Not In My Name: Trans Athlete Bans

Well the discourse seems to have gone exactly as well as could be expected

You mean generate traffic? Mark will be happy!

@stue once again, free speech doesn’t mean anyone can say whatever they like without consequence. It means the government can’t arbitrarily stop you from saying anything it feels like. So for example, if you say ‘Rishi Sunak is shit’ you won’t get dragged away in the night here like you would in some countries.

There are laws to prevent harm being done through words, and rightly so – you would be complaining about just the same it if you were on the receiving end.

How about they can compete but not officially have results recorded?

They get all the thrill of training ,competing and the satisfaction of knowing they won but without upsetting anyone.

Ooh like negros? Seperate but equal.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendell_Scott

If we all spoke one of the many languages that have three genders (for people, I mean, not grammatical genders)

Which are those? Genuine question.

Madame found it irritating competing against doped athletes, it felt unfair, I understand female athletes who find competeing against trans women unfair. Like Alpin I think that the people deciding who competes in women’s sport should be the women competing. Level playing field, fair, they are the principles of sport. In swimming we’ve seen very average male athletes become excellent female athletes, do those supporting trans athletes think that’s fair? I don’t.

As for STW taking an editorial stance, that’s fine. The editorial stance on Brexit was remain. Cameron also campaigned for remain and see where that led. I can’t read the article cos I don’t pay so I’m responding more to the comments and STW’s editorial position as previously stated (which I disagree with) than Hannah’s article.

Reading some of the stuff beyond STW it struck me that trans athletes in sport and the contravesy surrounding them is counter productive for the image of trans people in general. Unfortunate for the vast majority of trans people who don’t compete in sport and wish to integrate society being accepted for what they are rather than something they are not.

I’m in favour of people being able to gender identify as they wish. However, the scientist in me knows about chromosomes and the advantage in sport of having male ones

So whilst being no great fan of the UCI or swimming federations I think their decision on genders are appropriate.

That said, if trans athletes have to change pre puberty as the current rules say that poses a heap of ethical questions. Beyond 12 there is a significant differance between male and female performance; so to comply with current conditions children are going to have to make decsions which will affect the rest of their lives at an age they are very vunerable to infulence and grooming, that to me is unethical.

Remember how people of colour

 

Coughs, I believe this is incorrect now, we all have a colour…..

@StuE @Drac

Unless StuE added a load of hate spiel to his simple one sentence opinion that I read then you’re really stretching the ‘hate crime’ line very thinly.

You don’t open a debate like this and expect only nice agreeing responses.

For fundamentally non-competitive sport and games, I don’t care if someone puts on a skirt and calls themselves Susan at parkrun for example.

Those arguing for integration in competition need to start by asking what the purpose of the women’s category in the first place is. We could just all compete together as one group, but we (usually) don’t.

@cookeaa

being excluded from participation in a sport for not neatly conforming to a binary labelling system feels like constructive exclusion

It is indeed by it’s very definition. However,  that is because we determine who can participate in a sport by sex.  Men’s and women’s football / rugby / tennis is a sex based segregation – for very very good reasons.

If you don’t want to determine who can participate in a sport by sex, then how are you going to do it? Is it a free for all “one open category” like @johncoventry says?

If so, look forward to seeing no women in top-level football, or rugby, or tennis. Ever.

If we’re going to have men’s and women’s sports we have to differentiate – and sex is the fairest way to differentiate.

Trans people aren’t differentiated by sex. They’re differentiated by gender. Trans women are excluded from female sports because they’re genetically male – and that is a massive difference that cannot be overcome.

I see no substantial difference between excluding Trans Women and excluding Black Women

Then I’m sorry, but despite what you said here:

I think we’ve all had the obtusely scientific perspective on Gender and Sex explained to us ad nauseam

It seems that you need more science-based education. Science is not “obtuse” – its the system we’ve built our world on. Without it we’d still be living in wattle and daub huts. The difference between a black woman and a transgender woman – who is actually genetically a man – is massive and undeniable and if you posted that on twitter rather than this rather welcoming forum you’d be getting vilified for stating such an “offensively inappropriate” opinion. But I’m not going to hang you for naivety –

To illustrate in good faith:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66715669

For that “embryo model” the starting material was “stem cells”. If you took stem cells from a transgender woman and started building an embryo, what do you think you’d get?

