Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Brave reporter undergoes inhumane sex test for sports. Brace yourselves.

468 replies

singthing · 28/07/2026 11:08

Here's a blow-by-blow first-person account of what it is like to have the new sports sex test that is being decried as invasive and dehumanising and (in a rather extravagant bending of the facts) a genital inspection etc.

After such a big build-up, prepare to be.... underwhelmed. But please do stop scrolling now if you don't want to read the distressing details:

"I open my mouth and feel the swab brushing the inside of my cheeks for about 20 seconds. The practitioner carefully places the sample in a small plastic bag and then pops it into a sealed envelope. I sign the back of it."

https://archive.ph/kITV9

OP posts:
Thread gallery
16
AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 29/07/2026 16:30

Waitingfordoggo · 29/07/2026 16:08

Good point @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime re disappointment at not being able to compete. I think someone upthread mentioned a competitive skier who had a DSD and had been incorrectly raised as a girl. He competed as a woman in skiing events. At some point his genes were tested and it was found that he was a male with a DSD. If I remember correctly, he offered to give back the prizes and medals he had won up to that point because he accepted that he was male and felt bad about cheating women out of prizes.

Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Schinegger

That man had honour. Something I feel would be a completely closed book to men who knowing they were men deliberately competed in women's sports to steal medals from women who'd earned them.

Erik Schinegger - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Schinegger

Waitingfordoggo · 29/07/2026 16:08

Good point @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime re disappointment at not being able to compete. I think someone upthread mentioned a competitive skier who had a DSD and had been incorrectly raised as a girl. He competed as a woman in skiing events. At some point his genes were tested and it was found that he was a male with a DSD. If I remember correctly, he offered to give back the prizes and medals he had won up to that point because he accepted that he was male and felt bad about cheating women out of prizes.

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 29/07/2026 15:37

I notice, not for the first time, that the word "intersex" is always used when the poor blighters are being employed as a gotcha-tool, even though 1) many of them have said they dislike it because it's inaccurate and 2) many of the people with DSDs have repeatedly asked to be left out of the trans brangling and NOT be used in this way, because their lives are complicated enough already without all that horseshit.

PriOn1 · 29/07/2026 15:30

Deadlifter · 28/07/2026 16:43

Caster Semenya is exactly an example of complexity, and that it’s not as easy to put people in one of two boxes as we’d like to think. I think she’s an intersex woman, and I think it’s sad a world class athlete can’t compete.

Funny how the complexity always goes one way isn’t it?

It only ever affects women’s sports and never men’s.

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 29/07/2026 14:49

I was right to leave when I did last night; the ability actually to discuss didn't improve.

The only person on this thread who has "lost it" seems to be Deadlifter. I just hope doh may have stopped trying to have the last word and taken dohself off to work or sports training or whatever else doh may have as a priority in doh's life that doesn't involve insulting people who don't immediately agree with whatever unevidenced proposition doh chooses to put forward.

Incidentally, about disappointment in sport because of a hitherto undiscovered condition that prevents someone from competing: I used to know a man who had been chosen to captain the Great Britain team in his sport for the 1940 Olympics. Unfortunately those didn't happen, and after the war he was unfortunately no longer able to compete, or indeed to do his chosen sport at all. So he pulled himself together and went off and became a world expert at something else instead. I imagine he must have been bitterly disappointed, but he didn't allow it to become something he constantly whinged about.

RedToothBrush · 29/07/2026 14:31

GreyskySexRealistsky · 29/07/2026 14:15

And it all got complicated with accusations that the standards were being exploited:

https://marathonhandbook.com/did-a-runner-exploit-bostons-non-binary-qualifying-standards/

Quote from that article: "What this case reveals, instead, is the difficulty of balancing inclusivity with competitive fairness"

It's not difficult.

It's just seems that people have a difficulty saying no because they have been bullied into believing that competitive sport is a vehicle for the far right...

The next Olympics should aspire to all 8 finalists having a dead heat for gold.

