Skip to content

Moira thinks she’s got a gotcha

Last month, the International Olympic Committee announced that transgender women athletes would be barred from competing in all Olympic events in the women’s category – but not the men’s events.

Err, yes?

The new rules effectively redefine womanhood – but not manhood – as a novel and previously unrecognized category consisting only of those with a specific set of genetic prerequisites.

It’s a very odd hill to decide to die upon and it’s a strange way of doing so too.

Those who support the bans claim that testosterone, male puberty or male genetics confer an advantage in athletics, and that trans women must therefore be banned in order to preserve the integrity of women’s competitions. This sounds like the kind of argument someone could make without being unreasonably motivated by bigotry; the IOC, for instance, claims that its new ban is backed up by science and evidence. But the actual science of sex development, hormone therapy, and their impact on athletic performance turns out to be quite complicated, with a broad variation across both individual athletes and different sporting events. The science of how to ensure fairness and measure advantage in these contexts is “not settled at all”, said Eric Vilain, a University of California, Irvine, geneticist who advised the IOC on gender for more than a decade. This new insistence that a complicated scientific question is in fact a simple one – and that it is determinative and relevant only for women, and not for men – suggests that something other than a robust commitment to fairness is at play.

They’ve all got it in for me. Or them at least, a grand conspiracy to explain something as simple as nose on face. The reason we have “women’s” sports is because without the classification no woman would ever win anything. So, there must be policing of the classification becuase that’s why we have the classification.

Women’s middle distance running for example. Was it the women’s 2016 1600 where the first truly XY came in fourth?

It all is an odd hill to die upon.

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

43 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Van_Patten
Van_Patten
1 month ago

Just because she’s paranoid doesn’t mean they are all out to get her but Wow- Maybe even more bizarre than Murphy’s world.

As you say, seems an odd thing to get exercised about…

Theophrastus
Theophrastus
1 month ago
Reply to  Van_Patten

20260402_075952
JuliaM
1 month ago

‘…a novel and previously unrecognized category …’

No, just the one that existed before the madness of trans ideology overtook eberything.

NielsR
NielsR
1 month ago
Reply to  JuliaM

It’s remarkable that prominent parts of the left can spend decades demanding restitution for historical sexism, and then turn on a dime and claim sex is a novel invention.
Were transmen oppressing transwomen in the before-times?

Theophrastus
Theophrastus
1 month ago
Reply to  JuliaM

More madness…

20260421_164600
johnthebridge
johnthebridge
1 month ago
Reply to  Theophrastus

Gawd almighty.

Ltw
Ltw
1 month ago

Which is why golf has open events, right? They’re not defined as male/female. You think you can compete, you join the boys. Works in golf, probably not so much in boxing.

M
M
1 month ago
Reply to  Ltw

For pretty much every sport, the “men’s” category is actually the “open”.

You can compete in “men’s” if you’re a woman. You’re just really unlikely to do well.

The controversy in the past was mostly in team sports, where people thought picking e.g. a female goalie was done for reasons other than being the person who gave the team the best chance to win.

Bloke in North Dorset
Bloke in North Dorset
1 month ago
Reply to  Ltw

That category came from the early days of professionalism in golf when tournaments were for professionals only and signified amateurs could enter.

Bloke in South Dorset
Bloke in South Dorset
1 month ago

I’d always assumed it was the other way around, that early competitions were for amateurs only, with the “open” the exception that also allowed professionals.

But I looked it up and you are quite right, the ‘Open’ in golf started out as professionals only, and only became the “Open” when it was opened out to amateurs as well.

Ltw
Ltw
1 month ago

“The new rules effectively redefine womanhood – but not manhood”

Um, doesn’t that define both? For 99.9% of the population anyway you’re one or the other. Yes, there are some edge cases but they are more correctly labelled as genetic mishaps rather then a new sex.

Ottokring
Ottokring
1 month ago
Reply to  Ltw

That intersection in the Venn digram is just the minutest sliver.

