Labour discussing plans to include trans women on women only shortlists

Scroll to see replies

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/08/self-certified-trans-women-all-women-shortlists-labour

I personally disagree: it’s the current year, why are they not having trans only shortlists as well?

Trans and gender fluid people represent the best of the Labour Party, people like Eddie Izzard Among others are exactly the sort of forward thinking candidates that this country needs to move the Labour Party forward.

In other words, they put a man in a women's shortlist.

Guess that's inclusive.

Mind you, I'm not coming down on trans people here. Live life the way you want, fellas.

Reply 81

Zargabaath

Original post by yudothis

You are the literal fascists. Abusing and suppressing people with different opinions is a key element of fascism. There is no group that does this on as wide a scale as liberals right now. It's why I no longer consider myself a SJW or liberal.

Out of interest, what do you consider yourself as now?

Original post by Davij038

‘Fascist’ can include anyone to the right of Corbyn though

Yep, you often hear of all those leftists that call Bernie Sanders a fascist.

Reply 82

VGM

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

Well yeah. But why should it's members listen to those who want it to fail?

because it obviously won't fail considering the, more successful, conservative party (no I don't support them) doesn't have an AWS yet we have a conservative PM, conservatives have more MPs and since the 20th century labour has had 8 PMs while conservatives have had 16. Not to mention they have an all women shortlist and claim to be progressive but they've never had a female leader so dont you think they should follow what they preach? such a hypocritical party already seems like a failure.

Reply 83

yudothis

Original post by Zargabaath

Out of interest, what do you consider yourself as now?

Nothing really, there is nothing in the middle anymore. I hold some views that those on the right would label me liberal for, I hold some views liberal would shout bigot at me for. Everything is so polarized.

Reply 84

yudothis

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

Just becuase the term gets missused does not mean the word has no useful or agreed upon meaning. Or that we should take the claim that LGBT activitsts are fasicsts seriously.

Keep living in your cuckoo land. More and more people see how abusive and intolerant TRAs are.

Reply 85

mojojojo101

Original post by VGM

That is exactly the kind of meaningless liberal feminism that should be avoided, it is a brand of feminism that cares nothing about emancipation just aesthetic. Neither Thatcher or May could be described as feminists, at best they just ignore the issue.

OT: The Labour party rules state trans-women are women. To not allow them to stand on AWS would be in contradiction to the rules and principles of the Labour party.

Reply 86

username1148663

Original post by yudothis

Keep living in your cuckoo land. More and more people see how abusive and intolerant TRAs are.

I agree if you talk to people of different ages and backgrounds rather than an echo chamber of young people or twitter then you find them exactly what you are saying

Reply 87

VGM

Original post by mojojojo101

my point was that labour have an AWS where a woman will get the job even if theres a man as or slightly more qualified as them. How much you wanna bet there's been at least one woman in the history of the AWS that was as or slightly less qualified than a male leader? yet she's never been leader. The labour party is full of hypocrites.

Reply 88

So-Sarah

Original post by cat_mac

““What if men pretend to be trans to get a seat?” is the last refuge of the desperate. Politics is already a game rigged for incompetent white men – how would such a man benefit from posing as a trans woman?” a great point by Shon Faye :hahaha:

they'd certainly benefit in sport, I mean have you seen women's cricket? A man coulld hit a six or four every time, just for saying he thinks he's a woman, how are u gonna stop that??

Reply 89

cat_mac

Original post by So-Sarah

they'd certainly benefit in sport, I mean have you seen women's cricket? A man coulld hit a six or four every time, just for saying he thinks he's a woman, how are u gonna stop that??

Maybe they’d out perform their cis opponents, but they would be slated in the press, probably find it very difficult to get to professional level due to people’s negative views. If they were only identifying as a women but weren’t actually trans, I highly doubt other men would respect them for joining a womans team just so they could actually stand a chance at winning. I doubt women would get on with this person knowing they were exploiting opportunities made to make it easier for minorities. A career identifying as a fake trans women wouldn’t really benefit a man at all. How far would this person go to convince people? Is there really any benefit to that individual?

I’m going to be opening a whole other can of worms here but I don’t think athletics should be divided by gender, but by height and weight. Kind of like weight categories in fighting. I believe that a woman and a man, if given the same training, the same diet, that are similar in build, can compete as equals. Idk how it would work in team sports, and I doubt people will seriously consider something like this for a looot of years.

Reply 90

So-Sarah

would you allow a small man to compete in tennis then?

