Cycling UK 'Top 100 women cyclists' nominee declines over policy change

[Nearholmer]

If I’ve got the maths right, and the population of winners contains the same proportions of each as the overall population of cis-women and trans-women taken together, then on average this scheme would involve an award to a trans-woman roughly once in every six years. Even then, it might be that hardly anyone would realise it had happened.

The things I still can’t fathom are: who was being harmed for the eight years the scheme ran with no distinction being drawn; and, who, if anyone, benefits by the position that has now been arrived at? Put another way: what good does the ban this year do; as I asked before, what does it add to the sum of human happiness?

Can anyone tell me?

[Jdsk]

If I’ve got the maths right, and the population of winners contains the same proportions of each as the overall population of cis-women and trans-women taken together, then on average this scheme would involve an award to a trans-woman roughly once in every six years. Even then, it might be that hardly anyone would realise it had happened.

The things I still can’t fathom are: who was being harmed for the eight years the scheme ran with no distinction being drawn; and, who, if anyone, benefits by the position that has now been arrived at? Put another way: what good does the ban this year do; as I asked before, what does it add to the sum of human happiness?

Can anyone tell me?

These are exactly the sort of question that should be considered by those who have to come to a decision about the awards.

Jonathan

[Zulu Eleven]

But this outrage against the CUK decision is disproportionate. To extend your analogy, it's like:

"We've checked the law, and have to say that we won't be allowing cyclists on the motorway for the foreseeable future."

It's hardly bilious, or hateful.

But what if I Identify as an automobile? Poop poop.

[mattheus]

Could you signpost the outrage? I've not seen it, but I've not looked.

oh.

[roubaixtuesday]

But this outrage against the CUK decision is disproportionate. To extend your analogy, it's like:

"We've checked the law, and have to say that we won't be allowing cyclists on the motorway for the foreseeable future."

It's hardly bilious, or hateful.

But what if I Identify as an automobile? Poop poop.

This dismissive attitude this vulnerable minority contributes to, as per polling above, almost all of them feeling unsafe in the UK.

It's really sad to read someone proudly espousing such.

[roubaixtuesday]

Could you signpost the outrage? I've not seen it, but I've not looked.

oh.

So is there outrage, or not? There wasn't from the originator.

[roubaixtuesday]

If I’ve got the maths right, and the population of winners contains the same proportions of each as the overall population of cis-women and trans-women taken together, then on average this scheme would involve an award to a trans-woman roughly once in every six years. Even then, it might be that hardly anyone would realise it had happened.

The things I still can’t fathom are: who was being harmed for the eight years the scheme ran with no distinction being drawn; and, who, if anyone, benefits by the position that has now been arrived at? Put another way: what good does the ban this year do; as I asked before, what does it add to the sum of human happiness?

Can anyone tell me?

I have the identical questions, and am genuinely mystified.

Also, how would anyone know if a nominee were trans or not. Unless they're self nominating?

[mattheus]

Could you signpost the outrage? I've not seen it, but I've not looked.

oh.

So is there outrage, or not? There wasn't from the originator.

please define outrage.

[roubaixtuesday]

oh.

So is there outrage, or not? There wasn't from the originator.

please define outrage.

You were the one claiming outrage!

But this outrage against the CUK decision is disproportionate. Your words.

All I'm asking is that you signpost the disproportionate outrage you've seen.

[Zulu Eleven]

This dismissive attitude this vulnerable minority contributes to, as per polling above, almost all of them feeling unsafe in the UK.

It's really sad to read someone proudly espousing such.

The vulnerable minority who identify as automobiles? Yes, they’re probably not safe to be walking or cycling on motorways.

Shame you’re so much less bothered about the millions of women who have been victims of sexual assault and domestic violence who might want a space away from biological males in which to celebrate their own kinship and culture.

I’d be willing to bet a fiver that if, say, white people were demanding to be included in black musical awards, you would be outraged at the concept.

[roubaixtuesday]

This dismissive attitude this vulnerable minority contributes to, as per polling above, almost all of them feeling unsafe in the UK.

It's really sad to read someone proudly espousing such.

Shame you’re so much less bothered about the millions of women who have been victims of sexual assault and domestic violence who might want a space away from biological males in which to celebrate their own kinship and culture.

If you wished to know my views on sexual assault or domestic abuse, it would probably be better to ask for them, rather than assert them.

But we're now clearly at the point where it's necessary to put you on ignore. I expect you'll get the thread shut down shortly.

[mattheus]

So is there outrage, or not? There wasn't from the originator.

please define outrage.

You were the one claiming outrage!

But this outrage against the CUK decision is disproportionate. Your words.

All I'm asking is that you signpost the disproportionate outrage you've seen.

Obviously I wasn't clear: I think this is a pointless line of debate. I'm happy to stand by my statement. If you don't agree with me about the Gimps and Wobblies post, I doubt I shall change your mind.

[Zulu Eleven]

If you wished to know my views on sexual assault or domestic abuse, it would probably be better to ask for them, rather than assert them.

And there’s the classic error - you appear to think I’m interested in YOUR views on sexual assault or domestic abuse, I’m not, I’m interested in the views of the women who so very often suffer them, and what makes THEM feel comfortable and safe, and very many of the ones I’ve spoken to express THEIR opinions as being that they don’t want biological males who self-identify as females to be able to insert themselves into their culture and spaces. And frankly, unless and until there’s a clear consensus amongst biological women that THEY want to invite biological males into that space and culture, I think it’s categorically unacceptable for them to have to be presented with a fait accompli because some people worry that those men’s feeling might be hurt.

[Bmblbzzz]

If white people were demanding to be included in black musical awards....

Race and racial identity is just as un-straightforward as sex and gender.
https://socialgeographies.blogspot.com/ ... e-and.html

The sole function of racial categorization in the US was used (and has since been used) to simplify the complex identities of individuals to their physical characteristics (Appiah, 2020). The people of East Jackson have in many cases found themselves in opposition to the idea that their race is based upon their physical characteristics, but rather upon their family heritage and to others, their street address. Many residents of the community appear White, having blonde or red hair and light skin, but are categorized as Black because of their last name or simply because they live in East Jackson. Others choose to identify as such to honor their heritage.

https://intheblacknet.com/black-news/we ... race-ohio/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9mtCLL8rI0

[mjr]

I’m interested in the views of the women who so very often suffer them, and what makes THEM feel comfortable and safe, and very many of the ones I’ve spoken to express THEIR opinions as being that they don’t want biological males who self-identify as females to be able to insert themselves into their culture and spaces. [...]

That's anecdata that could equally be explained by you only talking to other frothing transphobes, and any actual supporters of trans-women being afraid to tell you what they really think, preferring to avoid the whole controversy.

I think Jdsk's advice to look at some real ethically-obtained survey data should be followed instead. It would inform the discussion far more than listening only to the noisy.