|
|
Post by os on Sept 3, 2024 22:58:29 GMT
Firstly I think the club needed to say something, rather than just leave a void for others to full which may well nonsense. Second I don't feel this issue has anything to do with the old phobic type scenario, it is a real issue which transcends sexuality, and it yet to be answered satisfactory to everyone's agreement. Turning to your argument regarding physical capabilities which you put well, but I disagree with. A biological man is likely to be on average taller than a biological female, an advantage when it comes to playing as a keeper or heading the ball. On average a biological man is likely to be faster than a biological female, also gaining an advantage. It is difficult to assess testosterone levels and there actual impact on performance and even more so the lower down the leagues you go with resources available. A generalization I know but it is also likely that a transgender female will be naturally bigger, we have a transgender relative and she is 6ft 6" and wears size 12 shoes. I also point you to the Algerian boxer who won gold at the Olympics, you can quote any testosterone levels or tests you like, but you could clearly see a complete mismatch in strength. I reiterate this isn't a phobic thing as it concerns both male and female, and I also accept its not an easy subject to resolve. Thanks for your reply, OS. I agree that the club needs to say something because people WILL fill that void as you say, but I am sure they will do so very soon. Unfortunately a lot of the issues people raise ARE rooted in transphobia and a lot of the talk about unfairness is just a smokescreen and is then repeated by people who aren't necessarily transphobic but have heard these "concerns" raised by others - which is why people like me question it. A big clue in that scenario is when you see a lot of men talking about what's right/fair/safe for women, without actually speaking to the women themselves about it. Has anyone objecting to trans women playing on women's teams asked their teammates/opposing teams what they think about it, or are we deciding on their behalf what they want and what's best for them? None of the above is necessarily referring to anyone on here, by the way. There's just a lot of it out there. You're right, height can be a significant advantage in football. The research does seem to be saying that such advantages are lessened or erased by low T levels and muscle mass that make it much harder to carry that larger frame around (the research sunmarised in that article specifically says trans women can't jump as high or run as fast as cis men of the same size) but you and others here are absolutely right that we don't know enough yet to draw firm conclusions. However, there is also no evidence at all that trans women do have an advantage over cis women in football. If trans women started showing up all over the place at the elite level of women's football and their cis counterparts were struggling to get into teams, then we'd have a problem. But that's not happening, so why try and solve a problem we don't have unless we're just trying to push trans women out of the game? It's interesting you mention Imane Khelif ("the Algerian boxer") and that there was clearly a complete mismatch in strength. Khelif is cisgender. She isn't trans. There doesn't seem to be any substance behind claims that she was ever found to have elevated testosterone levels or XY chromosomes. Khelif was born and raised as a girl. Being trans is ILLEGAL in her country. If there was a complete mismatch in strength that's simply because she's a better boxer than her opponents. I am not sure what this quote manipulation was all about, but I didn't see it so that is the end of the matter. I agree the numbers of transgender people in sport is low, but I am sure that will probably rise over time. As for research its not a given that T suppression is effective this from Wiki suggests something different : A 2021 literature review concluded that for trans women, even with testosterone suppression, "the data show that strength, lean body mass, muscle size and bone density are only trivially affected. The reductions observed in muscle mass, size, and strength are very small compared to the baseline differences between males and females in these variables, and thus, there are major performance and safety implications in sports where these attributes are competitively significant."Source : Transgender people in sports - Wikipedia When I was younger my position was a keeper, I am 6ft tall and even that is considered short in the men's game, but reach is hugely important. Not many biological females are 6ft, in fact you may remember me saying that I think the goals should be smaller in the women's game, and you told me off  I am not a women of trans, but like all of us I understand football and the will to win and be the best you can be. I can't thinking that T suppression (if it works) is at odds with that goal. You have biological females (btw apologies if my terms are wrong) who are working on building strength vs trans who will actually be working to reduce strength. I can see a conflict here, if you are transitioning, and you are a good footballer do you choose further T suppression or do you cheat a little to play say top level football (we all cheat, nowt to do with gender), and who decides what T level is acceptable? I am absolutely sure Lucy wants the best team see can field, and will choose her players on ability, does that include a T level test or certain criteria? I don't know I am asking the question. |
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on Sept 4, 2024 10:32:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Sept 4, 2024 10:36:00 GMT
