Talk

Advanced search

Connecticut high school sports transgender policy violates civil rights of female athletes

(55 Posts)
Lamahaha Thu 28-May-20 17:34:44

www.clickondetroit.com/news/national/2020/05/28/connecticut-transgender-policy-found-to-violate-title-ix/

HARTFORD, Conn. – A Connecticut policy that allows transgender athletes to compete in girls sports violates the civil rights of female athletes, the U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights has ruled.

The ruling, which was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, comes in response to a complaint filed last year by several female track athletes, who argued that two transgender runners who were identified as male at birth had an unfair physical advantage.

grin

OP’s posts: |
Mrsmorton Thu 28-May-20 17:37:00

Oh wow.

Sparkyduchess Thu 28-May-20 17:37:32

Omg! I am so pleased with this, finally someone recognised that female people matter 😊

Cuntysnark Thu 28-May-20 17:40:09

Wonderful news.

Lamahaha Thu 28-May-20 17:40:15

This is however separate from the ongoing federal lawsuit filed by three female athletes.

apnews.com/8fd300537131153cc44e0cf2ade3244b

OP’s posts: |
Babdoc Thu 28-May-20 17:41:45

Let’s hope it applies to the whole USA, and female athletes who have lost out on sports scholarships to universities, due to male bodied athletes taking their places, can sue for damages.

NonnyMouse1337 Thu 28-May-20 18:13:14

Very good news.

BatShite Thu 28-May-20 18:14:10

Unsurprising tbh, as blatantly obvious. But good news.

boatyardblues Thu 28-May-20 18:16:13

This is cheering news. I hope the federal case is heard fairly and impartially.

CaraDune Thu 28-May-20 18:23:30

Hooray.

I hope the federal case is heard fairly and impartially. Is that your tongue I see in your cheek, boatyard? That'll be the case going before the judge who is trying to prevent the complainants' counsel from using any factually accurate biologically based language that would clearly and unequivocally identify the male runners as male, because to do so would be unkind.

MrsNoah2020 Thu 28-May-20 18:36:48

This is great news but the ruling doesn't over-ride State law. It's basically just an opinion on policy until it's tested in court and, unless the girls win their lawsuit, it is highly likely to be over-turned if Biden wins in November.

If the girls do win, however, there is a good chance of them also winning the inevitable subsequent appeals, as Trump has placed conservative judges in many key judicial positions (not just the Supreme Court). Of course, this is not a good thing for women's rights in general, but it is good news for this case, And at least the current judge has shown pretty incontrovertible evidence of extrinsic bias, which is likely to be grounds for the girls to appeal if they lose in this round.

boatyardblues Thu 28-May-20 18:42:21

Is that your tongue I see in your cheek, boatyard?

wink

Gncq Thu 28-May-20 18:45:32

What's so upsetting is that they were allowed to compete with females in the first place.

Gncq Thu 28-May-20 18:48:06

That'll be the case going before the judge who is trying to prevent the complainants' counsel from using any factually accurate biologically based language that would clearly and unequivocally identify the male runners as male, because to do so would be unkind.

sad

OvaHere Thu 28-May-20 18:48:58

Great news but yes shocking that it was considered reasonable in the first place.

FWRLurker Thu 28-May-20 19:01:06

Unfortunately this will be used as further evidence of if this administration being “anti LGBT” when actually it’s obvious to literally everyone this is unfair.

Apparently the athletes are now claiming the trans women are taking HRT to “even the playing field” but the records being challenged were set before They were on any hormones (mere months after they were competing as boys iirc)...

MrsNoah2020 Thu 28-May-20 19:06:17

Apparently the athletes are now claiming the trans women are taking HRT to “even the playing field” but the records being challenged were set before They were on any hormones (mere months after they were competing as boys iirc)

Also, that is effectively an admission that transwomen not on HRT do have an unfair advantage, which previously Andraya Yearwood & co had vehemently denied. This is one of the good things about the US reliance on the courts to test policy - it often brings scrutiny to the assumptions underlying government (State or Federal) policy that, in the UK, would be hidden.

BatShite Thu 28-May-20 19:06:35

...HRT doesn't take away the advantages anyway, so not sure why that gets used as an excuse. Yeah it might possibly make you weaker in comparison to other men, but it does not take away biological advantages male puberty brings..

Mind, you do get TW who claim, among many other insulting things, that after transitioning they can no longer open jars. Same as how they suddenly become horrific drivers apparently hmm

FWRLurker Thu 28-May-20 19:13:19

Yes The sexism is appalling, I’ve also heard from Trans men That they took a sudden interest in science And math after starting TEstosterone.

MrsNoah2020 Thu 28-May-20 19:20:02

...HRT doesn't take away the advantages anyway, so not sure why that gets used as an excuse

I agree. But the point is that, by claiming that HRT is levelling the playing field (even though it isn't), Yearwood et al are effectively admitting that competing without HRT - as they were before - is unfair.

That is a really significant concession and quite a foolish one for them to have made, IME. If they had stuck to the line that 'fairness' to TW trumps all other considerations, they might have won out because that principle is arguably unaffected by biological reality - it is simply an issue of fairness to trans people (Again, this is not my own view, I am just summarising what their lawyers would likely argue)

Once they start conceding that measures need to be taken to reduce unfairness if TW compete against girls, they open up whole issue of biological differences between TW and XX women to scrutiny.

BatShite Thu 28-May-20 19:23:37

I agree. But the point is that, by claiming that HRT is levelling the playing field (even though it isn't), Yearwood et al are effectively admitting that competing without HRT - as they were before - is unfair.

Ah yeah, I see what you mean. Bit slow today it seems

Michelleoftheresistance Thu 28-May-20 19:38:56

Well it clearly makes the point - T 'rights' are the removal of female civil rights. That's what it boils down to. Any pleas to overturn this or anger about this is simply resistance to females retaining civil rights.

Datun Thu 28-May-20 19:45:39

Babdoc

Let’s hope it applies to the whole USA, and female athletes who have lost out on sports scholarships to universities, due to male bodied athletes taking their places, can sue for damages.

That'll do it. Bring it on.

Winesalot Thu 28-May-20 19:50:44

Awesome stuff!

ThinEndoftheWedge Thu 28-May-20 20:28:17

A good start, but a long way to go.

And this nonsensical HRT argument. Reduces male muscle mass - but not to female levels and has NO impact on anatomical, physiological, biomechanical and anthropometric male advantage.

The Connecticut girls are extraordinary.

Yet again - why is this left to girls? Where are all the grown ups? I would like male athletes/grandees to speak out about this. Seb Coe. Usain Bolt etc - apart from Daley Thompson. Where the hell are these guys? If they don’t speak out, they are all complicit in the removal of safe, equitable and fair sport for women and girls.

The categories should be women and open, not men and mixed sex.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in