You’d get a man.

That may sound harsh to some, or mean, but it’s not meant to be – it’s simply a statement of fact.   You’d get a man – with all the strength advantages that gives.

@sebcranked
I fully disagree with your opinion too, for many of the same reasons:

The cod “science” about “biological reality” that echoes around social media and even mainstream media outlets is incomplete at best and simplistic claptrap at worst

This is simply scientific denialism of the worst kind.

If you grow up a boy, then no amount of testosterone therapy can wipe out that advantage.

Sex and gender are two different things.

If, as you say, “Sport starts from the principle of inclusivity, or it is worthless” then you have to ban sex-segregated sports.

No more mens and women’s football, rugby or tennis. Everyone can compete against each other.  That’s the most inclusive principle.

Good luck seeing any women at the top level then.

Your “inclusivity above all” worldview is blinkered, unfortunately. There IS an objective reality that we have to be mindful of.

BTW – just to be clear – on transgender issues the ability to compete in elite level sports isn’t the problem.

It’s the mundane day-to-day life of the vast majority of transgender people that’s the problem.  We need to concentrate on making life easier for everyone at that level.   The sports discussion is a distraction that affects a vanishingly small minority of transgender people but it’s being used to halt progression on things that will make a real difference to the vast majority of trans people.

It’s the new moral outrage of our time.  The discussion around elite sports simply drums up opposition for movement where we should be making accomodations.  It’s a distraction from what’s important and what we can, and should do to accomodate our transgender brothers and sisters.

Stop getting suckered in.

I said i wouldn’t be involved but in an attempt to sort of facilitate* – another period and page of posts has passed and still one of the very important parts of Hannah’s very well written and thought out piece is being roundly ignored.

* I know, it’s a free debate and it’ll go where it chooses.

Competitive sport doesn’t trump human rights

Let’s go back to this idea: ‘we’re a welcoming and tolerant society that embraces everyone’. Remember how women felt fettered and kept down by being told we couldn’t play this sport, or do that job, or wear those clothes? Remember how people of colour were told they couldn’t go to that school, or walk through that door, or drink from that water fountain? History is full of one part of society telling another part that they’re not allowed to do this or that, and it doesn’t cast the tellers in a favourable light.

If we agree that the freedom to do the things we love, live safely with the people we love, and live full lives are human rights, then how can we place competitive sport as some kind of exemption where rights don’t apply? Clearly rights do matter when it comes to sport – no one is happy to learn of athletes being abused, or pressured into unhealthy training plans in search of ‘results’. And women have certainly fought hard enough to be allowed to participate that it seems fair to assume that participation should be seen as a right. I am deeply uncomfortable with the idea that I could be allowed to stand on a podium because someone else better than me wasn’t allowed to be there. That’s not protecting me, or women’s sports. That’s removing the human rights of others.

another period and page of posts has passed and still one of the very important parts of Hannah’s very well written and thought out piece is being roundly ignored.

I’m not entirely convinced it is that great e.g.

History is full of one part of society telling another part that they’re not allowed to do this or that,

Nobody is being told they can’t compete. They just can’t choose the sex they want to compete against

and

women have certainly fought hard enough to be allowed to participate that it seems fair to assume that participation should be seen as a right.

They did indeed, and now they usually have their own category where they compete against similar biological women (again, sex not gender)

Finally

am deeply uncomfortable with the idea that I could be allowed to stand on a podium because someone else better than me wasn’t allowed to be there

this just seems to be mixing sex and gender again

As others have said, the current situation just looks like the least bad approach – for now.

P.S. despite this apparently not being a click-bait article – you know it’s going to go on the STW Facebook feed and be a shit show

I’m an athletics coach, so obviously this is an area I’ve had to put some thought into. Full disclosure, I don’t, and never have coached a trans athlete, so I don’t yet have first hand experience of that.

But I have coached a lot of adults and children.

I believe everyone should be able to live the life they want to live, but I agree with British Cycling’s position at the moment, as I think it’s the best thing that can be done at the moment.

