Singletrack World Response to Nadine Dorries’ Comments on Trans Athletes

I disagree that the view that trans women are women is an oversimplification. It’s a starting point and nothing more. If you disagree with that position then there is literally no debate to be had. If you believe the opposite then I put it forward that THIS is the oversimplification as logically you do not believe there is any place in womens’ sport for trans women and therefore the Dorries position is the default – the debate is over.

Again respectfully, no.

Stating unequivocally that trans women are women (in this context), no ifs, no buts, no maybes, closes down this particular debate. I don’t “believe the opposite” – I just think there is a huge amount of nuance and complexity in that statement which you are dismissing when you are talking about whether trans women should compete directly with cis women.

And no, Saying that doesn’t mean that I “do not believe there is any place in womens’ sport for trans women” – it just means that I think opening a discussion on this issue with “trans women are women” is reductive when most sports currently only have binary categories of male and female

Good on you STW for taking a position and encouraging discussion and debate. Its a very difficult subject and one I have no answers to.
All arguments seem based on the principle of fairness but I think elite level sport in inherently unfair anyway. There isn’t equal access to support, funding, coaching, equipment, facilities etc. My daughter swam reasonably well when she was younger. The time, travel and cost commitment would not have been possible had I been a single parent on a low income for example. She was very fortunate that we were able to support her.
Are we in danger of alienating yet another group of disadvantaged people within society amd all to satisfy the need for fairness at the elite level…feels to me as though we have our priorities the wrong way round. Shouldn’t we sacrifice fairness at the elite levels in society to offer greater opportunities to those who others?

For me, Superficial has it right. There is a sufficient proven advantage for many trans women over born women at the elite end of sport (where the research exists) that it’s not possible to be supportive of the rights of women to compete in a fair space and also supportive of the rights of trans women to compete as women – at least in those sports where the effect has been researched.

There are ways to address “fairness” without calling for a knee jerk blanket ban on trans athletes across whole swathes of elite sports.

Bit of a straw man – pretty sure that’s not actually been dictated as the only solution.
The points made a few times of having a class for Women and an Open class sounds a bit gimmicky, but also like the most obviously fair solution

What’s the rules for people who were born non-binary?

No sure if anyone saw the report on trans athletes in cycling on yesterday’s news at one. It certainly seems relevant.

The report starts at about 25:30.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0018srh/bbc-news-at-one-30062022

At least £20, as I’ve just cancelled my subscription.

Stick it to the person.

They’ll survive without your sub.

Shouldn’t we sacrifice fairness at the elite levels in society to offer greater opportunities to those who others?

This makes a lot of sense to me.

Panic over, I just spent £20 in the ST shop

Phew! Mark was just about to cancel beer at your desk Friday.

Well one thing we have learnt is that simplistic slogans have no place in this debate.

My view is that in a world where discrimination is (in theory!) outlawed, there is little reason to not allow people to identify pretty much as they please socially and professionally. And that extends to recreational activities like parkrun where participants can identify as they choose.

Once you have a restricted category “women” such as competitive sport which discriminates by design, then it’s a whole can of worms, not just for trans but also intersex/dsd athletes. It’s important to acknowledge that there simply isn’t a solution that everyone will be happy with. My view, which is certainly open to change, is that the category needs to be defined in such a way that the roughly half of the population for who it’s not remotely debatable, needs to see themselves on a continuum with the elites. Just as I’ll never be Froome or Usain Bolt but I can see them as just more specialised and talented versions of me. I doubt many young girls who enjoy swimming look at Lia Thomas and think, I could grow up to be like her. I think the fairness to all those young girls (even though less than 0.1% of them actually will ever become elite swimmers) is more important than the fairness to Lia.

Just like I was born into a body that is not genetically gifted enough to be an elite sports person. I accept that.

You shouldn’t have to, we need a class for middle aged overweight biffers. Where do I sign up? 🤣

. Shouldn’t we sacrifice fairness at the elite levels in society to offer greater opportunities to those who others?

I’m not altogether comfortable with saying it, but this may need to be the short term fix while longer solutions are developed as the science evolves for each sport.

Would trans athletes be happy sacrificing personal glory to promote sporting inclusion at grass roots level? Would be an interesting problem. And I guess without visible trans athletes at the top level, where are the role models for those starting at the bottom of the pyramid? So many questions within questions.

In this case, talk is cheap.

But not talking about it is cheaper.

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.”

Oh, I like that. Where’s it from?

Fairness cuts both ways. Trans have a biological advantage in some sports.

But <devils advocate> isn’t that the point of sport? Tall people have a biological advantage in Basketball. Clever people have a biological advantage in Chess. Is sport’s sole existence not to prove that you’re better than someone else?

Is sport’s sole existence not to prove that you’re better than someone else?

Is there a top level, world class sport that has a truly open category that doesn’t split competitors by gender? Genuine question? I’m struggling to think of one.

I often think about the challenge the Williams sisters made many years ago that they’d beat any male pro-tennis star outside the top 200. Up stepped 203rd ranked Karsten Baarsch, who downed a couple of beers and finished his cigarette, then promptly thrashed the pair of them one after the other.

