Graham Linehan on Twitter / Trans debate

[johnnycool]

All you have to do is tilt your head and self identify as a woman.

Sporty young girls play sports with boys until age 12/13. Many drop out of sport altogether at that age. Female sport has to fight to keep them playing.  And now the LGFA is allowing men in.

After a year of hormone treatment at a minimum but you knew that.

And that makes it ok? Surely your not advocating that?

I'm saying its not just a matter of putting your hair in pigtails and having a clean shave as Seafoid was implying..

I think this is a very grey area and the LFGA are having an attempt to address an issue, perceived or otherwise and they're basing their criteria on testosterone levels used in some other sports.

There's other scientific evidence that there's a 10% drop in strength and speed once a born male goes through testosterone reducing treatment, obviously bone structure is still there.

I'm not saying it's right but lets not simply what is a very complex issue.

[seafoid]

All you have to do is tilt your head and self identify as a woman.

Sporty young girls play sports with boys until age 12/13. Many drop out of sport altogether at that age. Female sport has to fight to keep them playing.  And now the LGFA is allowing men in.

After a year of hormone treatment at a minimum but you knew that.

Does one year of hormones  negate male puberty? Of course it doesn't.

[johnnycool]

All you have to do is tilt your head and self identify as a woman.

Sporty young girls play sports with boys until age 12/13. Many drop out of sport altogether at that age. Female sport has to fight to keep them playing.  And now the LGFA is allowing men in.

After a year of hormone treatment at a minimum but you knew that.

Does one year of hormones  negate male puberty? Of course it doesn't.

Who's saying it does?

[seafoid]

It's doesn't matter what the rules are. They are not women and will never be.
The LGFA apparently went on a solo run on this.

[J70]

Also, the excuse of how dangerous trans women would be in contact sports, well a peak Serena Williams would be stronger than 99% of trans women, does than mean any women (non-trans) of her strength should be banned as well out of 'safety concerns'?

I brought up last week my own (at the time) 14 year old diminutive self being horsed out of it on the GAA field by lads who were a foot taller and three stone heavier. I'm sure many here have experienced the same.

Get up and get on with it was the option available.

Such a poor argument(yours and blanketattack are equally poor)and in no way is it the same as your  14 year old daughter (if you have one, if not insert sister, niece etc) coming up against a foot taller 3 stone heavier biological male who identifies as a female.

The point is physical disparity is often huge among men and women themselves, yet outside of the likes of boxing, it's never a consideration nor even a concern. A 5'3" man is never going to be a men's tennis champion because he simply lacks the physique, but no one bats an eyelid. Even a 5'3" woman would have a tough time against the Williams sisters in their prime. Yet the odd transwoman competing spells the end of women's sports as we know it and by extension, for some,  necessitates the denial of any legitimate consideration of transexuality.

[J70]

So there's a "movement " out there of people wanting to chop their arms off so they too can be disabled??

Well there are people who identity as those things so what's your opinion on them?

I would hope you need a medical confirmation to back up your request for a disabled parking pass.

Aside from that I don't have much of an opinion at all.

Homosexuality was once officially written off as mental illness. Did you agree with that?

Find it strange you don't have an opinion on it. Do you think these people who identify as transabled for example should taken seriously?
Do you think it's genuine or a mental illness that person may have? It's a pretty simple question.

Like above RedHand88, I'm not sure what homosexuality has to do with trans anything, but to answer your question no I don't agree with homosexuality being considered a mental illness but then as I said it's a completely different topic to transgenderism or transabledism or transracialism...etc etc etc

Why would you find it strange that I don't have an opinion on the "transabled".

I'm not sure I've ever heard before of someone being transabled, therefore I have no information to go on, which means any "opinion" I might have would be totally uninformed, ignorant and completely worthless.

The relevance of homosexuality being considered a mental illness is that is was considered just that, medically, until the 1970s. It was only decriminalized in Ireland 30 years ago FFS. Paisley was campaigning on "Save Ulster From Sodomy" just over 40 years ago. The AIDS epidemic was basically ignored when it first arose because it only affected themmuns i.e. gay people. Took until the 2000s for sodomy to be found legal in a Supreme Court decision in the US.

If you can't see the parallels...

Why do I find it strange?Just from reading this thread you seem to have an opinion on and are an advocate for all things trans so I was surprised who hadn't an opinion or even apparently never heard of other types of "trans" people

So now that you have heard of it(Transablism)and even a quick google will tell you these people exist, what is your opinion on someone identifying as such? Should we view it the same way as transgenderism and try and accommodate these people, maybe allow surgeries to amputate limbs or whatever?
I fail to see the difference between someone believing they were born into the wrong body be it an abled bodied person believing they should be disabled or a male believing they were female, why accommodate one and not the other. So if we allow people to change gender via surgery why not allow someone to become physically disabled by removing a leg or an arm?
What about transracialism should a white person for example who identifies as black be accepted as being such? They exist also another quick google search will confirm that for you.
Have you a line that can be crossed or is everything and everyone acceptable in this new trans world.

Not so much an advocate for all things trans as a devil's advocate pointing out the problems with the anti-transsexual absolutism. I've said several times that this is a very difficult issue and there are no easy answers. My issue is with those who bring poorly supported certainty to their insistence on denying the legitimacy of these people.

If you want to discuss transable and transracial people, knock yourself out. We heard the same slippery slope arguments for years on the likes of gay marriage. "Where does it end? Next thing they'll be looking to marry their dog or their sheep. Or to legalize paedophilia!"

