cherry-picking my words to support YOUR beliefs and YOUR narrative (which you've set in stone; I know I'll never convince you with logic and reality.) I said that trans women are women. That is absolute. That is all-encompassing. What I said is that for ATHLETES, we need to consider whether or not it is FAIR to the other athletes to allow a trans woman to compete if she went through her transition post-puberty: as in, her body was shaped by the testosterone levels of a biological male. It doesn't mean she ISN'T a woman, it just means we must consider the situation and decide if it is fair to allow her to compete, since her physical body was shaped by different hormones and may be larger/stronger because of that.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
"Woman" is a psychological and social gender construct and chosen identity
“Woman” is the everyday conversational word, that you use in place of female, the biological/medical term. Outside of a doctor’s office, you say woman instead of female. It’s about language, it has nothing to do with gender or “personal identity”. “Girl” for a human female child.
Emilu, they are only constructs in the sense that all words are constructs, but what 'girl' and 'woman' describe are females in different stages of development, the former being an immature female and the latter a mature female. There are no 'male' girls or women and no 'female' boys or men.
@Grandad Yes, but they're female or male as in XX or XY. They don't suddenly change chromosomes because they age sufficiently to go from being a 'girl' to a 'woman'. And there is a scientific difference between a biological woman and a transgender one, as I mentioned above -- I was simply stating how I would separate the two.
@Timothy I respectfully disagree with you... to a certain degree. One certainly wouldn't say "hello females and males" as we both know that's weird. From the other comments you've made here you're obviously transphobic and, well, I doubt some net rando will change your mind, so you do you. Taking that into account, I was stating above that I would say 'trans woman' indicates someone born male that identifies as female, but they're biologically male. You and I both agree that there is a difference between someone born as a woman and someone who says they're a woman. The above is how I would personally differentiate the two. I hope that makes more sense. And if you downvoted me because you disagree with me, please grow up. We can have a civilised discussion without that. I'm more than happy to return the favour if you want to play downvote city, but I'd rather not stoop to that level.
@Rick Fitz I deleted my previous comment because it was attacking you directly, which I try not to do. However, I agree with Don here -- even if you may not agree with their 'delusions' as you call them, it's plain respect to call someone by their preferred pronouns. I'll use this as a simplistic and crude example, would you like it if someone in your life addressed you as "stupid c**t" every time they spoke to you? If you say yes, then, well... I'm happy to contribute! But seriously. Treat others the way you'd like to be treated. It's not that difficult, and people appreciate it when you do.
While I agree with her right to be who she is, there are going to be some physical differences due to her growing up male. She is clearly still built like a man and that gave her the leg up in competition. I think perhaps it's time we start another group of competitions where we allow people who are self-identifying of a gender to compete without it resulting in unfair advantages. Just because they changed the gender to what they feel is more correct does not mean they shouldn't be allowed to compete it just means we should be accommodating that
We can tell the s*x of a person who died thousands of years ago just by looking at their skeleton. So yeah, males have an advantage.
Load More Replies...The problem that keeps coming up is not if people can identify and act how they want. But what that then in turn implies for society. If you say transwomen are real women why can't they compete in sports? Are they real women or not? Can they change in female dressing rooms. And if they go to prison can they go to a prison for females? Some people say yes for their safety transwomen should be in female prison, but what about the safety of biological women in prison? There is a whole lot of evidence out there that transwomen in prison r**e other women. If they are real women can they go on lesbian dating apps? Most lesbians don't want to date a woman with a p***s. On normal dating apps, if they are real women , does that mean they don't need to disclose they are trans? Could be quite the shocker for a man to go on a date with a woman and later find out she has a p***s. Most guys are not into this. So the problem is more where is the line? Most people are not
Part 2: I fully support people should live their best live and be whatever sexuality they want and act and dress however they want. Transition if it makes you feel better and more happy in your body. I just think we should be able to say that there are certain things that should still be considered off limits like competition in (biological) to women's sports. Being solidary with one group should not infringe on another groups comfort and safety.
Load More Replies...This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
What's your solution for people who are born interséx or have chromosomal abnormalities? "Sorry, but you can't compete at all"?
Load More Replies...Yes. It's such a vanishingly small percentage of people that it will almost never even be a problem. Those rare individuals can simply do something else. They can lift weights/do sports for fun, just not at the awarded competitive levels.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
People with DSDs are still biologically one séx with some secondary characteristics of the other, so they can still compete in the relevant séx category. EDIT: I just love the way that basic facts get downvoted so they are hidden.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
That's lovely dear. Now go and do your research and find a method of séx testing that neatky separates 100% of the human race into male and female, because there literally isn't one. This case should never have arisen because the organisers didn't do basic research, not because intrusive tests were required.




























11
110