Also, it’s been reasonably questioned as to whether we have any actual skin in the game here beyond just putting out a statement of position. In fact we do in so much as we’ve been approached for help in a dispute about the inclusion of trans competitors in a small mtb event that I will not name here. We could either claim total neutrality on the issues or take a side – for better or worse (I note some subs cancellations) we decided on the latter.

I hadn’t read the article, mainly because I very rarely read any articles at all on the site.
I had, however, cynically thought it seemed a bit of a clickbait article title but had a read of the forum post anyway.
I’ll happily hold my hands up and say I was wrong and the reasoning given above by Mark makes perfect sense. I don’t think STW do everything right but in this case I think it’s a really good discussion point and hopefully it’ll develop into a good adult discussion about trans athletes in sport without the same few people turning it into the shit-show that many good threads become.

Showjumping?

I wouldn’t know but I’ll take your word. Possibly horse racing too?

But lets be honest, the horse is doing the bulk of the work there. I can’t imagine gender offers an advantage. Most male jockeys are slightly overgrown children.

Normally we shun the idea of taking drugs to enhance one’s competitiveness.

Yes we do. There’s exemptions for medical use in various sports for various drugs of course which allows for the same drug being considered cheating for one athlete and not for another. Also, if someone transitions for sporting benefit then that could be considered cheating and we have procedures and rules in place to counter cheating – they may need to be modified and expanded of course, but it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that rules can be developed to counter that risk.

But <devils advocate> isn’t that the point of sport? Tall people have a biological advantage in Basketball. Clever people have a biological advantage in Chess. Is sport’s sole existence not to prove that you’re better than someone else?

You can’t really have this discussion without looking at the Caster Semenya story. She’s a biological woman who, due to a genetic quirk, produces more testosterone than other women. Some men also produce more testosterone that others but for Caster, something that, in a man, would make them exceptional, makes her an aberration that needs banning/chemically supressing. It’s not a trans story but has relevance.

Playing devil’s advocate myself, around the trans/fairness debate I’d also ask, what about boxing and combat sports? Many decades (potentially, prior to transitioning) of muscular and skeletal development provides not only a significant advantage to trans athletes but could also pose a significant danger to opponents.

Shouldn’t we sacrifice fairness at the elite levels in society to offer greater opportunities to those who others?

I’m going to repost the BBC news report on trans athletes in cycling in case it got missed, it’s primarily about trans athletes competing in cycling after there was a ban put in place, but does touch on the effect it has on their competitors. Fairness in this context is a bit like ‘positive discrimination’, you can’t have it without negative discrimination; personally the fairness/unfairness argument is a tough one.

The report starts at about 25:30 – https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0018srh/bbc-news-at-one-30062022

The trans athlete debate is really tricky. Personally I don’t think that there’s necessarily a ‘right’ answer so it’s always going to be contentious.

Sports has always been divided by sex. In theatre, men have commonly played female roles, and occasionally vice versa.

Men have commonly played female roles because women weren’t allowed to.

Why? Do they just think there’s a nip and tuck a change of clothes and some make up?

I think some people believe exactly this. The concept of “identifying” hasn’t helped with the hard of thinking who hear ‘trans’ and picture Little Britain’s “I’m a lady” sketches.

But here’s a question to those who cling to the idea that trans women are still really men: Would you be happy for trans men (who by the same logic are still really women) to compete in women’s events?

Because this is where it all falls down, you can’t have it both ways. If you don’t want trans women in ‘women’s spaces’ like female toilets, then you’re advocating having trans men in women’s loos instead. Or we have what someone suggested on the previous thread, we differentiate between cis women and everyone else. Then we stick all trans people of whichever gender in with the blokes and open up a whole new can of safeguarding issues.

(WTF is the obsession with toilets anyway? Can’t we just have toilets? We’re all the same when we’re having a poo.)

I applaud STW for taking a view point, rather than burying their heads in the sand.

In my view – in regular life, have at it. Nobody should be able to control someone else’s life or body. Whatever you define yourself as, I’m happy to oblige.

In amateur sport, I agree with the above poster, that wishes for people to find their appropriate level and play in a team or league that suits that.
For example, I play cricket to a not particularly high standard. As a 30 something man, I will often find myself playing with and against county over50, county U15, and womens county players. Obviously this is a non contact sport that is heavily, but not solely, skill based. Dividing the sport into age and gender categories is not necessary.

Professional sport though, is a different matter. Look at MTB. It was noteworthy on the few occasions when Rachel Atherton posted a qualifying time that would have qualified in the mens elite field. In XC, women do one lap fewer than men in about the same time. The back end of the mens field usually get lapped and pulled from the course.
Someone who is just about qualifying for a mens world cup could therefore be a solid podium contender in womens.
These people already put their bodies on the line and potentially risk their lives in pursuit of their elite sport career, and the resulting money and lifestyle.

If the non sport related social stigma was removed (and see above, I sincerely hope it will be) then is it too much of a stretch to think someone might be willing to do that to switch from an also-ran man living out of his van in the pits; to the life of one of the top pro women? And in doing so, what does that do to all of the born-as-a-woman competitors, and future cometitors?

(WTF is the obsession with toilets anyway? Can’t we just have toilets? We’re all the same when we’re having a poo.)

Dunno. Ask a woman (if you can find any on STW now).

EDIT – deleted. I have realised that this is just a troll by STW to get more clicks/engagment. V clever.