British Cycling Consultation on Transgender Policy

[lorisparkle]

Thought this might be of interest

www.britishcycling.org.uk/about/article/20201009-British-Cycling-publishes-Transgender-and-Non-Binary-Participation-policy-0

just sneaked into the top 100 in the UK

@AlecTrevelyan006

just sneaked into the top 100 in the UK

Wow.....I've never realised just how much "better" men are at sports.

There are still differences in cycling.

From wiki

'Road cycling Olympics
Since 1984, when women’s cycling events were introduced, the women's road race has been 140 kilometres to the men's 250 kilometres. The time trials are 29 kilometres and 44 kilometres respectively. Each country is limited to sending five men and four women to the Summer Games.[95]

Tour de France
'The race has been a men-only competition for over a century, with no equivalent available to women, apart from the “course d’un jour” — a modest alternative introduced following a petition initiated by riders in 2013.

According to Reuters, this year’s unique edition will see American Chloe Dygert and Dutch great Marianne Vos riding the same course as men — although not in direct competition.'

I'm no expert but I have read that women are pretty good at stamina events
On the wiki about the tour and women, it says women's events have really struggled to get financial backing.

In other sports, the difference in eg Wimbledon sets, often cited as proof that women get privileged treatment. I've read the women would be ok with 5 but it would jeopardise the time for the men's.

We were only allowed to run marathon at the Olympics from 1984.

The first time that women will be allowed to do the large ski jump at the winter Olympics will be this year. They were only allowed to do ski jump at all from 2014.

And it's not that the athletes don't want to. Women have to fight and fight and lobby and fight to get these things.

And we have fought and argued and worked and lobbyed. And just when there's really starting to be more interest in women's sport - more of it televised, mentioned in the sports pages, more sponsorship etc etc. Just when all that hard work starts paying off, Boom! At all but professional levels people should play with the sex they feel comfy with. To play on the women's stuff professionally the starting point must be that some transwomen will be included. And here's some really random metrics to guarantee that happens.

And while you might think that allowing males to join women's teams and compete against women would have a starting point of proving why that is fair. Instead again Boom the starting point is self ID for all but professional, into the showers changing, out into the match/ competition... And it's up to women who are put massively on the back foot to try and explain what everyone knows- that men and women are physiologically different. And on average men are bigger stronger faster etc. To try and challenge this while people shout that they're bigots, stupid, denying sport to vulnerable people, so immensely cruel etc.

It's awful to watch.

The other problem I have with this is that IF there is no real difference between men and women in terms of strength etc. And that women just aren't trying hard enough. What does this mean for violence against women? Why don't we fight them off, eh? Maybe we don't really mind that much...

@NiceGerbil

There are still differences in cycling.

From wiki

'Road cycling Olympics
Since 1984, when women’s cycling events were introduced, the women's road race has been 140 kilometres to the men's 250 kilometres. The time trials are 29 kilometres and 44 kilometres respectively. Each country is limited to sending five men and four women to the Summer Games.[95]

Tour de France
'The race has been a men-only competition for over a century, with no equivalent available to women, apart from the “course d’un jour” — a modest alternative introduced following a petition initiated by riders in 2013.

According to Reuters, this year’s unique edition will see American Chloe Dygert and Dutch great Marianne Vos riding the same course as men — although not in direct competition.'

I'm no expert but I have read that women are pretty good at stamina events
On the wiki about the tour and women, it says women's events have really struggled to get financial backing.

In other sports, the difference in eg Wimbledon sets, often cited as proof that women get privileged treatment. I've read the women would be ok with 5 but it would jeopardise the time for the men's.

We were only allowed to run marathon at the Olympics from 1984.

The first time that women will be allowed to do the large ski jump at the winter Olympics will be this year. They were only allowed to do ski jump at all from 2014.

And it's not that the athletes don't want to. Women have to fight and fight and lobby and fight to get these things.

And we have fought and argued and worked and lobbyed. And just when there's really starting to be more interest in women's sport - more of it televised, mentioned in the sports pages, more sponsorship etc etc. Just when all that hard work starts paying off, Boom! At all but professional levels people should play with the sex they feel comfy with. To play on the women's stuff professionally the starting point must be that some transwomen will be included. And here's some really random metrics to guarantee that happens.

And while you might think that allowing males to join women's teams and compete against women would have a starting point of proving why that is fair. Instead again Boom the starting point is self ID for all but professional, into the showers changing, out into the match/ competition... And it's up to women who are put massively on the back foot to try and explain what everyone knows- that men and women are physiologically different. And on average men are bigger stronger faster etc. To try and challenge this while people shout that they're bigots, stupid, denying sport to vulnerable people, so immensely cruel etc.

It's awful to watch.

The other problem I have with this is that IF there is no real difference between men and women in terms of strength etc. And that women just aren't trying hard enough. What does this mean for violence against women? Why don't we fight them off, eh? Maybe we don't really mind that much...

