Most sports (not chess) have been divided into male and female divisions, not because they don't want to play together, but because genetics generally endows males with bigger, stronger and faster bodies than females.

Recently there was a case where Mouncey a 6'3" 100 kg male AFL player transitioned to female and began playing in the Canberra women's league where unsurprisingly "she" performed spectacularly well. Unfortunately for "her" her attempt to join the AFL was blocked.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-17/afls-transgender-call-on-aflw-hopeful

I heard a suggestion that sport be divided into women's leagues and open leagues (male and other genders), which I think is fair. I would like the ideas of other OLO posters.

//I heard a suggestion that sport be divided into women's leagues and open leagues (male and other genders), which I think is fair.//

Seems reasonable. There are a number of sports where women could compete quite well with the men. Not all of them, mind you. I'm not sure I'd enjoy watching mixed ice hockey, for example... it's a pretty brutal game. But if was something like golf or archery... yeah, sure.

To hell with this segregation, there should be no discrimination in sport.
A level playing field for all genders I say.

Nasty fellow that I am, I'm looking forward to seeing females suffering the same hideous and permanent injuries caused by male sports that skinny little sheilas thing that they are tough enough to participate in. The stupidity might disappear when the girlies see some of their kind with cauliflower ears, twisted fingers and crooked legs.

//To hell with this segregation, there should be no discrimination in sport.
A level playing field for all genders I say.//

Because that can only end well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y77n--Af1qo

Dear Shadow Minister,

Women should be able to participate in any sport of their
individual choosing but not against men in physical body
contact sports because of their physical differences and
the liability of injury. Even in men's sports there are
limits controlled by weight or physical size.

Toni,

It's not how it ends, it's the principle.

Equal performance equal pay. Tell that to the men's tennis players. I doubt even Serena would make the top 1000 males and she has been a mile ahead of her counterparts.

runner,

Have you ever watched mixed doubles?

I don't know what it says about me, but in all my favourite sports women do compete on equal terms together.

Equestrian, where our gold medal winning teams have usually had female members.

Sailing, where women often compete on equal terms, although women's libbers have managed to introduce a number of female only classes.

Motor sport, where some females have competed on equal terms, sometimes very successfully. Pat Moss was almost as famous as her brother Stirling.

Of course I think it is time we introduced mixed tiddlywinks as an Olympic sport. This would be better than having the ladies all sweaty & smelly at the end of a game.

My 10 year old grand son recently asked his mother, at the end of a 4 day school holiday riding camp, how come there are so many girls horse riding, & why they were all so pretty. If that doesn't get young men interested in equestrian pursuits, nothing will.

Hey, this little girl took on the boys at Daytona on super bikes and beat them.

Her name Elana Myers. Not exactly net ball or bowls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCaTd_-bOhY

I'll try again

Elana Myers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CpOAODZbz8

Sorry, don't know why it is not working , but anyone can google her.

Is Mouncey legally a female?

If so then refusing to let her play is a clear case of discrimination based on sex.

Foxy,

I agree with you, for women to compete on anywhere near a level playing field would require a women's league.

IM made a valid point, in order to accommodate those with gender dysphoria all that is required to change one sex status legally is a letter from a doctor or psychologist irrespective of whether any physical transformation has actually occurred, and the question is whether banning a person who has all the male genitalia and other physical attributes is now discrimination?

Even if Mouncey goes through with the full gender reassignment surgery, his hulking 6'3" 100 kg frame is a result of maturing as a male and is physically a risk to other women in a contact sport.

There is something rather infantile about the discussion on gender change: yes, surgeons can dock a bloke and give him hormones to pump up his breast and bum tissue, and reduce his Adam's apple, but he's still a bloke. His DNA is XX or whatever, a bloke's. His body's hormone system will always be a bloke's. Being a man or a woman is a bit more that looking like a man or a woman.

Until the Gramscian Institute for Total Social Disruption develops techniques for changing people's DNA, a man will remain a man, and a woman will remain a woman. I'll drink to that :)

Joe

Dear Shadow Minister,

This is a bit of a tricky issue. I know very little
about gender re-assignment and what it entails and
I can't really make up my mind whether someone of a
certain height and weight who was a male should
be allowed to play as a woman. Women also come in all sorts
of shapes and sizes. There are tall women (6ft) and ones
who are rather weighty as well - what do we do about them?
Are they at an advantage in a woman's team? I think I'll
leave this up to the sporting organisations to decide what
they are going to do about their "different" team players.