GreyskySexRealistsky · 29/07/2026 14:15

ProfessorBinturong · 29/07/2026 14:03

Remember when the Boston marathon introduced a non-binary category, then after the first race got complaints that men had an unfair advantage and were winning all the prizes, so they should split it into female non-binary and male non-binary? And the people horrified that non-non-binary men were entering the non-binary group because it had a lower qualification bar.

And it all got complicated with accusations that the standards were being exploited:

https://marathonhandbook.com/did-a-runner-exploit-bostons-non-binary-qualifying-standards/

Quote from that article: "What this case reveals, instead, is the difficulty of balancing inclusivity with competitive fairness"

murasaki · 29/07/2026 14:06

ProfessorBinturong · 29/07/2026 14:03

Remember when the Boston marathon introduced a non-binary category, then after the first race got complaints that men had an unfair advantage and were winning all the prizes, so they should split it into female non-binary and male non-binary? And the people horrified that non-non-binary men were entering the non-binary group because it had a lower qualification bar.

Yes, that was very funny indeed. Odd how even the non binaries knew the difference.

ProfessorBinturong · 29/07/2026 14:03

murasaki · 29/07/2026 13:44

I'm pretty sure the female #bekinders would vanish from the open category like smoke on the breeze back to the female category where they'd have a shot at winning.

All whilst moaning how MEAN it all was.

Remember when the Boston marathon introduced a non-binary category, then after the first race got complaints that men had an unfair advantage and were winning all the prizes, so they should split it into female non-binary and male non-binary? And the people horrified that non-non-binary men were entering the non-binary group because it had a lower qualification bar.

BridgetYourFortyDaysAreUp · 29/07/2026 14:02

Helleofabore · 29/07/2026 13:31

I am just constantly reminded that to some people ‘good faith’ discussion is being able to say something and not be challenged on it even if it is not correct or if there are inconsistencies

To them Good faith does not mean engaging and providing an evidenced view point that is supported with links. So often we see people make claims about ‘good faith’ arguments where they also mean that they can insult and make unfounded accusations about posters individually or as a group because they feel that have a morally superior view point and can attack the people who are merely disagreeing and disagreeing by providing detailed analysis.

Yes, and yet women on these threads are not allowed to call out obvious posters for what they are, because that's "troll hunting." So their unfounded claims about who we are (transphobes, echo-chamber handmaidens, right-wing fascists) are allowed to stand unless we report (and we have to spend 20 pages arguing against them), but we're not allowed to say "I don't think you are who you say you are." There's an imbalance there. To say the least.

There have been a few threads recently like this. And while women are spending 20 pages deflecting insults and bad faith arguments, we aren't talking about women's rights and issues. Which, I suppose, is the whole point of the exercise.

BezMills · 29/07/2026 13:47

Oh wimmin on the mumsnets are now to blame for swastika blokes. Make it make sense

Mmmnotsure · 29/07/2026 13:45

MyAmpleSheep · 29/07/2026 13:34

It’s certainly true that attempting to bolster your position by saying Mumsnet is an echo chamber is not arguing in good faith.

Let alone Deadlifter's comment to posters:

People with a wider lens can also see things you’re not seeing - eg. How your views interact with the rise of the far right etc.

murasaki · 29/07/2026 13:44

BezMills · 29/07/2026 13:32

I think the closest we've come to inclusive and fair sport is dividing into Open and Female divisions. Anyone who is female can compete in the Female category, or if they prefer, the Open.

The Open division will be stacked full of all the females who prioritise inclusive sport, all the special gender feelings people, all the enbies, all the people with DSD that excluded them from the Female division and lastly but of course not leastly all the bog standard blokes who will win 100% of medals.

I'm pretty sure the female #bekinders would vanish from the open category like smoke on the breeze back to the female category where they'd have a shot at winning.

All whilst moaning how MEAN it all was.

