I think this will happen more and more

21 year old transwoman Emily Bridges is to race in women's cycling.

"Emily Bridges has continued to race against men for the past year while undergoing hormone therapy, and her successes include a gold medal at the recent University Championships in Nottingham."

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10656169/Team-GB-cycling-stars-face-losing-Olympics-places-trans-woman.html

It will be interesting to see if they improve from their last race in the Dorpenomloop Rucphen (Elite Men) FarNorth. They scored 0 and were placed 0. But that might improve when they compete against women.

You know how we're told everything in Ireland is just fine, with self-id of sex?

"Irish powerlifter 'felt cheated' after losing to transgender woman"

www.newstalk.com/news/irish-powerlifter-felt-cheated-after-losing-to-transgender-woman-1325401#Echobox=1648246332

FarNorth

You know how we're told everything in Ireland is just fine, with self-id of sex?

"Irish powerlifter 'felt cheated' after losing to transgender woman"

www.newstalk.com/news/irish-powerlifter-felt-cheated-after-losing-to-transgender-woman-1325401#Echobox=1648246332

She was cheated.

Genuine question here - I'd like to know opinions, particularly from the trans community who will have thought about this much more deeply: there is significant evidence that shows that it is the gender of the person at puberty that has a strong link with future athletic ability. I.e. that people going through puberty as a male will retain these advantages.

I understand, of course, many of the problems of using this to categorise (for sports) but what would be the philosophical support or objection to it?

gender of the person at puberty

The biological sex of the person is always the same, at puberty or any other time.

Big surprise, here's another one.

twitter.com/thetimes/status/1508712115233865729

Emily Bridges has been banned from taking part this time. amp.theguardian.com/sport/2022/mar/30/trans-cyclist-emily-bridges-banned-from-racing-at-british-meeting-after-uci-ruling.
The reasons are to do with him still being registered as a man, but I’m not sure how one athlete can be allowed to take drugs and it be legal, yet another can be banned for taking drugs.

From what I understand sajid javid is going to do an interview on sport today, stressing the importance of biological sex. Labour will be unable to comment because they are pretty much incoherent on the subject. How many party leaders are going to be impacted by the inability to discuss this topic, Starmer is the third by my reckoning.

It's very telling that the reason Emily can't race is not because of the inherent unfairness of being male, having gone through a male puberty with all it's advantages, but because he is still registered male. Well he would be wouldn't he, he's been racing in the male category up to and including last week. Why can't Emily change pronouns and still race with her biological sex?

Can Emily ever be registered as female?
Saying males can be a woman, may be inherently wrong, but it’s been made legal in the 2004 version at the request of men.

But saying males can be female would really be a lie, not even semantics.

Who on GN would tell lies, or endorse the telling of lies by others?

We’ve even had threads on “Is it ever all right to lie?”.
Are we to expect that the next step will be to demand that the word female must also be tinkered around with to accommodate men?

I think that there needs to be trans categories in single sex sports, either that or the trans person continues to compete within the sex category they were at birth.

I know there are multiple threads on this subject, but I am not advocating for me, I am advocating for my DD, DiLs and GDs, they must not have any sporting aims dashed because someone decides they are female despite having male physiology steals their dreams.

Rosie51

It's very telling that the reason Emily can't race is not because of the inherent unfairness of being male, having gone through a male puberty with all it's advantages, but because he is still registered male. Well he would be wouldn't he, he's been racing in the male category up to and including last week. Why can't Emily change pronouns and still race with her biological sex?

Yes. Emily's private life is (or should be) private, and could be lived 'as a woman' or not.

But that should be entirely separate from the racing. We don't ask about sports personalities' sexuality, as it's irrelevant. Why should 'gender identification' be any different? Competition should be graded by biological sex, and their private lives should be private.

GG13 A good suggestion, made by someone else was that there should be male, female and an ‘open’ category.
Competitors could then choose between racing in their birth sex race or the open category.
That would obviate the need for anyone to declare themselves trans-if they did not wish to publicise their sex.

