-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
Latest posts...
-
0
Cricket Authorities Ban on Transgender Women in Female Competitions Following Legal Ruling
Cricket Authorities Enforce Ban on Transgender Women in Female Competitions Following Legal Ruling Transgender women have been officially barred from participating in female cricket competitions in England and Wales, following a decisive move by the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB). The ruling, effective immediately, comes in response to a recent Supreme Court decision that redefined the legal understanding of "woman" and "sex" under the UK Equality Act 2010, asserting that these terms refer exclusively to biological sex. The ECB stated that “only those whose biological sex is female will be eligible to play in women’s cricket and girls’ cricket matches.” While transgender women and girls are no longer permitted in these categories, they will still be eligible to compete in open and mixed-gender cricket matches. The board explained that its decision was shaped by new legal advice following last month’s ruling, which it described as having a significant bearing on how equality law must now be interpreted within sport. “Given the new advice received about the impact of the Supreme Court ruling, we believe the changes announced today are necessary,” the ECB said in its statement. Despite the exclusion, the board reiterated its commitment to inclusivity and to providing ongoing support to those affected by the new regulations. “Our regulations have always aimed to ensure cricket is as inclusive a sport as possible,” the statement read. The ruling by the UK Supreme Court marked a significant shift in the legal landscape. In a unanimous decision, the court concluded that “a woman” and “sex” under the Equality Act 2010 must be interpreted as meaning “a biological woman and biological sex.” This interpretation has had wide-reaching implications across UK sports, prompting governing bodies to reevaluate their inclusion policies. The ECB acknowledged the emotional and personal impact the new policy would have on transgender players but emphasized that it will work closely with recreational cricket organizations to navigate the transition. “We understand this decision will have a significant impact on transgender women and girls. We are committed to supporting people impacted by this change,” it stated. The cricket board also took the opportunity to underline its stance against prejudice, saying that “abuse and discrimination have no place in our sport” and that cricket should always be played “in a spirit of respect and inclusivity.” The ECB’s announcement aligns it with similar measures recently introduced by other sports bodies. Just a day earlier, England’s Football Association declared that transgender women would no longer be permitted to participate in the women's game. In Scotland, the national football association implemented a similar ban earlier this week. Meanwhile, the Football Association of Wales indicated that it is awaiting further sector guidance before finalizing its stance. This broader trend follows moves in international athletics, cricket, and rugby to implement blanket bans on transgender women competing in female categories. These changes mark a significant moment in the ongoing debate over fairness, inclusion, and the evolving legal interpretations of gender in competitive sports. Related Topics: FA to Enforce Ban on Transgender Women in Women’s Football Following Legal Ruling Adpated by ASEAN Now from Sky News 2025-05-03 -
0
Satirical Art Silenced: ‘Licence to Offend’ Exhibition Cancelled Over Fear of Offence
Satirical Art Silenced: ‘Licence to Offend’ Exhibition Cancelled Over Fear of Offence A political cartoon exhibition featuring works by some of Britain's most renowned cartoonists, including Morten Morland of The Times, has been abruptly cancelled just hours before its private launch. The event, titled Licence to Offend, was set to showcase a range of satirical works that have already appeared in major national newspapers. But despite months of planning, the show was shut down over concerns it might cause offence, prompting fierce criticism from the artists and curators involved. Scheduled to open to the public on Thursday in Kingston upon Thames, southwest London, the exhibition was halted at the eleventh hour by TownSq, a co-working venue that had agreed to host the event. Guests who were due to attend a private viewing on Wednesday were informed not to come after the venue reversed its decision, citing potential backlash and staff safety. The exhibition included pieces by Morten Morland of The Times, Mac and Pugh of the Mail titles, Patrick Blower of The Daily Telegraph, and Martin Rowson of The Guardian. The cartoons, already published in their respective outlets, offered satirical portrayals of public figures such as Donald Trump, Sir Keir Starmer, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg. Morland, who has worked with The Times since 2002, condemned the decision as “idiotic.” “These weren’t offensive cartoons. They were cartoons that had already been printed in national newspapers. I’ve never experienced anything like it. It’s an idiotic decision on so many levels,” he said. He took particular issue with the rationale provided by TownSq, which described its need to maintain a “politically neutral environment.” In response, Morland said, “The decision to deny freedom of expression is in itself a hugely political act.” He further argued that cancelling an exhibition based on hypothetical offence is a dangerous