Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Olympics 2024
Comments
-
Gribbo said:Really enjoying women's synchronised swimming. Possibly a bit more than the women's beach volleyball if I'm honest.
I watched girls/women/females etc Beach volleyball in a tournament on Weymouth Beach a few years ago and It was a wonderful sight seeing nubile young fit women being sporty* and diving about.
The winning pair when asked "What's in it for you"
answered in perfect harmony, "SAND"
* Why did dirty replace Sporty on autocorrect 🤔0 -
Emma Finucane wins her 3rd medal by taking the 🥉in the Women's sprint.0
-
One gold, two bronze medals for Emma Finucane in the cycling at the age of 21!
Hopefully a fixture for the next couple of Olympics!1 -
Already had BALCO I guess.Off_it said:
It would be shocking if it came out that the US athletes were all on something and all of their medals got wiped. Shocking and yet hilarious at the same time!North Lower Neil said:Interesting story came out a few days ago, while the US athletes are all finding that extra gear/strong finish:
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/news/wada-statement-reuters-story-exposing-usada-scheme-contravention-world-anti-doping-code
Would be funny!0 -
Japanese cyclist fucked Carlin up, cut infront of him and the NZ bloke. Proper crash.0
-
Kamikazi?ValleyGary said:Japanese cyclist fucked Carlin up, cut infront of him and the NZ bloke. Proper crash.0 -
Very interesting. Just watched that the whole way through. Need to think about it some more but I might just change my views now.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.
https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)1 -
So one less medal than in 2012, but only 14 golds compared to 26.
Where are the next Peaty, Hoy, Kenny, Farah etc?2 -
bit short on her 7 Cycling golds prediction.ValleyGary said:Think I might be in love with Laura Kenny0 -
No, same number of medals as in London 2012. (65 in both)bolloxbolder said:So one less medal than in 2012, but only 14 golds compared to 26.
Where are the next Peaty, Hoy, Kenny, Farah etc?1 - Sponsored links:
-
But one more medal than Tokyo 2020.bolloxbolder said:So one less medal than in 2012, but only 14 golds compared to 26.
Where are the next Peaty, Hoy, Kenny, Farah etc?1 -
The trigger warning will be for next year when a man with de la Chapelle syndrome signs up to fight against women due to these new rules that transphobic people want to be in place.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Then that won't be good enough so they'll make new rules so eventually only their 'acceptable' version of female can compete.
The conclusion to all of this is the olympics will simply remove the strength and combat events from the competition because they don't want to deal with the headache. A shame.2 -
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.6 -
I’d like to think this is a more balanced view on the boxing situation
https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c0l8gxzw6n4o.amp
0 -
Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.6 -
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.2 -
Again ....IOC has a horrible track record of corruption from top down.Callumcafc said:I’d like to think this is a more balanced view on the boxing situation
https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c0l8gxzw6n4o.amp
Balanced maybe but I think Dr Emma Harris' view is more credible than sports journalist Dan Roan on the matter.
But (genuinely) thank you for the reasoned disagreement without calls of transphobia/ bigotry. It is healthy to have disagreement particularly when no one has the true facts on this particular case of the 2 boxers.1 -
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.1 -
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.2 -
Would have improved with Katie ArchibaldHal1x said:
bit short on her 7 Cycling golds prediction.ValleyGary said:Think I might be in love with Laura Kenny0 - Sponsored links:
-
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.1 -
It's worth watching it. It's backed by science given her qualifications and career regardless of philosophy.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.2 -
I've seen it.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
It's worth watching it. It's backed by science given her qualifications and career regardless of philosophy.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
If she is in favour of operating under chromosome testing, then I'd immediately ask what becomes of XX chromosome men, do they compete as women because in her mind they are one?
Then you get a physically presenting men, who may be infertile, beating up women in boxing events. So where is the progress?2 -
Why? I bet if you asked the good Dr. Emma Hilton she would claim they're women.blackpool72 said:
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.3 -
You are basing your argument over something that has never happened.SELR_addicks said:
Why? I bet if you asked the good Dr. Emma Hilton she would claim they're women.blackpool72 said:
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.
If the situation was to arise that would be the time to discuss it.
Until then it's irrelevant.2 -
It can't happen currently because of the passport test. There is already a rule in place to stop it.blackpool72 said:
You are basing your argument over something that has never happened.SELR_addicks said:
Why? I bet if you asked the good Dr. Emma Hilton she would claim they're women.blackpool72 said:
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.
If the situation was to arise that would be the time to discuss it.
Until then it's irrelevant.
If you're going to talk about women with genetic conditions, you have to accept that it also happens in men. So how do you solve it?1 -
RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
Dr. Emma might know a lot about the scientifics of XX/XY etc. but her follow-on arguments from there for this specific case are based on evidence that no one has seen.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
Again ....IOC has a horrible track record of corruption from top down.Callumcafc said:I’d like to think this is a more balanced view on the boxing situation
https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c0l8gxzw6n4o.amp
Balanced maybe but I think Dr Emma Harris' view is more credible than sports journalist Dan Roan on the matter.