Galaxy

From what I understand sajid javid is going to do an interview on sport today, stressing the importance of biological sex. Labour will be unable to comment because they are pretty much incoherent on the subject. How many party leaders are going to be impacted by the inability to discuss this topic, Starmer is the third by my reckoning.

Johnson seems to be trying to face both ways at the moment, and I'm curious about what he really thinks. He's waffled, as ever, and not really answered yet.

According to Conservative Home, he was making off colour jokes and mocking "transgender/defining what makes a woman" etc at the shindig the Tories threw Monday evening.

Yesterday, he was all understanding, all encompassing and verbally supportive of "Jamie", and the issue.

I think Johnson as usual has seen a political opportunity, its one of his few skills, he knows what a woman is anf also knows labour look weak on it, whats not to like for him. I dont think he cares about womens rights or transpeople.

I don’t think he cares about womens rights or transpeople.
Pretty accurate!

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202203/medium-876082-f39ad2b4-44d2-4420-a2fa-1f7e5152f76e.jpeg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202203/medium-397334-1958738e-ecf9-432f-b3c8-6c06495816bd.jpeg

Competition should be graded by biological sex absolutely, except in those few areas where sex of the individual is irrelevant. Equestrian events have always been mixed sex since it has no bearing on the skill of the rider.
You have to wonder why sports have been sex segregated if there is no advantage to males who've gone through a male puberty. Maybe it was just for aesthetics as in the uniforms required? Compare and contrast the official uniform requirements for beach volleyball for instance.
Are transmen who take testosterone allowed to compete, surely that counts as doping? I don't remember ever seeing a case of a transman medal winner, or hearing of a natal male being denied his place on a team, or in an event, having been ousted by a transman.

Oh yes, where sex is irrelevant there is no need to include it. I don’t have the expertise to say which sports that would apply to, but would happily defer to the opinions of independent experts.

Doodledog

Oh yes, where sex is irrelevant there is no need to include it. I don’t have the expertise to say which sports that would apply to, but would happily defer to the opinions of independent experts.

which sports that would apply to Very few! And I think they already are mixed sex, sailing is another one. Any extras that are to be brought into that category would need transparent evidence by truly independent experts that sex differences have no impact.

Cartoon in Private Eye's latest issue. So mixed species soon?

As more athletes begin to speak out, here is an interesting article :

"For example, the Tokyo men’s marathon qualifying time was 2:11:30, but the women’s world record is 2:14:04 – no female would ever come close to qualifying. Even on testosterone (which is banned under the WADA Code in and out of competition), we know from doping female athletes of the past that doping makes females perform better than non-doping females, but nowhere near as well as males."

athleticsweekly.com/blog/asking-for-fairness-1039954658/

Why should 'gender identification' be any different?

*Because a male person may lose a little ability, making him drop back in his male sport
*Because a male person ranking poorly can suddenly become a much-lauded winner
*Because some male persons like the idea of claiming to be a woman
*Because, in addition, some male persons like the idea of inserting themselves where female people don't want them to be

None of those are good reasons to allow male persons in females' sports.

Transmen who are not on testosterone can continue to take part in females' sports, and some do that.

FarNorth

Transmen who are not on testosterone can continue to take part in females' sports, and some do that.

That’s because transmen are female.

Thanks for the link FarNorth

It says it all.

Sport is performed by human bodies which are one of the two sexes – male or female. Sport is not performed by identities; we don’t, for example, have categories based on religion or voting preference.

Many male advantages cannot be changed at all, such as larger skeleton, skeleton shape and a larger heart and lungs. In the words of sports scientist Dr Ross Tucker “once testosterone has done its work during male puberty, it cannot be undone”.

In other words, the current campaign to allow trans athletes to compete in the category of their gender identity, in practice, benefits males only (and that comes at the expense of females who are excluded from their own category).

Females not permitted to take testosterone supplements will never be able to compete on an equal footing with men, so transmen have to make a choice between continuing with their sporting ambitions in the female class or having an effective transition. That is fair for females but not males? Tells you everything you need to know. This whole policy is by men for men, and women as usual should shove up, shut up and put up.