precedent. “This shuts down any discourse before it’s even been allowed to happen under the pretext that someone somewhere might have objections to something,” he said. “That is surely a much more offensive concept.” TownSq defended its decision, saying the level of discord the exhibition generated confirmed the need to avoid politically charged content in its space. “The fervour and discord around this event has been a testament as to why,” a spokesperson said. “This was not a decision that we took lightly, and we’re frustrated that it needed to be taken at all. We admire the artists’ work and the months of effort that [went] into curating it, but the conditions created following it meant it would be unsafe to host the exhibition.” Zoe Dorelli, the curator of the exhibition, expressed deep disappointment at the cancellation. “It’s quite amazing that we pulled together most of the best cartoonists that are working at the moment,” she said. “One should be sort of celebrating this kind of thing and not pulling it.” She described the cancellation as a blow not just to the artists, but to the broader principle of free expression in the arts. Whitelight Projects, the organiser behind Licence to Offend, is now actively seeking an alternative venue to host the exhibition. Dorelli confirmed that several offers are under consideration, suggesting that the show may yet find a stage where its voice—and the voices of its artists—can be heard. Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-05-03 -
0
Apple Shifts iPhone Production from China to India Amid Trade Pressures
Apple has announced a significant shift in its global manufacturing strategy, revealing that most iPhones and other key products destined for the United States will no longer be made in China. This move marks a major development in the company’s efforts to diversify its supply chain in response to trade tensions and mounting tariff pressures from the U.S. government. According to Apple CEO Tim Cook, India is set to become the primary hub for iPhone production for the American market. “We do expect the majority of iPhones sold in [the] US will have India as their country of origin,” Cook told investors during a recent earnings call. Meanwhile, Vietnam is emerging as the central production site for a range of other Apple products, including iPads, Mac computers, Apple Watches, and AirPods. “Vietnam will be the chief manufacturing hub for almost all iPad, Mac, Apple Watch and AirPods product sold in the US,” Cook added. This strategic reallocation of manufacturing operations appears to be a response to tariffs imposed under the administration of former President Donald Trump, which targeted products made in China. Although the Trump administration had long advocated for Apple to bring production back to the United States, the company has instead chosen to strengthen its presence in other Asian countries while making substantial investments on U.S. soil. During the investor call, Cook highlighted Apple’s domestic economic contributions, beginning the discussion by reiterating the company’s plan to invest $500 billion across several U.S. states over the next four years. This commitment signals that while production may be shifting internationally, Apple remains focused on maintaining a significant economic footprint in America. China, however, will not be entirely cut out of the equation. Cook confirmed that it will remain the main manufacturing source for Apple products sold outside the United States. “China will remain the country of origin for the vast majority of total products sold outside the US,” he noted. Apple’s latest financial report reflects resilience in the face of geopolitical and trade uncertainties. The tech giant posted its highest March-quarter revenue in over two years, with sales rising 5% to $95 billion. Net income climbed to $24.8 billion, up nearly 5% compared to the same quarter last year. Analysts attributed part of this growth to consumers rushing to purchase Apple products before new tariffs took effect in April, as well as strong demand for the newly launched iPhone 16e — a lower-end model featuring limited artificial intelligence capabilities. Industry experts have been watching Apple’s manufacturing shift closely. Patrick Moorhead, CEO of Moor Insights & Strategy, called the company’s production move “impressive,” especially given previous remarks by Tim Cook that only China had the infrastructure to build iPhones. “This is a marked change from what [Cook] said a few years back when he said that only China can build iPhones,” Moorhead said. “There is lots of progress that Apple must show here but it's a pretty good start.” Other tech giants are also navigating the evolving trade landscape. Amazon, for instance, has managed to weather the tariff storm, reporting an 8% increase in sales year-on-year in its North American e-commerce business. Overall, Amazon’s sales rose 9% to $155.7 billion in the first quarter of 2025, with profits soaring more than 60% to approximately $17 billion. Company executives even suggested that consumer stockpiling in anticipation of tariffs may have contributed to the strong numbers. Adpated by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-05-03 -
0
Another woke Judge’s Decision Sparks Outrage in Tesla Firebomb Case
