Walter Plinge

@letsjustfckngo @Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th This is a common misunderstanding of fairness in sport. Jon Pike’s work in this area is a good place to start if you want to understand the actual meaning of fairness in sport

@Lachlan_Edi @fcqv @SalemThe5th I don’t claim to know more. I’m saying that if they would truly care about fairness, they would put in place measurable standards to ensure that fairness. If they don’t, it’s excluding trans people that they care about, not fairness.

Neither Imane Khelif nor Caster Semenya are trans. They are male. It is not about hating or excluding trans people. It never has been. It is about respecting the female category. Always has been.

@letsjustfckngo @Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th The World Rugby policy documents are worth reading as they explain the policy with full scientific references. The workshop was over 5 years ago and there’s been stronger evidence published since, but it’s a good place to start if you want to understand what you’re talking about

@fcqv @Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th Any aspect that you claim gives sex an unfair advantage over people of a different sex.

@thesundaysport You’re always ahead of the game on the sex arse front, so I assume it’s not that…

Mates messaging me to ask what Scott Mills did - 'you'll know, you work for a newspaper...' Lads, we've not had the inside track on any news story since Mark Oaten

@BerthonJeanMarc @Marina_Ferrari @ILGAWORLD @francediplo @fs_lgbt @stop_homophobie It’s sex testing, not femininity testing. Until you understand the difference between sex and gender, all of your opinions on this question are pretty much worthless

Following the attempt to rehabilitate Russia, the @IOC has now decided to exclude from the Olympic Games those with variations in sexual characteristics and to impose femininity tests on female athletes that contravene both the law and ethical principles. France, through its minister Marina Ferrari, has expressed its deep concern.

@letsjustfckngo @Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th Apart from sex, which of the other current agreed categories (age, weight, disability etc) do you want to replace with a different system?

@Lachlan_Edi @fcqv @SalemThe5th That’s all fine, but then don’t try to claim that it is about the unfair advantage, cause it isn’t about that. It’s clearly just because you can’t cope with people you don’t understand. Just say that.

@BradfemlyWalsh @grace_hawthorn My Dad has the same name problem, compounded by a) the fact that he does have dementia b) for bureaucratic reasons it’s not on his NHS notes, so they always think he must have had a stroke and c) the fact that I have the same first name. Like bloody Feydeau last time he was in😂

@grace_hawthorn She wrote his name on that the first day they did it and they don't bother. She said the way they're treating him has made her terrified to get older (she's 78, he's 85)

My elderly dad is in hospital fighting a nasty UTI. Every day, a nurse has spoken to my mum about his 'senility'. My dad is not senile. What's happening is that he's always been known by his middle name and they keep calling him by his first so he doesn't respond . FOR FUCKSAKE.

@anon_gencrit @ukvillafan @PeterTatchell Campaigning for gay rights in many countries around the world; fairly principled on free speech and opposed to no-platforming; consistent critic of Sharia. He’s certainly horrendously wrong on several other topics, especially women’s rights, but he’s no common or garden TRA fool

@fcqv @ukvillafan @PeterTatchell TBF I’ve never heard him be right about anything 🤷🏼‍♂️

Olympic ban on all trans women competing in women’s events is unjustified They’ve no unfair advantage if they’ve had hormone treatment It reduces muscle mass, bone density & physical strength & endurance. Their performance declines to that of ‘biological’ women Individual assessment. No blanket ban @TransLucent_Org @TransITCUK @Mams4Trans @Transgendertrd @TransgenderNews @TransActionBloc @TransPride @LDNtranspride @TransNewsDesk @Mermaids_Gender @BobbityP @TransYouth @transgreens @RuthDavidsonPC @hillarytaylorvi @ZackPolanski @TheGreenParty @rachelmillward @MothinAli @LgbtqIndia @BuzzFeedLGBTQ @lgbtiqa_greens @LGBTIQAGreenLon @LGBTIQRights @LindaRiley8 @DIVAmagazine @glaad @HRC @hilarypepper @CliffJoannou @benjaminbutter