Baron Jackfield
Baron Jackfield
1 month ago
Reply to  Ltw

Essentially, if there’s a ‘Y’ chromosome anywhere in the mixture, it’s a bloke!

Bloke in Wales
Bloke in Wales
1 month ago

Was it the women’s 2016 1600 where the first truly XY came in fourth?

Did you mean XX?

britinkiwi
britinkiwi
1 month ago
Reply to  Tim Worstall

800m race – according to Wikipedia “all three medalists had the 46,XY karyotype and produced levels of testosterone in the male range.”

Marius
Marius
1 month ago

the actual science of sex development, hormone therapy, and their impact on athletic performance turns out to be quite complicated

No, it really isn’t. If she wants proof, let’s match her off against a man of the same age and weight in a 100m sprint, a 2km run and a boxing match.

Eric Vilain

Nominative determinism strikes again!

I confess I still fail to understand why these stupid bitches continue to support cheats and perverts who hate them.

Interested
Interested
1 month ago
Reply to  Marius

A certain type of woman is far more interested in signalling than truth. If you think about it, that’s what make up is. Boob jobs, too. This is no different.

Marius
Marius
1 month ago
Reply to  Interested

More interest in signalling than truth, I can fathom. More interested in signalling than personal safety I don’t get. Same as all the wimmin who welcome rapefugees.

Interested
Interested
1 month ago
Reply to  Marius

Human beings – especially young ones – never think it will happen to them. It’s how you get soldiers to do objectively insane things – it’s always going to be the other bloke.

Bloke in North Dorset
Bloke in North Dorset
1 month ago
Reply to  Interested

The part of the brain that is used for assessing risk is the last part to fully develop and that is around the age of 25, apparently.

By that time the average infantryman has either left after 3 years or is starting to get promoted and working his way further back, but not completely out of danger.

M
M
1 month ago
Reply to  Marius

In her case, it’s not personal safety. She’s not the woman boxer who has to block punches from a man in a wig.

Grikath
Grikath
1 month ago
Reply to  Marius

He’s technically right….

Go mess with hormones, especially ones that *shouldn’t* have been there according to genetic biology, and development and you got a mess on your hands.
Broad brush with many, often unexpected and detrimental, side effects.

So yes, it’s verrah, verrah complicated. And dangerous.
But that won’t stop the sociopolitical fanatics, because they are of the school of thought that Nature should bow to their (Gender) “Theories” and Activism.

Mental toddlers throwing tantrums…..

john77
john77
1 month ago
Reply to  Marius

99.999+% of male boxers will not fight a woman (many will not even spar with one in case they accidentally hit her too hard)

Ottokring
Ottokring
1 month ago

All this discussion of trannies makes me think almost wistfully and nostalgically of greats of the past such as Goehr, Koch, Drechsler and of course Kratochvilova. ❤️

jarmila-kratochvilova-1
Last edited 1 month ago by Ottokring
Marius
Marius
1 month ago
Reply to  Ottokring

I guess her coaches were pretty clear about the performance advantages of male hormones…. If only they’d thought to find a bang average male middle distance runner and lop his old chap off, but apparently even the commies weren’t that deranged.

Norman
Norman
1 month ago

God, she’s a miserable cow.

Bongo
Bongo
1 month ago

In the robot half marathon in Beijing last weekend I was disappointed that no female winner was declared.

Ottokring
Ottokring
1 month ago
Reply to  Bongo

Bigot !

Robots have an infinite number of genders. It is all down to where they have their nuts and flanges.

Gamecock
Gamecock
1 month ago

‘Trans woman’

Commie speak for female impersonator. Control the language and you control the conversation.

Use of ‘trans/transgender’ marks you as a Marxist pig. It’s not even about sex; it’s about the destruction of Western Civilization to open the way for Global Communism. THAT’S the hill she is choosing to die on.