A controversial court decision in Massachusetts has ignited public debate after a judge allowed a suspect accused of firebombing a Tesla dealership to await trial under supervised home release. The move, made by Judge Jessica Hedges, has drawn criticism for what many see as excessive leniency in a case involving politically motivated property destruction. The defendant, Owen McIntire, faces serious charges after allegedly setting fire to vehicles at a Tesla dealership, resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages. Authorities say the act was carried out in protest against the politics of Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. While no injuries were reported, the incident has been described by critics as highly dangerous and ideologically driven. “It’s only by a miracle no one was maimed or killed; this is no different from throwing molotovs through the window of a mosque or synagogue,” one observer noted, underscoring the perceived severity of McIntire’s actions. Yet, rather than being held in custody, McIntire was granted home release to ensure continued access to cross-gender hormone treatment, as well as medication for autism and ADHD. This decision has been described by some as a stark example of judicial bias, with accusations that the court is prioritizing the defendant’s identity and personal circumstances over public safety. “Judge Jessica Hedges had more sympathy for the accused terrorist than the victims and potential victims,” one critic charged. “It’s impossible to imagine this or any other judge being this lenient on a right-wing terrorist.” The backlash has also pointed to what some see as a broader pattern of perceived partiality within the judiciary. Citing previous incidents, critics referenced Hennepin County District Attorney Mary Moriarty’s decision not to pursue jail time for a Minnesota government employee who vandalized Teslas across Minneapolis, causing approximately $20,000 in damage. This, they argue, is part of a troubling trend in which individuals who commit politically charged acts against conservative targets receive more favorable treatment. Critics have extended their scrutiny to judges beyond Massachusetts and Minnesota. Milwaukee’s Hannah Dugan was mentioned as another example, after she was accused of misusing her position to shield an undocumented immigrant and was later temporarily stripped of her authority by the state court system. Federal judges such as James Boasberg of the DC Circuit have also faced criticism for issuing broad injunctions against presidential policies, with detractors claiming such actions exceed proper judicial bounds. As for Hedges, the criticism remains pointed. “Hedges is sending a signal: Go ahead, boys and girls. Throw your tantrums, set things on fire, and I’ll make sure all you get is a slap on the wrist,” one commenter remarked, reflecting the frustrations of those who see a double standard in how justice is being administered. Calls are now growing louder for accountability and balance in the judicial system. “America would be a better place if that also happens to Hedges — and any other bench-sitter giving a thumbs-up to crimes as long as they’re anti-Trump,” another critic concluded, capturing the deep divide over how ideology and identity are influencing outcomes in American courts. Adpated by ASEAN Now from NYP 2025-05-03 -
0
Press Regulator Clears Columnist Allison Pearson in Dispute with Essex Police
Press Regulator Sides with Columnist Allison Pearson in Dispute with Essex Police In a ruling that has sparked renewed scrutiny of police conduct, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) has dismissed a complaint by Essex Police over reporting related to a high-profile columnist’s clash with the force. Allison Pearson, a columnist for The Telegraph, was cleared by the regulator after Essex Police challenged the accuracy of reports about an unannounced visit by officers to her home on Remembrance Sunday last year. The dispute centers on a tweet Pearson had posted and later deleted, which a complainant claimed had incited racial hatred. Nearly a year after the tweet was removed, Pearson was visited at home by two police officers, who informed her she was under investigation. Pearson later wrote in her column that she had been told she was being investigated for a non-crime hate incident (NCHI), a designation used when police document actions perceived to be motivated by hate but that fall short of criminality. However, Essex Police claimed she was actually being investigated for a criminal offence, and subsequently filed a complaint with Ipso accusing The Telegraph of publishing inaccurate information. But Ipso found the police complaint to be without merit. In its judgment, the regulator emphasized that The Telegraph had appropriately included Essex Police’s official statement — which confirmed the investigation was into a criminal offence — while also reporting Pearson’s personal account of the encounter. According to Ipso, “care had been taken not to publish inaccurate information” because The Telegraph had sought comment from the police before publication, and the force had not disputed or corrected Pearson’s recollection of what officers told her during the visit. Mark Lewis, Pearson’s legal representative, expressed disbelief that the police had chosen to escalate the matter to the press regulator in the first place. “I was bemused as to why the police found it appropriate to file a report to a regulator,” he said. He added that the Ipso ruling would now allow Pearson’s legal team to move forward with her claim against Essex Police and the Essex Police and Crime Commissioner for damages. Pearson herself welcomed the decision and reiterated her commitment to holding the police accountable. “I am delighted that Ipso has confirmed I was entitled to tell the public what happened to me on the morning of Remembrance Sunday over a tweet deleted