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

I thought this was interesting from the article:

Joanna Harper is listed as a supporter on the WSWPG’s website and says she is “on board” with their attempts to seek a middle ground. The medical physicist is working towards a PhD at Loughborough University, studying transgender athletes. She is herself transgender — one of two trans women listed as supporters, the other being the former tennis player and coach of Navratilova, Renee Richards.

Research, especially peer- reviewed, is still in comparatively short supply and difficult to undertake, although Harper is hoping to change that. There is particular disagreement over whether and to what extent trans women retain so-called “legacy” physical advantages over cis-women, even after hormone therapy.

The last time I heard of Joanna Harper, it was in the context of some research Harper had done which seemed to consist of 'Me and my trans mates all measured our performance before and after taking female hormones and we all agreed that we ran a bit slower.' So it's good that Harper has seen that perhaps there's a bit more to it than that.

And as for “legacy” physical advantages, surely the larger, stronger bones don't get instantly smaller and weaker from taking oestrogen. But once they can put some numbers on this, I'm sure we'll all be able to agree that women are fundamentally different from men, and that a male person who modifies his body and takes female hormones doesn't actually become indistinguishable from a woman.

When a newspaper article says - "passionately divided", the reality should read - "Most people are fervently against transwomen competing in women's sport".
When there is a newspaper article which allows comments on this subject, the vast majority of people 100-1 ratio are against it.

So how can you know for certain when ALL the natural advantages are gone, if they are still training to be the best?!

I had a brief e-mail exchange with Ross Tucker about that, and he agreed with this take.

At the minute it looks clear from ongoing research that testosterone suppression nowhere near removes the 10-15% advantage on average, so you probably don't have to even start on this secondary argument.

But if testosterone suppression did lower performance 10-15% on average, clearly there would be greatly different response to the suppression between individuals.

To actually stop the top spots from still being hogged by males who lost only 5%, you'd need the minimum performance loss to be 10-15%, not average. Never going to happen.

Some males will lose a lot less than others. In effect my allowing testosterone-suppressed males you would be selecting for males whose physiology and/or training was best able to ignore loss of testosterone. You'd have pulled some males down to female level, but there would be plenty left above.

Tucker has been writing a lot about these long-distance running shoes. They're analogous, in reverse. They have a huge average positive effect - but this effect is not uniform and some athletes gain far more out of them than others, so if they're permitted, your running competition is now effectively finding the "best suited to the shoes". Similarly women's sport would end up being finding the "best suited to testosterone suppression" (and women would not get a look in).

Women are not just men with lower testosterone ffs!!!

This is an absolutely key point! We are just seen as Man Mark 2, the one which makes babies. Even the creation story that half the world knows treats it like that! Adam’s rib 😡

Why is this so hard for transpeople to understand.
We will freely give you your own section in sports. There is already mixed doubles in Tennis, so we can have mixed singles as well.
Your not changing sex, your changing the outside of your bodies, ergo your just Not.

@accessorizequeen

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.

I don't want to derail this thread, but the trans lobby, at the same time as weaponising suicide in this way when it suits them, also class threats of suicide or actual self harm or suicide attempts by the partners of transgender people as 'domestic abuse'.

A quarter of respondents stated that their partner or ex-partner had threatened or attempted suicide or self-harm as a way to make them do, or stop them doing something. Receiving such threats from a partner or ex-partner can generate intense feelings of guilt and concern for the wellbeing of the partner or ex-partner particularly since suicidal thoughts, threats and actions are strongly associated with mental illness, severe emotional distress, and vulnerability.

www.scottishtrans.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/trans_domestic_abuse.pdf

Not really the thread to discuss this, but it's clear how the trans lobby view threats of suicide from others as a sign of coercive control, but threats of suicide from trans people (or those lobbying on their behalf) are not.

OldCrone

"The last time I heard of Joanna Harper, it was in the context of some research Harper had done which seemed to consist of 'Me and my trans mates all measured our performance before and after taking female hormones and we all agreed that we ran a bit slower.' So it's good that Harper has seen that perhaps there's a bit more to it than that."

The Harper study was so flawed it was laughable, because the subjects of the study (all of whom were non elite athletes) had results from their 20's compared with results from their 30's and 40's.

the trans lobby, at the same time as weaponising suicide in this way when it suits them, also class threats of suicide or actual self harm or suicide attempts by the partners of transgender people as 'domestic abuse'.

So basically, if a TW feels suicidal that's women's fault for not giving up all our rights. And if a TW's wife feels suicidal, that's her fault and she is abusing her husband.

Got it.

If I recall correctly, the first piece Martina wrote after she was told to go and educate herself was all about how male physical advantages amount to so much more than testosterone. She must know this is in no way a middle ground.

I fear this attempt at a 'middle ground', while extremely well meant, will be acceptable to no one Errol I agree, as clearly many of us do, but I thought she was really sticking her neck on the line by even trying to talk about a middle way. I don't think there is one, but I do think the argument that one should be sought is a good one, simply because, once you put all the arguments out there, the flaws become very apparent. No debate means no sunshine. Middle way debate shows that there is no middle way

I do agree that seeking a middle way is misguided and doomed to failure, I just think it's unfair to criticise Martina. I was a child when she was a champion, but I'm still old enough to remember some of the flak she got for being a lesbian. The media were absolutely merciless. She faced all that down, and now she is having to fight for lesbian and women's rights again, 30 years on. I have nothing but admiration for her.

