British Rowing consultation on trans and NB policy

Thanks for posting this link - I've submitted my feedback.

I quite literally have no idea what you're talking about.

Try not to worry too much Mark19735 . When you reach adulthood, you'll understand that life is complex, that sex matters, that respect for difference and making reasonable adjustments is a good thing.
Stick around and read some of the insightful and well researched posts from women on here - it'll be an education.

So all this 'sex confers an advantage' malarkey ... are we going to revisit some of the other instances where society has legislated away this apparently obvious fact? Is it only on the sports field that this matters, or are we prepared to also revise our views about performance in many workplace settings, too? Or does sex not confer an advantage when there's incomes and livelihoods to protect? Or is it that the advantages conferred by height, or strength, are fair, provided that those advantages are only allowed to influence results within the category of sex?
I'm confused ... and it's not got anything to do with an obsession about genitalia. If anything ... that's the easiest part to understand. GCs want to discriminate on grounds of sex, but apparently only when it suits them.

Sex confers an advantage; it’s as simple as that.

Why are you obsessed with genitals?

So nothing to stop non members and activists from either side abusing the vote?

no-one need ever worry about what any competitors are packing in their shorts

In the case of sports, it really has nothing to do with what competitors are packing in their shorts.

Biological sex affects skeletal structure, muscle composition, 'normal' range of lung and heart pumping capacity, what organs we have... Outward appearance of genitalia is really not the issue.

How did we ever end up here? It’s fucking madness.

I think a lot of it is down to gender nonsense like this being repeated again and again and again through elite channels, until it became normalised amongst decision-makers:

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=93df9872940096802c0db6408d064c03333de35e

Why can’t sport just be based on biological sex? We don’t have women’s teams so that we can feel girlie or womanly, they’re because of fundamental physiological sex based differences. Why cant anyone express their identity however they like without demanding an acceptance of things that simply aren’t true. How did we ever end up here? It’s fucking madness.

thanks for the link OP.

Rowing has introduced a 'light weight' category which is essentially for shorter rowers.
I'm 5'9" any division by height would probably put me in the male group which is not fair - there is a pretty big over lap between men's heights and women's heights but a man the same height as a woman will (in the vast majority of cases be stronger). Sex separation first then weight/height classes where necessary. We don't put shortish male boxers in with the women.

Height is the #1 advantage in rowing. Longer legs make bigger levers and therefore bigger strokes in the water. Mind you I loved rowing in mixed eights, the power and speed were something else!

Really, it's so fucking obvious that tall people cannot compete fairly against small people. That's what genuine recognition that eg height plays a fairly fundamental role in rowing ability would really entail.

FTFY

Perhaps a genuinely inclusionary policy would have height classes for rowers (a bit like weight divisions for boxers) ... crews could compete in divisions according to their height and then no-one need ever worry about what any competitors are packing in their shorts ... would that be "fair" enough? Or does it always have to be discriminating by sex first and other criteria second? If so, why?

It's always the 5 mnol/l in males which is just crazy. You would think if they know that women only have 0.5-2.4 mnol/l they would already know just from that that it's unfair. But no...

Oh I had a quick look, it’s still all about T levels - no recognition that eg height plays a fairly fundamental role in rowing ability.

Really, it is so fucking obvious that men cannot compete fairly against women. Women’s categories were set up because there are differences which don’t go away because of what people wear, what they want to call themselves. Or even what hormones they are taking. They know it’s not fair - I’ve never heard a single sports administrator stand up and say it’s fair.

Why is it that there isn’t more focus on educating and encouraging men to welcome TW properly so they feel comfortable competing in the appropriate sex class?

It's so bizarre. With every single trans issue there are exeptions like this because they know there is a difference yet still they submit women to this bullshit.

Wasn’t it rowing that said TW could compete in women’s races, but mixed boats had to have a minimum number of biological women - because obviously the men involved shouldn’t be disadvantaged by competing against a boat crewed by men and TW. It’s almost as if they can see there’s an issue…..

Thank you for posting this.

I left a response imploring them to consider the review from Emma Hilton & Tommy Lundberg regarding male categorical advantage and how testosterone suppression doesn't eliminate this.

Also I asked them to consider that 'inclusive' policies which allow males to compete in the women's category often end up in practice excluding female athletes, and gave women's cycling as an example of where this has happened recently.