Page 1 of 6
Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:39 am
by android
The subject title should be Amelia Strickler or Beth Dobbin but you have never heard of them.
Seb needs no introduction. The President of World Athletics has changed his mind. His eye on the IOC Presidency may or may not be coincidental to this change. Last summer, in relation to sport, Seb was unequivocal; "biology trumps identity and "fairness is non-negotiable". Not anymore. He now prefers to tinker with testosterone rules, whilst at the same time acknowledging what we all know, that changing testosterone levels does NOT eliminate male advantage. Fairness is for males only, not females.
Amelia and Beth have stuck their necks out to disagree with Seb. They have put their careers at risk, and at the very least guaranteed themselves some dogs abuse from male rights activists. Beth is a runner who is nowhere near the level that the great Seb Coe achieved, but she did fulfil her ambition to make the last GB Olympic team. This is Beth's controversial statement: "women deserve to compete exclusively against competitors who don't have any of the advantages that the female category exists to exclude."
Who are you with - Seb or Beth?
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:42 am
by TheFamilyCat
History should tell you that this isn't the best forum for this discussion.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:53 am
by Vincent'sCap
People shouldn't post a thread with just a name,always sends shivers up my back,Coe,dead I hope not was my first thought
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:53 am
by Chester Perry
TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:42 am
History should tell you that this isn't the best forum for this discussion.
History also tells us that it is going to be a pertinent subject to football in the not too distant future given the increasing commercial opportunities in the higher reaches what is currently referred to as the women's game. Which is also where our club hope to be involved
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:00 pm
by Bosscat
Vincent'sCap wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:53 am
People shouldn't post a thread with just a name,always sends shivers up my back,Coe,dead I hope not was my first thought
You're not the only one ...
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:04 pm
by android
Vincent'sCap wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:53 am
People shouldn't post a thread with just a name,always sends shivers up my back,Coe,dead I hope not was my first thought
You are right - sorry about that!
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:17 pm
by AlargeClaret
Huge relief , thought the great man had gone for a moment . Thankfully just some penis removal chicanery .
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:20 pm
by Ric_C
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:29 pm
by TheFamilyCat
Chester Perry wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:53 am
History also tells us that it is going to be a pertinent subject to football in the not too distant future given the increasing commercial opportunities in the higher reaches what is currently referred to as the women's game. Which is also where our club hope to be involved
Having read posts on here about women's football I think my point still stands.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:29 pm
by bfcjg
If he's never been linked with Burnley he's a nobody.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
by GodIsADeeJay81
The women do have a point.
There was a trans MMA fighter who brutally beat her female opponent...it was grim.
Same with the trans swimmer dominating events, despite being a mediocre swimmer as a man.
Male to female trans athletes will have an unfair advantage in a number of events, it's clear as day and an issue that needs to be addressed.
You may as well just allow men and women to compete against each other if not.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
by Chester Perry
TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:29 pm
Having read posts on here about women's football I think my point still stands.
alas you are correct
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:47 pm
by Somethingfishy
It's a vastly different argument. Comparing mens and womens football isn't the same as debating whether it is fair that a trans athlete that is physiologically a man should be fairly allowed to compete with women.
The same people that have an issue with women in football are as likely to defend a womans right to fairly compete with her own sex.
Now a trans man competing in womens football? That would confuse so many people....
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:58 pm
by bf2k
GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
The women do have a point.
There was a trans MMA fighter who brutally beat her female opponent...it was grim.
Same with the trans swimmer dominating events, despite being a mediocre swimmer as a man.
Male to female trans athletes will have an unfair advantage in a number of events, it's clear as day and an issue that needs to be addressed.
You may as well just allow men and women to compete against each other if not.
Well put. End of post.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:08 pm
by GavlarClaret
One of the points that underpins fairness in sport is that nobody should have an unfair advantage in sport
I learnt that in A Level Sports & PE.
Seb Coe was right with his 'fairness is non negotiable' but what has changed SINCE then? The answer is nothing, other than money in his back pocket.
...... at which point it is of course, negotiable
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:43 pm
by Clovius Boofus
A person's biological sex is determined at the moment of fertilisation. Male only sports for biological born males. Female only sports from biological born females. If trans people want to compete, then they can do so in their 'assigned at birth' gender/category. Born male - you compete with males, etc. This way, nobody is discriminated against.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:48 pm
by Buxtonclaret
GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
The women do have a point.
There was a trans MMA fighter who brutally beat her female opponent...it was grim.
Same with the trans swimmer dominating events, despite being a mediocre swimmer as a man.
Male to female trans athletes will have an unfair advantage in a number of events, it's clear as day and an issue that needs to be addressed.
