One
Literally just one.
There is 1 transgender athlete competing in the Olympics. Literally just one. https://t.co/vQm4vngQbf
— Ash Sarkar (@AyoCaesar) June 21, 2021
There is one Tongan denied a place in the NZ women's team. Literally just one. But she is neither rich nor white nor male so she is expendable.
Samoans say https://t.co/7nTMZzfpJH
— Scattergrains (@scattergrains) June 22, 2021
There is one woman who has trained for years, dreaming of an Olympic medal, a Gold Medal – who will be cheated out of it by a mediocre man. But it’s LITERALLY JUST ONE WOMAN. So it doesn’t matter.
— KM (@kaeon22) June 22, 2021
And this one man has a performance record that might make him mediocre amongst his male peers, but puts his weightlifting records out of reach of even the best women, probably forever.
This graphic puts it quite clearly.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4XDFvWUYAQGvwp?format=jpg&name=small
One, today, this Olympics. But, once the endorsement deals are landed on Hubbard’s agent and men see the way he is treated as “brave and stunning” for smashing a civil rights boundary there will be more in all games.
There are two so far, likely three, this Olympics.
Good find Tigger @1. I like the statistic at the bottom, the probability a woman in the W35 division lifting the weight Hubbard did, 1 in 2.8 billion. That statistic, even if the statistic is in that general range, could be used alone as evidence that Hubbard should not be competing in the women’s division. Take that and a simple physical examination and you have an undeniable case of cheating. He’s a man illegitimately competing in the women’s division, and there has been no argument worth considering to refute the fact. I’d like to see them try actually, make an argument that can’t be distilled down to hurting their little feelings. F that. :P
Indeed, twiliter; if a woman did a lift with a 1 in 2.8 billion chance, she’d be judged to have cheated. Actually, the odds could be several orders of magnitude less, and she’d still be judged to have cheated.
He’s cheating.
When Trans Rights supporters make this style of argument — “there aren’t going to be many transwomen athletes,” “very few transwomen will bother women in the pubic bathrooms/ showers/shelters/prisons,” “hardly any transwomen win Woman Entrepreneur of the Year” — I wonder if they understand their own argument: Transwomen are women. They’re implying that there’s some level of participation, a particular limit of incidents, a line crossed which shouldn’t be crossed, which will make them want to step back and start applying restrictions.
But if transwomen ARE women, that’s just not possible. It would be like saying “too many top athletes in sports are black — let’s start writing some rules to prevent this.” Not going to happen.
I’ve mentioned this before, but I don’t recall ever hearing anyone argue for legalizing gay marriage by saying “There won’t be that many. Most gay people don’t want to marry — so what’s the harm?”
Only one, huh, Ash? So … what’s the magic number where we put a stop to it?
Actually, I have heard it, but only on the localized personal level, not as an argument put forth by pundits or advocates. Why? Because it’s a stupid argument.
CeCe Telfer is disqualified at Olympic trials because his testosterone levels were too high.
Transgender runner CeCe Telfer unable to run Olympic trials due to eligibility rules