A thycling influenther
BBC still banging the same stupid drum. Bang stupid drum, win stupid prizes.
A cycling influencer nominated for a list of top 100 women cyclists said she has declined the honour due to the decision not to include trans women.
Oh yay, good for her, how very plucky and brave and stand your ground-y. Women are such greedy sluts; of course they shouldn’t have prizes just for them.
Cycling UK, a charity promoting the sport, has compiled its 100 Women in Cycling list for the last nine years, but this year decided only to include biological women following the recent unanimous UK Supreme Court ruling defining a “woman” and “sex” in law.
Claire Sharpe, a cycling guide and coach from Bristol, said: “If they don’t want to ride with all women, then it’s not the kind of ride I want to be part of”.
They do want to ride with all women; they don’t want to ride with men. See the difference?
Ms Sharpe said she is one of four Bristol riders who have declined to feature in the ranking.
Speaking to BBC Bristol, Ms Sharpe said: “[The list] was originally set up to celebrate women who inspire, encourage and empower people to experience the joy of cycling.”
Check; to celebrate women who do that. Not people in general, not women and men, but women. Specifically women.
“By excluding trans and non-binary people, it’s just not doing what I think it was set up to do. It excludes people that have helped create the community that I was nominated for.”
But it’s a thing for women. We’re allowed to do things that are for women.
They’re exploiting an ambiguity in the word. Exclusion can mean unreasonable cruel “we hate you” action but it can also be entirely morally neutral. Researchers working on disease X exclude people who don’t have disease X because they’re working on disease X. Not all exclusion is “You’re not invited to my birthday party because we all hate you and you’re ugly.” Much exclusion is like excluding whipped cream as a building material. It’s not that whipped cream is being punished, it’s just that whipped cream is unstable in hurricanes.
This is like that. A list of top women cyclists is a list of top women cyclists. There is no need to include fish or hammers or the BBC or the space station. That’s not an aspersion on fish or hammers or the BBC or the space station, it’s just having a list that is what it says on the tin.
So fish don’t need bicycles? Does that mean women don’t need men?
Honestly? Yeah no, women don’t generally need men.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thanks for the giggle, Colin. (•‿•)
It’s remarkable how successful the cult has been in recruiting women. I suppose it’s exploiting the natural urge to nurture and perverting the social pressure to be kind and ‘inclusive’ by misrepresenting the actual dynamics. So many women of my acquaintance still refuse to pay any attention to the ugly truth that it’s sometimes disheartening. They prefer the fantasy where women and girls can sometimes find themselves having been born in the wrong body. It means that society is set up just right, nobody is being restricted in their choices by arbitrary social rules, it’s just that a few people have a gender which doesn’t match their biology. In their world, there are no AGPs or crafty sex offenders and no sports cheats; those are imaginary monsters invented by people who inexplicably want to be cruel to the most vulnerable people in the world. It’s a hard defensive shell to get through, because these women are actually terrified that we’ll convince them that we’re actually right, and that we’ll strip them of their comforting illusions that everything is perfect.
Just the tiniest tweak.