Forum menu
Pippa York says her power was down by about 20%, her weight up 10%, resulting in n/n ca 30% in W/kg.
ie a substantial DISadvantage.
spare me. If it’s 0.5% it’s too much. It’s not even elite sports. It’s even your local parkrun.
Why should a woman who works hard, and races hard to place highly be forced down the ranks?
In a Parkrun then I’d say suck it up, it’s just a bit of fun, which elite sport certainly isn’t
I had a discussion about this with my female mate about whether she’d be pissed off if she got beaten by a trans lady in one of our county tt races. Her response was yeah she would be a little, but ultimately it wouldn’t be a big deal because she and all the other girls she competed against would know who the real winner was
I doubt someone who missed out on an Olympic spot or funding would be so philosophical. Hence why elite sport needs to be treated differently, there are actually consequences to trans folk competing
I guess the point is that as there are more “types” of gender than gender cats in sport, sport probably needs to catch up with reality
Sport is segregated on the basis of biological sex, nothing to do with gender. It's biological sex that is the biggest predictor of sporting differences not gender so gender is irrelevant.
Trans women aren't banned from competing, they are still free to compete in their biological sex category. That's already inclusive.
Instead we have men rushing to signal their lack of prejudice and bigotry by handing over women's rights to other men.
And yes, I'm quite happy for transmen to compete in female events, providing they are subject to the same doping rules as the rest of the field.
In the highly unlikely scenario that someone else joining in your parkrun has transitioned, or is transitioning… why do you want to stop them, and how will you police it?
Indeed, who wants that job?
"Jeska, a trans woman, was convicted of the attempted murder of Ralph Knibbs, HR manager for UK Athletics after Knibbs investigated Jeska's eligibility to compete as a woman."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Jeska
Instead we have men rushing to signal their lack of prejudice and bigotry by handing over women’s rights to other men.
I see a lot of prejudice and bigotry here but it's all coming from you.
It was a statement like yours that drove away the only openly trans member on here several years ago. She wasn't even a competitive cyclist but the TERFs still circled in their sad little wagons and drove her away.
Nobody is proposing the erosion of women's rights, in fact just about everyone (I say that as I may have missed a comment) has said any competition has to be conducted fairly. Mark clarified STW's position which seems totally fair if not what seemed to be said first time around. The only folk that seem to be all about denying rights are the anti-trans competitor side. So sad that feminists fought for their rights then some decided to slam the door behind them. Because that's exactly what you're doing and at the same time completely denying people's identity.
I see a lot of prejudice and bigotry here
the TERFs
Presumably you think Sharron Davies, Martina Navratilova, Dame Laura Kenny, Tessa Sanderson are all bigots too? All female athletes who oppose biological males in competitive sport.
Sport is segregated on the basis of biological sex, nothing to do with gender. It’s biological sex that is the biggest predictor of sporting differences not gender so gender is irrelevant.
OK there are more sexes than male /female. Not talking about trans here, biological sexes.
OK there are more sexes than male /female. Not talking about trans here, biological sexes.
My biology degree must have skipped over that part...
DSD's - disorders of sexual development != new biological sex
And intersex people have stated they object to being used as gotchas in any discussion about trans rights.
Not a gotcha, just there's more to the human race than the two categories chosen by sporting bodies
The one voice that's always under represented in this debate is that of trans athletes themselves.
Good article above with Pippa, let's hear some more voices.
I think the real problem is that people are accidentally, or deliberately confusing 2 things. THe first is what an individual wants to identify as , the second is biological science.
As far as I am concerned individuals can identify as whatever they like each to their own and make your own choices. However you cant argue with the basic biology that in 99.999% of case people are either born xx or xy and that leads to different scientifically provable attributes that make a difference when you are talking elite sport. THose who rise to the top in elite sports do, in part because they happen to have a more optimised genetics for a particular sport. I know there are lots of other factors like opportunity, training etc etc
let’s hear some more voices
The problem is... there are actually very few trans athletes... and only a small proportion of them want to draw attention to themselves. Because that attention is unlikely to be overwhelmingly positive and supportive, is it.
the second is biological science
Part of the problem is that so many people consider that closed. Where as the biological science as regards sports performance/advantage of transitioned people is a young science. A lot of people are quick to compare men and women, rather than looking at the differences between trans women and other women. In swimming, the work has been done to support the position Fina have taken (obviously this could change again in future when more is known)... but that shouldn't be taken as meaning the same results and rules apply across all other elite sports, and definitely not across sports at all levels.
