Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:07 pm CEB, the thing I found ridiculous was specifically your confident diagnosis of a particular DSD. It may well be she does have a DSD, it may even be the one you have suggested but I find it bizarre that you would think your research qualifies you to do that.

I also find your vitriol towards the people involved and anyone who may disagree with you jnteresting, the similarities with people who espouse conspiracy theories are striking. That is not the same as saying you are following a conspiracy theory, just that the way this seems to have taken over your life and become such a core belief is similar to those who are caught up in conspiracy theories.

I don't actually disagree that their should be eligibility testing, or that people should be stopped from competing if they have an unfair advantage. That point can be made quite easily without resorting to abuse.

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:27 pm

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:07 pm CEB, the thing I found ridiculous was specifically your confident diagnosis of a particular DSD. It may well be she does have a DSD, it may even be the one you have suggested but I find it bizarre that you would think your research qualifies you to do that.

I also find your vitriol towards the people involved and anyone who may disagree with you jnteresting, the similarities with people who espouse conspiracy theories are striking. That is not the same as saying you are following a conspiracy theory, just that the way this seems to have taken over your life and become such a core belief is similar to those who are caught up in conspiracy theories.

I don't actually disagree that their should be eligibility testing, or that people should be stopped from competing if they have an unfair advantage. That point can be made quite easily without resorting to abuse.

Excellent back-pedalling.

“It may well be she does have a DSD”

He does.

“I find it bizarre to think your research qualifies you to do that”

I don’t; the combination of the undisputed facts plus the hard work and excellent communication by sports scientists and biologists who have discussed this have prepared me to be able to put forward a much clearer, much more likely version of events than existed on this forum before I did so. My own certainty is not something I expect others to adopt

“Vitriol for those who disagree”

I don’t have vitriol for disagreement. I reserve that for people who fail to actually engage in discussion and yet still confidently act as if their position is the ethical one to take. Especially when that goes in tandem with suspicion of the motives of trying to better understand the issue.

“that this has taken over your life”

Being knowledgable about something does not = obsession. My knowledge on this wider subject stems from quite how many people I know were confidently advocating for a cause that struck me as ethically flawed and intellectually incoherent. I could not in good conscience lend my support to that cause, and was invited to “educate myself”. I did so, with the intention of alleviating my doubts. My doubts were not alleviated, and I believe it to be a scandal. A scandal about which I’m informed enough to be able to discuss in depth. Horrific!


“I don’t actually disagree that there should be eligibility testing”


Then perhaps instead of “how dare you inform yourself about what might be happening here! Obsessed!”, your response to this thread might have been better framed as “CEB I know we’ve fallen out on this, but youre not wrong to suggest that the sex of this boxer is legitimately in question. I won’t take your opinion about the boxer’s condition at face value, but we can all agree that the IOC needs to actually investigate here, because if you’re right, it’s a scandal”


Instead, not at all contributing to the vitriol, you suggested that I would baselessly question the sex of Serena Williams, conveniently disregarding that there is a *legitimate* reason to believe that Khelif is male, and that that reason is not “doesn’t look feminine”


Remember; you posted dismissive vitriol to those questioning some tenets of trans activism (which is of course pertinent to this discussion) long before I did, and when I first rejoined this board, you never, ever treated a single point I made on this issue as if it was made in good faith.
At least MB Gold came out and accused me of “drifting far right” - your insulting dismissal of the act of actually educating myself about a controversial subject, without ever, ever, discussing *any* aspect of it with me, is how you earned vitriol .

The Reverend wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:55 pm

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:27 pm

Mick McQuaid wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 5:07 pm CEB, the thing I found ridiculous was specifically your confident diagnosis of a particular DSD. It may well be she does have a DSD, it may even be the one you have suggested but I find it bizarre that you would think your research qualifies you to do that.

I also find your vitriol towards the people involved and anyone who may disagree with you jnteresting, the similarities with people who espouse conspiracy theories are striking. That is not the same as saying you are following a conspiracy theory, just that the way this seems to have taken over your life and become such a core belief is similar to those who are caught up in conspiracy theories.

I don't actually disagree that their should be eligibility testing, or that people should be stopped from competing if they have an unfair advantage. That point can be made quite easily without resorting to abuse.

Excellent back-pedalling.

“It may well be she does have a DSD”

He does.

“I find it bizarre to think your research qualifies you to do that”

I don’t; the combination of the undisputed facts plus the hard work and excellent communication by sports scientists and biologists who have discussed this have prepared me to be able to put forward a much clearer, much more likely version of events than existed on this forum before I did so. My own certainty is not something I expect others to adopt

“Vitriol for those who disagree”

I don’t have vitriol for disagreement. I reserve that for people who fail to actually engage in discussion and yet still confidently act as if their position is the ethical one to take. Especially when that goes in tandem with suspicion of the motives of trying to better understand the issue.

“that this has taken over your life”

Being knowledgable about something does not = obsession. My knowledge on this wider subject stems from quite how many people I know were confidently advocating for a cause that struck me as ethically flawed and intellectually incoherent. I could not in good conscience lend my support to that cause, and was invited to “educate myself”. I did so, with the intention of alleviating my doubts. My doubts were not alleviated, and I believe it to be a scandal. A scandal about which I’m informed enough to be able to discuss in depth. Horrific!


“I don’t actually disagree that there should be eligibility testing”


Then perhaps instead of “how dare you inform yourself about what might be happening here! Obsessed!”, your response to this thread might have been better framed as “CEB I know we’ve fallen out on this, but youre not wrong to suggest that the sex of this boxer is legitimately in question. I won’t take your opinion about the boxer’s condition at face value, but we can all agree that the IOC needs to actually investigate here, because if you’re right, it’s a scandal”


Instead, not at all contributing to the vitriol, you suggested that I would baselessly question the sex of Serena Williams, conveniently disregarding that there is a *legitimate* reason to believe that Khelif is male, and that that reason is not “doesn’t look feminine”


Remember; you posted dismissive vitriol to those questioning some tenets of trans activism (which is of course pertinent to this discussion) long before I did, and when I first rejoined this board, you never, ever treated a single point I made on this issue as if it was made in good faith.
At least MB Gold came out and accused me of “drifting far right” - your insulting dismissal of the act of actually educating myself about a controversial subject, without ever, ever, discussing *any* aspect of it with me, is how you earned vitriol .

Putting your obsession with this topic aside - which in itself is quite odd - what is especially bizarre is that you feel that the message board of a league 1 football club is the place to write interminable paragraphs about it. You’re so obsessed with this topic that you overturned your own flounce (which I believe was some sort of protest on ethical grounds) to re-register for this site to argue with people about it.

You’re basically a pound shop version of that bloke who wrote Father Ted who rants and raves about this all day everyday, but even he chooses to do it on Twitter rather than the message board of a 3rd tier football club.

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 6:22 pm I certainly think it’s strange to post on a thread you have no interest in, to insult someone you regularly accuse of harassing you, repeating an assertion of obsession despite mentioning me 37 times on a thread about Cole Palmer which you derailed when I wasn’t even here.

Now get back in your box you tedious little bellend

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 6:52 pm How curious

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2024 7:12 pm Agree. Edited my posts accordingly. My own fault, and undermined a thread I want to keep on track. Stupid of me