Any furniture fans?

[Rubbishplayer]

Carini had an unhealed broken nose and when she got hit in the face realised she was not ready to fight again.

Now the IBA is offering Carini prize money because this is all entirely p*litical and nothing to do with sports.

It is extremely disappointing that Carini has not (to my knowledge) has not conceded that she was outclassed by a stronger woman, but my experience of "top flight" atheletes is that, all too often, a significant minority will happily play whatever card they can to reduce cognitive dissonance.

 

[spawnofthesith]

Based on the only statement regarding any of this from Carini that I've seen, I find that the shit talking and bullying of her online is also gross and misogynistic


Unless I missed something transphobic or her hopping on the idiot bandwagon (please someone educate me if so).

Just because bigots are using her to be bigots doesn't mean that she deserves any misogyny or backlash, and all the people participating that are part of the problem imo.


If she's expressed any transphobic shit that I missed, then my apologies. Bully away

 

[TedEH]

I find it hard to believe that we have to stretch this far to think of motivations for why someone wouldn't want to be punched in the face, rather than taking them at their word. They're world-class face-punchers, they don't need excuses. Having an already-broken nose OR recognizing being outclassed are equal reasons to back down. It literally doesn't matter, unless you're searching for a reason to paint one fighter as having "man-like strength".

 

[BlackMastodon]

This may be a dumb comment since I'm not a competitive athlete and never have been, but isn't the whole point of competitive sports, especially non-team sports, to prove what the individual human is capable of? Like there are small genetic differences in every person that can give them a competitive edge (Michael Phelps' wingspan, having double jointed elbows, and giant hands/feet, for example), so it's super disingenuous for people to latch on to a woman who doesn't fit into traditional western beauty standards and use it to fuel their bigoted views (especially ironic with the rise in popularity in recent years of women's rugby).

Not to turn this into a conversation about genetics in athletes because I know there's a lot of straight up racist rhetoric in those talks, I just find it ironic (though not surprising) that instead of celebrating an individual's skill people have to turn it into transphobia.

 

[Rubbishplayer]

Do you not see what you're doing?

Calling someone a bigot when they're being a bigot is not, in itself, bigoted. But more importantly, calling something out doesn't "shut down" conversation, it opens conversation. If I insult your identity or try to take your rights away, calling me out on it is not "silencing" me - it's quite the opposite - it's an invitation to open the discussion to what exactly was done and how it was received. A refusal to take that criticism (and using it as an excuse to call LGBT people "bigoted") is the thing that shuts down conversation. And then you get stupidly bogged down in "how to argue" arguments instead of addressing the actual subject.

If the only point to make is about the manner in which points are made, then you have no real point. You're just invalidating people's views on the basis of them not being presented in the way you like.


What exactly are these impacts on others you're talking about? This is a conversation about a person who isn't LGBT at all, being spun as "the LGBT-agenda allows man-shaped people to beat up women-shaped people", which is not at all what happened. I've got plenty of opinions about how modern identity does or could or should work, but at no point does any of that subject really have a meaningful impact to folks who are outside of those communities.

Oh dear, so many misconceptions.

Let's start with the fact that I'm not talking specifically about the boxing drama which, on the face of it, appears to be a clear case of Carini using dogwhistle transphobia.

Secondly, your strawman argument that I'm concerned with the style of debate or the right of people to call out bigotry. I believe everyone has the right to call out clear bigotry, where it exists. Even yours.

Then there's your other strawman argument that no cis-gendered people could harbour valid concerns about trans rights. You appear unaware of concerns women might have about safe spaces. Your question regarding the nature of these concerns was amply answered in the original post, yet you appear to have missed that. Hopefully you are not "calling out" these concerns as bigotry, are you?

Then there's your strawman argument that I have "invalidated" people's views: which views precisrly did I invalidate?

You finally cap it all with sheer naivety: to think that women-only spaces are not impacted by trans demands for equality, or that such subjects do not involve cis-gendered women is, bluntly, a clear sign of your own bigotry.

Thanks for illustrating my case with a real-life example.

 

[spawnofthesith]

Let's start with the fact that I'm not talking specifically about the boxing drama which, on the face of it, appears to be a clear case of Carini using dogwhistle transphobia.

Source? I seriously don't get why Carini keeps getting attacked in all of this.

Attack the idiots using her, but based on everything she's ACTUALLY said that I can find she doesn't deserve any hate or accusations hurled against her. She's made it pretty clear that she stands with Khelif and has apologized for anything being misconstrued by her not shaking her hand

 

[MaxOfMetal]

You appear unaware of concerns women might have about safe spaces.

What is that exactly?

There is a lot of conjecture from the cis male perspective, which tries to white knight and speak for cis women, but most polling of cis women shows they're far more concerned about the sort of "gender verification" and cis men themselves than trans people, by a pretty significant margin.