Reply 91

username2080673

Original post by cat_mac

I’m going to be opening a whole other can of worms here but I don’t think athletics should be divided by gender, but by height and weight. Kind of like weight categories in fighting. I believe that a woman and a man, if given the same training, the same diet, that are similar in build, can compete as equals. Idk how it would work in team sports, and I doubt people will seriously consider something like this for a looot of years.

Agree, to an extent. With sports like lifting, boxing etc. it would be unfair because men would have the advantage. I don't see a justification for not having men and women compete together in sports like shooting, pool, trampolining etc.

Reply 92

cat_mac

Original post by So-Sarah

would you allow a small man to compete in tennis then?

100% yes, we’re just as capable as men. They have a biological advantage of generally being bigger, but skill wise I don’t see any reason why a woman shouldn’t have the chance to oppose a man in sport. Serena williams could sure as hell beat a lot of men in tennis, maybe there are some she couldn’t beat. I’d love for people to have the chance to prove or disprove these reasons why genders are separated in sports.

Reply 93

cat_mac

Original post by Conceited

Since men have a biological advantage of generally being bigger, the higher weight/hight categorise would be predominantly male and the smaller would be predominantly female. So with lifting and boxing the way we vet categorise could address any issues with advantages. I think it would be long process and each sport would have to be analysed for how we could make it fair and equal.

But yeah I agree there are some sports that could easily transition into mixed gender, sports is the only part of society that we’re still divided in and imo it’s time to change!

Reply 94

username2080673

Original post by cat_mac

It's not just being bigger, men on average are stronger than women. Integrating sports responsibly makes complete sense to me so long as it is just that, responsible. Certainly something that should be focused on.

Reply 95

Davij038

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

Just becuase the term gets missused does not mean the word has no useful or agreed upon meaning. Or that we should take the claim that LGBT activitsts are fasicsts seriously.

Terms change over time and can have different meanings in terms if context - eg ‘liberal’ has a variety of meanings.

LGBT people are, just like any body else capable of wrong doing.

Reply 96

Davij038

Original post by Zargabaath

Yep, you often hear of all those leftists that call Bernie Sanders a fascist.

Not unheard of. The fact that he’s a white male is enough for some : https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/11/bernie-sanders-black-lives-matter-squirm

Reply 97

yudothis

Original post by cat_mac

You're joking, right? You want to transition sports into a single category? I guess you've never actually competed, have you?

Do tell, what are these sports that could so easily be transitioned?

Reply 98

cat_mac

Original post by yudothis

You're joking, right? You want to transition sports into a single category? I guess you've never actually competed, have you?

Do tell, what are these sports that could so easily be transitioned?

Not a single category, no. Category based on height, weight and skill. Two people of the same level of training who are 5”7’ and similar weight range should be able to compete against each other, d*ck or not imo. I’ve competed in karate from when I was 7-16, none of that is gender separated. Beat plenty of dudes.

Sports that could easily be transitioned: archery, pool, shooting, martial arts, darts, and other individual events. Group sports will be more difficult to integrate, as stats are probably harder to match in teams.

I’m not suggesting a dainty 5’1” girl fighting a 6’2” built man. I’m suggesting that women are just as capable of training, skill and technique, and should have the opportunity to face other opponents than their gender category.

Reply 99

yudothis

Original post by cat_mac

Absolutely irrelevant. If you lined up men and women in order of ability for each sport, sure the best women will beat plenty of men. But guess what, the best men will beat all women. So whether or not you manged to beat plenty of dudes is irrelevant.

Next, how do you measure 'skill' a priori? Like leagues? Great, almost no women would be in the top league. And weight and height? So why don't women in the same weight category as men compete in boxing for example against men? Because they would get their ass kicked.

Sports that could easily be transitioned: archery, pool, shooting, martial arts, darts, and other individual events. Group sports will be more difficult to integrate, as stats are probably harder to match in teams.

Again what is it with the 'stats'? Leagues? Should in darts suddenly all the fat guys no longer compete against skinny guys, coz their weights are different? As to the rest, I doubt any woman would win anything in them against the best men. There is only one sport that I can think of where women are even, and that's equestrian. And guess what, because of it they already compete directly against men. There is a reason it hasn't happened elsewhere.

I’m not suggesting a dainty 5’1” girl fighting a 6’2” built man. I’m suggesting that women are just as capable of training, skill and technique, and should have the opportunity to face other opponents than their gender category.

And I am telling you that it's nonsense to have 'categories' for everything.

Can you imagine having 10 different 100m competitions at the Olympics based on 10 'categories'? Not only is that ludicrous, no one would care about 90% of those, they'd care about the fastest. Or could you imagine all the short sprinters wanting to beat Bolt nah sorry, he is too tall, he is in a different category. They'd be furious, too.

Sorry, but your idea is insane.