I know this is not a good answer - but I can't think of
anything else to say.

Dear Joe,

I'm not sure that I agree with you. People who feel they
are born in the wrong body and they are absolutely certain
of that fact should be allowed to correct that error.
Take the famous entertainer - Carlotta - who for 26 years
from 1963 - was the undisputed Queen of Kings Cross - the
legend of Les Girls, a landmark theatre restaurant where
all the women on stage are really drag queens.

I read her story "He Did It Her Way" and found it to be
a fascinating and often hilarious journey into her world as
a performer and transexual who started life as a Balmain
boy and went on to have one of the first sex change
operations in Australia.

There is no way that you would ever describe Carlotta as
being a male. She was candid, witty, irreverent, classic
Carlotta - and so, so female.

Dearest Foxy,

I think you may have proven my point: that bloke's DNA would still be a male's. He can dress up all he likes, and ponce around, acting out some blokes' exaggerated and stereotypical fantasies about how women are supposed to look and act, and he's still a bloke. And not a particularly feminist one at that.

What the Gramscians need to do is find some wimpy little bloke who wants to get docked etc., and apply to join a women's sporting tam. Then they can whinge about how terribly cruel the world is for not allowing a man, obviously no bigger than many women, to play the sport he loves. Etc. Etc. Whatever works.

I suppose I'm still a bit of a residual Marxist, and I wonder what Marx would have made of some of these incredibly trivial issues that the well-off classes go on about. Currently, almost all of Yemen is without water, so people will soon start dying, not just from malaria and cholera, but from thirst as well. And hunger. The Saudis have blockaded all their ports, so food can't be brought in. It's possible that millions will die in the next few months. Now THAT's an issue that the Left should be getting their baby-teeth into.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

No I did not prove your point at all.
Carlotta is now a female. She's had re-assignment surgery
and she definitely is no longer male. She hasn't been male
since her early childhood. Perhaps if you read more about
her experiences you would understand the situation of
transgender better. I would highly recommend her book,
"He did It Her Way". to you. It is not merely a question
of "dressing up" as you put it. The change goes far deeper
than that and it's called corrective surgery. It should
also not be trivialised. A bit of empathy would help
towards understanding someone else's situation and would
make the world a better place for us all - if we were to try
to understand the suffering of others be it physical or
in this case psychological.

Just to add to the Politically Correct BS we have this.

Schools are banning best friends to protect students’ feelings

Members of the royal family aren’t often told what they can and can’t do. But just a few days into his first year of school, 4-year-old Prince George already faces a mandate: No best friends allowed.

Thomas’s Battersea, the school George attends, bans kids from having best friends,Marie Claire reports. Instead, teachers encourage all students to form bonds with one another to avoid creating feelings of exclusions among those without best friends.

Jane Moore, a parent whose child attends the school, explained the idea on a recent episode of the British talk show “Loose Women.” “There’s a policy,” she said, “that if your child is having a party – unless every child is invited – you don’t give out the invites in class.”

The trend of banning best friends has been growing for several years, and it’s spread beyond European borders to American schools as well. Some psychologists and parents argue kids become more well-adjusted when they have larger friend groups and can avoid negative feelings associated with feeling left out.

Critics, however, say the approach robs kids of the chance to form valuable coping skills. By grappling with mild social exclusion when they’re young, kids will emerge as more capable, resilient adults, these advocates argue.

People who support kids having larger friend groups in place of best friends tend to view these larger groups as healthier for nurturing a sense of belonging. “We try to talk to kids and work with them to get them to have big groups of friends and not be so possessive about friends,” Christine Laycob, director of counseling at Mary Institute in St. Louis, told the New York Times.

Best friends, with their tight bonds and inside jokes, throw a wrench into that open environment, school officials contend.

Rest of article

http://www.businessinsider.my/schools-are-banning-best-friends-to-protect-kids-feelings-2017-9/#.WhOxbPCBqW4.twitter

Foxy,

I think that the issue is at what point does someone's gender change. The present legislation does not require any treatment whatsoever. Theoretically, I could be male on Tuesdays and Thursdays and female the rest of the week.