Sport and competition need to be seen as different things. Sport can be totally inclusive, but competition cannot, otherwise it’s no longer competition. And like it or not, for some people competition matters just as much as anything else. It can be their livelihood, it can be their passion, it can be how they define themselves, it can be how they express themselves. To them, it really matters.

And thus competition, not sport, needs to be fair. Not equal, but fair. Female competition categories exist primarily for a single reason. If they didn’t, a female athlete would never be able to win. And whether you like it or not, in competition winning is the whole point. It is why competition exists in sport.

It’s not just a problem for elite competition either, but amateur too. The same reasons why people compete at an elite level also exist at an amateur and grassroots level. How do I coach a 14 year old girl to her first county level 200m race and keep her in the sport, when a 14 year old boy who identifies as a girl could beat her without even training?

Whenever anyone chooses to pursue competition they make sacrifices. Whether that is not spending time with their family because they need to train, losing weight (gaining weight!), not having an income they’d like, or a social life, or a myriad of other things. There are always sacrifices to be made if you wish to excel in competition. And I feel that this is something that trans athletes perhaps need to consider. What is more important to them? The competition or the transition? Until there is a way to concretely determine that a transitioned male has no more advantage in a given sport than any female competitor, then in my opinion, they cannot compete. If the competition is more important, then they cannot transition until they no longer wish to compete.

But we are not denying people any rights any more than we are denying an older person to compete in a lower age category or an larger person to compete in a lower weight category, if we have sex based categories (that are separated based on innate advantages of one sex over another) then we need to have them as sex based not gender based.
Don’t get me wrong I’d love there to be a time when nobody feels the need to be labelled and we are all considered as equals whatever sex gender or persuasion we are and I recognise the struggles that people who don’t fit the so called normal pattern face but I think the whole sports gender/sex debate genuinely does them a disservice.

I am deeply uncomfortable with the idea that I could be allowed to stand on a podium because someone else better than me wasn’t allowed to be there.

So you’d be quite happy for a woman never to be stood atop of a podium again then, purely in the spirit of inclusivity? Or there any competitive sport in the world where a born woman would feature in the top 10 fastest times including both sexes?

I am deeply uncomfortable with the idea that I could be allowed to stand on a podium because someone else better than me wasn’t allowed to be there. That’s not protecting me, or women’s sports.

But this is a fundamental truth about the entirety of women’s sports. The top woman is only there (in the vast vast majority of cases, sure there are about 3 exceptions worldwide) because men were not allowed to compete in the same event.

It’s hard to know how to debate someone who either isn’t aware of this, or chooses to ignore it completely. Without a boundary for what “woman” means in sport, there is no women’s sport, and no women on podiums, anywhere, ever.

But we are not denying people any rights any more than we are denying an older person to compete in a lower age category or an larger person to compete in a lower weight category, if we have sex based categories (that are separated based on innate advantages of one sex over another) then we need to have them as sex based not gender based.

My daughter was (is) a black belt in Tae Kwon Do – 2nd Dan – so half sensible at it.

She did fine when competing as a child as classes were based on height not age. When she had to go to adult categories based on weight (like boxing) she didn’t stand a chance. She’s not even 5ft and the lowest weight was still way above her weight. She got pummelled every time she fought and eventually stopped. She didn’t want to but accepted it was just how it is.

There is a very simple way of solving this, just dispose of gender catergories and have open competitions.

Competition is rarely fair so why worry.

I’d like to mention (again) that the definition of what it is to be a woman also has to consider the various DSD/intersex cases. While it’s somewhat different, the issues are still quite similar: what is a “woman” for the purposes of competitive sport? I don’t think the answer necessarily has to the the same for every sport.

There is a very simple way of solving this

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

Bruce
Full Member
There is a very simple way of solving this, just dispose of gender catergories and have open mens competitions

because this is what you’d end up with 99% of the time

and one more point (I know)

the ability to compete in elite level sports isn’t the problem.

It is if there is a trickle down and athletes who happen to be TG are no longer allowed to participate in ‘grass roots’ sports as a result. You might think it only matters at National / international level but there are many voices that feel it’s unfair at all levels. And to reiterate – an ‘other’ category or ‘they can still participate in means’ is not a solution.

@thecaptain – the definition of “woman” also has to consider whether or not any form of chemical or surgical change has taken place, or are we happy that self-id is sufficient?