Also note this is incremental: there is no finish line. Should the commies get men into women’s sports, they aren’t going to smile and go away. The onslaught will continue perpetually. They will chip away til Gramsci’s hegemony is achieved.

Michael van der Riet
Michael van der Riet
1 month ago
Reply to  Gamecock

It’s almost as if women want to be inferior to men.

Michael van der Riet
Michael van der Riet
1 month ago

There are some Olympic sports where men have no advantage.

Baron Jackfield
Baron Jackfield
1 month ago

None of them involving physical strength.

Gamecock
Gamecock
1 month ago

What’s your point?

Grikath
Grikath
1 month ago

*mentally checks the list of actual *sports*
*checks google*

Umm the only Olympic sport that hasn’t got gender separation are the equestrian events…
And that’s because the *horse* does all the actual work…

Even in the shooting events ( gun or archery ) there’s gender separation, because wimminz *demonstrably* are worse at (instinctive) ballistics than men, with actual physiological and mental differences you can point to.
( for one, female hip placement gives a less stable platform. What makes ’em wiggle-wiggle and allows them to push out sprogs *also* influences on how much they can stand perfectly still…
In the same vein, wimminz can’t throw as accurately as men, in general. Giving them a gun or a bow to compensate for strength doesn’t change that.)
Not by *much* at that level, but enough to make a statistical difference which requires gender separation.

And while at Olympic level you’re hitting extremes and differences can be *very* small… This doesn’t change the fact that these differences becomes *far* more apparent at lower levels of expertise/training.
It’s not that the Olympics determine gender separation, it simply follows the categorisation made necessary by the practicing of a sport at lower levels.
As it bloody well should.

Gamecock
Gamecock
1 month ago
Reply to  Grikath

Betcha the horses know.

jgh
jgh
1 month ago

Why should castrated men be banned from men’s events?

Grikath
Grikath
1 month ago
Reply to  jgh

To protect them from their inevitable misery, failure, and quite likely injury if it’s anything …physical….
They simply don’t stand a chance…

It’s generally seen as a moral obligation to protect the deluded from doing self-harrrrrrr… Oh…wait…..:rolleyes:

Nope… let them….By all means….

john77
john77
1 month ago
Reply to  jgh

AFAIK they aren’t (unless they declare themselves “women”

Gamecock
Gamecock
1 month ago

The science of how to ensure fairness and measure advantage in these contexts is “not settled at all”, said Eric Vilain, a University of California, Irvine, geneticist who advised the IOC on gender for more than a decade.

Argument from authority.

BTW, checking XX/XY chromosomes has been settled for generations. Olympics™ is not IMPLEMENTING it, they are RETURNING to it.

Critics argue that these measures may unfairly exclude certain athletes from competing in their chosen categories

Whah! Whah! This is akin to letting Iran have nukes because Trump does mean tweets. Protecting women in sports is vastly more important than playing up to freaks. Women should not suffer the consequences of freaks’ problems.

In fact, in counterpoint to this appeal to sympathy, I give you Lia Thomas. Not a sympathetic character at all.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4yy4dv2dyo

comment image.webp

Last edited 1 month ago by Gamecock
Bongo
Bongo
1 month ago
Reply to  Gamecock

That Riley Gaines lass is amazing, like a JK Rowling without the books but with medals instead, usually silvers. Her dad was called Rowdy, can’t think why, smiles

Agammamon
Agammamon
1 month ago

Its this weird disconnect with people.

‘Men’ encompasses everyone. ‘Woman’ is a subset of men. Everyone can compete in the men’s division, only women can compete in the women’s division.

These are the same people that complain Spanish has ‘gendered’ words but they don’t understand how those words work.

Gamecock
Gamecock
1 month ago
Reply to  Agammamon

“Compete” is probably the wrong word. “Participate” better word.

Receiving awards like Participation Trophy, Most Improved Trophy, Miss Congeniality.

Caddie.

Last edited 1 month ago by Gamecock
43
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x