Thanks for your reply, OS. I agree that the club needs to say something because people WILL fill that void as you say, but I am sure they will do so very soon. Unfortunately a lot of the issues people raise ARE rooted in transphobia and a lot of the talk about unfairness is just a smokescreen and is then repeated by people who aren't necessarily transphobic but have heard these "concerns" raised by others - which is why people like me question it. A big clue in that scenario is when you see a lot of men talking about what's right/fair/safe for women, without actually speaking to the women themselves about it. Has anyone objecting to trans women playing on women's teams asked their teammates/opposing teams what they think about it, or are we deciding on their behalf what they want and what's best for them? None of the above is necessarily referring to anyone on here, by the way. There's just a lot of it out there. You're right, height can be a significant advantage in football. The research does seem to be saying that such advantages are lessened or erased by low T levels and muscle mass that make it much harder to carry that larger frame around (the research sunmarised in that article specifically says trans women can't jump as high or run as fast as cis men of the same size) but you and others here are absolutely right that we don't know enough yet to draw firm conclusions. However, there is also no evidence at all that trans women do have an advantage over cis women in football. If trans women started showing up all over the place at the elite level of women's football and their cis counterparts were struggling to get into teams, then we'd have a problem. But that's not happening, so why try and solve a problem we don't have unless we're just trying to push trans women out of the game? It's interesting you mention Imane Khelif ("the Algerian boxer") and that there was clearly a complete mismatch in strength. Khelif is cisgender. She isn't trans. There doesn't seem to be any substance behind claims that she was ever found to have elevated testosterone levels or XY chromosomes. Khelif was born and raised as a girl. Being trans is ILLEGAL in her country. If there was a complete mismatch in strength that's simply because she's a better boxer than her opponents. I am not sure what this quote manipulation was all about, but I didn't see it so that is the end of the matter. I agree the numbers of transgender people in sport is low, but I am sure that will probably rise over time. As for research its not a given that T suppression is effective this from Wiki suggests something different : A 2021 literature review concluded that for trans women, even with testosterone suppression, "the data show that strength, lean body mass, muscle size and bone density are only trivially affected. The reductions observed in muscle mass, size, and strength are very small compared to the baseline differences between males and females in these variables, and thus, there are major performance and safety implications in sports where these attributes are competitively significant."Source : Transgender people in sports - Wikipedia When I was younger my position was a keeper, I am 6ft tall and even that is considered short in the men's game, but reach is hugely important. Not many biological females are 6ft, in fact you may remember me saying that I think the goals should be smaller in the women's game, and you told me off I am not a women of trans, but like all of us I understand football and the will to win and be the best you can be. I can't thinking that T suppression (if it works) is at odds with that goal. You have biological females (btw apologies if my terms are wrong) who are working on building strength vs trans who will actually be working to reduce strength. I can see a conflict here, if you are transitioning, and you are a good footballer do you choose further T suppression or do you cheat a little to play say top level football (we all cheat, nowt to do with gender), and who decides what T level is acceptable? I am absolutely sure Lucy wants the best team see can field, and will choose her players on ability, does that include a T level test or certain criteria? I don't know I am asking the question. From what Lucy's said, if I have understood it correctly, it's the increase in oestrogen that makes more of a difference and it isn't clear whether that research examined that; what is very clear is that more research is needed. But I think the main point is that having trans women in women's sport has NOT been making a significant impact on the game. Players are not complaining about playing against trans women (other than a few high-profile ex-sportswomen who clearly had an agenda beforehand and aren't currently playing competitive sports). If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Anyway, the club's now released a statement which although it doesn't make explicit exactly why the match was postponed (and there may well be a good reason why they can't explain that in a public statement at the moment) you can certainly read between the lines on that and it does send out a reassuring message about the club's stance on discrimination. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesc on Sept 4, 2024 11:52:21 GMT
Nice to see a statement, and to see the clubs commitment to be inclusive and reject bigotry.
Doesn't explain why the game was cancelled in contrary with these very valid and important morals though.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveb on Sept 4, 2024 12:03:32 GMT
Or why it was called off so late or why Ebbsfleet were not given a reason.
