I objected to this match on Twitter last week and my employers are now getting repeated messages lobbying to have me sacked. I said nothing transphobic, my objection was to a woman unfairly getting battered on a world stage. It’s the first time I’ve voiced an opinion on all this as I’ve been scared of the backlash. Believe me, it’s real. I’m terrified how far they’ll go. No wonder women don’t speak out. Thank you to those who do.
This is why i have an anon twitter account. I work for an ultra woke organisation and if they knew what i posted and i was identifiable i would probably be sacked too. Unfortunately these loonies want blood if you dont agree with them.
Well, the Washington Post gave me a punitive 36-hour ban from their comments. I'm quite sure it was because I was too strident when I informed readers that both "women" boxers have XY chromosomes.
The gender critical side needs to do a better job in such situations of marshaling the facts and making a persuasive case why the individual is male. The pieces by GC writers seemed a bit nebulous.
The Post has banned me a whole bunch of times. However, I didn't know there was an article about this that I could post comments on. The only article I found was an opinion piece that wasn't taking comments.
About the Post, however: They certainly are challenged when it comes to recognizing what reality is.
Some of the Post's comment reviewers are also biased in my opinion. I regularly make quite pointed and snarky comments about far-right religion and religious figures, and they make it past the reviewers. Were I to be equally frank and harsh in a comment about a trans topic, the least that would happen is the comment would be deleted.
They certainly are biased. I'm never snarky in comments. I make clear and unequivocal statements that would be accepted in any formal debate, and yet they still delete my comments. If you state a truth that they don't like too clearly, they get rid of it as fast as they can. If you go to my Substack, you'll see an article on such an incident with the Post.
Regarding the people around Starmer being fed guff by their kids, etc ... I think it's (also) possible that they are representing much more powerful interests than that. Starmer is, to me, clearly a stooge of capital, and the medical and pharmaceutical industries have a great deal of proverbial and all-too-real skin in the 'gender' game.
We know how the medical and tech sectors have poured money into this issue, and how this has influenced politics at a high level in the US (see the Pritzker/Obama link). But then, if you point to things that are actually happening but relate to powerful interests, then you're a "conspiracy theorist".
Thank you, Arty, for posting about the Mess in your Substack -- it goes to my inbox and alerts me right away to watch. Also so appreciate your astute observations today not just about the women's boxing fiasco but also other issues. Please pass it on, that this particular subscriber (me) will continue to watch and thumbs up the Mess until further notice. All the best to you, Graham, and Helen! 👍🏼❤️
I don't think conservatives are becoming more feminist, I think they think of women as possessions and don't want men encroaching on the spaces of what they see as "their" women.
It's distressing to hear reports of censorship, for making the most tentative of remarks, or choosing an alternative narrative about what's gone on biologically.
I've been "pasting" the following neutral-ish comment all over the place at every opportunity, after collating a wee sample of the growing numbers of scientists speaking out with an alternative explanation to the dominant "Imane is a girl, leave her alone you bullies!" one. Sometimes I stick my Anthropologist hat back on and look at some of the (Algerian,Muslim) cultural stuff., but this is the basic version. The glue seems to be holding, touch wood, more like marine adhesive than starch paste. No deletions, bans or warnings ... so far, anyway!
I deliberately avoid implying that "Imane K was in on it" although of course I do believe that Imane knows damn well he's a he, and that it's probably a case of both individual male and national opportunism!
"There are very, very robust scientific explanations re how I.K. is most likely an XY 5-ARD DSD male. Mistakenly registered as female at birth, but went through male puberty, at which point balls descended. More statistical likely than Swyer's, which renders most carriers sterile and comes with other symptoms. A 5-ARD XY individual, on the other hand, grows up to be an entirely healthy, masculine-looking man, apart from the delayed genital formation that occurs in utero because of an enzyme blip.
Taking the IBA results, this sound knowledge re 5-ARD over-representation among elite "women" athletes from developing countries (which lack diagnostic tools), it's a plausible explanation.
I suggest you check these scientists explanations out:
Do you make any allowances for medical conditions? Hyperandrogeny or intersex? I think it is an inappropriate sport and these females need to do a non contact sport. But I understand that these people have are born either with Jake or female organs and an excess of hormones.
It's generally considered fair to allow ANYONE to compete in the women's category who fail to meet meet ALL of these conditions. In order to NOT qualify as a woman, ALL of these must be true:
- You have XY (male) chromosomes AND
- the presence of testicles AND
- testicles function and generate testosterone AND
- the body is able to react to the testosterone AND
- the body went through a male puberty.
So there's absolutely TONS of allowance for medical conditions. For example, you can be a male with intact testicles and high levels of testosterone and STILL be permitted to play in the women's league in many sports, simply because your body lacked the ability process the available testosterone during your puberty.
Women's athletics is really available to virtually anyone except typical males with normal hormones.
Imane Khelif has been tested positive for XY (male) chromosomes. And he's tested positive for "high testosterone" which in this context is taken to mean that he has functional testicles and a functioning male hormone system that runs on testosterone.
So athletically speaking, he's a typical male with a typical male hormone system.
(Socially, he was raised as a "girl", probably because his penis was malformed.)
I objected to this match on Twitter last week and my employers are now getting repeated messages lobbying to have me sacked. I said nothing transphobic, my objection was to a woman unfairly getting battered on a world stage. It’s the first time I’ve voiced an opinion on all this as I’ve been scared of the backlash. Believe me, it’s real. I’m terrified how far they’ll go. No wonder women don’t speak out. Thank you to those who do.
So sorry to hear this! I hope they don't sack you. No one should have to put their livelihood on the line for defending fairness.
Really sorry to hear this, Stella. May I ask, are your employers being supportive of you?
