Not In My Name: Trans Athlete Bans

@kelvin I happen to live in Brighton. There are trans-inclusive women’s groups, and there are even a number of trans-only groups. A woman tried to organise one, single female-only group group, but that can’t be tolerated.

I’ve just realised how many of the contributors on this thread haven’t actually been able to read the original article.

Listen to women instead of dismissing them.

hes agreeing with hannah

I had thought we had stopped burning people to death for their beliefs 400 years ago, but in the world of social media the issue of transgender athletes seems to have started it again.

Live your life with kindness and tolerance.  Beware of people who have certainty for they will almost certainly be wrong.

 

 

Beware of people who have certainty for they will almost certainly be wrong.

This ^^^

The problem with competitive sport is that we’ve grown up with it the way it is and we’re not really sure what to do about it. Originally it was ‘leta see who can run the fastest’, then when women wanted to play the men said ‘maybe we’ll let the women have a go’ and then we had two categories and that’s how it stayed.

It’s flawed for whole load of reasons, so it’s not really like we are trying to return to some simple truth.

I don’t think I covered myself in glory yesterday. I was angry and I’m never at my most persuasive or empathetic when I’m angry.  I think Hannah said everything I was trying to say in a far far better way than I ever could so I’ll do what I should have done in the first place and just pick out a few parts that really chimed with me and step out (for real this time, I promise).  It’s also chimes with what I hear from a lot (but not all) my female friends and family.

Hope this is OK (and I really think this article should be read by everyone so I would recommend removing the paywall for it).

And then I thought, it’s one thing for me to fear the comments section telling me my opinion is wrong. How must it feel to have the comments section telling you your existence is wrong? Debating your right to exist, to compete, to live life in its entirety?

All too often I see women saying things along the lines of ‘we’ve fought hard for this and trans people are taking it away from us’. My attitude is ‘we’ve fought hard for this and now we have the power to help others have it too’.

It seems more important to me to say ‘we’re a welcoming and tolerant society that embraces everyone’ than to say ‘this podium is only for us, because some of you might possibly have an unfair advantage, although we don’t really know where to draw the line on where that is or even if it actually exists’

The new policies set definitions of what it is to be a woman, and along with that there comes finger pointing, lab tests, and judgement. Does she look like a woman? Should she be asked to prove she’s not a trans woman? Do female athletes need to conform to some sort of ideal or norm in order to avoid such speculation?

If you do want to see the perpetuation and growth of women’s sport, trans women are not the issue. The sidelining of women’s events so that they don’t get equal coverage and equal prize money is the issue. Spurious (demeaning, objectifying) differences in professional sporting uniform requirements are the issue. The cat-calling and threat of violence that puts women off training alone, or at night, is the issue. The policing of girls’ bodies so that they feel too fat/too thin/too exposed/too sweaty when exercising through the changing bodies of their teenage years is the issue. The men that stare, or grope, or threaten. The men that don’t call out other men that stare or grope or threaten. Predatory coaches. Those are the issues. Not trans women. Addressing those issues, in sport and wider society, would make the world a better place for all of us

I’ve responded to other comments, but I’ve not acutally responded to Hannah’s post. Here’s one point I’d like to address:

Now that I and other women get to enjoy the freedoms we’ve fought for, why would we stand in the way of others experiencing them too? If we women thought it was unfair and detrimental to our abilities to live life to the full if we couldn’t participate in sport at all levels, surely we should understand how it feels to be excluded?

Trans women are not exluded from sports, and have never been excluded from sports. The point simply isn’t valid because this isn’t a question of having a right to particiapte or compete per se. It’s about the right to participate and compete in the category of one’s choosing, because competing in one category might make someone feel good while competing in another category might make them feel bad.

A “welcoming and tolerant society that embraces everyone” is a good thing, but this discussion is about priviledge not equality. However bad gender dysphoria is for those who experience it, I can’t support policies which require that female people (I’m using these terms to avoid starting a side argument) to give up opportiunities and rights in order to make male people feel better. It sounds very patriarchal, whatever Hannah might have said about not wanting to join it.

And until someone can show me a time in hostory when female people were the oppressors of male people, I’ll contiue to believe this arguement is topsy-turvy:

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.

As Hannah said, “The Equal Pay Act didn’t come in until after I was born, and it’s still not fully implemented”. We should be extremely wary (to say the least) of laws and policies which detrement female people to the benefit of male people.

Trans women are not exluded from sports, and have never been excluded from sports. The point simply isn’t valid because this isn’t a question of having a right to particiapte or compete per se. It’s about the right to participate and compete in the category of one’s choosing, because competing in one category might make someone feel good while competing in another category might make them feel bad.