Will the game be played? Have Ebbsfleet been
awarded the points?
|
|
|
|
Post by boomboom on Sept 4, 2024 12:19:44 GMT
Nice to see a statement, and to see the clubs commitment to be inclusive and reject bigotry. Doesn't explain why the game was cancelled in contrary with these very valid and important morals though.Well, it does and it doesn't (and it was postponed, not cancelled, btw): The well-being and safety of all our players is of paramount importance to us and it was through an abundance of caution on this subject that the decision was made to postpone the match on Sunday. We will not tolerate any behaviour that undermines our values or puts anyone’s health or safety in jeopardy.The specific details as to why there was an "abundance of caution on this subject" in relation to the match taking place are left open to conjecture but it appears clear that the club was concerned about the safety of the players in this instance. It is possible that the club is having discussions with the FA and/or relevant league as to the circumstances regarding the postponement before any decision is taken about a possible points deduction etc. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesc on Sept 4, 2024 12:33:33 GMT
Nice to see a statement, and to see the clubs commitment to be inclusive and reject bigotry. Doesn't explain why the game was cancelled in contrary with these very valid and important morals though.Well, it does and it doesn't (and it was postponed, not cancelled, btw): The well-being and safety of all our players is of paramount importance to us and it was through an abundance of caution on this subject that the decision was made to postpone the match on Sunday. We will not tolerate any behaviour that undermines our values or puts anyone’s health or safety in jeopardy.Quite why there was an "abundance of caution on this subject" in relation to the match taking place is left open to conjecture. Right. But being left to conjecture is the entire issue. This is a solid, inarguable and easily supported statement on inclusivity. Not one on why the game was postponed. As I type this the clubs socials directly and indirectly are awash with conjecture, rumours and guesses. Suttons own town news feed is full of ot, and as you can see it's made the national news papers. This narrative is being filled in by everyone but the club. Sutton United isn't a part time operation anymore. It has a comms team. The board and that team need to wise up. I will speak plainly. I have no thoughts personally either way on the rights or wrongs of trans people in gender specific sport. It's in the rules, so it's fair as far as I'm concerned. But, this was ALWAYS going to be a controversial decision, and so the club should have been ready and prepared for that controversy. There should have been a fully explained statement in hours, not days. One that explained, not signalled the clubs honourable and correct moral stance. |
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on Sept 4, 2024 13:09:52 GMT
I find the neccessity of people wanting to know every single detail utterly ghoulish.
There is nothing wrong with the statement, and the club has been clear about the reason why the match was postponed, without having to go into the weeds which could already flare up an already sensitive situation.
Full kudos to the club. It's a thoughtful, well written response which the rabid media and individuals like Sharon Davies will struggle to twist to push their own, very persona agendas, and by association, potential harmful actions done by others who are really dangerously obsessed by this topic to the point of physical harm to others. Issues I strongly believe exist because of their dislike of Lucy for what she is, even though they have no idea who she is, which I also find utterly abhorrent.
If you're not happy with the club not only supporting our players and staff with pride and integrity, but also against any action by the club which puts anyone's health or safety in jeopardy, then in all seriousness, go and support someone else. You don't share the values of the club.
There's literally nothing wrong with the timescale either. Part time or not part time, it's vitally important that the club establish all the facts, speak with relevant authoritie and not rush into a statement just to satiate ghouls and sh*t stirrers.