Coincidentally (or otherwise?), there’s now a parallel thread on doping in sport, where it’s generally accepted that folk need to be protected from themselves in their pursuit of competitive advantage. I’m finding it difficult to reconcile that with the notion that nobody would be willing to “fake” transition for the same reason, particularly if that transition amounted to little more than wearing pink. Various sports bodies allowing transitioned athletes were setting some boundaries (e.g. testosterone levels) but that’s still exclusionary.

It is if there is a trickle down and athletes who happen to be TG are no longer allowed to participate in ‘grass roots’ Competition as a result.

To be blunt, it is unfair to expect grassroots competitions to allow TG athletes to have an unfair advantage over the other athletes in a competition. It’s widely seen that keeping teenage girls in sport is already really difficult due to to a number of factors. Removing / reducing their ability to complete and win on a fair playing field is not going to help keep girls interested in sports.

So what about a grass roots women’s football or netball team? Inclusive or exclusive? make them play in a men’s team? Or a team only for transwomen?

Keeping all young people in sport for the health and mental benefits is important; I’d argue the MH impacts are even more so for someone to be accepted as they are and welcomed as a person rather than othered.

@bensales, great post.

Firstly, I respect that Hannah has chosen to write this. She will have known what the comments would look like and the potential backlash and did it anyway. That deserves credit.

I agree with much of written, but like many here, competitive sport is where I have questions.

This quote made me think:
“But then I saw a social media post from a trans athlete who should have been representing her country at the UCI World Championships.”
Whilst this is true, that place on the team was taken was taken by someone else, someone who may well have been somewhat upset had that place on the team been taken by a trans woman.

It isn’t a zero sum game, the place taken by the trans athlete could have been taken by a cis athlete.

Right now, what the cycling, swimming and running world is doing seems about right. It’s not perfect, it’s a bit blunt, but at the moment it seems like the best option.

There are basically four choices.

You allow anybody who has transitioned to compete as a woman.

You have one open category.

You make anybody who is trans compete with men.

You have an LBGT category.

None of the options are satisfactory.

<p style=”box-sizing: border-box; –tw-translate-x: 0; –tw-translate-y: 0; –tw-rotate: 0; –tw-skew-x: 0; –tw-skew-y: 0; –tw-scale-x: 1; –tw-scale-y: 1; –tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; –tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; –tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; –tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); –tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; margin: 0px 0px 0.5rem; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5rem; font-family: Roboto, ‘Helvetica Neue’, Arial, ‘Noto Sans’, sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ‘Segoe UI’, ‘Apple Color Emoji’, ‘Segoe UI Emoji’, ‘Segoe UI Symbol’, ‘Noto Color Emoji’; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;”>So what about a grass roots women’s football or netball team? Inclusive or exclusive? make them play in a men’s team? Or a team only for transwomen?</p><p style=”box-sizing: border-box; –tw-translate-x: 0; –tw-translate-y: 0; –tw-rotate: 0; –tw-skew-x: 0; –tw-skew-y: 0; –tw-scale-x: 1; –tw-scale-y: 1; –tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; –tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; –tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; –tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246 / 0.5); –tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; –tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; margin: 0px 0px 0.5rem; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5rem; font-family: Roboto, ‘Helvetica Neue’, Arial, ‘Noto Sans’, sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ‘Segoe UI’, ‘Apple Color Emoji’, ‘Segoe UI Emoji’, ‘Segoe UI Symbol’, ‘Noto Color Emoji’; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;”>Keeping all young people in sport for the health and mental benefits is important; I’d argue the MH impacts are even more so for someone to be accepted as they are and welcomed as a person rather than othered.</p>

<p> </p><p>and that’s where it’s difficult – I think there is two options; firstly is three categories – men, women and open. The other option of competing with it the sex category as assigned at birth. <span style=”font-size: 0.8rem;”>On the whole, the first option of 3 categories is probably the least worst option </span></p>

None of the options are satisfactory.

Bingo, a bit like democracy it’s the best bad solution that should prevail.

firstly is three categories – men, women and open.