98-99%
Or 99.98%
Dependant on definition
Yeah, good point.
I still think it would help massively though.
Instead we have men rushing to signal their lack of prejudice and bigotry by handing over women’s rights to other men.
Absolutely. The reason I cancelled my membership (recognizing as stated above that this does no harm to STW) is that I have no desire to financially support a sexist business.
Trans women are male. Women are adult human females. Trans women are males who feel or believe themselves to be women. This does not mean they are women. It means they are trans women.
If the definition of woman is to include trans women it become so broad we deny the term any real meaning, and remove from females the support in fighting sexism that sex based spaces provide.
I am a bit conflicted to be fair, want to support people and be inclusive but have reservations based on things I have read or listened to in terms of competitive advantages.
The More or Less podcast did a very interesting episode on this subject, would say it is worth a listen.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0bnmpld
Someone who is just about qualifying for a mens world cup could therefore be a solid podium contender in womens.
Could they really? Post transition, being bigger and heavier than their cis-competition, but having substantially reduced their hgb capacity and thus their endurance and W/kg
https://www.rootsandrain.com/event9598/2022-jun-11-mercedes-benz-uci-world-cup-dh-3-leogang/results/
Most recent DH world cup. The fastest male who did not make it out of qualifying, was still 8 seconds quicker than the winning female time on race day.
Same at the previous race, though the gap was 20 seconds
With the best will in the world (and I really do mean that) the Pippa Yorke interview is one persons experience, I don’t doubt the claims she makes for herself but it’s contrary to the results of scientific studies on the effects of testosterone reduction in transwomen where significant advantages are retained in strength and power.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865
Note that the second link there is led by Joanna Harper, a pro inclusion trans women which concludes that advantages are retained even after three years of testosterone reduction.
It is a very, very difficult subject. Personally on balance I come down on the side of fairness rather than inclusion but like many on here excluding a portion of the population doesn't sit easily.
Pippa York says her power was down by about 20%, her weight up 10%, resulting in n/n ca 30% in W/kg.
I don’t dispute the figures and have to admit to not knowing the timing of her transition relative to her retirement, but I would suspect that most elite level riders regardless of sex see similar power drops and weight gains following retirement. There are a lot of numbers being thrown about on both sides of the argument which seem to be accepted on the basis that it fits a particular argument rather than scientific rigour.
I’m firmly on the fence on this one, as I can see the arguments on both sides. At ‘fun’ or even club level I can’t see an issue. At an elite level the governing bodies are caught between the devil & the deep blue sea, although having Nadine Dorries wading instinctively makes me jump he other way. On the other hand that reflects both sides of the debate which on the whole seems to be conducted by people who are only capable of listening to their own point of view.
I don’t think that YouGov pole helps much either. I’m not sure that the answers I could give cold to a telephone or internet survey to those questions would even vaguely reflect my views.
As has already been said there is a lot of grey between the two poles, unfortunately sport is binary so the governing bodies are being pushed into an impossible position.
I find STW’s desperation to be ram the culture war down our throats really exhausting. I just enjoy reading about cycling, and have no interest in the various crusade.
And yet, here you are, taking time not just to read posts that don't interest you but to flap your fingers up and down telling us all about something you have no interest in.
Weird.
Not at all, as I’m sure you know already. This isn’t a symmetrical situation, so claiming that people supporting women’s right are pushing for a symmetrical solution is a deliberate straw man.
Symmetry or no, one does not protect someone's rights by crushing someone else's. Like it or not, just like the discussions we were having around homosexuality a decade or so ago, trans people exist. And like it or not, they're not going to cease to exist just because their mere existence makes some other people uncomfortable.
Again: Who would you have trans male athletes compete against?
Also a straw man. Toilets are the least important contested space,
Correct, any that's exactly my point. It's always about toilets, just like fishing cropped up again and again in the brexit debates. Truth is, it's an irrelevance, it's something no-one gave a second thought to until the TERFs realised it could be weaponised.
Some YouGov figures to help inform the conversation
I'm not sure the opinions of the British public should be considered informed or reliable.
I don’t think that YouGov pole helps much either.
I think it's telling - and wholly unsurprising - as a metric for measuring intolerance against demographics. I could probably have filled in most of that chart with a good degree of accuracy without surveying anyone.
Who would you have trans male athletes compete against?
Other females, subject to the medication they take being acceptable to the relevant sporting bodies.
