New Zealand

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Your lack of concern is no doubt why you cannot grasp the concept of unfairness to female athletes, and the relevance to this thread.

You're doing the usual DIYnot GD tactic of making inflammatory comments, assuming my unwillingness to discuss one issue translates into an entirely different issue. That is the tactics of the likes of transam, fillyboy, mottie, etc. I do not expect it from you.
Please do not copy their tactics of making an incorrect and inflammatory assumption on one issue based on my comments about another issue.

Because I do not (currently) wish to discuss women's rights (because I consider it is not relevant to this thread) does not automatically mean that I have no concern and am uninformed. If you make that misconception, that suggests your resort to the tactics of the aforementioned, but it is not accurate.

The athlete in question is now considered to be a woman, and as such has every right to compete in women's sports. She has been medically and scientifically tested and examined and been assigned the sex of female, within the definition of Olympic sports. If your personal morals and ethics cannot cope with that, it is your problem, but please do not confuse it with other people's lack of concern for an unrelated issue.

We have already agreed that genital anatomy is occasionally not binary. Her history, any previous assignment of the label according her a sex, and genital anatomy is unknown to us, and we can make no assumption on the lack of information. Making assumptions based on the lack of evidence or information is for the un-intelligentsia.
On that lack of information, we are reliant on the decision of the relevant committee, who, I am confident will have taken into consideration the evidence and the issue of women's rights.
I will add that the issue of women's rights that you have mentioned so far, i.e. men entering a women's only facilities, or a male requiring a cervical smear, etc, is totally irrelevant and for the birds, in this thread.
Until and if you can convince me that the issue of women's rights is relevant to this thread, I will continue to be unwilling to discuss that issue.
If we do discuss that issue, I highly suspect we would be in total agreement, which is why it's not relevant.

 

[JP_]

Crumbs, this thread is still alive! So, what is the latest, anybody changed their opinion yet?

 

[JohnD]

My cat's opinion is that she is an owl.

The other owls disagree and will not let her into their nests.

She says that is unfair and demands to be treated as any other owl.

Will the other owls change their opinion?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

My cat's opinion is that she is an owl.

The other owls disagree and will not let her into their nests.

She says that is unfair and demands to be treated as any other owl.

Will the other owls change their opinion?

She obviously needs more than a cursory glance to decide if she is a cat or an owl, and a medical examination is required to see if she meets the criteria for owls.
If she is assigned the label of a cat, then she has to live with it, and the rights of the owls be respected.

If it is found that she has been an owl all along, but was incorrectly labelled as a cat at birth, then the rest of the owls need to accept it, because she will have had all the rights of being an owl conferred upon her.

 

[JohnD]

She has announced that she considers herself to be an owl, and she "plans" to begin a transition process at some time in the future.

She says that is enough.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

She has announced that she considers herself to be an owl, and she "plans" to begin a transition process at some time in the future.

She says that is enough.

Clearly it isn't. If she wishes to be allowed into the owl's nest she will be required to have completed her transition, and pass any medical examinations required.
The matter isn't decided by the owls, nor by the cat. There is an independent committee that makes such decisions.

 

[JohnD]

HMRC have instructed her employer that's enough.

 

[JohnD]

Metropolitan Police say that's enough.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

HMRC have instructed her employer that's enough.

HMRC have no jurisdiction on who is allowed into an owl's nest.
They don't care if she's a cat, an owl, a giraffe or an ant, as long as she pays her taxes.

 

[JohnD]

Karen White says that's enough.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Metropolitan Police say that's enough.

The Met are notoriously racist, sexist and corrupt.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Karen White says that's enough.

Roger Black says it isn't.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Good game, good game!

 

[JohnD]

Was Roger Black put into a woman's prison, and is he a rapist and sex offender?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Was Roger Black put into a woman's prison, and is he a rapist and sex offender?

Not to my knowledge. Was the athlete in question put into a women's prison, is she a rapist, and a sex offender?