Where do I start with this ? well at the bottom and work my way up point by point I think it’s shocking and disgraceful that you chose to use domestic violence as some defence for your argument in what has been a debate on the British cycling trans debate. Male violence has no place in this debate and no place in sport either.

One of the issues is that mostly the teams are run by men and the funding is given more to the men’s equally wrong it was wrong in the time of the 90s and it’s wrong now.
Even the prize money isn’t equal and it’s wrong
It’s not that women’s cycling doesn’t and can’t compete with the men’s it’s not given enough airtime or space to be seen in mainstream sport broadcasting.
I’m not going to quote and reply to all those previous and pointless replies mentioning every sport that has nothing to do with cycling, this thread is about trans women in cycling I support it but I also support increased testing for trans competitors and a period of layoff should that person have been a competitive cyclist prior to transition.

I also support greater representation of women in sport in cycling in triathlon in all areas of sports that is underrepresented.

But I also support the freedom to choose to play sport,to cycle competitively and to be free to make your own life choices and enjoy the sport of cycling competitively.

I also support increased testing for trans competitors and a period of layoff should that person have been a competitive cyclist prior to transition.

What would they be testing for? What difference does a period of layoff make?

But I also support the freedom to choose to play sport,to cycle competitively and to be free to make your own life choices and enjoy the sport of cycling competitively.

Absolutely. I support that too but but we have sex segregation for a very good reason so life choices - great, competitive cycling - great but it has to be in the correct category for a persons sex. Women deserve fair competition as well.

'Male violence has no place in this debate and no place in sport either.'

Boxing? The very controlled battle that rugby essentially is? Martial arts?

Are you serious?!

And I note your displeasure at bringing male violence into it more generally.

If there are no fundamental physical advantages of male over female physiology. And I've variously seen it argued that it would be fair to separate on weight/ height. Or that testosterone is the be all and end all. And that women just need to train harder...

Then yes of course it has implications outside of sport if generally accepted. How could it not?

DH has v low testosterone. We don't know why. He gets treatment. It's low enough to compete as a woman according to the Olympic rules etc

He's over 6 fit foot and used to play rugby. He is built for the position where you're just massive. Not built for speed. Great if you need a wardrobe lifting.

He could kill me without any problem. I would need to be armed and sneak up.

But according to some rules he has no physical advantage over me.

If you think the statement that men have no physical advantage over women under certain circs in sport will not seep out to other areas then you're not thinking.

But I also support the freedom to choose to play sport,to cycle competitively and to be free to make your own life choices and enjoy the sport of cycling competitively.

They can do that. In the male category. They can’t choose to do whatever they want, anymore than I can choose to compete in the under 18 category.

What qualifies McKinnon, Bridges et al to compete in the women’s category, other than “their own choice”?

'I also support increased testing for trans competitors and a period of layoff should that person have been a competitive cyclist prior to transition.'

But what about

Teenagers where there have been no interventions (and rightly so)
All of the sports clubs, thousands and thousands of them, that are not professional? Where the idea is you play where you feel most comfy?

What about the simple fact that used to be accepted (and 99.9% of people in the world still know), that male and female humans have very different bodies, with different strengths and weaknesses, and that as sport is literally man made, male humans have an advantage?

What's your position?

Do you think that males (not professional athletes/ sports people) with no medical intervention have an advantage over women or not?

If not, why were sports sex segregated in the first place? Why do males from puberty out perform females?

If you do believe there is an advantage, then what's the justification for opening girls and women's clubs, competitions etc etc up to boys and men on a self ID basis?

Most male sports etc are open already. It makes no odds.

This whole thing is just infuriating.

Women are being asked to prove that it won't be fair, it won't work, and in some cases will be dangerous, to compete against males. Something that everyone in the world knows is true.

If men aren't physically advantaged then why are women and girls taught to be cautious? Why is anything single sex at all?

Just think about what you're arguing and what it could mean if accepted.

Why should a non-professional transwoman take my team place from me? How is that fair? Non-elite women should not have their access to competition taken away from them just as much as professional sportswomen should not have their team places, their funding and their chances for medals taken away from them.

The fact that you become an elite sports person by starting in non professional stuff is also bizarrely overlooked.

DH was a good swimmer, swam for school and a club, and then you go up though regional etc.

Professional sportswomen don't appear by magic when they are ready to compete professionally. There's a very very long haul and years of intense dedication, which is now to be on self ID.

The other point is that women's sport is still not as well funded.

Women dropped to semi professional status losing insurance.

www.rugbypass.com/news/womens-rugby-if-the-clubs-want-elite-womens-rugby-we-should-be-looked-after/

Maybe related- 15s funding dropped after success

idrottsforum.org/forumbloggen/rugby-cuts-show-fragility-of-womens-place-in-sports-marked-masculine/

'But now, during England's four-week lockdown , most female academy players will not be able to play football.