Trans women do have an immediate advantage over women as they don't have a menstrual cycle for starters....let alone the advantages of generally speaking, a stronger physique.
No idea what the answer is in elite sports. Compete as the sex you were born? I've listened to Sharron Davies opinion on this as she was a competitive female (woman) and she has very valid points.
Correct, any that’s exactly my point. It’s always about toilets, just like fishing cropped up again and again in the brexit debates.
Perhaps you could remind me who was it that brought up toilets in this thread?
No mention of Kate Weatherly? Interesting story, 2018 NZ women's DH champion.
A vastly complex issue, on which I 'm still kind of undecided, but I think that STW hasn't put any effort or thought at all into this article and certainly not into explaining the reasons behind what seems a pretty firm stance, albeit slightly tempered by Mark's responses. Sorry folks.
I'd rather not think of it as the clickbait that has been alluded to above, but I don't think that the authors have written anything to explain their thinking behind, and justification for, trans competitors in disciplines that are strength, and possibly endurance, based or are contact sports.
I would appreciate more, perhaps a short rationale from each of the article's contributors (I assume since it's byelined 'Singletrack Magazine' there were multiple contributors.)
@scotroutes I'm not sure how else to describe the people that chased Rachael off. Certainly not in polite terms. As for TERF it's not exactly an inaccurate acronym for people who hold those beliefs.
Proposing people only compete as their birth gender shows a lack of understanding of the issue that is ignorant at best and profoundly cruel at worst.
As for anything else, Cougar summed it up nicely. People shouldn't have rights at the expense of others, it's a nuanced issue and should be treated that way. Yes, that goes both ways and obviously needs far more thought put into it than some folk here seem willing or capable to put in.
Proposing people only compete as their birth gender shows a lack of understanding of the issue that is ignorant at best and profoundly cruel at worst.
Sex is not equal to gender.
Women’s only spaces are necessary in society to confront sex based discrimination and in sport to allow for fair competition. Allowing males to compete as females denies women this right.
Allowing males to compete as females denies women this right.
The issue being at what point does a "male" become a "female", you know, the key thing for trans people....
Someone way up there in the comments seemed to suggest this was written because it’s what I’d been told to write. One of the great pleasures of working for Singletrack World is that I don’t have to write anything I don’t believe in.
It would likely have been easier for us to say nothing, but personally I believe that Nadine Dorries’ direction leaves out any possibility for inclusion of Trans athletes in competition, and that is - I think- a position too exclusionary and prejudicial to ignore.
Much has been said in the comments in the name of defending women. As a woman, I thought I would add my personal perspective - and since I started drafting this comment someone has asked for it. So here goes.
Personally, I am uncomfortable with the FINA position, in as much as I think it risks the policing of women’s bodies. Who is ‘woman enough?’ to avoid being subjected to tests and inspections because someone thinks a successful athlete looks a bit too tall/powerful/muscular/whatever to be allowed to compete without some form of certification? I have been quite regularly misgendered throughout my life, which is both mystifying and unpleasant when it happens. I hate to think what someone could be subjected to if people could demand you confirm 'what' you are. The science seems to me far from settled - it’s only fairly recently that the idea of ‘women’s specific geometry’ has been largely dropped from bike design. If we can spend years assuming women’s arms, legs and torsos are so differently proportioned that they need different bikes, only to rapidly drop such a premise, perhaps other ‘measurements’ of female-ness may also be revisited, or at least subject to more research?
In addition, as women have broken down barriers to participation, there are an increasing number of sporting instances where they are challenging - and sometimes beating - male counterparts, over the same courses. Perhaps this demonstrates that the male/female divide is not necessarily that relevant - or perhaps these successful women are going to find themselves subjected to tests? I fear that the threat to women’s bodily autonomy and right to privacy is greater than the ‘threat to women’s sports’. Certainly, I think there are far greater threats to women’s sports - a lack of equal pay, for example - and to women’s liberties more generally.
I can't help but feel that stirring up division between those who might otherwise share common goals of overcoming barriers and oppression is exactly what those with power want - it's a big dead cat that's making us weak in the face of broader restrictions on liberties and human rights.
Thank you for what are, by and large, reasonable and thoughtful responses to this article.
Agree with zezaskar one hundred percent. And while we should all support a society that is diverse, inclusive and equal let’s not forget the problems still faced by the female half of the population such as the gender pay gap, casual sexism, and domestic abuse which are a much higher priority imo.
The issue being at what point does a “male” become a “female”, you know, the key thing for trans people….