MyAmpleSheep · 29/07/2026 13:34

Helleofabore · 29/07/2026 13:31

I am just constantly reminded that to some people ‘good faith’ discussion is being able to say something and not be challenged on it even if it is not correct or if there are inconsistencies

To them Good faith does not mean engaging and providing an evidenced view point that is supported with links. So often we see people make claims about ‘good faith’ arguments where they also mean that they can insult and make unfounded accusations about posters individually or as a group because they feel that have a morally superior view point and can attack the people who are merely disagreeing and disagreeing by providing detailed analysis.

It’s certainly true that attempting to bolster your position by saying Mumsnet is an echo chamber is not arguing in good faith.

BezMills · 29/07/2026 13:32

I think the closest we've come to inclusive and fair sport is dividing into Open and Female divisions. Anyone who is female can compete in the Female category, or if they prefer, the Open.

The Open division will be stacked full of all the females who prioritise inclusive sport, all the special gender feelings people, all the enbies, all the people with DSD that excluded them from the Female division and lastly but of course not leastly all the bog standard blokes who will win 100% of medals.

Helleofabore · 29/07/2026 13:31

I am just constantly reminded that to some people ‘good faith’ discussion is being able to say something and not be challenged on it even if it is not correct or if there are inconsistencies

To them Good faith does not mean engaging and providing an evidenced view point that is supported with links. So often we see people make claims about ‘good faith’ arguments where they also mean that they can insult and make unfounded accusations about posters individually or as a group because they feel that have a morally superior view point and can attack the people who are merely disagreeing and disagreeing by providing detailed analysis.

MyAmpleSheep · 29/07/2026 12:00

Deadlifter · 29/07/2026 06:53

I promise you that not everyone who disagrees with you had just misunderstood something.

Just to share with you all - one night on a mumsnet gender criticial thread made me feel anxious, less patient (sorry to some of you on that!) and just like… meaner and smaller.

I’m glad some of you seem to think you’ve found a kind of righteous anger after years of being told to be nice or kind, but I wish you’d directed it somewhere else instead of a tiny group of people who really aren’t affecting your lives or making you less safe (I know you think they are; they’re just not). You’re like people who’ve fallen for the small boats thing - an imagined bogeyman to fear and obsess over.

I’m going to ban myself commenting on a similar mumsnet thread again, as I don’t think it’s a space where people are able to engage in good faith anymore. It’s too obsessive.

I hope you all have ways to take care of yourselves - I think you’re doing each other a world of damage passing around and building up so much fear.

Your point that some scientists (which?) think that this test oversimplifies the concept of biological sex could only be relevant if anyone in authority was saying this is a test to determine if someone is a man or a woman in any wider sense. They aren’t.

This is a test to rule out from competing in the women’s category anyone who has benefitted from male puberty advantage.

Competitors with the SRY gene who have CAIS can still compete as women. They are testosterone insensitive and have no male advantage.

For sporting purposes they are “women” and sport doesn’t need to take a position on their social or other legal status.

I’m going to ban myself commenting on a similar mumsnet thread again, as I don’t think it’s a space where people are able to engage in good faith anymore. It’s too obsessive.

This is your reaction when you realize that your arguments are easily refutable and refuted. It’s your way out of the cognitive dissonance of being wrong and wanting to be right. You’ll get there though.

Helleofabore · 29/07/2026 11:54

ElectoralControversy · 29/07/2026 10:42

Could the answer be, to have an "open" category which anyone can compete in, and a "female" category restricted to those who are unequivocally female?
Simpe but effective, right?

It is a good alternative and has been suggested by some sports.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 29/07/2026 11:43

Dadalus · 29/07/2026 07:42

@Deadlifter
You said many pages ago that you don't have the answers - this is not surprising. You want there to be a solution that pleases everyone but there just isn't one.
On this forum anyone can argue and debate for either side, people have for many years, and nothing like a perfect solution has emerged. Neither has any particularly persuasive argument been made as to why women's sports shouldn't be protected.

There are other online spaces where the opposite view dominates, but these tend to occur where that viewpoint is protected by censorship and banning of alternatives.