@PeregrineT49351 @brookelynn74 @WitchyMcWitch @GirlScout27 @thefempire50 @mar2vickers @ForWomenScot @jk_rowling @sharrond62 Indeed:) Logically you can construct any number of non-circular definitions (e.g. “woman” means “a human being”; “woman” means “table” and “trans” means “wooden”) but they are not particularly useful for rational people🤣

@fcqv @brookelynn74 @WitchyMcWitch @GirlScout27 @thefempire50 @mar2vickers @ForWomenScot @jk_rowling @sharrond62 It doesn't have to be circular. They can be honest and admit that 'woman gender' is just 'femininity'. This does involve admitting they think butch lesbians aren't really women, so they tend to go with the circular approach. But we know what they actually THINK a woman is.

To all media… we are watching you closely. Misinformation, deliberate gaslighting, and ambiguous language is not excusable, you have been told relentlessly and very clearly by the IOC; the policy applies to males not being allowed in the female category, for integrity, safety, fairness and equality of opportunity of females in their category. It’s that’s simple. Feelings and personal identities have no place in sport, just biological reality.

@ObhishekSaha @CostelloWilliam AFAIK this is illegal under UK law. If so, do you believe the law should be changed?

Relationships thrive, and are built upon, implicit consent. When you know (and you know your partner knows, and you know that your partner knows you know) that it is fine for you to go ahead with an act without explicit consent. I think that if you normally enjoy oral sex, but you would be annoyed at your partner waking you up with one, your relationship with your partner needs improving.

Would you be happy or annoyed if a partner woke you with oral sex without explicit consent? N = 4,413 (24% female) 84% of men said happy 67% of women said annoyed Large effect size. The somnophilia fetish is arousal from initiating sexual activity with someone who is asleep.

@brookelynn74 @PeregrineT49351 @WitchyMcWitch @GirlScout27 @thefempire50 @mar2vickers @ForWomenScot @jk_rowling @sharrond62 You can only make this true by using a circular definition of the word “women” It is nothing more than a religious mantra - you are welcome to believe it, but it has no meaning outside of your religion

@PeregrineT49351 @WitchyMcWitch @GirlScout27 @thefempire50 @mar2vickers @ForWomenScot @jk_rowling @sharrond62 Trans women are women.

@letsjustfckngo @Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th It doesn’t per se, but his views are aligned with the decisions being made sporting bodies. This is unsurprising because his views, like those of the sporting bodies, are based on the relevant evidence from sports science and ethics. Your views are not based on the evidence

@Lachlan_Edi @SalemThe5th Then why does it matter what you want?

@ThomasWillett9 Nor is Rowling. Do you have an argument based on truth rather than fantasy?

Lewis and Tolkien weren’t known for whipping up campaigns of abusive every time a trans person sneezes.

@ClueCultComm @SarahTheHaider Beautiful? Pretty? Jolie laide? Whatever? Of course. But attraction is something else

@fcqv @SarahTheHaider I don't mean to quibble about this, but you've never found a celebrity attractive?

Men, please don’t let yourself be blackpilled by the most abnormal women alive. You don’t actually want to be the kind of guy who really turns them on.

@runthinkwrite Sorry, non-neuro typical

@fcqv NNT?

Peter confuses sex-based categories with performance-based rankings. Sex-based categories are male and female. Performance rankings work through leagues, Cat 1/2/3, squash ladders, and so on. At this point in the debate, the confusion is either malicious or just very stupid.

@ClueCultComm @SarahTheHaider Probably just a problem of definitions then. I can’t conceive of finding someone attractive if I’ve never talked to them

@fcqv @SarahTheHaider Nope. Does that change my ability to figure out if she's attractive?

@ClueCultComm @SarahTheHaider Have you ever met her?