|
|
|
|
Post by paz on Sept 4, 2024 13:47:21 GMT
Or why it was called off so late or why Ebbsfleet were not given a reason. Will the game be played? Have Ebbsfleet been awarded the points? Opposing anything to do with this subject can be very hairy and can even lead to arrests in todays ever authoritarian society. So if your intent is to not spread any hate or discrimination, then you have to be extremely careful how you word your arguments, to avoid being in heat. Particularly if you are in the limelight and have influence. For this reason, I do think that even if there were some women in the team who had concerns with the situation, as some of the media has touched on, they may well feel compelled to stay quiet out of fear from any internet backlash and hate from those who would perceive them as some kind of monster or backward thinking "Bigot". It can be quite intimidating for individuals in that position and many fear it. To summarise, I think the main grey area that needs addressing is defining the difference between males who have fully transitioned (Quite the commitment), and males who just socially identify as a woman, and then regulate accordingly. From there it would be easier to then study the advantages or disadvantages Transitioned Women have, the regulations needed to ensure a consistent monitoring, And then conclude what is best for all. Until we get to that point I cant see the water getting any clearer any time soon.. |
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on Sept 4, 2024 14:01:50 GMT
Or why it was called off so late or why Ebbsfleet were not given a reason. Will the game be played? Have Ebbsfleet been awarded the points? Opposing anything to do with this subject can be very hairy and can even lead to arrests in todays ever authoritarian society. Pardon my French, but that's bollocks. And you know it's bollocks. Name one person who has been arrested for "opposing anything to do with this subject". |
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Sept 4, 2024 14:03:13 GMT
We are already there, Paz. Sports governing bodies do things like testing hormone levels, which will change as someone transitions and will affect their performance significantly. You would not be allowed to play women's sports if your testosterone levels, for instance, were too high.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amber Aleman on Sept 4, 2024 14:23:30 GMT
To summarise, I think the main grey area that needs addressing is defining the difference between males who have fully transitioned (Quite the commitment), and males who just socially identify as a woman, and then regulate accordingly. From there it would be easier to then study the advantages or disadvantages Transitioned Women have, the regulations needed to ensure a consistent monitoring, And then conclude what is best for all. Until we get to that point I cant see the water getting any clearer any time soon.. That distinction is recognised in the FA's policy on transgender players (linked from our club's statement), specifically in the following paragraph. If a trans person has not undergone or is not undergoing hormone therapy or gonadectomy, The FA will consider their application taking into consideration the two requirements to ensure (1) the applicant’s and fellow players’ safety and (2) fair competition. The policy statement makes clear that the FA adopts a case-by-case approach. No two players are identical. |
|
|
|
Post by suttonpodcast on Sept 4, 2024 14:35:02 GMT
Whilst I hear where Paz is coming from, I would counter that the majority of players have been signed by Lucy who is not exactly shy with openness.
The few left had a chance in the summer to move on and would of had clubs straight away so no need to suffer in silence. Plus, love her, but Jaz isn't exactly the suffer in silence type.
Personally I have found asking questions is generally fine but in modern world no one likes to admit they might have it wrong so both sides of argument get entrenched and nothing changes.
In this thread I have learnt about the meds which I didn't know caused loss of strength.
|
|
|
|
Post by newfmkr on Sept 4, 2024 15:36:40 GMT
To summarise, I think the main grey area that needs addressing is defining the difference between males who have fully transitioned (Quite the commitment), and males who just socially identify as a woman, and then regulate accordingly. From there it would be easier to then study the advantages or disadvantages Transitioned Women have, the regulations needed to ensure a consistent monitoring, And then conclude what is best for all. Until we get to that point I cant see the water getting any clearer any time soon.. That distinction is recognised in the FA's policy on transgender players (linked from our club's statement), specifically in the following paragraph. If a trans person has not undergone or is not undergoing hormone therapy or gonadectomy, The FA will consider their application taking into consideration the two requirements to ensure (1) the applicant’s and fellow players’ safety and (2) fair competition. The policy statement makes clear that the FA adopts a case-by-case approach. No two players are identical. that's the actual wording from the FA? They would consider somebody who has had no, and may have no intention of transitioning whatsoever? Not saying they'd allow it, but to even consider a male who self IDs, to be allowed to compete against women is staggering. |
|
|
|
Post by paz on Sept 4, 2024 15:40:30 GMT
Opposing anything to do with this subject can be very hairy and can even lead to arrests in todays ever authoritarian society. Pardon my French, but that's bollocks. And you know it's bollocks. Name one person who has been arrested for "opposing anything to do with this subject". I don't need to find a live case to prove that it's potentially possible to be arrested based on current-day British jurisdiction, you just need to research the laws on hate speech or what is deemed as "extremely offensive" and understand their subjective nature. Not only do I not "know its bollocks" but I will assert that my warning is very valid. One is particularly valuable if you have no money and someone wealthy takes offence to something you have said, or someone has the backing from well-financed think tanks. www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homophobic-biphobic-and-transphobic-hate-crime-prosecution-guidanceYour dismissive comments might just come back to bite you. |
|
