More shocking anti-trans comments from Scott Morrison’s hand-chosen Liberal Party candidate for Warringah Katherine Deves have come to light, including saying trans women are indulging in “womanface”.
The revelation comes as the prime minister and senior ministers double down on their support for her.
In the days leading up to the beginning of the election campaign, Deves attempted to scrub her online presence from the internet by deleting her Twitter account.
However, many of her posts on Twitter were captured by tools that automatically archive the internet and comments made on other people’s YouTube channels are still online.
Reporting from news.com.au and Guardian Australia found that Deves had previously called trans people “surgically mutilated and sterilised”, claiming half of trans men are sex offenders and likened anti-trans activism to opposing the Holocaust.
However, her history of transphobic comments goes much further than that. Deves has a pattern of accusing trans people of transitioning for nefarious reasons beyond their gender identity — frequently accusing them of using it to sexually assault women.
In October last year in response to a UK incident when a trans woman was accused of sexually assaulting another woman in a hospital, Deves accused the NHS of facilitating sexual assault by treating a trans woman as a woman.
“Men with a special identities being able to access ‘quality health care’ does not mean offering up vulnerable women as sacrificial sexual assault victims, making ward staff and patients sex props in a AGP [autogynephilia] fetish, or indulging a womanface identity,” she tweeted.
Autogynephilia is part of a controversial concept proposed by a sexologist in the 80s that claims that trans women either transition because they are attracted to men or because they’re sexually attracted to their own body as a female. Despite being promoted by anti-trans campaigners, it has not been adopted by the medical community who treat trans people and has been criticised.
Deves also made comments to publication Epoch Times in December last year that male rapists would transition to “erase the sins of the past” and to attack women.
She also tweeted that “gender identity ideology is a gift to sex predators” because trans women could be imprisoned with other women.
Deves said that sexual predators would “weaponise and exploit” becoming trans to access young women in a video posted to YouTube Channel TERF Talk Downunder.
“On the one hand we have this huge debate in the political arena about sexual harassment in the workplace and in Parliament House and so on, and on the other, we’re just completely opening the door,” she said.
In an interview with Benjamin A Boyce at the end of 2020, Deves spoke disparagingly about the consequences of a 2020 Victorian law that banned conversion therapy and other practices meant to change or suppress a person’s gender identity.
“You could get out of a sticky divorce settlement by saying you weren’t supported in this and you don’t have to give half your earnings or whatever, I mean you could really game this,” Boyce said.
“Oh absolutely,” Deves responded.
She also agreed with Boyce when he says that trans teens would transition to “completely demolish their parents or enact vengeance on their family.”
Deves has also made disparaging comments about women in sport, including misgendering intersex woman Caster Semenya as a “he” when calling for her exclusion from women’s running events, and claiming that the presence of trans swimmer Lia Thomas in the change rooms was “state sanctioned sexual abuse” in an interview just a month ago.
Deves’ interviews also give more insight into her political intentions. She told Boyce that she had voted for every political party and was political homeless”. She lamented that politicians criticising trans rights were often “divisive, conservative figures.”
“This is my great interest, fighting against gender identity ideology,” she said.
Despite intensifying pressure, Morrison as recently as Saturday said that he still supported Deves’ candidacy.
Archives of 6,000 tweets deleted by Deves can be found here. Spot anything interesting? Get in touch at cwilson@crikey.com.au.
My prior comment wasn’t especially helpful and apart from anything was more tediously long and garbled than usual even for me, so the Mods are probably value-adding by turfing it. I’ll try again: I have some skin in this game and like all parents in particular have pretty strong, and mixed feelings about the issues. TBH I think that any certitudes here are in themselves amber flags. For me, Keira Bell’s ongoing legal engagement with the Tavistock and Porter NHS Foundation Trust is a very useful case to follow – for both camps. It’s complex and ongoing through the UK legal system, which for all its clunkiness might turn out to be the least-worst mechanism by which to sensitively but thoroughly look at every perspective.
