The “ I’ve got something to say, but it doesn’t warrant its own thread “ thread.

[Guest Manini]

2 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Defo contact the card provider. Pay on credit card? That’ll make it a lot easier to refund 

Debit card unfortunately. All advice points towards contacting the merchant first either way, so she’ll have to do that tomorrow and see where she stands after that. 

[ajthefox]

4 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Conspiracy theorists never fail to dazzle. Truly amazing what they've come up with around 15 minute city planning

Such a shame as well because these theories are the antithesis of the intent.

[Bellend Sebastian]

46 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Don’t say she’s gone full Le Tissier. 
 

No one should ever go full Le Tissier. 

Not far off.

 

What she's definitely not doing is the most rudimentary fact checking before losing her shit.

 

What's really clear is that the inconvenience of this thing that isn't real is going to put her to is OFF THE SCALE

 

 

[Bellend Sebastian]

11 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

Such a shame as well because these theories are the antithesis of the intent.

And drawing in the great and good. First Sharron Davies, but who next?

 

Kim Wilde? Cheryl Baker?

 

I'll level with you, I'm nervous

[Daggers]

3 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

And drawing in the great and good. First Sharron Davies, but who next?

 

Kim Wilde? Cheryl Baker?

 

I'll level with you, I'm nervous

Christopher Biggins has got to be nailed on for the next full on crank - if he’s still alive that is. He would also be my choice for next celebrity death - again, if he’s currently alive. I have this feeling he’s already dead. 
 

*If he happens to be alive now yet dead by tomorrow, I have video footage of me watching Apprentice on catch-up with the wife tonight. It wasn’t me. Look elsewhere, coppers. 

[Bellend Sebastian]

8 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Christopher Biggins has got to be nailed on for the next full on crank - if he’s still alive that is. He would also be my choice for next celebrity death - again, if he’s currently alive. I have this feeling he’s already dead. 
 

*If he happens to be alive now yet dead by tomorrow, I have video footage of me watching Apprentice on catch-up with the wife tonight. It wasn’t me. Look elsewhere, coppers. 

His health is as robust as his opinions.

 

Or something

[Wymsey]

I know it's disrespectful to say, but in staying slightly on topic always think Jeremy Clarkson and King Charles appear unwell whenever they're seen.

[Jon the Hat]

11 hours ago, Samilktray said:

Just noticed I’ve been on foxestalk 3 years shy of 20 years, absolutely bonkers that

JOINED

9 November 2004

 

Jesus.

[Jon the Hat]

7 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Containing Olympic silver medalist Sharron Davies, in a turn that literally nobody expected.

 

She's got places to go and she's furious about it

Suspect you might be in a minority assuming you are talking about her position on whether male bodied people should be able to compete in women's sport.

[Jon the Hat]

6 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Not far off.

What she's definitely not doing is the most rudimentary fact checking before losing her shit.

What's really clear is that the inconvenience of this thing that isn't real is going to put her to is OFF THE SCALE

Pretty sure she has never claimed any personal inconvenience.  During her competitive career we would have laughed at the idea.  

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Pretty sure she has never claimed any personal inconvenience.  During her competitive career we would have laughed at the idea.  

....that's not stopping her being Don Quixote and tilting at windmills, apparently.

[Jon the Hat]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

....that's not stopping her being Don Quixote and tilting at windmills, apparently.

Ah she is imagining male bodied people being allowed to compete in sport against women.  That must be it.  If it isn't real why does anyone care if it banned?

Edited 21 February 2023 by Jon the Hat

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Ah she is imagining male bodied people being allowed to compete in sport against women.  That must be it.

No, she's imagining that it's somehow a part of a monumental conspiracy against cisgender women on the part of a highly marginalised demographic and, I don't know, someone else perhaps?

 

This whole discussion, yet again, requires nuance. She lends none.

[Bellend Sebastian]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Suspect you might be in a minority assuming you are talking about her position on whether male bodied people should be able to compete in women's sport.

You assume incorrectly, Jon.

 

I don't go anywhere near that particular debate, mainly because it bores me rigid

[ClaphamFox]

54 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

You assume incorrectly, Jon.

 

I don't go anywhere near that particular debate, mainly because it bores me rigid

It’s great that you have the privilege of being bored rigid by something that doesn’t affect you personally but does seriously affect women in sport. Like this woman, for example:

 

 

 

[Finnegan]

16 hours ago, Samilktray said:

Just noticed I’ve been on foxestalk 3 years shy of 20 years, absolutely bonkers that

 

Ha what a sad loser

[Samilktray]

17 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Ha what a sad loser

Oh look, here come the online bullies!

[leicsmac]

36 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

It’s great that you have the privilege of being bored rigid by something that doesn’t affect you personally but does seriously affect women in sport. Like this woman, for example:

 

 

 

... and it's great that you (and I would assume most here) have the privilege of not being stabbed to death simply because of who you identify as, as happened recently.

 

Privilege obviously has degrees.

[ClaphamFox]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... and it's great that you (and I would assume most here) have the privilege of not being stabbed to death simply because of who you identify as, as happened recently.

 

Privilege obviously has degrees.

Indeed, but the horrific murder of Brianna Ghey is a separate issue to the threat to the integrity of women's sports, which was the topic under discussion. Thankfully murders of trans people (in the UK at least) are extremely rare. The concerns that people have about biological males accessing women's spaces and sports are not going to go away, and citing this terrible crime will ultimately not do anything to answer them. We're still in the same position as we were before.