a year earlier. I felt it was in the public interest, and still do,” she said. “My legal team will now pursue my case against Essex Police and the commissioner of police.” The case has stirred broader debate about freedom of the press, the definition and use of non-crime hate incidents, and how police interact with journalists. Critics argue the visit to Pearson’s home and the force’s subsequent complaint to a media regulator raise serious concerns about proportionality and accountability in law enforcement. Essex Police, which has been contacted for comment, has so far not issued a public response to the Ipso ruling. Related Topics: A Police Visit on Remembrance Sunday Reveals the Reality of Our Two-Tier Justice System Female Journalists Rally Around Allison Pearson Amid Fears for Press Freedom Police Face Criticism Over Internal Review Clearing Essex Force Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph 2025-05-03 -
0
FA to Enforce Ban on Transgender Women in Women’s Football Following Legal Ruling
FA to Enforce Ban on Transgender Women in Women’s Football Following Legal Ruling From June 1, transgender women will no longer be allowed to participate in women’s football in England at any level, following a landmark decision by the Football Association (FA). This new regulation, announced in response to a Supreme Court ruling on April 16, marks a significant shift in the governing body’s stance on transgender inclusion in sport. Until now, the FA had permitted transgender women to play in amateur women’s leagues if they had maintained reduced testosterone levels—below 5nmol per litre—for at least 12 months. However, the legal redefinition of “woman” has compelled the FA to revise its policy. “The Supreme Court’s ruling on the 16 April means that we will be changing our policy. Transgender women will no longer be able to play in women’s football in England, and this policy will be implemented from June 1, 2025,” said the FA. Acknowledging the impact of the decision, the FA continued, “We understand that this will be difficult for people who simply want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify, and we are contacting the registered transgender women currently playing to explain the changes and how they can continue to stay involved in the game.” The FA emphasized that it must act within the framework of both UK law and international football policy as set by UEFA and FIFA. “Our current policy, which allows transgender women to participate in the women’s game, was based on this principle and supported by expert legal advice,” the FA explained. “This is a complex subject, and our position has always been that if there was a material change in law, science, or the operation of the policy in grassroots football then we would review it and change it if necessary.” The move aligns football with several other sports, such as rugby union and hockey, which have already restricted women’s competitions to those born female. Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns at advocacy group Sex Matters, welcomed the decision, stating, “This is welcome but long overdue. The FA has had ample evidence of the harms to women and girls caused by its nonsensical policy of letting men who identify as women play in women’s teams. The requirement to lower their testosterone tells you that everyone knew they were not women.” She continued, “Thankfully, the UK Supreme Court has now confirmed this, saying it is lawful to exclude ‘all men, including trans women, regardless of their GRC status.’ Every other sporting body now needs to re-establish a genuine women’s category, and this shameful period in history will finally be brought to an end.” Currently, around 20 transgender women play amateur football in England under the April 1 rules. While FIFA only mandates reduced testosterone levels, there have been no known cases of transgender women seeking to play at elite or international levels in England. Canadian international Quinn, who identifies as transgender and non-binary, continues to play in women’s football, having been born female. The policy shift comes amid rising tensions and scrutiny around trans inclusion in sports. In September, Sutton United’s women’s team postponed a match following backlash over the inclusion of transgender goalkeeper Blair Hamilton. Sutton’s manager Lucy Clark, the first openly trans referee in English football, took the helm in January 2024. In another incident, a 17-year-old girl was suspended for two matches after repeatedly asking a transgender opponent, “Are you a man?” during a grassroots game, prompting a protest outside Wembley Stadium. The England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) is also expected to follow suit. The ECB currently allows self-identification at amateur levels, but after adopting stricter rules for professional cricket in line with the International Cricket Council, its directors are set to vote on whether to extend the ban to all levels of the women’s game. If approved, players who have undergone male puberty will no longer be allowed to compete in women’s or girls’ cricket, whether professional or recreational. As sporting bodies across the UK respond to legal and public pressure, the FA’s decision may be a harbinger of broader changes ahead, reshaping participation and inclusion across the sporting landscape. Related Topics: Cricket Authorities Ban on Transgender Women in Female Competitions Following Legal Ruling Adpated by ASEAN Now from The Times 2025-05-03
-
-
Popular in The Pub
-
-
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
Recommended Posts