Why 3? Women and Open would cover all bases. A third category for open strikes me as something that would get attention for all the wrong reasons

I know I said I wasn’t going to get into this again but I couldn’t help having a look.  It’s disappointing.  I see multiple falsehoods and opinions being stated as fact and it’s the same falsehoods and opinions that have been challenged and shown to be wrong or just opinions on multiple threads and yet every thread they are once again stated as facts.

I just have to remind myself that the UK is particularly hostile towards transgender people, people over 45 are particularly hostile to transgender people, and men are particularly hostile to transgender people.  The demographics of this forum are very much skewed towards being a hostile crowd.  Hence why @hannah sticking her head above the parapet was very much appreciated.

I particularly appreciate the ‘scientists’ who have turned up, as they always do.  I tend to view people who say, ‘I’m a scientist and biological sex is very simple’ in the same way I view people who come into the bikeshop and say, ‘I’m an engineer and…’

Funnily enough, you seldom hear anyone say, ‘I’m a scientist in the field of Developmental Biology and biological sex is very simple.’

I just take solace from the fact that the younger generations are far more accepting than older generations and acceptance of transgender people is a question of time.

Oh, and if you are going to say that transwomen have a purely physical advantage over ciswomen in sport (as opposed to a cultural advantage by being raised as boys and thus having more access, support, and encouragement to take part in sport) then please show your working.

That means posting a link to research.

That doesn’t mean posting a link to a BBC article reporting on the research.

It also doesn’t mean posting a link to paywalled research that only gives you the abstract and conclusion.

Once you actually read some of the research, as I have, you realise the conclusions don’t always tally with the results.  And that’s assuming there aren’t glaring problems with the methodology to begin with. Which there always are.

The only conclusion you can really draw from the limited research so far is ‘More research needed.’ Which is made more difficult when you ban trans athletes.  But I suspect that is the idea.

@scotroutes:

the definition of “woman” also has to consider whether or not any form of chemical or surgical change has taken place, or are we happy that self-id is sufficient?

Are you talking sex, or gender?

If we’re talking sex – the definition is clear.  It’s genetic.  And no amount of chemical or surgical operation can change that reality.  You can suppress hormons, but if you grow up a girl or a boy then your body grows that way.

If we’re talking gender – again surgery doesn’t matter.  The vast majority of transgender women still have penises.   Does that mean they’re not proper women? We’ve agreed that – when we’re talking gender – that’s not the case.   So again, surgery or hormone replacement is largely irrelevant.  Conversely – self-id is sensible, doesn’t hurt anyone and allows transgender people the dignity to live their own reality.

You have to separate sex and gender.  They’re very different things.

You have an LBGT category.

What the hell would be the purpose of an ‘LGBT Category’ for sport? I am women and a lesbian. When I play competitive sports my sex (female) is important, my sexuality is irrelevant.

You have an LBGT category.

A category based partly on sexual preference?

This type of thread is just pure poison on here these days ☹️

I’m not here for a debate. In my books it’s not a debate, it’s a side show. Thank you Hannah for voicing your support.

What I will say is that trans elite athletes are a tiny percentage of a small percentage of the population. However, EVERY trans/non-binary person I know has seen a huge increase in the amount of hate and intolerance since this has become “news”. So, just think before you speak/type please and thank you.

@ BruceWee Bravo sir! (Particularly the Engineer piece. . .)

@chevychase – I chose my words carefully by using woman and not female. I don’t think that anyone on this thread believes one can change their sex. If self-id is sufficient then any category based on testosterone level or genital appearance is irrelevant anyway.

I’m not here for a debate. In my books it’s not a debate, it’s a side show. Thank you Hannah for voicing your support.

What I will say is that trans elite athletes are a tiny percentage of a small percentage of the population. However, EVERY trans/non-binary person I know has seen a huge increase in the amount of hate and intolerance since this has become “news”. So, just think before you speak/type please and thank you.

Most of the ‘hate’ you mention is just women asserting their boundaries. The ‘news’ is increasing awareness of the extent to which these boundaries are being trampled. Just a couple of weeks an established lesbian speed dating event was shut down due to complaints by trans rights activists. The complainants also reported the organiser to her employer in an attempt to rob her of her livelihood.

Most of the ‘hate’ you mention is just women asserting their boundaries.

Some are asserting their boundaries others are definitely not and for any other protected human characteristic they would be charged and prosecuted for their hateful language/actions.