 

[Bordersfox]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

 

 

Edited 21 February 2023 by Bordersfox

[Bordersfox]

15 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... and it's great that you (and I would assume most here) have the privilege of not being stabbed to death simply because of who you identify as, as happened recently.

 

Privilege obviously has degrees.

Not really a helpful comment on a debate you said required nuance.  

 

One woman is killed in the UK every three days, overwhelmingly by a man.  It's great you (I assume as a man) have the privilege of not being at that risk.

 

It doesn't really add anything to this debate though.  

 

A better argument might be to point out that Thomas's times are actually not record breaking or out of the ordinary for women's swimming and so it could be argued she is not putting female swimmers at a disadvantage.  It's not an argument I'm convinced by but at least it's relevant.  

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Indeed, but the horrific murder of Brianna Ghey is a separate issue to the threat to the integrity of women's sports, which was the topic under discussion. Thankfully murders of trans people (in the UK at least) are extremely rare. The concerns that people have about biological males accessing women's spaces and sports are not going to go away, and citing this terrible crime will ultimately not do anything to answer them. We're still in the same position as we were before.

 

The same demographic is involved in both matters, so they're related IMO.

 

Certainly both matters need resolving, but when I hear someone voicing concern about a problem and not referring at all to a rather bigger closely related problem in this case, I'm inclined to point it out - particularly when privilege is mentioned for a fuller picture.

 

Hopefully we can work on dealing with both matters at the same time.

 

1 minute ago, Bordersfox said:

Not really a helpful comment on a debate you said required nuance.  

 

One woman is killed in the UK every three days, overwhelmingly by a man.  It's great you (I assume as a man) have the privilege of not being at that risk.

 

It doesn't really add anything to this debate though.  

 

A better argument might be to point out that Thomas's times are actually not record breaking or out of the ordinary for women's swimming and so it could be argued she is not putting female swimmers at a disadvantage.  It's not an argument I'm convinced by but at least it's relevant.  

Speaking personally, I think it adds at least a little perspective to the situation when it is needed, but obviously ones mileage may vary on that.

 

WRT the last paragraph,  I'm actually of the opinion that it's pretty likely being a trans woman will give someone an advantage in competitive sports against other women in some cases and it really does need to be looked at in lots more detail (along with other aspects where humans of the same gender might differ) to provide an accurate picture of what to do... but at the same time I get a mite aggravated when this issue appears to be highest in the mind of some folks and not the much bigger issue of discrimination and sometimes outright violence against trans folks - at a statistically higher level than against most other demographics. Even though we can focus on both as per above, bigger problem is priority problem IMO.

[LiberalFox]

Rightly or wrongly trans women are barred from competing as women by the majority of sports bodies in the UK as they are allowed to by law. I know Sharron Davies is a bit obsessed with it, and that's her choice. There were actually a lot of cases of men being passed off as women by communist bloc countries so it's sort of ironic that she's that bothered by openly trans women who are happy to have their hormones monitored and their performance monitored for scientific interest. It's a bit of a white western obsession in general. Globally I think patriarchal attitudes about how girls and women should live their lives and poverty are far bigger problems for women's sport. 

 

 

[Scotch]

I agree that there are far more pressing matters in Trans rights than whether or not they can compete in sports. 

I agree that there are far more serious issues facing women than whether or not Trans women can compete in their sport. 

 

The exception here for me is combat sport. They need to figure that out and figure that out quickly before someone is seriously and permanently hurt. A biological male who identifies as a woman, beating all the completion to oblivion in a swimming pool is one thing but a biological male who identifies as a woman PHYSICALLY beating up biological women is something completely different. 

[LiberalFox]

26 minutes ago, Scotch said:

I agree that there are far more pressing matters in Trans rights than whether or not they can compete in sports. 

I agree that there are far more serious issues facing women than whether or not Trans women can compete in their sport. 

 

The exception here for me is combat sport. They need to figure that out and figure that out quickly before someone is seriously and permanently hurt. A biological male who identifies as a woman, beating all the completion to oblivion in a swimming pool is one thing but a biological male who identifies as a woman PHYSICALLY beating up biological women is something completely different. 

It won't happen. The issue is the public aren't knowledgeable about trans people and shouldn't really be expected to be either but have heard a lot of things thrown around and have a lot of confusion. There's no such thing as a man just identifying as a woman and competing as a woman and there never will be. When you're talking about a trans woman being allowed to compete as a woman you're talking about someone who has less testosterone than the average woman and has been like that for several years. The debates are around whether someone who has ever undergone a male puberty retains any kind of muscle mass / muscle building advantage and also the fact that a male puberty make someone reach a taller height than they would have otherwise. My personal take is that outside of serious competition there's no evidence to suggest a fully transitioned trans woman is dangerous to other women but that it's hard to argue a male puberty isn't an advantage. I think there's a good chance that someone who didn't undergo a male puberty could fairly compete as a woman. But then that conflicts with another of societies current beliefs which is that children should be forced to have a natural puberty even if all the evidence points to them being trans and that an unwanted puberty would cause them harm. Because people hope that these kids will 'decide' to grow up as not trans. Which is something I can understand even if I think it will probably end up being seen as bigoted. The idea of a kid who might have been happy as they were born ending up having a complete sex change because of peer pressure / confusion / predatory medical establishment / mental illness etc is certainly horrible.