More trans cycling

From the Times:

British Cycling has been accused by former Olympic competitors of discriminating against females with their policy for transgender athletes.

Emily Bridges, 21, who began hormone therapy last year, is due to compete against Laura Kenny, the five-times Olympic champion, in the National Omnium Championships in Derby on Saturday, having reduced her testosterone levels to the five nanomoles per litre required by British Cycling’s policy.

But critics such as Mara Yamauchi, the former marathon runner, and Sharron Davies, the former Olympic swimmer, feel that testosterone levels are only one of the advantages conferred during male puberty and that other factors will make the inclusion of transgender women in female sport unfair.

“The Sports Council Equality Group (SCEG) made very clear that inclusion of [trans women] in the women’s category and fairness for females cannot be balanced and that national governing bodies have a choice,” Yamauchi said yesterday. “British Cycling has chosen male inclusion instead of fairness for females. It’s an either/or — people need to understand that it was a choice and British Cycling has made that choice. That’s got to be discrimination against females. It’s not an exaggeration to say that this is about the very existence of women’s sport.”

In September, the SCEG issued guidance for community sport that “testosterone suppression is unlikely to guarantee fairness between transgender women and natal females in gender-affected sports” and there are “retained differences in strength, stamina and physique between the average woman compared with the average transgender woman or non-binary person registered male at birth”.

There are also concerns that female athletes are fearful of speaking out against the inclusion of transgender women because of the potential backlash from activists. “Many people who speak out in defence of women’s sport face abuse and death threats. I’ve had this myself,” Yamauchi said. “Fear of that abuse has led to a lot of self-silencing. I know this because I’m in touch with a lot of female athletes. I really feel for the female cyclists this weekend. The fear of being branded a transphobe or bigot, and of the loss of sponsorship or income — these are very real concerns. A lot of athletes can’t risk that and it’s much easier to stay quiet.”

Indeed. But then we get some expert analysis from one Joanna Harper - "a researcher at Loughborough University, studying the effects of gender transition on performance of athletes" - to muddy the waters: 

We can have meaningful competition in sports between right and left-handers, and left-handers even have advantages in some. The broader question is whether we can have meaningful competition between trans women and other women. We will know more when we see more high-level athletes like Emily Bridges and Lia Thomas, but we don’t yet know for certain.

Yes we do. Absolutely we know for certain. And it's surely relevant - though the Times doesn't bother to tell us - that Harper is in fact a trans woman, with a clear agenda to push for trans inclusion in women's sport.

Elsewhere Times sports writer Owen Slot wrings his hands at the awful dilemma:

This, sadly, is one of the modern-day challenges for sport for which there is no absolute solution. If you believe in fair competition, there is no correct answer for all. Adjustments, such as testosterone suppression, can be made, but nothing can properly eradicate the natural advantages of male DNA.

Therefore, either Bridges is made ineligible for competition — which penalises transgender athletes — or Bridges remains eligible and the women against whom she competes are penalised. Until science can completely remove the genetic male advantages, then it has to be one or the other.

Oh dear, oh dear. Penalising transgender athletes seems to be the worst thing one can possibly do: much worse than ruining women's sport. But what's being penalised is the inclusion of male athletes in women's competition, not transgender athletes per se. No one is suggesting they can't still compete in men's competitions. But - alas - they then wouldn't win any medals, never mind the "validation" of their chosen gender. They could do the sport - cycling, swimming - on their own, outside the world of competitive sport. Or they could organise their own trans sports. It's really not one of the world's great problems.

If men choose to transition, one of the consequences should be, quite clearly, that they can't then compete in women's sport. Either that, or women's sport is ruined. It's not really a difficult choice.

Comments

[Dom]

“… having reduced her testosterone levels to the five nanomoles per litre required by British Cycling’s policy.”

The normal t-levels for a woman is 15 to 70 nanograms per deciliter. I believe this translates to 0.5 to 2.4 nanomoles per litre. Twice as high for trans women cyclists. Of course it’s a little confusing because there is something called free blood Testosterone also.