The trans lobby objects to words like ‘mutilation’ and that’s fair enough – but that is exactly how a very small minority of detransitioning trans come to regard their reassignment surgery themselves. The numbers aren’t entirely clear and it’s early days but somewhere b/w 1-5% seems the current best guesstimate. One survey identifies around 240 detransitions of which an even smaller number – low double digits – were/are at this point permanent, and the expressed level of regret seems varied, too. So yes it’s a small number, but is early…and if your child is a Keira Bell, then the ‘stat’ is as far as you’re concerned 100%, and extreme. So it doesn’t help to attack parents/feminist simply giving voice to such ‘worst fears’. They’re rare – or seem so, at this early stage – but they can eventuate. The issue of consent is one that has to reconcile oft-competing child, parental, clinical in loco parentis and State concerns and imperatives. And – this is where the trans lobby goes not just MIA, but aggressively censoring – consent has to include embracing responsibility for consequences, including negative ones like post-operative regrets, complications and so on.
Another plain fact in this debate we ought to be allowed to talk about sceptically without being accused of transphobia is the clinically startling increase in gender dystophia case numbers, particularly of pubescent girls wanting to transition to men. It’s just another fact, and from a Feminist and Lgbtqi PoV – ie emphasis on the L – surely is a legitimate concern. Maybe many adolescent girls who think lately they are boys are simply…lesbians. It’s very hard to ignore the occasional hints of homophobia and even misogyny that hover around these discussions. Certainly the nastier fringe attacks on conservative women (Deves here) and ‘TERFs’ are drenched in misogynistic and homophobic hate.
And you can’t escape the reality that even though yes the issue is relatively niche and rare, allowing a Lia Thomas to compete for elite female sporting primacy does require discriminatory disadvantage against an entire (largest) gender cohort – biological women – for the sake of a very small different cohort, trans women. Yes, I do think the two cohorts are different genders, and no, I just don’t see the absolutist need to assimilate/equate the two, from any requisite, State or organisational mandated ‘loving, inclusion and acceptance’ PoV. Whatever your gender, it doesn’t automatically entitle you to get everything you ‘want’. I’ll never win an Olympic swimming gold medal, either. That doesn’t mean I’m being oppressed, excluded or hated by society or by elite swimming. It just means I can’t swim as fast as my gender cohort elites.
These three elements aside, the ferocity and vehemence with which parts at least of the trans lobby attack feminists like Deves – or JK Rowling, or Camille Paglia, or Germaine Greer – when they diverge from the received woke orthodoxies is to me compelling reason enough for hearing what they have to say.
Chrs, Crikey. Excuse the earlier effort.
Bell has also permitted a very active old school homosexual conversion therapy advocate (Mary E. McAlister) to speak on her behalf within the American legal system: https://healthliberationnow.com/2021/09/26/when-ex-trans-worlds-collide/#The_Petitioners_Who_Are_They_and_What_Are_Their_Motivations
For all that she pushes the line that gender transition is a kind of conversion therapy, nothing I’ve seen from her shows any engagement with how gay conversion therapist operate and conceive of their work in the current moment. Short version, they increasingly spotlight and exploit detransition narratives. Note how the CT advocacy organisation the International Federation for Therapeutic and Counselling Choice positions them alongside ex-gays on the current iteration of their website – https://iftcc.org/ – and how its members differentiate, or more accurately don’t differentiate, between homosexual and trans patients: https://twitter.com/Chican3ry/status/1463293728538382341
apols, ‘dysphoria’ not ‘dystopia’. Spell check, am v. sorry for the unfortunate clunk.
I agree that there is discussion around certain issues needed, in particular whether teens should be allowed to transition without getting counselling. I think the view that they don’t need counselling is nonsensical and contrary to common practice where other life changing decisions are involved ie having breasts removed to lessen the chance of getting breast cancer. I think there are quite a few societal issues that could do with decent and respectful discussion with all sides involved, issues like abortion. But it’s never going to happen when the rabid right are prosecuting their cultural wars because the second that the people they are against appear to give ground by even admitting the need for discussion they claim they’ve ‘won’ the discussion and that they were right all along.
And linking genuine concerns about how transitioning happens and how teenagers decide they want to transition with nonsensical arguments about toilets and prisons means that no-one who genuinely has concerns for the trans community will ever be involved in those discussions. If Deves and her ilk want to be taken seriously then they should take the topic seriously. They know that the toilets argument fires people up so they use it. They don’t deserve our consideration because they don’t give consideration. The murder and abuse of trans people is incredibly high, and it seems that people like Deves have no problems fanning that particular flame. So until people like her are out of the discussion entirely, I cannot imagine any trans person who cares for their safety being involved.