Exactly.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 29/07/2026 11:41

Deadlifter · 29/07/2026 08:16

You still think ‘on here’ is the only place people have been discussing this for years. Lots of people have spent equal time and energy learning about this issue, and still disagree with you. Lots of people have life experience you might not have - we work alongside respectful trans woman who we can see every day are not taking anything from us at all. People with a wider lens can also see things you’re not seeing - eg. How your views interact with the rise of the far right etc.

I wish I’d been politer - I’ve said that. But you have lost it at a single person disagreeing with you; I don’t think you should kid yourself that you’d have fared better with hordes of people disagreeing with you.

I genuinely hope you manage to extricate yourself from this one day and look back like ‘woah, that was a weird time

LOL. I very much hope society manages to extricate itself from this mad immersive fiction and people stop making complete fools of themselves over it.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 29/07/2026 11:37

RedToothBrush · 29/07/2026 09:57

Women can never do the right thing. It's impossible.

We are damned if we do and we are damned if we don't.

Once you realise this, you stop giving a shit what some dumb activist says and just get the fuck on with it without needing the validation and approval. The 'Be kind' shit becomes worthless. If you feel strongly enough about the subject matter you just default to proving the point and not caring if the dickheads don't like it.

It's kinda liberating to cross the point of worrying whether you are going to be called names for demonstrating a perfectly reasonable and moderate position that's recognised by law as being so.

I don't need other people's approval to know what's fair and to understand biology.

Exactly.

Mmmnotsure · 29/07/2026 11:35

MrsOvertonsWindow · 29/07/2026 10:45

That's what many sports are doing. Although I recall that when swimming? offered this there were no entries - despite all the years of whining and wailing.

The only conclusion I can draw is that the attraction is both cheating, along with the thrill of demolishing women's sport?

That was World Aquatics. They had a men's (male) category and a women's (female) category and also introduced a further open one for anyone who wanted to identify into that. They took time and trouble to do that. There were no takers, (un)surprisingly.

Adding self-validation to your cheating and thrills.

singthing · 29/07/2026 11:32

I have just read about 10 pages of catch up on this thread. With each post, I eagerly expected to see the details of the science that supported this, the scientists and other relevant parties who had written expert literature disagreeing with the IOC et al. The research, the papers, the experiences, anything. Science exists to propel our collective knowledge forward. This kind of ground-breaking work that overturns one of biology's most established facts would be front-cover-of-Nature news! This was a golden opportunity to counteract the stats and research laid out.

But all I got was "google it". Google WHAT? It doesn't exist apart from self-selecting opinion pieces and those circular citations that WPATH conjured up before their ruse was blown.

OP posts:
MrsOvertonsWindow · 29/07/2026 10:45

ElectoralControversy · 29/07/2026 10:42

Could the answer be, to have an "open" category which anyone can compete in, and a "female" category restricted to those who are unequivocally female?
Simpe but effective, right?

That's what many sports are doing. Although I recall that when swimming? offered this there were no entries - despite all the years of whining and wailing.

The only conclusion I can draw is that the attraction is both cheating, along with the thrill of demolishing women's sport?

ElectoralControversy · 29/07/2026 10:42

Deadlifter · 28/07/2026 22:17

Thank you. Definitely not a domestic goddess or a cake maker! I was drawn to this thread specifically rather than any of the other gender critical threads because I have a genuine interest in women’s sports (as I say, I compete in a strength sport where performance expectations across male and female, weight and ages classes are of course very different). I want my sport and all sport to be fair for women, but I also don’t want to exclude trans or intersex people (and there ARE quite a few trans people in lifting communities)…. And that’s because I love my sport! I think everyone should get to do it!

I honestly don’t know what the answer is, but I don’t think it’s as straightforward as ‘there’s male and female, that’s it, no variance or discussion to be had’.

Could the answer be, to have an "open" category which anyone can compete in, and a "female" category restricted to those who are unequivocally female?
Simpe but effective, right?