It’s not just that either though. Just imagine a 7’2” trans woman with hands like shovels turning up in the WNBA (as an extreme example). Yes she could well be female by all accounts, but fair…?
The issue being at what point does a “male” become a “female”, you know, the key thing for trans people…
Sex does not change. A trans woman is an adult human male.
This is an interesting thread for context on sex
https://mobile.twitter.com/RebeccaRHelm/status/1207834357639139328
I don't know why a statement needed to be made at all.
As can be seen from the posts above it's now another thread to fuel division and nastiness on this website.
Add it to the Covid - Brexit - Boris - Kier - Indyref 2 - all threads full of hate.
Not seeing any hate on this thread, just different opinions.
This is an interesting thread for context on sex
With this as a rebuttal to the initial argument, for those that just can’t get enough of reading stuff!
https://quillette.com/2020/06/07/jk-rowling-is-right-sex-is-real-and-it-is-not-a-spectrum/
to avoid being subjected to tests and inspections because someone thinks a successful athlete looks a bit too tall/powerful/muscular/whatever to be allowed to compete without some form of certification
But surely this is unavoidable, there needs to some kind of ‘rule’ surely, regardless of what that is.
Currently we are debating woman who are trans, they’ve made a gender choice, they are undergoing transitioning. Whether they should be allowed to compete with females is up for debate, personally I don’t think they should at elite level
But with no ‘tests and inspections’ as you put it in place, there would be nothing stopping a bloke who wasn’t trans, identifying as a lady simply to win. You honestly think there isn’t a chance someone languishing around 600 in the world in the mens tennis ranking wouldnt be remotely tempted to rock up and take home the 2 million quid woman’s Wimbledon prize if they could?
Not seeing any hate on this thread, just different opinions.
+1
Currently we are debating woman who are trans, they’ve made a gender choice, they are undergoing transitioning.
I'd argue that for the vast majority of TG people it is not a choice, it's a need. If you want to consider it a choice, I can't give a definitive answer but my son would say the choice is between transitioning and ending his own life.
Sure, they may be cases where people may in future transition 'just enough' to retain as much advantage as possible and as few of the disadvantages, but that needs a different analysis.
Reading Mark and Hannah's comments (thank you both) has clarified things a bit, but it seems to me that the STW and Dorries positions are not so very far apart.
Dorries expressed clear support for the FINA policy, as did Mark with some reservations, and this does allow for the inclusion of both trans men and trans women.
I realise that the FINA policy is controversial, and I have reservations about it too, but overall I think it offers an evidenced-based position which I can support because it allows for fair competition while including women with 46 XY DSDs who didn't benefit from male puberty and trans women who transitioned before male puberty.
@stwhannah
When I said journalists write what they are paid to write, I was responding to this:
"...even most of the junior staff at the tabloids, have views so out of kilter with the majority of people in the UK"
You know, as if those working at the Mail share the same views as Paul Dacre.
Agree with much of what tpbiker says apart from the bit about trans people making a choice about their gender. It's not a choice in any meaningful sense of the word. But it does mean, in my book, that trans women cannot compete in some professional sports.
I’d argue that for the vast majority of TG people it is not a choice, it’s a need. If you want to consider it a choice, I can’t give a definitive answer but my son would say the choice is between transitioning and ending his own life.
Must be hard seeing your child experiencing that much distress - I hope things are improving. I don’t know if you’re happy to answer personal questions, but if you are I have a couple, and I don’t know anyone in real life in this situation who I could ask.
I don’t know how old your son is, perhaps already an adult, but if not, do the experiences of people who have transitioned, particularly when including surgical procedures, and later regretted it and wishes they hadn’t done, does that worry you at all? Clearly transitioning is the solution for some people experiencing discomfort with their body, but perhaps not the answer in every case? How do you strike the balance between the immediate needs of your child, given the suicidal thoughts, and the risk of future regret?
Also, what do you think about the debate over conversion therapy for trans people? Some people argue that anything that isn’t entirely affirming amounts to conversion therapy, whereas others argue that exploratory/talking therapies are an important safety net and a way of getting to the bottom of someone’s distress over their sex/gender, and for a lot of kids who feel like they may need to transition it turns out not to be the right solution for them. Obviously out and out attempts to “cure” trans people are as offensive as efforts to “cure” gay folk, but exploring the possibility that other issues may be a factor seems sensible and reasonable to me. I’d be interested to hear what you think? I hope nothing there causes offence, it’s certainly not meant to.