@SarahTheHaider Aella is definitely abnormal, but she's also very, very attractive.

@ukvillafan @PeterTatchell I don’t think there’s any point trying to have a logical argument with Tatchell. I don’t think he’s a bad person, but I suspect he has a primitive view of the world split between goodies and baddies. Sometimes he’s right, sometimes he’s wrong, but he’s not capable of debate

Everything @PeterTatchell is saying here is 100% incorrect and is a deflection from the true issue. It is a mark of the sheer stupidity of the ‘arguments’ advanced here that it will take many paragraphs to debunk it all. Please read to the end. Tatchell either knows this, and is therefore blatantly lying, or he doesn’t, which makes him exceedingly ignorant. One cannot, of course, rule out the very likely possibility that he is both ignorant and a liar in equal measure. Sport is segregated by sex, not any notion of ‘identity‘. All ‘trans women’ are male and thus have no entitlement to participate in female sport; zero, none, nada, zilch. That’s it. That is sufficient justification for a ‘blanket ban’ because such a ban excludes all males from female sport irrespective of how any individual may identify. Nothing more is required. The issue of performance differentials between males and females is actually irrelevant to specific bans on so-called ‘trans athletes’ because those differentials are what underpins the reason for the female category being created in the first place. The IOC policy isn’t a ‘blanket ban’ on trans athletes but a blanket ban on male athletes in female sport. Calling it a ’blanket ban on trans athletes’ is deliberate misrepresentation. The policy has the effect of banning all males from female sport, no more, no less. Even if performance differentials were relevant in a ‘trans’ specific sense, then Tatchell is still lying when he claims that men who have had ‘hormone treatment’ do no retain a male advantage. Tatchell’s claim here that, “They’ve no unfair advantage if they’ve had hormone treatment. It reduces muscle mass, bone density & physical strength & endurance. Their performance declines to that of ‘biological’ women” is a flat out lie. The proper science is very clear and settled and has been for many years. The Sports Council’s guidance issued in 2021 makes this abundantly clear. movingtoinclusion.co.uk/wp-content/upl… There is no contradictory science apart from partisan, activist-led studies that are fundamentally methodologically flawed, such as Blair Hamilton’s work which compared young fit women to older, unfit trans-identifying males. Moreover, Tatchell’s suggestion of a case-by-case approach is a prime example of muddled thinking. Firstly, the whole basis of the claim that some men should be allowed into women’s sport is that ‘trans women are women’. Unless that assertion is objectively true, the whole notion falls flat on its face If this were true, though, the logical argument must be that all ‘trans women‘ should be eligible for women’s sport. To argue for a ‘case by case’ approach is to admit that at least some ‘trans women’ should be excluded. This can only be argued on the basis that such ‘trans women’ retain ‘too much’ advantage. That advantage can only derive from their maleness. Seemingly, therefore, some ‘trans women’ are just not ‘womanly’ enough to be let into the female category. This facile and vacuous thinking is the hallmark of ‘trans’ logic. Ultimately, it defeats itself because it is internally inconsistent and inherently irrational. This is why all those who are against the IOC policy have to resort to lies in a vain attempt to concoct an argument. x.com/ukvillafan/sta…

@_lliesl_ It’s so hard. 💪 and ❤️

Probably not going to be on X much. My dad has been taken unwell. On an related note there is a lot of negativity about immigration but the nurses (who I presume are from India) who have been dealing with my dad have been wonderful.

@EtanSmallman Genuine eco greens (whether dark or bright or whatever) have already abandoned Polanski. He’ll now double down on a range of niche anti-Israel, anti-women, or anti-capital policies…whatever gets the most ill-informed populist votes

Interesting that Polanski didn't respond to story of antisemitic Green WhatsApp group, but he can't stop responding to one about family's fury with him. I'll make a prediction: his party will become increasingly hostile to him and all he used to stand for. (And he knows this. )