Re your claim that women’s spces are not at risk – did you follow the Graun‘s headfirst plunge into the Wi Spa incident in LA’s Koreatown (24 June,2021)?
“… a woman claimed on Instagram that a Korean spa in Los Angeles had allowed a “man” to expose himself to women and girls in the women’s section.”
The two activist journos. wrote that these were “…unsubstantiated allegations..about a “man” who was naked in front of women and girls.”
On 3 September, 2021 the same ‘journos’ wrote, without apology.
“The LA police department (LAPD) announced late on Thursday that it had put out an arrest warrant for Darren Merager,52, who is facing five felony counts of indecent exposure at Wi Spa in the Koreatown neighborhood…Police said Merager has been a registered sex offender since 2006 and has a history of previous indecent exposure charges. Merager was convicted of indecent exposure in LA in 2002 and 2003, and pleaded not guilty to seven counts of indecent exposure in an alleged December 2018 case, according to court records…including in women’s toilets & changing areas, including a public swimming pool, park and beach.”
So he was a flasher, but was he trans?
He claimed that he was a women which is the only requirement these days in the UK, USA & this country – dissent is not permitted.
Transwomen are male all the way down to the cellular level and the great majority, 70%+, claiming that status retain male genitalia.
Well, he can only claim to be a woman until he comes out as a man.
What is the problem? Did the man masturbate or was he just naked? Is this a problem?
I find all this to be unnecessary and hurtful to those having to cope with transition.
Give it a rest. It doesn’t affect you so keep out of it. Toilets? Bathhouses? Sexual predators?
Grow up.
How can you seriously ask, about a bloke in a women and girls’s space “…was he just naked? Is this a problem?” yet don’t wonder what right he had to be in there?
Look, occasionally, even far away, a flasher does cause a bit of distress to women. How he wangled his way in is not really the issue, but it’s not worth fighting an Australian election on.
Ever heard of eternal verities?
That 0.0004% of the population terrifies some people for some reason.
Source?
For a start, I made no mention in any of my posts about ‘safe spaces’ for women. You made that up. I talked about toilets and prisons. It looks like you just went and googled to see if you could find something about men supposedly posing as women so you could make your pointless comment.
I went and read about it. That’s a murky little affair. They did not just ‘claim’ they were a woman. They have a drivers licence which says so, which was apparently produced to the people at the desk when they entered. What happened after that is not very clear. They have since been charged and I guess that the forthcoming court case might make things a bit clearer. Both sides in this have behaved disgracefully. As one trans woman who has been going to the spa for some years said, you would think that Merager would just change in a cubicle. At any rate, it would appear it is not as simple as a male dressing as a woman in order to flash women in a women only space.
I note with some juvenile amusement that the owner of the spa in question is called David Whang.
I have a feeling that what we might see a spate of is nasty little right wing men testing the boundaries and saying they are women to try and get into women only spaces. Because I really can’t see this becoming a big thing otherwise. If it was, it would have happened a lot more often. Women’s only spaces have been around for a long time. If men posing as women to get in was a big thing I’m sure we’d know about it. As I said before, if a male wants to abuse a woman, they can easily do it. It would actually be a lot harder to do it in a women only space, as there are usually lots of women around, and women aren’t helpless.
I think there is a discussion to be had about gender and how it manifests itself. Like I said earlier, how do people like you want to police this? Because this person had a driver’s licence. Do you want people to do dick checks at the door? The photos I’ve seen of feminist anti trans events have a lot of women involved who could, quite frankly, be taken for men if appearance is the way we are judging gender. I’m going to bet a lot of them have had trouble with that for most of their adult life. I wonder how they would like to see women only spaces policed. I wonder if they’ve even thought about it.
Why the constant catiness about other women’s appearance?
Either you find they are too pretty or not pretty enough “…feminist anti trans events have a lot of women involved who could, quite frankly, be taken for men…“.
That is really low, petty & pathetic.
Because looks are gender identifiers. I’m not commenting on how those women I am talking about look because I care one way or the other. I’m commenting because they are the ones who want to somehow be able to identify women they say aren’t women. And I’m asking how, when they are perfect examples of how you can’t identify women by how they look. Maybe if you got off your nasty little picky high horse and took two seconds to stop being a twot you might actually understand the point. But I won’t hold my breath. You’ve never bothered before.
Your “…looks are gender identifiers.” perfectly encapsulated the shallow, narcissistic, misogynist essence of the trans delusion – that it’s all about dress-up, usually as mummy.