Join the Free Speech Union, they’ll support you.
This is why i have an anon twitter account. I work for an ultra woke organisation and if they knew what i posted and i was identifiable i would probably be sacked too. Unfortunately these loonies want blood if you dont agree with them.
Well, the Washington Post gave me a punitive 36-hour ban from their comments. I'm quite sure it was because I was too strident when I informed readers that both "women" boxers have XY chromosomes.
The gender critical side needs to do a better job in such situations of marshaling the facts and making a persuasive case why the individual is male. The pieces by GC writers seemed a bit nebulous.
The Post has banned me a whole bunch of times. However, I didn't know there was an article about this that I could post comments on. The only article I found was an opinion piece that wasn't taking comments.
About the Post, however: They certainly are challenged when it comes to recognizing what reality is.
Some of the Post's comment reviewers are also biased in my opinion. I regularly make quite pointed and snarky comments about far-right religion and religious figures, and they make it past the reviewers. Were I to be equally frank and harsh in a comment about a trans topic, the least that would happen is the comment would be deleted.
They certainly are biased. I'm never snarky in comments. I make clear and unequivocal statements that would be accepted in any formal debate, and yet they still delete my comments. If you state a truth that they don't like too clearly, they get rid of it as fast as they can. If you go to my Substack, you'll see an article on such an incident with the Post.
Was it the Post piece by sports writer Jerry Brewer? If so, it's the article I emailed and told them off about. I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't the only "hit-piece" on women boxers in the Post, they are that captured. I wonder how many other irate subscribers they've heard from. If you're interested, here's the link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2024/08/02/olympic-boxing-culture-war-imane-khelif-lin-yu-ting/
Ah, I found an article on this, and I am posting now. So far they aren't trying to punish me.
Regarding the people around Starmer being fed guff by their kids, etc ... I think it's (also) possible that they are representing much more powerful interests than that. Starmer is, to me, clearly a stooge of capital, and the medical and pharmaceutical industries have a great deal of proverbial and all-too-real skin in the 'gender' game.
We know how the medical and tech sectors have poured money into this issue, and how this has influenced politics at a high level in the US (see the Pritzker/Obama link). But then, if you point to things that are actually happening but relate to powerful interests, then you're a "conspiracy theorist".
Thank you, Arty, for posting about the Mess in your Substack -- it goes to my inbox and alerts me right away to watch. Also so appreciate your astute observations today not just about the women's boxing fiasco but also other issues. Please pass it on, that this particular subscriber (me) will continue to watch and thumbs up the Mess until further notice. All the best to you, Graham, and Helen! 👍🏼❤️
I don't think conservatives are becoming more feminist, I think they think of women as possessions and don't want men encroaching on the spaces of what they see as "their" women.
Such poor audio. How can I be bothered to listen to it? Forget about speaker phones -- talk into microphones!
It's distressing to hear reports of censorship, for making the most tentative of remarks, or choosing an alternative narrative about what's gone on biologically.
I've been "pasting" the following neutral-ish comment all over the place at every opportunity, after collating a wee sample of the growing numbers of scientists speaking out with an alternative explanation to the dominant "Imane is a girl, leave her alone you bullies!" one. Sometimes I stick my Anthropologist hat back on and look at some of the (Algerian,Muslim) cultural stuff., but this is the basic version. The glue seems to be holding, touch wood, more like marine adhesive than starch paste. No deletions, bans or warnings ... so far, anyway!
I deliberately avoid implying that "Imane K was in on it" although of course I do believe that Imane knows damn well he's a he, and that it's probably a case of both individual male and national opportunism!
"There are very, very robust scientific explanations re how I.K. is most likely an XY 5-ARD DSD male. Mistakenly registered as female at birth, but went through male puberty, at which point balls descended. More statistical likely than Swyer's, which renders most carriers sterile and comes with other symptoms. A 5-ARD XY individual, on the other hand, grows up to be an entirely healthy, masculine-looking man, apart from the delayed genital formation that occurs in utero because of an enzyme blip.
Taking the IBA results, this sound knowledge re 5-ARD over-representation among elite "women" athletes from developing countries (which lack diagnostic tools), it's a plausible explanation.
I suggest you check these scientists explanations out:
Dr Colin Wright:
https://x.com/salltweets/status/1821774545931661742?t=BrVtCD10LZv79I5qo99RRA&s=09
Dr Emma Hilton:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_9rynD9KlU0
Professor Ross Tucker:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/0nhX9D2QDmpvUeoPYPAoWS"
Do you make any allowances for medical conditions? Hyperandrogeny or intersex? I think it is an inappropriate sport and these females need to do a non contact sport. But I understand that these people have are born either with Jake or female organs and an excess of hormones.
It's generally considered fair to allow ANYONE to compete in the women's category who fail to meet meet ALL of these conditions. In order to NOT qualify as a woman, ALL of these must be true:
- You have XY (male) chromosomes AND
- the presence of testicles AND
- testicles function and generate testosterone AND
- the body is able to react to the testosterone AND
- the body went through a male puberty.
So there's absolutely TONS of allowance for medical conditions. For example, you can be a male with intact testicles and high levels of testosterone and STILL be permitted to play in the women's league in many sports, simply because your body lacked the ability process the available testosterone during your puberty.
Women's athletics is really available to virtually anyone except typical males with normal hormones.
Imane Khelif has been tested positive for XY (male) chromosomes. And he's tested positive for "high testosterone" which in this context is taken to mean that he has functional testicles and a functioning male hormone system that runs on testosterone.
So athletically speaking, he's a typical male with a typical male hormone system.
(Socially, he was raised as a "girl", probably because his penis was malformed.)