parkrun defending their position

[Funtime2]

I used to be a parkrunner and do not understand how parkrun can defend their position of allowing trans identfying males into the female category.

I read that 280 published race winners in the female category are actually men identifying as women. How is this fair to women? Some women don’t care about this but some women do, just as some men take it as a race and care about the rankings and some men don’t

The other option of course is they could stop the timing, stop recording winners and records?

AIBU to genuinely not understand why parkrun claim not to be a race when they time the runners, publish times by category, rank times and runners, and have record holders by category.

And….this thread has become an echo chamber like all GC threads always do, thanks to the usual rude, patronising, ad hominem posts from women who think they’re defending women’s rights despite ganging up on any woman who even mildly disagrees with them until everyone gives up and leaves them to it. What a win for feminism if Parkrun gets shut down and women can’t participate any more.

At the end of the day it's Park Run's event, and it's what they want for it that matters.

Exactly! Except you'll probably get "The Rules" trotted out to you in response to that like I did upthread.
"It's not us! Oh and if it is, your behaviour made us do it." 🙄

I will post this, as I have posted about it before, but not specifically linked to the gender discussion.

3 years ago (almost exactly) my 3 year old DS ran away from me in the supermarket. And I could not catch him. A 3 year old could run faster than I, a grown woman could. A kindly stranger had to help me.

I was 17 stone, size 22/24, and hadn't willingly done any exercise since school.
Part of this was due to the constant and unwanted sexual comments, assult and abuse I had suffered since I was 11, from boys and men. When I was thin, blond and young, the male sex were horrific to me. When I was fat, they just didn't see me.

However, three years ago, I vowed that something had to change. I was prediabetic, and honestly, how could a 3 year old out-run me?

The next day (Coronation Day), I went out incredibly early so no-one could see me and did the first of the Couch 2 5K runs. It very nearly killed me. I could hardly do the 1 min runs, and I had a massive nosebleed.

But, this mattered. I did it for my children. I carried on. Always early, always on my own. I didn't even tell my DH, as I was ashamed of how badly unfit I was.

By 2 years ago, I did my first public 5k, and then 10k race. Last year, I ran my first half marathon. This year, I did my local half marsthon, raising money for my DC's school. It has been hard work, a struggle against my own demons AND how I've been publicly perceived. I've had foul comments shouted at me from passing cars/vans (always males). I've had water and bottles thrown at me, as a solo female runner.

Why does this matter? Because I started running Park Runs, and then was made aware that my ranking was not accurate. The local course record was never going to be obtainable by me, because it was held by a trans identifying male. I can NEVER challenge that record. I have wide hips, so big Q angles. I run best at a lope (as many females do). I have birth injuries.

Why do I not deserve to be able to see my own rank, accurately, when my DH does?

I have stopped doing PR. We have taken the DC out of Junior PR. We run weekly with the DC at a free local run that has no timing (bar our own watches), no categories and encourages the DC to be the best they can be WITHOUT lying that sex doesn't matter.

Running has, quite literally, changed my life. Why should I, as a woman, not be able to celebrate my achievements, because some men want to muscle in on my category?

Oh, Fair. What a moving post. It speaks volumes, especially in the context in which it sits. I'm so sorry for all of it - and congrats, like to Millie, on your amazing running achievements.

Thank you Catiette that means a lot. You are one of the posters that I love to read, you have a nuanced take and are happy to discuss.

I've never really linked my running and sex realist beliefs before, but it's so sodding obvious when I think about it.

DH is not a runner, but over 100m he absolutely trounces me.

Running has made me respect all that my body can do. And all it's limitations.

And the question still stands. I've dragged myself up out of the depths of self-neglect. Why do I matter less than a man?

That means a lot to me to hear, too - especially as I started to realise that since my "Orwell moment" earlier in the thread, I've got a bit carried away! I just care so very, very deeply - and am desperate to see more reasoned argument. In one sense, it's a way of testing my own thinking. It's striking how often the responses are like those above your posts, and that does reassure me that I'm not missing too much (watch this space - I'll keep questioning 😅). Millie seriously made me think (such a good point about transmen - and honestly a bit scary and something to learn from, that I'd pretty much discounted this as a possibility - it really shows you have to keep questioning). But I was struck by how excited (sad but true!) I was to read posts that really delved into the nitty-gritty of this from "the (kind of, ish) other side". Still mulling it over now...

And yes. That's exactly it: why do you matter less? Your post alone would be enough to convince me that this needs open democratic debate at the least - and that there's something very wrong indeed that other posters are denying so much as the need for this.

But it's not your post alone. There are so, so many women hurting - really, really hurting - because of this, whether because of deeply upsetting concrete impacts like yourself, or just one hell of a shock to their world view and sense of security, like you, again, I imagine, and definitely me.

May we live in interesting times, right? It doesn't get more "interesting" than this stuff!

What really gets me is that if they had the will, and a little imagination, I'm sure there are things Parkrun could do to keep EVERYONE happy (except men who specifically want unfair advantage over women, who shouldn't be!).

My suggestion would be: create a proper "sex" category, options: M, F, and either a PNTS option with its own stats, and/or an option to opt out altogether (but then not be included in any sex data). Runners would be expected to put their correct sex (so virtually all presumably would), & it wouldn't be "policed" on the day, but if women noticed an obvious man had got the female record/first finish or even just kept beating them to 6th place in the "Female 60-64" group, it could be reported to HQ, who could ask him to verify his sex and either change his registration or be banned if he refused.

Then, for anyone who feels it important to be allowed to run as their "gender", have an ADDITIONAL, optional "gender ID" category, with some sort of gender options (masculine/feminine??, & possibly others), & for non-believers, either a "none" option or just don't enter anything.

Then you use the "sex" data to send to the running orgs and for age/sex categories, age grades, M/Fvrecords etc, cos sex is the relevant factor for those, and that way, women & girls get fair data and opportunities.
Anyone who chooses not to state their sex misses out on those (or for PNTS you could possibly give some stats, but not all the above), BUT they could add options so those people can instead view the same data by "age/gender ID" category (& even have additional "gender" records if enough demand), again excluding those who opted out (or showing "none" as a separate category). So they can still compare themselves to people of the same age and gender identity, as THEY wished, but those who don't have one would not be included, and nobody would be assumed to have a/any particular GI. (Unlike now - a PP made a good point about runners who signed up before the rule change then being assumed to have a GI that "matches" the sex they'd previously entered, & not being given the option to say otherwise without losing access to the "female" stats altogether! And later sign-ups still faced the same bad choice - pretend you have a "gender ID", or lose the closest thing we HAVE to sex data currently!).

I can't see any real reason why BOTH groups shouldn't be happy with that solution? Only men actively wanting to exploit their male advantage against women might be rather miffed, but the ones Parkrun says it's worried about, who "just want to run as what they identify as", would be able to do that without being unfair to women. Some might wonder, of course, whether the "gender identity" categories might be a bit thinly populated if they were optional and clearly differentiated from "sex", but trans activists tell us that EVERYONE has a "gender identity", so I'm sure the numbers will bear that out - won't they?