Well, sure, that may be true, but from the perspective of trans people (and possibly others), this is little like saying Rosa Parks wasn’t excluded from public transportation in Montgomery, and she was really juat arguing about the right to sit wherever she wanted so she could feel better.

But in any case, if “trans men are excluded from men’s sport and trans women are excluded from women’s sport” seems less confusing from your perspective than merely “trans people are excluded from sport”, then okay…

We should be extremely wary (to say the least) of laws and policies which detrement female people to the benefit of male people.

I agree with this – without necessarily agreeing with what your definition of female and male are – if only out of caution to the principle itself…

I don’t think I covered myself in glory yesterday.

@Bruce, I think you’re wildly wrong about many political issues 😉 and I am lost as to whether you’re right or wrong on this issue. However, I think you have been remarkably patient and level-headed on this thread considering some of the abrasive and obnoxious language and dogpiling that has popped up at points. (I am not including people like rainper in that, who have expressed their strongly-held views in a way that is uncompromising and clear, but not wilfully abusive).

this is little like saying Rosa Parks wasn’t excluded from public transportation in Montgomery

It’s absolutely not like that. Not morally, historically or legally.

If all discrimination were the same, the Equality Act would be very short indeed: One category/treatment for all people, for all things, in all situations”.

I’ll rephrase my last comment as: “If all unequal treatment were the same, the Equality Act would be very short indeed”. It’s a clearer way to describe the different treatment (legal discrimination of sorts) that the EA lays out.

maybe I’ve missed them, but I genuinely haven’t read many abrasive or abusive comments on this thread, other than a couple by one poster

Saying ‘I don’t agree that trans woman should compete for x reason’ is not abusive. You may not agree with the reason, but overall I think it’s been a reasonably respectful debate

Out of interest, has this thread generated the same spirited discussion on the ‘ladies only’ forum, and if so what’s the general consensus? I’d be far more interested in hearing their opinions tbh.

Frankly @tpbiker, I thought that too.  So I clicked on it knowing that I wasn’t allowed to contribute but interested to see what is being said.

Then I found I’m not even allowed to read it.   Which is unforgivable, tbh.

Freedom of speech is freedom to be exposed to ideas – it’s not just what you can say, it’s what you’re allowed to hear.  I’d like to give STW the benefit of the doubt and that either that pillar of freedom of speech hasn’t occured to them, or that they don’t know how to implement read-only access.

But I’d very much like to see that fixed.

why the **** do you think you should be entitled to read the women’s forum?

So to summarise. It’s important that women have protected spaces, but we have to be allowed in to know what they’re doing in them. Right-o

But isn’t inclusivity everything?
We are all equal some are more equal than others.

It’s almost like someone just thrives on controversy.

And then I thought, it’s one thing for me to fear the comments section telling me my opinion is wrong. How must it feel to have the comments section telling you your existence is wrong? Debating your right to exist, to compete, to live life in its entirety?

Denying that transwomen should be able to compete in womens sport does not equate to saying their existence is wrong, that they should not exist, that they they should not be able to compete. No one can live life in its entirety if that means everyone being entitled to do everything that anyone else is entitled to do.

All too often I see women saying things along the lines of ‘we’ve fought hard for this and trans people are taking it away from us’. My attitude is ‘we’ve fought hard for this and now we have the power to help others have it too’.

Women fought for the right to compete. Transwomen have the right to compete in the sex based category they qualify for. They are fighting for the right to compete in a category they don’t qualify for.

It seems more important to me to say ‘we’re a welcoming and tolerant society that embraces everyone’ than to say ‘this podium is only for us, because some of you might possibly have an unfair advantage, although we don’t really know where to draw the line on where that is or even if it exists

Being welcoming and tolerant does not preclude categorisation. Regarding sex based categories, the line is very clear. There are two human sexes, male and female, and humans can’t change sex.

The new policies set definitions of what it is to be a woman, and along with that there comes finger pointing, lab tests, and judgement. Does she look like a woman? Should she be asked to prove she’s not a trans woman? Do female athletes need to conform to some sort of ideal or norm in order to avoid such speculation?

The ideal situation is that women’s category boundaries are respected by all men, however they identify, and so testing isn’t necessary. Given some people would likely try to take advantage, testing may be necessary in some cases.

If you do want to see the perpetuation and growth of women’s sport, trans women are not the issue. The sidelining of women’s events so that they don’t get equal coverage and equal prize money is the issue. Spurious (demeaning, objectifying) differences in professional sporting uniform requirements are the issue. The cat-calling and threat of violence that puts women off training alone, or at night, is the issue. The policing of girls’ bodies so that they feel too fat/too thin/too exposed/too sweaty when exercising through the changing bodies of their teenage years is the issue. The men that stare, or grope, or threaten. The men that don’t call out other men that stare or grope or threaten. Predatory coaches. Those are the issues. Not trans women. Addressing those issues, in sport and wider society, would make the world a better place for all of us

If prize money matters then the taking of winning spaces by transwomen matters. If body consciousness is an issue then having trans identifying men or boys in changing rooms is an issue. That there are also wider societal issues such as cat calling or the threat of violence is irrelevant to the trans argument. Womens sport does not benefit when it allows in a subset of men.

