Martina out in front, women/transwomen in sport US

[highame]

An article tucked away in the Times on transgender sport in the US. Navratilova out in front again, taking the flack so others can come forward, which they know there are a lot of. What happens in the US is important to us because it will influence our politics.

I think this might be the first sports article in the Times that is GC. The last time I saw one, the journalist got a pasting.

Anyone got a share token? www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-joe-biden-blew-up-a-trans-storm-tml3fqr2w

Sorry, meant that the last article was pro transwomen in women's sport

That's the first time I've ever opened the Sunday times sports section - here you go

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-joe-biden-blew-up-a-trans-storm-tml3fqr2w?shareToken=4ccd16c8488c1090b7eb3d18bba49de5

And straight in with the suicide threats.

I was struck by this quote “The benefit of sport to the trans community and how much it means to the trans community — we’re talking reducing the risk of suicide attempts [and] increasing the likelihood that trans people will graduate from high school — these are really concrete things,” she says. “That should be the focus, as opposed to any hypothetical fearmongering.” The language used is so emotive. And calling safeguarding concerns fearmongering is beyond the pale.

Their proposal is thus: that non-competitive, recreational sport and physical education should be inclusive for all, allowing trans girls and women to compete according to their gender identity. In competitive and elite sporting environments, the group state that trans girls and women should be able to compete in women’s categories provided they have “sufficiently mitigated their male sex-linked advantages”, for example through hormone therapy, “consistent with the rules of their sport’s international federations”.

I’m not sure if the distinction they are making between non competitive and competitive sport - surely most sport involves an element of competition? I can’t think of anything, from my daughters athletics training where they run races constantly, to the tinies football clubs that try to win matches against each other.

It is interesting that they are trying to find a middle ground, disappointing that the article includes the suicide/not finishing college threat if the athletes are not allowed to compete with opposite sex but I can’t see where it would exist in any way that if fair to girls.

Also they mention mitigating ‘their male sex linked advantages ‘ in line with sports federations - we know that the rules on testosterone suppression make minimal difference, with the suppressed level of 10 nm/l for men far surpassing the natural level in women of 1-3nm/l (roughly) for women. So when you bear in mind that temporarily suppressing testosterone doesn’t reverse the changes of puberty, it is not even close to being fair.

It is good that the conversation is drawing in people from both sides but I really don’t think their proposed solution works at all for girls.

Ultimately it is not perfect but it is a good idea to try to find a middle ground to start with.

If a science based approach is a adopted and at a 'professional level' transwomen continue to outperform at ridiculous levels then there will be more evidence that the 'heritage theory' has merit and it is still unfair on natal women. That is not necessarily a bad thing as they will then have proof that a more moderate approach still discriminates.

I hope that both the TRAs are agreeable to this kind of middle ground. If they are not then the motives are very questionable indeed.

A clear area that needs clarification is sports scholarships. These need to be included in the elite/ rather than school model, though I suspect they already are.

I fear this attempt at a 'middle ground', while extremely well meant, will be acceptable to no one.

The quote prioritising trans people over the vast numbers of women and girls disadvantaged, together with the real risk of physical harm (it's already happening, not 'fearmongering' ffs) makes this not quite as balanced a piece as it should be. But as the OP notes, better than some previous efforts ... not by a male sports journalist, I note. Countering the usual trend, the best coverage in mainstream media on sports has often been from the guardian sports writter, Sean something iirc.

There isn't and can't ever be a middle ground. You either believe people of one sex are somehow actually the other sex, or you don't.

@BlackForestCake

There isn't and can't ever be a middle ground. You either believe people of one sex are somehow actually the other sex, or you don't.

I totally agree that there are only 2 sexes but if this is a fight to the bitter end women and girls are going to lose out altogether because in the US this is only going one way under a Biden administration.

I was hoping that Matthew Syed, being a sportsperson and talking rather a lot about sciene, would at some point come into this debate but he wrote this in his comment (about left and right wing zealots) today which makes me think he might not be quite as much on the side of science as he likes to think:

"This isn’t just about the hard right, of course. The radical left uses identical techniques, merely from a different direction. JK Rowling is about as decent a person as you could imagine, but she expressed a heresy over transsexuality (in fact, a sincere, if disputed, opinion) so has been cancelled — the secular equivalent of being burnt at the stake."

I'm not sure you can discern much on his position on that article which was about the methods of political zealots rather than the issues per se. It puts JKR in the rational middle ground in contrast to those who cancel her.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/zealots-on-the-right-and-left-are-true-heirs-of-religious-fanatics-gvh8skrv8?shareToken=cae071057d3d92b7d5d113a2d645d90c

I’m not sure if the distinction they are making between non competitive and competitive sport - surely most sport involves an element of competition? I can’t think of anything, from my daughters athletics training where they run races constantly, to the tinies football clubs that try to win matches against each other.