But (genuinely) thank you for the reasoned disagreement without calls of transphobia/ bigotry. It is healthy to have disagreement particularly when no one has the true facts on this particular case of the 2 boxers.She’s taking IBA statements as factual because it suits her already entrenched point of view. She may be credible on the specifics of the science but I cannot accept what she has to say as unbiased.
The IOC have work to do on this issue. But it’s an incredibly delicate subject and could lead to thousands of cases of invasion of women’s privacy if not handled correctly.
Appreciate the thank you and return it. Not sure we are going to agree but glad to be able to have the discussion in the way it’s being handled.4 -
That's the sort of question that Dr.Emma Hilton should be asked.SELR_addicks said:
It can't happen currently because of the passport test. There is already a rule in place to stop it.blackpool72 said:
You are basing your argument over something that has never happened.SELR_addicks said:
Why? I bet if you asked the good Dr. Emma Hilton she would claim they're women.blackpool72 said:
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.
If the situation was to arise that would be the time to discuss it.
Until then it's irrelevant.
If you're going to talk about women with genetic conditions, you have to accept that it also happens in men. So how do you solve it?
Not me, an overweight 69 year old with little knowledge on the subject 😉0 -
Which was my original comment, curious she hasn't mentioned it.blackpool72 said:
That's the sort of question that Dr.Emma Hilton should be asked.SELR_addicks said:
It can't happen currently because of the passport test. There is already a rule in place to stop it.blackpool72 said:
You are basing your argument over something that has never happened.SELR_addicks said:
Why? I bet if you asked the good Dr. Emma Hilton she would claim they're women.blackpool72 said:
Not going to happen.SELR_addicks said:
No because men can't compete in female events.blackpool72 said:
Has that ever even happened.SELR_addicks said:
Has she mentioned whether she would be happy for a man with XX chromosomes to compete in the boxing events? Or is she skirting over this issue because it doesn't suit her current world view?RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
But under 'their rules' they could.
If the situation was to arise that would be the time to discuss it.
Until then it's irrelevant.
If you're going to talk about women with genetic conditions, you have to accept that it also happens in men. So how do you solve it?
Not me, an overweight 69 year old with little knowledge on the subject 😉
Perhaps it's because she knows people won't like her answer about it (she thinks they're women).0 -
Cheers mate 👍Callumcafc said:RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Callumcafc said:
There is zero factual evidence of XY chromosomes in either boxer, only confused statements from a federation that’s been done for corruption.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:Off_it said:
I find it bizarre, and actually quite worrying, that some people can form some very clear and entrenched views based on "facts" that just aren't true at all.Swindon_Addick said:
She isn't a man. No-one is claiming that she's a man, including those who are claiming that she has a chromosomal irregularity that would make her ineligible for women's sport. The people making those claims have no credibility, but even they don't think she's trans.KBslittlesis said:Men telling me that a man winning a women’s event is irrelevant.
Yeah, cheers guys.
The lack of credibility of the IBA doesn't in itself prove that they're lying, neither does the fact that when they held their press conference they couldn't even agree what test they were claiming they'd run that she'd failed. But I want to seem some actual evidence before we start disqualifying people, and I want to know why that evidence wasn't presented to the IOC in advance so that, if one or both of the two boxers isn't eligible, they could have been excluded without ruining the competition for everyone else.
Obviously we've seen that recently with all the aggro around the UK, but this is another example of where the facts don't seem to trouble some people.
For example, my mum is insistent that the Algerian "is a man", even though nobody in any sort of official, or semi-official, capacity has ever said that, as far as I'm aware.https://youtu.be/_9rynD9KlU0?si=PitVrj4XZFGpagvE
(Trigger warning for some of the rantier posters it does discuss the issue of micro penises)
Until some actual proper gender testing is done by a reputable organisation, we do not know either way and these are nothing more than accusations without proper basis. Gender testing as a regular practice is a separate topic that can be debated.
Dr. Emma Hilton, as a trustee of the Sex Matters charity, isn’t exactly going to come out with a balanced view on this.
The IOC is one of the most historically corrupt organisations going. The excellent Lords of the Rings gives good insight on that.
Dr Emma Hilton is an expert in developmental biology so I take her views and insights as credible.
Dr. Emma might know a lot about the scientifics of XX/XY etc. but her follow-on arguments from there for this specific case are based on evidence that no one has seen.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:
Again ....IOC has a horrible track record of corruption from top down.Callumcafc said:I’d like to think this is a more balanced view on the boxing situation
https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/articles/c0l8gxzw6n4o.amp
Balanced maybe but I think Dr Emma Harris' view is more credible than sports journalist Dan Roan on the matter.
But (genuinely) thank you for the reasoned disagreement without calls of transphobia/ bigotry. It is healthy to have disagreement particularly when no one has the true facts on this particular case of the 2 boxers.She’s taking IBA statements as factual because it suits her already entrenched point of view. She may be credible on the specifics of the science but I cannot accept what she has to say as unbiased.
The IOC have work to do on this issue. But it’s an incredibly delicate subject and could lead to thousands of cases of invasion of women’s privacy if not handled correctly.
Appreciate the thank you and return it. Not sure we are going to agree but glad to be able to have the discussion in the way it’s being handled.1