I disagreed with the concept of the woman’s forum in the first place.  But I accepted that I wasn’t allowed to contribute simply because of my sex.   But to not be able to read it is a really insidious form of censorship.

Freedom of speech is two parts – one the ability to impart your ideas and two, equally important (potentially more important) is the ability to receive them.

Now, STW is a privately owned space, so it’s up to them.  But there’s a reason that Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1st Amendment of the US constitution enshrines the right to receive information and ideas.

Restricting access to even read the forum doesn’t make it any less of a “safe space” – because the women on that forum cannot be subjected to the horrible bile that us demon men are just gagging to fire at them.  Chomping at the bit, verily.   But what it does do, is prohibit exposure to women’s ideas from the very people who potentially most need to hear them – us idiot male abusers.

It’s akin to banning books tbh.   However, only for men.

@chevychase – I sort of understand where you’re coming from. For many men, being able to read what women think about this issue might be informative and educational. However, I also think that having a space “away from prying eyes” might help women be a bit more open and honest. It’s a difficult balance for sure, but this “open” forum still exists for any woman that wants to come over and help with the education process.

If they want us to hear ideas then they can come on here and tell us. As, indeed, Hannah did, 300 posts ago before being told her ideas were wrong (at least by some if not the majority)

If they don’t want to share, they have a protected space where they can discuss away from middle aged blokes interfering.

I did note and repeat too, the women’s forum is for those that identify as women. Yay, inclusivity in action.

It’s akin to banning books tbh.

I laughed so hard and long at that, I had to take a breath.

Then I found I’m not even allowed to read it. Which is unforgivable, tbh.

Getting all quantum the act of observing may change the observed behaviours.
To claim it is unforgivable is, to put it mildly, a bit special. If for no other reason than if it gets all mumsnetly I think it would be best to save all us blokes from it.

Anyway back on subject.
I really dont know if there is any good answer to this. That its MtF and not the other way round is telling I think.
I can sort of see why some women would oppose it and I can sort of see the other side as well.
I think if a supporter of either side talked to me I would be convinced but when the other side supporter came to me next I would switch sides ad nauseum.

Ffs, why the aggression?

Just to be clear I don’t want access, nor to read the woman’s forum. I have zero issue with them having their own forum.

however excuse me if I’m interested in the opinion of the party most affected by this, women, so was hoping one of the few ladies on this thread may be able to shed some light on the what they all think, rather than a bunch of middle aged blokes who’s opinion on the matter I don’t really give a hoot about either way

Obviously Hannah was the OP, and a few other ladies have chipped in already. My female mate also had a browse of this thread and simply shook her head in dismay, although that was more to do with the squabbling than having a strong opinion either way..

edit..maybe some of the above comments were aimed at the ‘unforgivable we shouldn’t be able to read it’ post! It’s a women’s forum, we should absolutely not be able to access it imo.

But isn’t inclusivity everything?
We are all equal some are more equal than others.

For about the 10th time. No, inclusivity doesn’t automatically mean the same thing as treating everyone equally. It means treating people fairly and respectfully, and if that means the more privileged have to from time to time take a hit for the inclusive benefit of the less privileged – then that’s what needs to happen.

Same philosophies as BLM, or if a house in your road catches fire, demanding the fire brigade hose all houses equally.

@tp, I don’t think the ‘aggression’ is aimed at you, rather elsewhere; ie your edit is correct

I did note and repeat too, the women’s forum is for those that identify as women.

Which, in itself, means that some women one won’t be thinking of it as the “safe space”, but that was all covered when the womens forum was first established.

@scotroutes

I also think that having a space “away from prying eyes” might help women be a bit more open and honest

You think so?  Is that what male-only spaces engendered?

If not, why do you think women-only spaces would encourage anything different?

For me, rather than “prying eyes” I think “light of day” is the more apt saying.

It’s a balance, yes, but not a massively difficult one IMO.  There’s a double standard we’re accepting of, but for me, that acceptance has limits and not being to express myself is one thing, but not being able to receive information is another. It’s not a restriction that makes me comfortable at all – for the reasons I linked above.   Yes, it’s a private company trying to do the right thing and I fully appreciate that.  But a bit more high-mindedness when it comes to how STW restricts people on the basis of their sex would be welcome.

TBH if you want to get the opinions of a number of women on this topic, the best thing you could do would be to ask them.