You may as well just allow men and women to compete against each other if not.
Spot on, Sid.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:54 pm
by Lowbankclaret
GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:32 pm
The women do have a point.
There was a trans MMA fighter who brutally beat her female opponent...it was grim.
Same with the trans swimmer dominating events, despite being a mediocre swimmer as a man.
Male to female trans athletes will have an unfair advantage in a number of events, it's clear as day and an issue that needs to be addressed.
You may as well just allow men and women to compete against each other if not.
Yep, that’s it in a nutshell.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:56 pm
by Greenmile
Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:43 pm
A person's biological sex is determined at the moment of fertilisation. Male only sports for biological born males. Female only sports from biological born females. If trans people want to compete, then they can do so in their 'assigned at birth' gender/category. Born male - you compete with males, etc. This way, nobody is discriminated against.
What about people like Caster Semenya? Should they be allowed to compete at all?
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:06 pm
by Falcon
Greenmile wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:56 pm
What about people like Caster Semenya? Should they be allowed to compete at all?
Unfortunately probably not.
The alternative (letting her compete) harms all female athletes, whereas a ban harms only those who are intersex.
Always take the option that does the least harm.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:10 pm
by Vegas Claret
there is a really really simple solution as there is no reason why anyone can't compete:
Men compete against men
Women compete against women
Transgender compete against transgender
it's not rocket science
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:30 pm
by NottsClaret
Male entitlement is really something to behold. Good luck to Beth and Amelia.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:39 pm
by ŽižkovClaret
There should probably be a 3rd category for sport, imo. Male, female and "Open"
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:56 pm
by 2 Bee Holed
TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:42 am
History should tell you that this isn't the best forum for this discussion.
Indeed, people need to grow a pair.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:57 pm
by android
ŽižkovClaret wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:39 pm
There should probably be a 3rd category for sport, imo. Male, female and "Open"
One problem with that is that the "open" category would likely be too small to be much fun for either participants or spectators.
The least worst proposal I have seen is that the "Male" category becomes "Open".
Preserving or restoring the Female category is crucial. Swimming and rugby have taken these steps but there is a long way to go in many sports.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 3:15 pm
by android
GavlarClaret wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 1:08 pm
One of the points that underpins fairness in sport is that nobody should have an unfair advantage in sport
I learnt that in A Level Sports & PE.
Seb Coe was right with his 'fairness is non negotiable' but what has changed SINCE then? The answer is nothing, other than money in his back pocket.
...... at which point it is of course, negotiable
In the case of Coe, a backhander or money motive seems very unlikely to me.
I think fear or ambition are behind his change of stance.
There are positive signs that the tide is turning but on balance there is no doubt that favouring male rights over female rights gives you an easier life at this point. It can get very nasty if you are in the public eye. You need to tread very carefully supporting women's rights and there is good reason to be fearful. But you would think Coe has some guts.
Most likely it is ambition for the IOC Presidency. For a wealthy man like Coe, surely that is more about status, lifestyle, influence and so on rather than money. Better not to rock the boat, as male rights trump fairness in the corridors of power.
If you were being really, really generous you could say he is playing the long game. Maybe he thinks it is worth it to yield greater influence if he gets the IOC. But how many women and girls ambitions will be crashed and burned in the meantime?
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 3:27 pm
by CnBtruntru
Thank god, thought we was going to sign him.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:12 pm
by CaptainKirk
Vegas Claret wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 2:10 pm
there is a really really simple solution as there is no reason why anyone can't compete:
Men compete against men
Women compete against women
Transgender compete against transgender
it's not rocket science
Surely, it would not be fair for someone born a woman (who is now a man) to have to compete against someone born a man (who is now a woman).
Maybe it is rocket science after all.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:22 pm
by IanMcL
android wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:39 am
The subject title should be Amelia Strickler or Beth Dobbin but you have never heard of them.
Seb needs no introduction. The President of World Athletics has changed his mind. His eye on the IOC Presidency may or may not be coincidental to this change. Last summer, in relation to sport, Seb was unequivocal; "biology trumps identity and "fairness is non-negotiable". Not anymore. He now prefers to tinker with testosterone rules, whilst at the same time acknowledging what we all know, that changing testosterone levels does NOT eliminate male advantage. Fairness is for males only, not females.
Amelia and Beth have stuck their necks out to disagree with Seb. They have put their careers at risk, and at the very least guaranteed themselves some dogs abuse from male rights activists. Beth is a runner who is nowhere near the level that the great Seb Coe achieved, but she did fulfil her ambition to make the last GB Olympic team. This is Beth's controversial statement: "women deserve to compete exclusively against competitors who don't have any of the advantages that the female category exists to exclude."