I understand is that Mouncey has yet to have any surgery, and while (s)he has had hormonal treatment that suppresses his testosterone, he could switch back to being a fully functional male simply by stopping.

Although his testosterone has been suppressed for more than a year, his height, muscular mass, and muscular density has resulted in the physique of a male athlete that is near impossible for a female to achieve. So while someone may be legally female, the implications for contact sports are deeper.

Similarly Carlotta may well have transitioned as far as possible, but the harsh reality is that whilst the majority of people are happy to refer to trans people by their adopted gender, only a tiny minority of men are prepared to date trans women, so acceptance is not universal.

My thoughts on all this transgender business.

You are born either a boy or a girl.
That's all there is.

If you were born a boy then you CAN cut off your willy get surgical boobs if you want to;
- And you can 'identify' as a girl.
You CAN also 'identify' as a Dingo, Cassowary, or a Hairy-Nosed Wombat if you want to.
And why should anyone stop you?
As long as it doesn't affect anyone else and they don't have to pay for your choices then why shouldn't you be entitled to live however you choose?

But if your born a BOY then YOU CAN NEVER ACTUALLY BECOME a GIRL.
It's impossible, you cannot EVER GIVE BIRTH;
The genetic nature and function of a FEMALE.

YOU CAN NEVER ACTUALLY BECOME a Dingo, a Cassowary, or a Hairy-Nosed Wombat either.

- But you are free to 'identify' with whatever the hell you want.

And other people DO NOT have to 'identify' with that which YOU 'identify'.
If you are a boy and you 'identify' as a girl then you are free to do so;
- But other people should be free to refer to you as either;
And they should also be free to instead refer to you as 'that gender confused person' if they choose to.

Likewise, if you want to identify as a Dingo, a Cassowary or a Hairy-Nosed Wombat you should be free to do so;
- But others should also be free to refer to you with names such as 'idiot'. 'lunatic' or 'nutjob'.

And that's pretty much all I have to say on the mostly weird topic of 'Transgender'.

As for sports, I'm not going there.
I'm just gonna sit back and watch this ill-conceived idea unfold and laugh.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The AFL (as reported in The Age) based its decision on
the Victorian Equal Opportunity Act - which states that
athletes can be discriminated against based on their
sex or gender "if strength, stamina, or physique is
relevant".

Of course in Hannah Mouncey's case she is going to have
a size advantage over some of the girls - though not
all, apparently. While having ruled her ineligible for the
AFLW draft in October the AFL cleared Mouncey to compete
in community level competitions because football at that
level is based around participation, inclusion, and
involvement.

What happens next year will have to wait and see as Hannah
has, as she's explained fully transitioned now.

As far as some males not accepting transgender women.
Some don't. Yet quite a few do. As Carlotta and others
can testify.

Foxy,

HM has not completely transitioned to quote:

"She revealed she was unlikely to have gender reassignment surgery because of the cost and said she has lost the strength, speed, endurance and stamina she had as a male."

Secondly, while Carlotta might have found many male lovers amongst the millions in "her" city, the reality is that acceptance by straight males is virtually non existent and the figures bandied around are 1-3%.

Dear Shadow Minister,

In an interview with Peter Stefanovic on
60 Minutes Hannah Mouncey stated -

"Some people will get
cosmetic surgery, you know, hundreds of thousands of
dollars to re-shape their jaw or their voice-box and
have surgery and all sorts of stuff. I'm definitely not
going down that path. I am fully transitioned."

As far as males accepting transgender women are concerned?
Those statistics are hard to come by. But seeing as the
number given of transgender women is 1.7% of the population,
and you tell us that a similar percentage of men accept
those women, that seems like a rather good stat and confirms
what Carlotta has said all along.

Thank You.

Foxy,

The figures for transgender total is closer to .5% and definitely less than 1% and the 1-3% that would date transgender mostly include those experimenting, not those intending any relationship.

However, the point I was trying to make is that roughly 49 in 50 straight men would run a mile if they found that their date was not born female which makes the acceptance of trans people mostly superficial.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I don't believe that to be true.

cont'd ...