Yes, it’s a private company trying to do the right thing and I fully appreciate that.  But a bit more high-mindedness when it comes to how STW restricts people on the basis of their sex would be welcome.

I think gender is the more appropriate term there.

I think quoting the human rights act is a bit melodramatic!!

I’d like to hear what the ladies think if they were willing to share on here, simply as it might actually educate us on their opinion! (As scotsroute points out). I’m hearing alot of ‘the ladies won’t be happy with trans folks competing against them’, but so far we have only heard from a sample size of 2, split very much down the middle on the issue

@scotsroutes,

I have asked 2 ladies at my cycle club previously. Both strongly against which influences my thinking somewhat. A pretty small sample size tbf, but all I have to go on for now!

@scotroutes:

TBH if you want to get the opinions of a number of women on this topic, the best thing you could do would be to ask them.

Women are free to volunteer it and a few have.  I would, however, have liked to have seen a more female-centric discussion to see how it panned out.  But I’m denied that on the basis of my sex.

@theotherjonv

I think gender is the more appropriate term there.

No.  I used sex, because sex is the appropriate term.  Sex and gender being completely different things.

Edit:  Just had a thought about this.   Are trans-women allowed on the women’s forum in STW on the basis of self-identification?

Mods?

@tpbiker

I think quoting the human rights act is a bit melodramatic!!

It applies everywhere, not just to the most extreme cases.  I was using it to illustrate a principle.

People should be more mindful of principles all through their lives.  They’re what guide us.   Like the principle of innocent until proven guilty.  If we’re not mindful of that we get mob rule and witch-hunts.   And it’s the little transgressions that are the most dangerous – because they normalise that behaviour.  Then the next transgression is a little bigger – and then you’re on a slippery slope.

I think we’re more than halfway down that slope now in the UK and it’s frankly terrifying.  And the most terrifying bit is that most of the population doesn’t even understand the principles, never mind pay them any attention.

I have asked 2 ladies at my cycle club previously. Both strongly against which influences my thinking somewhat.

Did you / anyone else present the case for?

I went on a long club ride and had an extended chat with a lady about this. She didn’t know I had a chip in the game, until I mentioned it (early on, wasn’t a trap). She’s also age group competitive, used to be a rower and now cycling (no she’s not Rebecca Romero) so definitely has a chip in the game too.

At first she was strongly against but when I spoke about my son’s struggles with – yes, here it comes again, inclusion – and being accepted more than anything, she started to come around. It wasn’t that long a ride that she changed her mind, and I don’t think she ever would / will but she was glad of the talk and now at least has a much better understanding of what she is actually against.

Which is all I ask for. Don’t change your opinion if you still think that way but understand what the other argument is and the impact it has. Sure, we’ll disagree but that’s OK.

Edit:  Just had a thought about this.   Are trans-women allowed on the women’s forum in STW on the basis of self-identification?

Mods?

Yes. As I put in a previous post and hence why I offered the correction.

Singletrack Women’s Forum

~theotherjonv

Yes. As I put in a previous post and hence why I offered the correction.

I stand corrected. 🙂

Didn’t know you’re a mod?  If so, perhaps consider read-only access for those who identify as men?

I can neither confirm or deny that. And if I was that’s not something for mods anyway IMHO, that’s a STW policy decision.

I think the discussion was done pretty well when it was announced, in

https://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/get-ready-for-the-singletrack-womens-forum/

– a discussion in which you played an active part.

No I didn’t present the case for or against, I simply asked in conversation

unlike you I don’t have a chip in the game. If the ladies who trans athletes compete against are happy for them to do so, then I’m all for it. if not then I have reservations.

i find it a very interesting topic, but as it doesn’t personally affect me in any way, my own personal views on the matter are kind of irrelevant imo

not every one is going to be happy with the way this ends up going, but either way I hope all parties are treated with the respect they deserve 👍

If the ladies who trans athletes compete against are happy for them to do so, then I’m all for it. if not then I have reservations.

Ah, but that’s part of the issue. How many TG athletes will they have competed against? Maybe none because of the assumption they won’t be welcomed, are just there to pot-hunt, because that’s the mainstream press line. In fact, how many TG people do they know and are they aware of the isolation that these decisions may be having on them?

That’s the issue. The TG community is being steadily marginalised by Government, sections of society and even from within the LGBTQ+ community. And sport and competition is one ‘easy’ battleground that is being used; another is GI in youth and adolescents. Rarely is the alternate view presented, and when it is (back to Hannah’s article) then ‘common sense says….’ is the response. Is it really common sense or is it the steady drip of everything being written being one sided?

Just look at the tone of the Pippa York cafe ride rebuttal that I posted a page or two back. By all means argue the points but it’s done in a horrible and unscientific way.