Almost as funny as the manager of Sutton United Ladies stating that she wants to field a team of entirely transgender players , so Sutton United Ladies without a single biological female ?!.
Last edited:
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Sutton United Ladies put their head above the parapet
- Thread starter Lenny Rider
- Start date
Lucy Clark opens up on the abuse she has received since becoming the first Transgender manager in the top 5 divisions of English football
Sutton United Women manager Lucy Clark opens up on transgender abuse
Sutton United Women manager Lucy Clark reflects on her experiences as the first transgender manager in the top five divisions of English women's football.
www.skysports.com
I think you would be genuinely surprised how much support for the transgender community is out there , there is no agenda against transgender sportspersons .
The problem here as far as i am concerned is purely to protect the rights of female sport , that should be clear to anyone .
That's not exactly what she said. I believe she said that "At some point we will field a team solely of trans women for the first time in history." I think that we could refer to Sutton United or society in general.
PascalGroß Tips
Well-known member
- Jan 29, 2024
- 568
Any abuse or hate is absolutely wrong and should be dealt with. Gender critical views though (such as a tweet from JKR) are not abuse or hate and is a protected characteristic - depending on how it was used of course. The clip makes no actual reference to what abuse was received (I mean high level - not specifics) … it only mentions gender critical views.Lucy Clark opens up on the abuse she has received since becoming the first Transgender manager in the top 5 divisions of English football
Sutton United Women manager Lucy Clark opens up on transgender abuse
Sutton United Women manager Lucy Clark reflects on her experiences as the first transgender manager in the top five divisions of English women's football.www.skysports.com
This is surely the only real solution. Maybe have travel costs subsidized by the FA or something if the teams are too spread out to make it work.
Until that, it needs to be banned. That it is competitively unfair is one thing but the reason we don't even see "mixed teams" exhibition games is because its dangerous to the female players. Its a sport where you have to be careful not to break someones leg, and someones leg is a lot more likely to go off if they have half the muscle mass. Basically you can't have players with male physique kicking females, avoiding that must be prio no 1 and then the rest of it can be solved tomorrow.
I quoted the line in The Telegraph that was on the post .
I honestly thought i`d seen/read somewhere that there are already fledgling Transgender leagues growing ? , and more power to them .
But the thought of a totally Transgender team representing the Women`s league surely can`t benefit anyone , certainly not Women .
There is one already TRUK Utd. There's also a TRUK Utd made up of trans men - they lost to Dulwich Hamlet in an inaugural match last season.
There's also a trans men rugby team that my son is involved in but it's only just getting off the ground.
BTW, for those people who say that it doesn't happen in reverse, with transmen taking the place of blokes. My son played for a rugby team about a year ago in a festival, he finished up top try scorer for the team and was their player of the tournament. In the same month, he got included in a club cricket team, leading to a cis male player to be excluded (but as that was me, there was no big fuss made).
Unfortunately, he then got a job in a night club and work shifts than finish at 7.00 in the morning leave little time for any sports.
m20gull
Well-known member
If all people and genders are welcome in sport what does that mean for women's sport? Is it the right thing that women give up their sporting achievements?
Not sure JK Rowling is someone I'd bring into this conversation. Her views are ... somewhat inflexible, as well as tainted by association with some organisations that raise concern about her true views. Personally, I believe her views are far more about anti-trans hate than they are about pro-women's rights / protection.
It's not as black and white as that. Unfortunately (as much as some, like JK Rowling, would have us believe otherwise) biology and genetics is not that simple. While rare, it is possible during early development for genes to switch on / switch off - and this includes gender-defining genetics. It is possible, for example, for the brain to develop "female" and for male-defining genes that were previously switched off to switch on and the body to then develop "male". As a result, it is genetically and biologically possible for a person with a "female" brain to born into a "male" body (and vice versa).
As I've mentioned above, it's not just mental health. There are scientifically proven genetic / biology explanations for why some people feel the need to transition.
Interesting one here - would be good (if @Hamilton can provide) to see some of the military studies that appear to contradict what @hart's shirt has shared. If what Hamilton says is correct, the solution might be simpler than we realise: it could be as simple as ruling that a male who has transitioned to female and wants to compete in women's sport must show X years of uninterrupted gender re-assignment treatment that would "reverse" the bulk of their "male advantages".
Respectfully, that wasn't my point. My point was @BrickTamland 's assumption that the trans haters are also woman haters doesn't stand up to scrutiny of the leading actors.
Either way Rowling has been forced into doubling down by an active and fierce campaign against her, something that is unfortunate when the issue is debated as binary instead of nuanced.
Not sure I agree. The wider "gender critical" movement globally has a poor reputation and known associations with recognised hate-movements on the far right. I'd also argue that their hyper-strict "biology" basis for their views is wrong, which undermines their whole justification for their views. While the vast majority of us are either "biologically male" or "biologically female", for a small minority the vagaries of genetics (one of the pillars of biology) means that it is possible for an individual to not fit neatly into the "male or female" division.
So, IMO, someone who aligns with "gender critical" ideology needs to have what they share considered carefully. They are either ill-informed on genetics/biology from a scientific standpoint, aligned with hateful groups, or both.
That's cool. My point was that just bringing her name into the discussion was rife for unpleasantness (not from you).
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
I think you have misunderstood what I have said. Whether someone has a mental illness, a difference in sex development (DSD), or just feels uncomfortable in their own skin or whatever else, it makes no difference to their body being their own. You simply cannot be 'born into the wrong body' because if you were you wouldn't be you.
It doesn't mean anything at all. There will still be men's and women's sports. Or are you proposing that we do away with gender altogether? Radical, but I can't imagine people are ready for that.
I think you're being a pedant.
Okay, the phrase 'being born into the wrong body' can be twisted and misconstrued. Happy?
The points previously made still stand. And as we've agree, it's not a mental health issue alone.
In that case, you're not using that phrase in the way that the vast majority would understand it. That phrase has been used a lot in reference to people who are born physically one gender but firmly believe they are the other gender. It's a phrase that they use themselves, to describe the way they feel about their bodies.
Edit: worth noting, that some in the transgender community are moving away from the phrase. Doing a little of what I sometimes preach and self-educating a little as we go in this thread
.
Last edited:
hart's shirt
Well-known member
Yes, fair point. If that's correct, it could be.
Nevertheless, the burden of proof remains with those who argue that any male advantages that cannot be removed - increased muscle mass, increased strength and the shape and size of the skeleton - are insignificant enough to allow fair competition with biological females.
Until such a time that this is conclusively proved beyond reasonable doubt, the only objective position to hold would surely be to follow the sports scientists and physiologists who think otherwise.
It's a very difficult topic, and it disturbs me how many (on social media in general, not so much necessarily on here) have a very fixed black or white view of the subject. A LOT of nuance required.
m20gull
Well-known member
So how do you decide who fits in a womens sports team?