I agree with MissLucy - I have total respect for Martina. I hope those who are saying the middle way will fail and then it will be shown that a middle way is not possible.

The problem with a middle way is that even non-competitive schools sports affect the competitive sports.
Male footballers are more likely to have been born between Sept to Dec. That's because they are the oldest/largest in the school year. The younger boys in the year lose out, even if they are potentially just as talented.

If boys can play or race against girls at school level then the girls will lose out, they will think they are not as good as they are, because the boys will be winning. Who would go on to compete in elite sports if a man who has reduced testosterone can compete against you? Why would you even think about elite sports if in school sports boys show they can win against you?

They do probably have to start from this 'middle'. Hopefully more and more of the sporting bodies will follow the lead of World Rugby. And hopefully the association with Harper will mean that the Loughborough research is done and reported properly - I've little doubt that if it is the necessity of single sex sports will re-emerge. There may be a few sports which don't have to be segregated at all but it's hard to think which other than, as now, equestrian. And there's always scope for mixed social sporting events - people already can work out how to arrange the pairs in badminton or tennis fairly enough to get a good fun game if there's three of one and one of the other sex, or a youngster.

It's no solution to the issue to continue to allow transwomen to compete against women in all but elite sport.
The mismatch is still there, the lack of safety is still there and the unfairness is still there.

I'm disappointed if this is all Martina is arguing for.

I am in a currently polite online conversation regarding the Utah bills banning transgirls from playing in female school teams. I referenced the physical risk to girls from playing against physically stronger males, and have been asked to provide evidence. Does anyone have a link to some of the UK incidents in eg football or rugby. Much appreciated.

If what they mean is, 'We know this looks like a shit deal but we believe it's the best we can get right now,' then I wish they would say so. Because that, I could get behind. But please don't try and sell it to me as a 'middle way' when it isn't.

@spongedog

I am in a currently polite online conversation regarding the Utah bills banning transgirls from playing in female school teams. I referenced the physical risk to girls from playing against physically stronger males, and have been asked to provide evidence. Does anyone have a link to some of the UK incidents in eg football or rugby. Much appreciated.

There are lots of resources on this thread.

@spongedog

I am in a currently polite online conversation regarding the Utah bills banning transgirls from playing in female school teams. I referenced the physical risk to girls from playing against physically stronger males, and have been asked to provide evidence. Does anyone have a link to some of the UK incidents in eg football or rugby. Much appreciated.

World rugby did a lot of research on this. I don't have a link to their report but there's an article about it here:

www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/jul/19/transwomen-face-potential-womens-rugby-ban-over-safety-concerns

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 think perhaps what they are saying is that the US should fall inline with international decisions. I don't think this means they are compromising on what "sufficiently mitigated" means, just that they can then fight that battle at a more central level, with sporting bodies, without having to take on the American Democratic party first.

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?

Absolutely, and this is how it will work in practice. It will be dropped as a requirement because firstly it’s unimplementable, and then secondarily because it’s intrusive and “othering”. I have done a couple of sports at a level that, while not professional (because we’re women for fucks sake and that’s a whole other rant!), were taken very seriously by the athletes, and there is absolutely not the slightest chance that anyone even at that sub-pro level would be getting their testosterone level checked. How would this work? Do you test every woman playing in your amateur rugby league, or just the ones that look like they might be male? Are people self declaring, or are you requiring female athletes to “snitch”? How often are you testing? What about in the off season? Which labs are set up to do the testing? Who is paying?

And following that, it will be about how to include non binary male bodied people, who may also describe themselves as trans women and don’t feel comfortable or safe in men’s sports. And you can’t gatekeep by requiring any physical modification.

Here’s my recipe for inclusion: do a sport like triathlon, or mass participation road racing, bike or running. Everyone competes together over the same course, at the same time. You’ll be ranked into your sex category, but so what? If the object is participation, then you’re golden, you’re right there with everyone else, male and female.

You can only argue against that if actually, it’s vital that you are “validated” or that you have to be able to win, and nobody has a human right to that.

That’s interesting about a possible change of direction from Harper, though, getting that study flayed alive by Ross Tucker et al must have stung.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

@OldCrone

Thank you both. I am on too many threads on here so can never find what I need in a hurry. I am going to very deliberately only provide a couple of recent UK examples and leave the message to sink through slowly. As usual it is men arguing that it is OK.

I think this must be very difficult for Martina. Whilst we are all supporting her, she is really out there on her own. I feel that maybe she is just treading very carefully at the moment in the hope that momentum really gets going and more and more people come out against this.

I really admire her.

I admire her too. I just don't like being told something's a middle ground when it's not.

“I don't want to derail this thread, but the trans lobby, at the same time as weaponising suicide in this way when it suits them, also class threats of suicide or actual self harm or suicide attempts by the partners of transgender people as 'domestic abuse'.”

This tactic is new to me.