Well done.
Jesus. You are really ignorant.
“the shallow, narcissistic, misogynist essence of the trans delusion – that it’s all about dress-up”
So, every transwoman is “dressing up”?
May I respectfully ask how many transwomen you know?
Didn’t realise deves was a feminist
The most important factor is “Captains Pick” as is the PMs picks all seem to have the same twisted view of the world as seen by the Pentacostal Magic Pudding club
If you truly think that’s the ‘most important factor’ in the Deves/trans conversation then I’d say you have very little of use to add to it, Eric. And you’re unlikely to be a genuine supporter of the trans community at all.
Comments like yours help nothing and no one with any real stake in this issue. Chrs.
Read all your comments, Jack.
May I ask, as I have asked others, respectfully – how many people who are transitioning, have transitioned or are considering transitioning do you know?
Four. One pretty close, and at the fairly crucial stage of transition. Others from the wider queer/community I regard as friends. (Crikerians have a truly quaint habit of making all sorts of old-fashioned personal assumptions about us ‘white old bloke patriarchal oppressors’, PW! )
May I sidestep further amplification? This is a super hard issue as you doubtless know and this is a public site, where I post under my real name. At core they are desperately singular, personal and private matters and family stresses are complex enough to navigate anyway.
I’m in best good faith, I promise you, as are every single one of my comments. We’re all just trying to feel our way through this with minimal hurt, harm and hate. Chrs.
PS…and I hope it goes without saying that it actually doesn’t matter a bit, btwPercy. Everyone has equal skin in this issue, right.
Perkins, soz.
Whom do you prefer singing your theme song – the Platters or Freddie Mercury?
Ah, not a real name, then. OK, dumb catphished me I guess. 🙁
As an interesting estimate of the number of detransitioners, I occasionally check out the detransitioner support group on reddit. Currently it’s about 10% the size of the “trans” subreddit (and a little less than 10% of “ftm” and “mtf” added), and growing at about 1000 a month. So I think that 10% is a pretty reasonable estimate of the size of the detransitioned group, compared to transitioned.
Of course, that is in context of there being very little support for detransitioners in the community, or from the doctors that transitioned them in the first place, and of the massive rise of child transition being a very recent movement. I personally expect that within 10 or 15 years the majority of transitioned children will be attempting to detransition. As a matter of policy I’d support any politician who would vote in favour of holding gender clinics to a much higher standard so as to filter out future-detransitioners, even if they are a Liberal! And even if they did use bad language once. Policy is more important.
Yeah, that’s a really important and in fact vital evolution now needed. It’s one absolutely not coming from – and NOT to be allowed to be twisted in discussion of it, thus – from any Cult War bogeyman place of assertions that these clinics are corrupting, conniving, gender-bender-agenda hotbeds of exploitation. There is no doubt a wide range of expert motivations/imperatives propelling this burgeoning sector – it’s just a pragmatic truth for example to acknowledge that places like Tavistock have to be financially sustainable – but I don’t for a second accept the nastier attacks on perojative lines. By and large I’m confident accepting that these are good and loving and highly sophisticated centres of expert, best-practice care, with clinicians busting a gut to help navigate individuals case-by-case to the best possible place for them.
But it’s critical to vastly improve both the (anonymised, obviously, in the standard medical stats way) clinical transparency of transitional, case-by-case reality as each actually unfolds, not as we’d ‘wish it to’; and especially (actually as a key/symbiotic part of that first bit), to rigorously codify and enforce the follow-up legal/clinical/outcome in-loco parentis obligations if clinics. Possibly – given the profound dynamicism of gender identity – even in some cases over (up to) a post-transition lifetime. This is already the case in all major surgical activity, and an awful lot of non-physical clinical care/intervention too.
At the moment the ‘cutting-edge’ end of this issue is still drenched in moral hazard – experts doing their expert thing with great expertise, tender care and emotional adroitness…but individuals, families, lobby groups then – too often, anyway (maybe?) – being left to manage ‘less-good’ outcomes, certainly longer term. As with all moral hazard in expert fields, the main reason you want to eradicate is of course simply because we know that when experts truly do become complicit in all possible consequences of their expertise, there is nothing that focuses and self-improves the application if that expertise more efficiently and thoroughly. It can’t be anything but a good thing for the trans community and anyone with a stake in it – which ideally is us all – to know that if transition doesn’t pan out as well as they’d expected/hoped, they’ll remain absolutely in the best expert hands until it does. Or as best as prices possible.