Dear Shadow Minister,

Here is a link that explains why some Australian men travel
to Manila to date transgender women:

http://www.news.com.au/travel/world-travel/asia/a-night-at-mixed-nuts-bar-in-manila/news-story/1de8aa14689e526a75fd15f409c56ee4

SM,
"However, the point I was trying to make is that roughly 49 in 50 straight men would run a mile if they found that their date was not born female which makes the acceptance of trans people mostly superficial."

I'd agree in regard to older and middle aged Australians, but this pro-gay safe-schools thing has really done a number on the younger ones.

Foxy,
You should be careful.
From where I'm sitting you're so far to the left that if you go any further you'll be supporting child molesters next.
But I guess you support Muslims despite their shortcomings...

Foxy,

Look it up:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_demographics_of_the_United_States

Secondly, I think your article actually makes my point. The people going to date trans women go precisely because they are trans / feminised men not because they are women. Luke Williams accurately describes them as the third sex.

AC,

While I don't believe that normal people will ever completely accept that trans people are the gender they profess, I do believe that they deserve a modicum of respect and tolerance so that they can function in society.

What I don't believe is that the education system needs to ignore the needs of the 96% of straight children and focus heavily on the needs of the 0.6%

Dear AC,

So you think that I "support" Muslims?

Simply because on this forum I have consistently
been against irrational, inflexible, attitudes
towards entire categories of people. Against
arguments rooted in generalisations that ignore
the differences among individuals.

I do not support fundamentalists or extremists.
I do not support terrorists. But not all Muslims
belong to those groups. The same as not all
Christians are child molesters.

However, I realise that some people are only
capable of thinking in terms of general categories,
if only to enable them to make sense of the world
by simplifying its complexity.

I find it rather sad though that instead of trying
to understand what is being said and attempt to broaden
the discussion some people have the need to stoop down
to personal insults, and labelling. Terms like "Leftist"
spring to mind. I'm not even sure of what that means
exactly. My family fled from the Soviet regime. Their
families suffered severely and were tortured. Many members
died. My father would turn over in his grave if he knew
that his daughter was being called a "Leftist" by some
anonymous person - when she is merely following her
conscience of what she sees as fair.

Have a nice day.

As always, I will defend and justify my statements.

After your comments which were in support of Carlotta, you went further with this statement "Here is a link that explains why some Australian men travel
to Manila to date transgender women".
FYI, Some Australian men as well as men from many other countries also travel to Manila to engage in sex with children.
There are as many as 100,000 kids in the Philipines involved in prostitution rings.
Whole suburbs are engaged in it; seemingly normalised and mothers even sell their daughter into it.

I want you to look at the following link.
https://www.infowars.com/drag-queen-festival-in-austin-promotes-early-sexualgender-confusion-2/
To me it seems reasonable that the transgender movement is also associated (by extension) with the sexualisation of young children.
Is this not a fair statement and if you don't think so please explain why.
Do you support the sexualisation of children?
Are you fine with this?

And so my rationale is that if you ignorantly support 'Transgenders' then you also support the 'Sexualisation of Children', (by extension)
And supporting Transgenders in Manilla and the men who go to see them is awfully close to supporting men going to Manila to have sex with young kids.

This is why I made that comment.

[Cont.]
Likewise, your support of Muslims also includes (by extension) some tolerance for 'gang rapings', 'terrorism and extremism', 'subjagation of women', 'slavery', and all the other 'bad things' associated with Islam...
'Beheading infidels'? Have you heard of that one?
'Mutilating young girls vagina's' Are you aware of this occurances in our country?

Why should my beliefs in less tolerance in this kind of behavior in our society be any less valid than your tolerance, (and silent consent by extension) of it?

I believe in freedom and liberty for all people, but I don't think one person should give up their liberties so someone else can have theirs.
Your tolerance of these things puts me, my family and the people I care about at risk.
Why should I not speak up in defense of the things I care about?

These are my positions or criticisms; but I also do take note of valid points made by others in support, and to better understand the issue in a brader perspective.

By if you want me to accept your reasonable arguments, you too need to accept mine.
And honestly it always seems like a one-way street with the left.
And if you don't know what the 'left' is, well I think thats interesting but maybe a topic of a different conversation, unless you want me to divulge my thoughts?

Dear AC,

On this forum I have made it quite clear as to
what I do or do not support. I have no interest
in explaining anything else to you.