Who are you with - Seb or Beth?
I have every sympathy with transgender persons, however, a man becoming a woman retains male physiology and vice versa. One would be at an advantage and the other have no chance.
I am with Beth in a sporting environment.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:32 pm
by elwaclaret
Scotland have had to go the other way, after a rapist in custody had a gender change hoping to be given time in a women’s prison.
Same argument, different stakes.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:04 pm
by Stanbill05
TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 12:29 pm
Having read posts on here about women's football I think my point still stands.
I'm not a dedicated follower of Womens football but bumped into the City squad in a Bristol hotel yesterday and was weirdly starstruck. The majority were recognisable and would be for a lot of people. Not sure that would have been true 2 years ago. Whether that increased profile will translate into commercial success I'm not sure, but it's got to help.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:16 pm
by Clovius Boofus
Sturgeon's U-turn goes to show that her gender reform bill is a screeching load of nonsense.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:16 pm
by Lowbankclaret
Stanbill05 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:04 pm
I'm not a dedicated follower of Womens football but bumped into the City squad in a Bristol hotel yesterday and was weirdly starstruck. The majority were recognisable and would be for a lot of people. Not sure that would have been true 2 years ago. Whether that increased profile will translate into commercial success I'm not sure, but it's got to help.
It has been a success, I watched a few minutes of a city game and an Arsenal game, the standard is very very poor.
A transgender team of 16-18 years would walk the league with ease.
That some how does not feel fair.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:18 pm
by Lowbankclaret
Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:16 pm
Sturgeon's U-turn goes to show that her gender reform bill is a screeching load of nonsense.
Yes I thought she would be jumping to the convicts defence and saying she/ he had every right to be in a woman’s prison. She has made herself look silly.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:19 pm
by Stanbill05
Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:16 pm
It has been a success, I watched a few minutes of a city game and an Arsenal game, the standard is very very poor.
A transgender team of 16-18 years would walk the league with ease.
That some how does not feel fair.
Lol, I've watched more than a few minutes of Burnley playing shite, if that's your measure.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:23 pm
by Lowbankclaret
Stanbill05 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:19 pm
Lol, I've watched more than a few minutes of Burnley playing shite, if that's your measure.
The Brazil national woman’s team played a team of under16 boys, got beat 6-0. There are other examples,
My point is a transgender footballers would win the woman’s league.
I don’t think that would be fair.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 pm
by Devils_Advocate
Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:16 pm
Sturgeon's U-turn goes to show that her gender reform bill is a screeching load of nonsense.
It shows you don't have any idea at all what the bill covers as it has absolutely no relevance to what prison someone should be assigned to.
The fact that this rapist is rightly going to be put in a mens prison also further demonstrates that the scare stories spread the that this change in law would mean that rapists identifying as a trans women would now have the right to be put in a women's prison was also right wing media scare story boll*cks
Before having such a strong opinion on something maybe actually take the time to educate yourself on the facts
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:40 pm
by Clovius Boofus
You should stick to your Sycamore Farm reviews, pal.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:44 pm
by Devils_Advocate
Clovius Boofus wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:40 pm
You should stick to your Sycamore Farm reviews, pal.
You're the one who is commenting about the Gender Recognition Reform Bill when you obviously don't understand what it covers.
Have whatever opinion you want but at least take the time to understand something before forming a strong opinion about it
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:46 pm
by boatshed bill
Is it time for a trans-gender only sporting category?
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:50 pm
by CrisyPbacon
Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:25 pm
It shows you don't have any idea at all what the bill covers as it has absolutely no relevance to what prison someone should be assigned to.
The fact that this rapist is rightly going to be put in a mens prison also further demonstrates that the scare stories spread the that this change in law would mean that rapists identifying as a trans women would now have the right to be put in a women's prison was also right wing media scare story boll*cks
We were waiting for the opinion of DA then we know how to think unfortunately he did not address the issue of men competing in women's only sport .
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:55 pm
by Vim Fuego
I'm an Ovett man
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:00 pm
by elwaclaret
Vim Fuego wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:55 pm
I'm an Ovett man
You managed to Cram that in.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:02 pm
by AlargeClaret
If you’re born a bloke compete against other blokes
If you’re born a woman compete against other women
It’s almost impossible for anyone with even a modicum of brain matter to reason otherwise, it’s entirely apolitical too.