Your anecdotal numbers are interesting, Emma, but like most of the more subjective ‘stats’ swirling all over this issue/conversation, they demand ruthless scepticism, too. We’re still not sure of most of the transition numbers, or what they actually tell us, beyond a few clear-cut ones like (maybe) the rise in transition ‘starts’ among adolescent girls, say. Or…maybe. That there remains such unclarity regarding hard detransition data is especially unsurprisingly, given a) these early days but b) I think more pertinently also that detransition itself isn’t any easily-measurable, yin/yang, one-size or even one-way/permanent number ‘fits’ all. There are infinite degrees of gender ‘detransition’, ntm ‘regret’, ‘bespoke tweaking’, and plain old contrariness, etc…and ultimately, as I said in earlier posts, every individual’s ‘stat’ is kind of…100%.
Again, this is absolutely the reason for imposing an uncompromising obligation for case-by-case, individual follow-up and ‘in loco parentis’ clinical care from the experts. And tbh I wouldn’t expect – can’t see why – anyone in the gender transition clinical fraternity would possibly have any issues with that. The best ones doubtless already assume just that. It’s a pretty standard professional/clinical application of basic Hippocratic principles. Right?
Chrs Emma, it’s a very important strand in this, I think. Prolly can’t afford to sidestep it any more just from a legal liability PoV, hence processes like the Tavistock case o/s, I guess.
PS soz, to clarify Emma: ‘This is already the case in all OTHER major
surgical activity, and an awful lot of OTHER non-physical clinical care/intervention, too.’
And ‘ Or as best as IS possible.’ Sorry, another stupid spellcheck (?!) clunk.
Why is this woman so fixated on trans-gender females?
Should the police unit that stalked the lawyer for some bikies and arrested the “Friendly Jordies” journalist be notified of her danger to people quietly going along with their lives?
Now I know why Scummo has earned his name!
Encouraging people to harass the vulnerable, is bad enough.
To do it to dog whistle and attract the haters and the nutters, is to invite the same sort of violence that we have seen in the UK.
Be warned Scummo, if anything happens this will be hung around your neck like a dead and rotting chook.
You will not be welcome, anywhere!
It reminds me of the cabinet leak of some years ago, when he suggested an anti-Muslim scare campaign might play well.
It worked against Towke so he thought the Cabinet should be appraised of such a brilliant tactic.
Ha, you think he’d take responsibility for that?
Anyone who does not think that transactivism is a problem hasn’t been paying attention.
It is not about people being free to choose how they live but the demand that society change to accommodate their delusions.
Ten years ago gender dysphoria was exceedingly rare and was categorised as a mental disorder; sufferers were repelled by the sexual aspects of their own bodies.
Some people become alienated from, say, their left arms and beg doctors to cut them off.
In the UK, the population signing up for sexual ‘reassignment’ has risen 4,400 per cent between 2010 and 2018, the majority of those referred for gender treatment are now adolescent girls.
4400 percent? What? Did it rise from 1 person to 20 or something?
I noticed you ignored the actual numbers.
BTW.. “some people” also commit suicide.. and in far far greater numbers than anyone asking doctors to cut their friggin’ arm off. Get some perspective. You’re as bad as Morrison’s “gender whisperers” harmful comments.
Grow up and give it a rest. You’re not helping.
You can look it up yourself, after you’ve done a quick course in remedial arithmetic, as links freak the madBot.
Female Minors are Now 74% of Patients at the Tavistock Gender Clinic in Britain – The Times 2/7/2019
New figures from the Tavistock gender clinic in Britain have been released and show that 74% of their minor patients are females. This is up from 6% last year.
Gender clinics show large increases of female teens & young adults with gender dysphoria. Plastic surgeons report they are doing many more FtM & non-binary surgeries. Social contagion is a likely factor.
Between 2010-2018, the referral rates for under 16yrs old to the (for profit) Tavistock clinic rose from single figures to 1,630 for girls and 590 for boys.
In 2018-19 there were 3,398 referrals under 18yrs old.
The number of 13-year-olds seeking treatment rose by 30% in a year to 331.