New report tells us how the public actually feel about trans people

Today, the Equality and Human Rights Commission published a new report on public attitudes to trans people – drawing on data from the British Social Attitudes Survey. At...

www.stonewall.org.uk

 

[TedEH]

your strawman argument that I'm concerned with the style of debate

It's not a strawman, you literally said you think LGBT people shut down conversation.

Then there's your other strawman argument that no cis-gendered people could harbour valid concerns about trans rights.

I did not assert this.

You appear unaware of concerns women might have about safe spaces.

I'm well aware of them. Whether or not I agree with them is a different story.

Hopefully you are not "calling out" these concerns as bigotry, are you?

If they ARE bigotry, I have no qualms calling them out.

to think that women-only spaces are not impacted by trans demands for equality

Not what I asserted either, but no, I don't think women only spaces are impacted in a meaningful way.

 

[Rubbishplayer]

Source? I seriously don't get why Carini keeps getting attacked in all of this.

Attack the idiots using her, but based on everything she's ACTUALLY said that I can find she doesn't deserve any hate or accusations hurled against her. She's made it pretty clear that she stands with Khelif and has apologized for anything being misconstrued by her not shaking her hand

Yes, having looked further into it, you are correct. I therefore retract that statement, which was made on the basis of summarised BBC reporting on the day. She has my apology.

Indeed, if she has come out in support of her opponent, then she is setting the right example.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

Yeah, I think Carini is being unfairly criticized. She lost, and lost hard on a huge stage and did not take it well, but I haven't found anything attributed to her that's genuinely questionable.

There are mentions of one of her coaches bringing up the bullshit IBA thing, but again, no direct quotes.

All the dipshits that created this controversy are western rich people and politicians looking to stoke the culture wars.

 

[Rubbishplayer]

What is that exactly?

There is a lot of conjecture from the cis male perspective, which tries to white knight and speak for cis women, but most polling of cis women shows they're far more concerned about the sort of "gender verification" and cis men themselves than trans people, by a pretty significant margin.

New report tells us how the public actually feel about trans people

Today, the Equality and Human Rights Commission published a new report on public attitudes to trans people – drawing on data from the British Social Attitudes Survey. At...

www.stonewall.org.uk

I happen to be very familiar with both Stonewall and this report. Indeed it includes the following:

"The biggest change is in attitudes to trans women in refuges, where now just 51% of the population are comfortable (compared to 61% in 2016) and 24% are uncomfortable (compared to 16% in 2016). Contrary to common anti-trans narratives, these views are not driven by fear - only 1% of women are scared of trans people. So what we’re seeing is that the incessant and largely negative media coverage on these issues is likely starting to negatively impact and influence people’s attitudes."

I have personally witnessed some individuals on both sides of this debate weaponise that 51% figure. Although in the minority, they still cloud the waters by choosing to characterise that gap as a trans-phobic question, rather than one that requires simple clarity, mutual respect and civilised debate. Sure, the right-wing press are working their agenda, but that debate is not enobled when the "discomfort" felt by women is itself written-off as TERF bigotry.

 

[Rubbishplayer]

It's not a strawman, you literally said you think LGBT people shut down conversation.

Where did I say that? I'll give you a clue: nowhere. I said there is a small minority. Thus your argument is a clear strawman.

I did not assert this.

Hmm, maybe not directly, I'll concede, but given that a recent survey (republished by Stonewall) indicates that 24% of cis-gendered people feel uncomfortable on the issue of trans people in women shelters will hopefully more positively embrace my point.

I'm well aware of them. Whether or not I agree with them is a different story.

Here's where the rubber hits the road. Given that 24% of cis-gendered people have concerns, it would seem reasonable, whether you agree with them or not, to at least respect these views and engage with them positively, rather than write them off, no? After all, only 1% of women in that same report expressed fear, so it must be something else, right?

If they ARE bigotry, I have no qualms calling them out.

Try understanding them first, why not?

Not what I asserted either, but no, I don't think women only spaces are impacted in a meaningful way.

Well that'll be your little secret then.

 

[eaeolian]

Getting a tad heated for this forum, gang. Let's turn it down a notch, or Alex will nuke this forum, too.

 

[TedEH]

Where did I say that?

Right here:

labelling anyone who opposes their views as "phobic", which closes down discussion.

Edit: given the previous comment, I won't bother saying what I was going to say. I had some choice paragraphs about how I feel like we're beating around the bush with these "concerns", but I'll leave it at: I stand by what I said.

Well that'll be your little secret then.

What a weird thing to say.

 

[Rubbishplayer]

Right here:


Edit: given the previous comment, I won't bother saying what I was going to say. I had some choice paragraphs about how I feel like we're beating around the bush with these "concerns", but I'll leave it at: I stand by what I said.


What a weird thing to say.

Let's end on a more positive note. It is clear we are both pro LGBTQ+ and that we both feel passionately about this subject.

I suspect if we were to meet over a beer, we'd probably agree on most core things - the right of individuals to live their life the way they choose being one - and may disagree on others - whether the LGBTQ+ are without their quotient of "absolutists".

But I hope we can agree to disagree respectfully.

Peace.