I assume that competitive sport means those in which there are awards, prizes or important consequences for the winners. So in school PE lessons and training sessions, trans girls can be in the girls teams and compete against them, but when it comes to actual matches and competitions where college scholarships might be at stake they can't. The trans lobby are unlikely to stand for that as it will be seen as 'othering' and proof that the world doesn't believe trans girls are girls.

I'm pretty sure that in this area, as in everything else, nothing less than complete capitulation to the trans lobby will be acceptable.

Maybe an approach of seeking the middle ground will help to expose the objections and justifications from the tras and the unreasonable aspects of their position will be highlighted.

We have seen it recently - a player wishes to play in the women’s team which is agreed to but the women are not keen on sharing a communal shower with that player so an alternative showering arrangement is proposed (not usually the major highlight of a sporting event) and said player decided that is extremely important to them and takes legal action.

It is not a good look.

It's that phrase (in fact, a sincere, if disputed, opinion) that makes me uneasy Errol I can't quite put my finger in it maybe I'm misinterpreting how he means it.

I heard Martina talking about this in the radio a couple of weeks ago when the proposals were unveiled. I was very disappointed I'm afraid. So much hand wringing obeisance to the T.
How can they protect sport at the elite level and not at the lower levels of club and school sport? Where will the elite athletes come from if they haven't been able to win at club level and work their way up?
And for sports like rugby women playing at a non competitive level will still be at risk of harm.

I can't see a middle ground on this, at least not this way.

So how do girls ever achieve elite athlete status if they never come first?

@FannyCann

I heard Martina talking about this in the radio a couple of weeks ago when the proposals were unveiled. I was very disappointed I'm afraid. So much hand wringing obeisance to the T. How can they protect sport at the elite level and not at the lower levels of club and school sport? Where will the elite athletes come from if they haven't been able to win at club level and work their way up? And for sports like rugby women playing at a non competitive level will still be at risk of harm.

I can't see a middle ground on this, at least not this way.

I think that's unfair. Martina has taken a massive amount of abuse when (like JKR) she is not personally affected and could just have opted for a quiet life.

You have also got to think about her intended audience. She's not trying to win over GC people - we're already on her side. She is trying to get the Be Kind lobby to understand the consequences of being kind. She won't do that by adopting an extreme position - that will just turn them off.

I support Martina and it is important to look for compromise but I am worried that she is giving away too much.

It is vital that women's sports college scholarships are for females only but if you start making a distinction between elite and other levels in womens sports - bracketing them as competitive and social, it sends out the message from a very early age that girls sports are social events and boys sports are competitive, that sounds like something from the nineteenth century.

That looks nothing like a middle ground to me.

My idea of a middle ground would be to make changes to men's sport - which I believe is already classed as 'open' in most cases anyway. Instead men are being asked to give up nothing.

Anyone who has ever been involved in kids sports knows how maddening it is to maintain a balance between fun and competition and even the most well meaning can struggles with it at some times, usually when their own kids are involved but this sounds like boys and girls sports will have different standards.

I am so fed up of hearing about testosterone suppression.... Women are not just men with lower testosterone ffs!!!

Also, I have never understood this - sport, especially elite sport, is about trying to be the best, working and training to be the fastest, strongest, score the most.... You have a group of competitors striving to be the very best they can at the same time as some of those competitors are taking drugs to make them weaker, slower.... So how can you know for certain when ALL the natural advantages are gone, if they are still training to be the best?!

Does that make sense?

@PopperUppleton

So how do girls ever achieve elite athlete status if they never come first?

Quite. And even if they only let the 'transgirls' train with the girls (which is what I assume they mean by non competitive sport), the girls are likely to become demoralised by seeing how far behind the 'transgirls' they are in training.

It's all about 'being kind', but only being kind to one sort of people.

provided they have “sufficiently mitigated their male sex-linked advantages”

Define "sufficient". If you've been following Emma Hilton, Tommy Lundberg and Ross Tucker, you'll know that it's becoming clear that's not possible through mere hormone treatment. No amount of current testosterone removal will undo all the male advantages. They can't have negative testosterone, and current testosterone isn't that strong a factor - it's cumulative exposure.

If you really want to let males compete with women, the only way to "sufficiently mitigate their advantages" would be to actually handicap them - physically or by scoring. Move their start line back, or make them throw something heavier.

That might be viable. It would make something of a farce of elite sports - having two groups of competitors alongside each other with different handicaps, and you'd be spending all your life arguing about what the handicaps should be - but handicaps are used in some lower levels for other purposes. Running two separate competitions and not attempting cross-sex comparisons is a hell of a lot simpler...

But it's not part of the fantasy - they want to believe that taking hormones can turn them into a woman, so they want that to be the only "mitigation". But it really is not sufficient.

(Mind you, I'm increasingly seeing the argument coming up that demanding hormone treatment is transphobic - why should they be treated different from "other women" who can compete with natural testosterone levels?).

How can someone mitigate their male sex-linked advantages enough to compete in women's sport? Male puberty confers an inherent advantage which will never be lost. I don't think this is the way forward. At all.

Martina is courageous and I have a lot of respect for her.