In 2010-11, 43% of patients were girls and by 2015 they were 58%. In 2019 the equalities minister, Penny Mordaunt, ordered a review into the surge in girls seeking transition. She said “It’s vital that we look into the surge in girls wanting to change gender”
PS: re: Bell, for those unfamiliar. She began on puberty-blockers at 16, and then proceeded along a fairly typical clinical transition path including hormone treatments, lifestyle transition, and then a double mastectomy – albeit as an adult, at 20. Her argument now – she ‘took over’ as complainant in an existing consent case being argued by the mum of a 15 year-old at the start of that same transition journey – is that she (ie any minor) wasn’t/isn’t capable of true consent for that first step, rendering the subsequent path ‘non-consenting’ in entirety. A path which, she argues, became/becomes a kind of dynamically-reinforcing, outcome-loading one (if not a ‘fait accompli’), given the emotional vulnerability to circumstances and immediate environment of adolescence. It’s not ‘transphobic’ to be anxious about the very fine lines between support, advocacy, enablement and an active steering towards a particular choice. (As a parent, that applies to pretty much every aspect of adolescence, just by the way, whether it’s gateway drug use, sexual experimentation, physical risk-taking, education, or keeping your fanned room tidy.)
The stats regarding ongoing transition just don’t support that non-consensual ‘slippery slope’ proposition as a legally tenable fact/a human universal (except, again, that if you’re child is a Keira Bell, well, manifestly they might as well.) One study I saw for example puts the numbers of fully completed v interrupted/ceased transition at roughly 50/50, suggesting that taking that first step is just that: ‘a’ step, on a complicated personal journey that may or may not continue all the way through radical surgery to a good, sustainable outcome. The first legal ruling had agreed that Bell wasn’t truly able to consent to that first step, anyway, because the (potential) later step consequences, such as of that surgery, weren’t truly factored into it. That was unsurprisingly overturned on appeal; but Bell is appealing that ruling. Again, in her case, it ‘was’ the first part in a slippery slope she now does regret, and does have to reconcile. So those who argue we simply can’t these conversations without being transphobic are, too, ignoring the best interests of at least some of our (currently or future) potentially trans kids.
What the case really highlights to me is the real risks of over-politicising this issue – that is, trying to impose a ‘universal’ collective ‘cause’ or set of outcome/management criteria – including universally resistant or opposing ones – on what should only ever be treated on a singular, by-case individual basis, by expert clinicians, sure…but parents and kids picking their singular paths very personally through it. The clinicians – and this is a very new discipline – assure us that this is precisely how they try to manage each case, and that’s often true. But far too often they, too, go MIA when the outcomes aren’t such positive advertisements for their own simplified assertions. Everyone wants the best outcome for every gender-uncertain child, and there is no shortage of proud authors of the happiest ones . But who will take responsibility when the outcomes of our best intentions are, however unintentionally so, not happy?
And are we even allowed to talk about them, without being abused as the hateful authors of those unhappy ourselves? It seems to that responses to the likes of Deves suggests…not. And that polarised rigidity of good/badthinking makes the trans ‘movement’ to me something of a category error, however sympathetic I am to the better advocates. You can’t make a genuine rainbow picture of gender fluidity issues if you’re only allowed black and white to work with. So I just see this as a very, very different ‘cause’ to other genuinely collective, cohort-wide equality/justice campaigns, such as is inherent in feminist, gay or racial rights/equality movements, for example. Also, I just refuse to have a bar of any trans so-called advocate or supporter who thinks the uglier excesses of this debate from ‘their’ side are more justified and less repulsive than the equivalent excesses of their opponents. To attack a JK Rowling as a transphobic hater who puts trans kids at risk of suicide…sorry, whatever else you are, you’re no more a trans kids’ advocate than those who would send any gender non-confirming youngster straight to hell. Same hateful zealotry, different vocabulary is all.
This is all just what I think, anyway. It’s a very complex issue, and it’s dynamic. Thanks as always for the fair say, Crikey.
At least Crikey allows Deves a forum for her obsessively narrow views,
https://uat.crikey.com.au/2021/07/22/allowing-male-born-competitors-excludes-women/
as well as a forum to criticise them.
Not much risk of getting both sides of the argument at NewsCorp and, alas, even Nine and its once rather good print organs.
Thanks for that link. It passed me by at the time as sport doesn’t interest me. It was interesting to see the thoughtful and measured comments below, in contrast to here. A sign of how the issue is being weaponised for political purposes I fear.