I have made my views clear. You believe I should have more reliable data than the FA, and unless I am certain I should accept their data, even though I know they make little attempt to keep accurate records. The FA use an app called, 'Just Play' and anyone can search for football events and rock up and play. Yet they confidently assert there are '30' individuals affected by their new policy.“Who knows how many” is indeed the very question I’m hoping you can answer for me. But if you refuse to even consider the FA’s own data to be reliable and will only speak in grand hypotheticals, then I’m afraid it’s difficult to share your level of outrage. Clearly you think that makes me some kind of misogynist.
It’s just you seem well booked up on the matter. Yet trans men seem to have been overlooked by those whooping and cheering this ruling. If somebody presents as male but was born female and wants to use a women’s loo or changing room, how is that to be enforced?Ask them, not me. If they can't maintain a single sex category without clear rules then they are failing to offer fair competition.
I believe that if you’re going to dismiss one set of data when making your argument, then you should be able to say why that’s the case and offer alternative data that you believe to be more accurate. You’ve done neither.I have made my views clear. You believe I should have more reliable data than the FA, and unless I am certain I should accept their data, even though I know they make little attempt to keep accurate records. The FA use an app called, 'Just Play' and anyone can search for football events and rock up and play. Yet they confidently assert there are '30' individuals affected by their new policy.
TBC
Trans boogeywoman in this case.I believe that if you’re going to dismiss one set of data when making your argument, then you should be able to say why that’s the case and offer alternative data that you believe to be more accurate. You’ve done neither.
Your argument that thousands of women were impacted by the hypothetical trans boogeyman lurking in every dressing room is valid as far as that hypothetical argument goes. But if you want to start claiming that the data backs you up on this then we should probably see the data.
Even if born a woman?My gaff, my rules: if you've got a cock play mens football
That’s not strictly true is it? My argument was that a ruling that involves the playing status of <30 players isn’t quite the seismic and existential moment for women’s football that you and others claim it is. You clearly disagree, to the extent you bumped this thread after several weeks to suggest that I’m not only wrong but also a misogynist for saying so. That’s your prerogative, I’d just appreciate it if you had an argument beyond “it’s impossible to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ “ to back it up.I have never claimed any data backs up my case. Quite the opposite. My point is we don't have any reliable data and yet the FA confidently announced their spurious figures.
I doubt that the figure is as low as that. We have some very good friends who are parents to a trans-woman. She plays football for her University's women's team, and i understand she is not the only trans-woman in the side. I assume it is a generational thing (i hesitate to use the term "fad"), but doubtless some will have been "influenced" by their peers and the online world, meaning that universities are likely to be something of a breeding ground (if you'll pardon the ironic pun) for trans people. I don't know if there are any data available on the percentage of people who identify as trans in students as compared to the general population, but if the number of courses i am required to do on the subject by my employer is anything to go by, i would say it is higher among students.I cant find it now but a year or two ago the FA replied to a FOI request that there were 72. Not certain of the figure.
The FA told us that 11.8 million players football in England but I can't find how they arrived at that figure.
I really don't know how and who they are counting.
The issue is men abusing the rules to play in a competition they are biologically too strong for. I don't think the other way has proved to be an issue or know of any occurrences, but to be clear, the gender you'd be in the graveyard.Even if born a woman?
Has the ‘other way’ been proved to be an issue in women’s football? I assume there are thousands of examples?The issue is men abusing the rules to play in a competition they are biologically too strong for. I don't think the other way has proved to be an issue or know of any occurrences, but to be clear, the gender you'd be in the graveyard.
This is the crux isn’t it. Assuming that nobody’s really transgender, they just say they are to win trophies in Sunday League.The issue is men abusing the rules to play in a competition they are biologically too strong for. I don't think the other way has proved to be an issue or know of any occurrences, but to be clear, the gender you'd be in the graveyard.
It's been shown many times that an average men's team will beat a women's team. Only a few years ago an elite women's team lost to an average youth side. Of course the game is newer, less of a pool and less development / money etc, but there is no reason that a coached women's team can't be as technically good as men, but sheer physicality and strength will prevail. It's a reason that even between men we have weight categories in boxing. Quite simply an average non-league player at conference level would rip it up at elite women's level. Not only is that unfair and dangerous, but he's also taking the opportunity away from a woman.Has the ‘other way’ been proved to be an issue in women’s football? I assume there are thousands of examples?
Well let's not debate then.That’s not strictly true is it? My argument was that a ruling that involves the playing status of <30 players isn’t quite the seismic and existential moment for women’s football that you and others claim it is. You clearly disagree, to the extent you bumped this thread after several weeks to suggest that I’m not only wrong but also a misogynist for saying so. That’s your prerogative, I’d just appreciate it if you had an argument beyond “it’s impossible to know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ “ to back it up.
Give me a break. You said that sharing your view on this was a prerequisite for believing in equal opportunities for women. As I’ve said multiple times, it’s your prerogative to be as angry as you like about this, but at least own it when you try to suggest it’s your way or the highway.It is you who has repeatedly misrepresented my views in bad faith. I have not suggested you are misogynistic.
So you are calling me a misogynist then?I think it is reasonable to deduce that a person continually downplaying the impact on females of previous FA policies is not prioritising equal opportunities for women.
I think we should agree that we see things differently and let this particular exchange conclude.
Nice attempt at the hit and run, in that case then. Good to see you back.
Nice attempt at the hit and run, in that case then. Good to see you back.
If you think that me disagreeing with you on this one specific issue amounts to a “continually downplaying the impact on females” to the point where you think I don’t prioritise the issue at all, what can I say? I suppose the only option is to never downplay or qualify, always maximise?
It’s an interesting discussion, I don’t have a dog in the fight per se. Sorry?You do for some reason seem very invested in this topic
I'd assumed lack of footballing ability, but you were thinking of chucking a frock on for your Chelsea ladies trialIt’s an interesting discussion, I don’t have a dog in the fight per se. Sorry?
Is he in court again?, He'll get sent down one of these days Imo!I'd assumed lack of footballing ability, but you were thinking of chucking a frock on for your Chelsea ladies trial
Equal pay is about receiving the same amount for playing for the national team, not club wages, where each individual contract is negotiated independently.Equal pay and can't sell out Wembley.
Can't wait for L2 players to be paid the same as Prem players.
Is it the same for women's keeping as men's? Male GK peak at around 32 and often play high level until late 30's but not sure if it's the same or not. As our resident expert, perhaps @oakey might know best?Mary Earps "retiring" from international football at age 32, 25 days before the Euros. For a goalkeeper that is very young, and letting her country down, even if she was only there to be an inspirational presence in the dressing room. Most likely thrown her dummy out of the pram after losing her place as number one keeper. Pathetic!
Clearly not the "team player for the greater good" that everyone had her down as!Is it the same for women's keeping as men's? Male GK peak at around 32 and often play high level until late 30's but not sure if it's the same or not. As our resident expert, perhaps @oakey might know best?
It is disappointing about ME and Sarena Weigman suggested that she'd tried to change her mind. I would have thought she'd realise that even from an experience PoV it would help even if she's not playing she'd make a big contribution as Hampton only has 13 caps and the other two have zero.
Good idea!I see Villas points system will now allow supporters to accrue points by attending villa ladies games
That's a great initiative to boost attendances for their women.
I see that Everton Ladies will have Goodison Park as their home ground! Is that a cunning way to boost their attendances, as a whole heap of confused Scousers will turn up having forgotten the men's team have moved?
I assumed it would be earmarked for demolition and the site sold for housing (a la HR). Interestingly, the pitch and the seats are currently being removed - how will the girls play on that??
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?