This really is the patriarchy in action, isn’t it? That’s the word we should be using (particularly when we are told we should just roll over and ‘be kind’)

And btw I think there should be options of mixed sex and single sex social leagues, so females have options

@haw

Well, either "female" and "open" categories. This is the only way in sports where you need to play against someone - trans women would generally have to play against men, save in social leagues where women have consented to mixed sex competition. This is fairer, given differences in strength and bone density.

Or separate "transwoman"/"trans man" categories - if there is no one declared in the race starters, then you don't have to award a prize. This is easy for individual sports - golf/running/swimming etc.

I don't think it is difficult to balance fairness and inclusion, if you are happy to start with the premise that trans women are not biological women but should have options to play sport.

I would be fuming OP and would be complaining to whoever appropriate. This isn't on and we shouldn't be rolling over

We're way past "micro-aggressions" here.

Aren’t we just.

Out of interest if you're willing to share, in response to the it's so difficult comments, how would you easily address this to make competitive sport both fair and inclusive in the future?

Could you tell us why it is not fair and inclusive for all males of whatever gender to compete together ?

Wouldn't it be fair and inclusive to also have an 'open' category where any one can enter and then a female category? It has been suggested a few times on this thread if I remember correctly.

Out of interest if you're willing to share, in response to the it's so difficult comments, how would you easily address this to make competitive sport both fair and inclusive in the future?

This is interesting, tbh.

I mean many of those on this thread who are like "it's so difficult" "no one should have to put themselves" "be kind" "it doesn't matter" are doing so from a place where they have been so heavily socialised as a female that they cannot conceive of a situation in which it would be acceptable to hurt someone's feelings, even if not grounded in reality. I'm not into gratuitously upsetting people, but equally this is not inclusion, this is just pretending.

Ask yourselves, why would anyone not want to celebrate a transwoman running well as a transwoman (I would, so would others in this thread)? Why would it necessarily be awful for someone (who often doesn't pass as female - OP clearly had doubts that she tried to suppress to be kind...) to have to be be out as a trans woman for racing purposes? Why is it better to place as a "woman" in the race but have everyone quietly thinking "that person is absolutely not female and shouldn't really be competing against females as it is unfair"? Why would it be better (and mentally healthy) for someone to live their whole life knowing that everyone else is trying their best to ignore objective truth for their benefit? Inclusion could mean celebrating trans women as trans women.

Ask yourselves, honestly, would a man do this if the situation were reversed and he was beaten by someone who didn't belong in the relevant category? would a trans man think it were acceptable to compete against men knowing they had advantages and would men put up with it?

It will be better once more and more transitioned males compete with their sex to remove any obstacle to their participation.

Absolutely this!

*the formatting today is nuts! I had three paragraphs!

I wonder why trans women want to run against actual females anyway, the victories are so hollow and they must know that.

People want to socialise with the same people they usually socialise with. This was a fun run so mainly social with only a bit of competition thrown in.

The opportunity for victory was unexpected and the "victory" might well have felt hollow afterwards but refusing the place would have been noticeable and required explanations and fuss. "Today I'll go on a fun run and out myself".

Jaiyah Saelua is an international level rugby player who plays as a male. I also remember that the Samoan president, Tuilaepa Sailed Malielegaoi did not support Laurel Hubbards inclusion in the Olympics either.

www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/29/jaiyah-saelua-transgender-footballer-interview

There was also a transitioned male skier who also only ever competed as a male.

It will be better once more and more transitioned males compete with their sex to remove any obstacle to their participation.

I agree that it's forced complicity in our own oppression.

If this person has a GRC though I wonder how that would change things?

And if you write to the governing body OP I think it may be worth pointing out that there's now one single sex group and then another for everybody else.

I do think you should write, but like a pp said, from an anonymous email. And explain why you're not giving your name too.

But how do you know this runner is trans? You haven't answered it. If they pass so well that nobody knows, did they tell you?

It maybe depends what you count as a 'victory'. Is it a 'victory' to win against a bunch of people whom you know you have an advantage over, or is a victory to get away with deception, or is it a victory to impose yourself on people when you know they are unable or unlikely to protest? Some people even see humiliation and ridicule as a kind of victory, believe it or not.

And what transwoman is going to choose to race in a category that labels them as "not actually a woman", especially if they believe they are "living as a woman"?

We have just been given the example of a transwoman golfer who does compete in the correct sex category.

Although until recently some golf clubs barred women so a transwoman insisting on playing as a woman would have had to give up, or find another club.

NecessaryScene, forgive me, I don't follow the argument here:

'What happens to trans people with a GRC whose passports and birth certificates record them as female?'

'Well, that doesn't affect transwomen, then. Documentation saying "female" means nothing, so them waving a birth certificate saying "female" isn't going to gain them entry.'

If someone's passport says female, doesn't that mean they're eligible to race with women? And if they're an ex-man/transwoman with a GRC and a passport/birth certificate saying 'female', that DOES affect transwomen, no, because it affects them...?

Again, forgive me: it's post-lunch and I have very little brain...

No, and I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. I believe that transwomen should compete in the male/open category at all levels of all sports in which there is a separate category for women, and that the organisers of small grassroots races should not be obliged to take on the additional administrative burden of providing an additional category and prizes for them. Unfortunately, we're dependent upon males who want to be regarded as women being honest enough to refrain from racing as women, and I don't know what we can do to enforce that without a clear directive from the national athletics organisations covering the entire sport.

I wonder if you would have wanted her to

OP has said that she would have preferred that this runner did not compete in the female category, didn't she? That would have meant that OP would not have need to 'want her to' slow down or not.

If this person couldn't have known they would end up 3rd when they overtook, why did they bother to be gracious and supportive?

She was gracious and supportive when she overtook you, you don't know her well but you like her. She couldn't have known she would end up 3rd when she overtook you (I wonder if she would have slowed down had she known, I wonder if you would have wanted her to).

You sound lovely, and she sounds lovely. Congratulations on doing so well in your race

It really is the recycling of the 'how would you police toilets' argument?

I truly think that those who make that type of argument cannot see how they are removing the agency of adults OR that they believe that these adults will make the decision to deliberately go against the laws/rules/regulations/society norms knowing will cause negative effect to females.

I'm not saying what should happen, just suggesting that there will be cost and administrative implications for the way sport is organised at community/club level if strict rules about biological sex are applied to mixed sports.

Why? Sport has been happening for years and years, long before gender was anything more than something which described nouns in languages. Sports clubs have had boys, mens, girls, womens categories and somehow it wasn't a problem.

I'm afraid whatever colour someone's hair may be I won't be using the pronoun 'meow'. That wouldn't be indulged in a four year old in a reception class, never mind an adult in a workplace.

Sorry

'if the rule should applies the whole way down.' should be

if the rule should be in place at organisational level, it applies the whole way down.