[jcpen]

Just as I expected, you did everything but answer the questions I asked. No problem if you don't want to, that's fine but don't reply at all rather than ignore the questions asked, though not answering them tells me all I need to know anyway.

[Gmac]

It's doesn't matter what the rules are. They are not women and will never be.
The LGFA apparently went on a solo run on this.

policy downstream from the culture war

[seafoid]

Also, the excuse of how dangerous trans women would be in contact sports, well a peak Serena Williams would be stronger than 99% of trans women, does than mean any women (non-trans) of her strength should be banned as well out of 'safety concerns'?

I brought up last week my own (at the time) 14 year old diminutive self being horsed out of it on the GAA field by lads who were a foot taller and three stone heavier. I'm sure many here have experienced the same.

Get up and get on with it was the option available.

Such a poor argument(yours and blanketattack are equally poor)and in no way is it the same as your  14 year old daughter (if you have one, if not insert sister, niece etc) coming up against a foot taller 3 stone heavier biological male who identifies as a female.

The point is physical disparity is often huge among men and women themselves, yet outside of the likes of boxing, it's never a consideration nor even a concern. A 5'3" man is never going to be a men's tennis champion because he simply lacks the physique, but no one bats an eyelid. Even a 5'3" woman would have a tough time against the Williams sisters in their prime. Yet the odd transwoman competing spells the end of women's sports as we know it and by extension, for some,  necessitates the denial of any legitimate consideration of transexuality.

Transsexuality and trans are 2 different concepts.
People are born transsexual. Trans can be self ID into being.

[seafoid]

There was a discussion on OTB on Sunday about trans. One of the points was that a generation ago nobody paid much attention to Jan Morris. Another was that self ID is the law of the land. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNoLeOn1_kc

Laws can be changed behind closed doors. Not everything goes to a referendum.

[J70]

Just as I expected, you did everything but answer the questions I asked. No problem if you don't want to, that's fine but don't reply at all rather than ignore the questions asked, though not answering them tells me all I need to know anyway.

So failing to spout nonsense on something I know zilch about is telling to you, is it?

Sure go ahead and tell us why transsexuality is equivalent to those other issues. Do they all have the same biological basis, whether developmental or hormonal or some pathological brain chemical problem? Is something else at play that unites them ?

[J70]

Also, the excuse of how dangerous trans women would be in contact sports, well a peak Serena Williams would be stronger than 99% of trans women, does than mean any women (non-trans) of her strength should be banned as well out of 'safety concerns'?

I brought up last week my own (at the time) 14 year old diminutive self being horsed out of it on the GAA field by lads who were a foot taller and three stone heavier. I'm sure many here have experienced the same.

Get up and get on with it was the option available.

Such a poor argument(yours and blanketattack are equally poor)and in no way is it the same as your  14 year old daughter (if you have one, if not insert sister, niece etc) coming up against a foot taller 3 stone heavier biological male who identifies as a female.

The point is physical disparity is often huge among men and women themselves, yet outside of the likes of boxing, it's never a consideration nor even a concern. A 5'3" man is never going to be a men's tennis champion because he simply lacks the physique, but no one bats an eyelid. Even a 5'3" woman would have a tough time against the Williams sisters in their prime. Yet the odd transwoman competing spells the end of women's sports as we know it and by extension, for some,  necessitates the denial of any legitimate consideration of transexuality.

Transsexuality and trans are 2 different concepts.
People are born transsexual. Trans can be self ID into being.

I don't know what that means.

What is a transsexual by your definition?

[whitey]

If you all want to get really confused check out Libs of Tik Tok on Twitter

[trueblue1234]

Yeah and in Scotland you don't have to chop anything off, you just say you are a woman now by "self identifying" and away you go

You'd have to wonder where it all stops. Now I'm not talking about people identifying as a tree ffs, but I mean if you identify as being disabled, and you feel you were born into the wrong body as an abled person, should you be allowed to claim disability for example? What difference is there to someone, a man for example,saying they were born into the wrong body and they feel they are female.?
It's no different is it? Or you identify as being black even though you were born into a white body.

Those that support these trans people( whatever trans you may be) do you have a point where you think a line has been crossed or should everything just be accepted? Once again I'm not talking about nutters who claim they identify as broccoli.

I don't care what someone else wishes are if they don't impact me. If someone is transabled, so be it. It's their call. Should they automatically get disability, no. It should be assessed. Some transabled people go through operations as they have a disorder known as Body Integrity Identity Disorder which causes a person to feel as if they should be physically disabled in some way, like some part of their body or senses shouldn't be there. It may be a neurological disability, but it's still a disability.
I know it sounds crazy to me. I can't get my head around someone feeling like that. But just denying it exists is pointless. Will there be some abuse of this. Most definitely, but then we know there is easier ways to abuse disability welfare and we see countless examples of this everyday.
I would ask, for people who deny the various trans movements, what would they suggest to these peoples as alternative means to live their life?

[Gmac]

Gay population has probably remained the same throughout the last 20 years but Trans population is exploding in that period if you believe some people, why would that be ?

Gay population is 8% Trans less than 1% but exploded, like Mica Richards exploding onto the England team!

in a country of 30m a .1% would be 30k if it went up to .9% it would be 270k that would be an explosive increase to me and all correlated to the youth's obsession with tik tok and instagram and other social media . There are genuine people of course but mostly confused young people with parents who want to be their friend and not a parent and huge increase in mental illness in western countries.