If blokes that used to be called Bernard wanna dress as women, call themselves Cassandra ,take hormones and have their crown jewells removed , good for them , but you can’t compete against women , it’s ludicrous.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:02 pm
by Devils_Advocate
I haven't told anyone how to think but his comments about the case of the rapist and linking it to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill was factually incorrect.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:35 pm
by Vegas Claret
CaptainKirk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 4:12 pm
Surely, it would not be fair for someone born a woman (who is now a man) to have to compete against someone born a man (who is now a woman).
Maybe it is rocket science after all.
well have a trans men and trans woman category - it's about fairness of competition and the only way do that is for them to have their specific category - so yes, it's a simple solution
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:46 pm
by android
Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:02 pm
I haven't told anyone how to think but his comments about the case of the rapist and linking it to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill was factually incorrect.
It is disingenuous to suggest that the GRR bill has no relevance to the treatment of the rapist. The SNP went to some lengths to block the amendment to the Bill that would have specifically prevented a male sex offender being placed in a women’s prison. Sturgeon insisted on preserving the right of the sex offender to be assessed on a case by case basis. It was against this backdrop that the rapist was initially allocated to the women’s prison. After 24 hours of overwhelming pressure Sturgeon caved.
The reverse ferret of the no debate crew has been spectacular.
Of course it is good news that reality is starting to dawn.
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:55 pm
by Devils_Advocate
android wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:46 pm
It is disingenuous to suggest that the GRR bill has no relevance to the treatment of the rapist. The SNP went to some lengths to block the amendment to the Bill that would have specifically prevented a male sex offender being placed in a women’s prison. Sturgeon insisted on preserving the right of the sex offender to be assessed on a case by case basis. It was against this backdrop that the rapist was initially allocated to the women’s prison. After 24 hours of overwhelming pressure Sturgeon caved.
The reverse ferret of the no debate crew has been spectacular.
Of course it is good news that reality is starting to dawn.
Wrong the bill does not give any additional rights to trans people with regards to whether they are able to serve their sentence in a women's prison beyond the rights they already have as part of the 2010 Equality Act
The misinformation that has been spread about this bill with respect to it giving new/additional rights to Trans people to have access to women only spaces such as toilets, changing rooms and prisons is disgusting and as someone who professes to deeply care about these issues I would expect you to understand the bill and want it to be discussed honestly based of facts and not misinformation
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:32 pm
by android
Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:55 pm
Wrong the bill does not give any additional rights to trans people with regards to whether they are able to serve their sentence in a women's prison beyond the rights they already have as part of the 2010 Equality Act
The misinformation that has been spread about this bill with respect to it giving new/additional rights to Trans people to have access to women only spaces such as toilets, changing rooms and prisons is disgusting and as someone who professes to deeply care about these issues I would expect you to understand the bill and want it to be discussed honestly based of facts and not misinformation
Just typed a reply and lost it - apologies if this appears twice.
Anyway, yes the amendment was to block rapists from obtaining a legal sex change, which would obviously prevent them going to a women’s prison (you are right that it was not directly about prisons but it’s clearly relevant).
To be clear, are you saying that the rapist Isla Bryson (think that’s the chosen name) is not a woman?
Or are you saying that no male sex offenders should be in women’s prisons (unlike Sturgeon until her reverse ferret today).
Re: Sebastian Coe
Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:13 pm
by Devils_Advocate
android wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 10:32 pm
Just typed a reply and lost it - apologies if this appears twice.
Anyway, yes the amendment was to block rapists from obtaining a legal sex change, which would obviously prevent them going to a women’s prison (you are right that it was not directly about prisons but it’s clearly relevant).
To be clear, are you saying that the rapist Isla Bryson (think that’s the chosen name) is not a woman?
Or are you saying that no male sex offenders should be in women’s prisons (unlike Sturgeon until her reverse ferret today).
The amendment is totally irrelevant to the point I have argued that the Gender Recognition Reform Bill has no relevance to the rights Trans women have to serve their sentence in a women's prison and the case of Isla Bryson has not been impacted in anyway by that bill.
The rights of Trans women to serve their sentence in a women's only prison is provisioned under the Equality Act 2010 and as part of that act in some circumstances someone claiming to be a trans women can be denied that right and that is what has happened in the case of Isla Bryson
The only thing I have involved myself in this thread and the only thing i have any intention of involving myself in is to challenge dangerous mis-information that mis-represent the Gender Recognition Reform Bill.
If you don't agree with me that the Gender Recognition Reform does not give trans women any new or additional rights around access to women only spaces beyond the rights they already have under the Equality Actthen feel free to provide your evidence and I'll happily discuss.
If you accept that I am correct about the bill then I hope you'll join me in agreement that false information should be challenged.
As for the other things you want to discuss then I'll leave you to it with others on here because my only concern was to challenge the dangerous mis-information I read with regards the Gender Recognition Reform Bill