A girl footballer with suspected autism is facing a ban of up to 12 matches for asking an adult “bearded” transgender opponent: “Are you a man?” The Telegraph has the details.
In the latest case to raise major questions about the Football Association’s ongoing failure to ban those born male from the women’s game, the 17 year-old has been left distraught at being charged by her county FA over a remark made during a match against a trans-inclusive club.
She was charged last month with saying, “Are you a man?”, “That’s a man”, “Don’t come here again”, or similar comments during what was a pre-season friendly back in July.
In documents seen by Telegraph Sport, the girl admits asking a player she describes as having “a beard”, “Are you a man?” She also admits asking the referee for guidance about the player’s eligibility to participate in women’s football “given my concern for my safety after already suffering a number of overly physical challenges”.
But she has denied doing so constituted transphobia or that she made any comments that could be construed as such, while Telegraph Sport understands the referee also heard nothing he deemed to be discriminatory.
The girl was charged after the opposition club lodged a complaint via Kick It Out, English football’s anti-discrimination watchdog, which included testimony from the trans player and that team’s captain accusing her of persistent transphobia.
She faces a six-to-12-match ban if found guilty during a hearing later this month and she and her mother have decided to speak out about her plight because they feel they have been left with no choice.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Transgender teachers must be allowed to use the same showers and lavatories as female colleagues, schools have been told in training from the National Governance Association (NGA). School governors are informed that staff should be given access to the bathroom “available to other members of their newly acquired gender”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I despair for humanity and for society. The lunatics making up these policies *must* have the dismantling of society in their sights, because that is where this is all heading.
I’m 56 now and by this time next year hope to be retired altogether. I’ve already once retired from the police, but I’m still working. Once I’ve stopped working, I intend to do my very best to seal myself off from the outside world. I won’t want to know what’s going on in the world because I will already know that it will be mental and bloody stupid. Whenever I interact with people, I will talk like human beings should talk, and if that offends anyone, I will simply tell them to grow a spine.
I don’t know where you work now but generally in the private sector retirement at 56-57 is impossible. Good luck to you personally but the country cannot afford to pay people for no work for 30-40 years.
I retired at 50 so I could enjoy life before my physical deterioration started. I highly recommend this as I’ve had lots of fun between the ages of 50 and the normal retirement age of 65+
I retired 24 years ago at 52 after two careers. University to read Dentistry (got kicked out). HM Forces (17 years) then City. My mum brought me up solo whilst working looms in the mill then became a clippie on the buses. A Boomer, I don’t doubt the route I took would be all but unachievable now.
Perhaps by “retirement” he meant being financially independent….?
If by “retirement” he meant merely “in receipt of and surviving solely on a state-funded pension”, then yes, I agree, at 56-57 that would not be feasible. Not for him nor the taxpayer.
I appreciate that most people define “retirement” as the latter, but I rather suspect he meant the former, and good on him. We should all aim to be financially independent as soon as possible.
On point of fact: when your yearly costs can be met with 4% of your net worth, you’re free.
So, it’s all about your costs. Which you control. Along with the only other thing you can control – your emotions
That’s interesting about the 4% of net worth figure. I’m going to look that up.
Unless the swines in government take it away from me, I will have my police pension. It’s not enough for me to live on at the moment as I have high mortgage payments. I have to work for now. If all goes to plan, however, my girlfriend and I will buy together and either be mortgage-free or have a relatively small one which we will pay off over a small number of years. Between us we should be comfortable and not *need* to work. We may yet decide to work, but it will be on our terms.
Additionally, in 10 years time we will receive state pension, again, swines in government dependant. We should do okay, fortune willing.
Sorry to distract from the main topic.
Welcome to FI
What has this to do with the subject matter?, sounds like bragging to me?.
It wasn’t bragging. Nothing of the kind. It was my despair at society.
They can’t afford it? Is that because they squander half the tax revenue on mollycoddling illegal migrants, recruiting DEI training staff, teaching kids about White PriviledgeTM, Net Zero and fire-hosing the NHS with cash that all makes its way into the pockets of senior management?
Humanity is not the problem. We are up against those that hate humanity and wish to destroy anything that is good. There are many in positions of authority that hold abominable views similar to that below.
“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man”
Club of Rome
Perhaps we will all have to make a stand, somehow, for humanity.
“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.”
Thomas Sowell
Si vis pacem, para bellum…
The physical differences between human beings with an xx chromosome make up and those with an xy chromosome make up are so large and significant that this difference must be acknowledged in any activity where physical prowess and strength are key factors.
If our society now says you can change gender then so be it we need to differentiate between social gender differences (men/woman) which can change and people with xx chromosomes and people with xy chromosomes where the difference must be acknowledged and recognised as immutable for the purpose of participating in physical activities.
It beggars belief that I even have to say this, most people throughout history would be amazed that we have got ourselves into the ridiculous pickle of having to even discuss the question as to whether a person with xy chromosomes can take part in a tough physical activity with people who have an xx chromosome make up.
Madness. This is dangerous for young girls.
Not that I wish it to happen but it’s going to take a serious injury to some poor girl to make people see sense. (maybe)
It’s already happened. A girl playing hockey had her leg shattered by a bloke.
The collapse of our civilisation seems to be accelerating.
Uncle Vladimir ‘The Impaler’ Putin must be laughing his hairy Russian a*se off at our stupidity.
I wonder why multi-tier, gimme-free-gear, absolutely-not-queer, never-seen-Lord-Alibaba’s-rear Keir thinks about this given his inability to say what a woman is?
More cowardly officials who are terrified of being called names by political activists. Why don’t you all grow a spine you pathetic specimens of humanity, while hiding behind closed doors and policy documents.
The normal response of the madleft is diversion by making accusations of heresy: “transphobe!”, “bigot!”, “racist!”, etc.
I feel impelled to observe, yet again, that the party in office the past 14 years encouraged, financed and facilitated this sort of nonesence.
Because they were essentially of the left too. Or were unable to prevent the left in the civil service from doing what it wanted.
Do we have to always add something to the effect that our victim is “autistic”. Isn’t everyone nowadays?
Yeah it’s not overly relevant. Autistic people seem generally to be a bit more direct when speaking, and less worried about what other people think. But whoever is asking the question “are you a man” it’s a legitimate question. Offence is taken, not given.
Agree completely
It’s a way of implying that the problem is the person who points out the blooming obvious.
I felt it was thrown in as a sort of “she can’t help it” method of excusing the truth having been spoken. It should be applauded that she spoke the truth.
Possibly hedging their bets a bit I’d say – fight fire with fire
My friend compiles the league tables for the local pool group. There is a cup for the best male player and the best female player. There are a number of ladyboys who play for their local pub and it was pointed out that they were included in the female group.
Apoll of all the pubs was taken to see if these ladyboys should be included in the womens grouping – a firm response of ‘NO’ was stated by all the pubs so now they are included in the mens grouping. No complaints about this were received from the ladyboys involved.
Tis all common sense really methinks.
If it has a Willy, it’s a Bloke. If it doesn’t have a Willy, it ain’t a Bloke. Seriously Simple. Anything else is psychology. From a purely Scientific point of view, there are no in-betweens. I totally agree, anyone should be free to wear a dress, heels or whatever – I’ve certainly tried it and can walk wonderfully in high heels. However, you won’t find this bearded 63-year-old claiming he is Rita.
Horribly disturbing. Where has the Britain of my early days gone? The dystopian sci-fi films, the ‘fantasy’ novels… all were right.
I’m so sorry for the poor girl. She’s just one step away from being banged up for 31 months by the likes of the very nasty, extreme Left and highly prejudiced Judge Inman!