This is because most girls' football academies are not classed as an 'elite' sport - while boys' academies are.'

www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-54876198

And on and on and on and on.

I don't get why anything non professional is going to be self ID.

I don't get why any male people are even in women's events etc at all.

(Well I do- males are more important than females. Plus ca change).

“But I also support the freedom to choose to play sport,to cycle competitively and to be free to make your own life choices and enjoy the sport of cycling competitively”

And I support the freedom for my daughter, sex female to play rugby with other sex females.

But I also support the freedom to choose to play sport,to cycle competitively and to be free to make your own life choices and enjoy the sport of cycling competitively

no one disagrees with that, and no one is stopping TW from doing that - they can do it in the male sex category where they belong

And we are back to completely ignoring ALL the current research that proves that lowering testosterone reduces the effect of a testosterone androgen puberty by 5%.

And I notice, we are back to separating ‘elite’ vs ‘social’ like women should not have the right to a fair competition at ALL levels.

Excellent posts nicegerbil

OwningAllMyMistakes

How about you start posting some robust evidence that supports your position that males who have had the benefit of male puberty have those benefits reduced enough to compete in women’s category?

We all agree that everyone should be able to participate in their chosen sport. But as their birth sex. It should never have been allowed in the first place that someone who went through puberty as a male can compete against a female.

You also ignore many other posts because they didn’t focus on cycling. Righto.

Tell us exactly then how to get around the discrepancy of training and coaching opportunities given between the sexes historically for cycling? How does this get mitigated enough to include males with females NOW?

Tell us exactly how the challenges of having menstrual cycles, including menopause, should be accounted for enough to include males. And I would like to see evidence too that menstruation suppression has no impact either (from my personal experience my menstrual cycle was very much in existence in other ways even with suppression).

This includes the late entry of males into women’s age defined categories and is directly relevant to McKinnon’s inclusion. I pointed out a rugby example because I had it, but I see you won’t address any point brought forward that isn’t about cycling.

One of the issues is that mostly the teams are run by men and the funding is given more to the men’s equally wrong it was wrong in the time of the 90s and it’s wrong now.
Even the prize money isn’t equal and it’s wrong
It’s not that women’s cycling doesn’t and can’t compete with the men’s it’s not given enough airtime or space to be seen in mainstream sport broadcasting.

And I doubt you will have disagreement about this statement, absolutely too many males are making decisions that prioritise male cycling events.

But...

Why include males with unfair advantage in an already deprioritised category? Why add to the challenges faced by women?

Or are you waiting for a specific cycling study because ... well, sports scientists and biologists and other experts stating increased heart and. lungs, oxygen levels, limb proportions , different muscle types and leverage have no cycling specific studies and only a study on each event will be good enough. (Yes, I know it is drearily another sport example, but this is the rhetoric pushed by those arguing to allow males who have benefited from male puberty, but believe reducing testosterone makes it completely fair for those males to play rugby against females so I assume there will be similar arguments used in cycling too).

Let’s have a look at some world bests according to wiki and I have randomly picked them.

Mens 1 km time trial : 59.324
Junior men’s 1 km trial: 1:00.498
Women’s 1 km time trial: 1:06.144

Men’s hour record: 54.526 km
Women’s hour record; 47.791 km

This is just track, but to me speaks the reality of men vs women sport.

Why on earth do you think women should accept males, however they identify, into their cycling events when it is clear that there will be significant competitive differences ?

Why on earth do you not believe the science that has been published that states testosterone doesn’t diminish sporting advantage? (and in some cases the reduction can be trained away)

Or do you believe also that a male’s decision to feminise in a way that reduces their muscle bulk etc should be considered in some way or rewarded by inclusion in female sport. Like women are just lesser men and if women bulked up they too would win men’s events?

The whole premise of including male’s in female sports defies logic in my point of view.

@NiceGerbil

'I also support increased testing for trans competitors and a period of layoff should that person have been a competitive cyclist prior to transition.'

But what about

Teenagers where there have been no interventions (and rightly so)
All of the sports clubs, thousands and thousands of them, that are not professional? Where the idea is you play where you feel most comfy?

What about the simple fact that used to be accepted (and 99.9% of people in the world still know), that male and female humans have very different bodies, with different strengths and weaknesses, and that as sport is literally man made, male humans have an advantage?

What's your position?

Do you think that males (not professional athletes/ sports people) with no medical intervention have an advantage over women or not?

If not, why were sports sex segregated in the first place? Why do males from puberty out perform females?

If you do believe there is an advantage, then what's the justification for opening girls and women's clubs, competitions etc etc up to boys and men on a self ID basis?

I would like to see ‘Owning’ answer these questions?

Because, as we have seen from the English rugby, lobby groups are absolutely trying to push the attempts to put parameters on participation.

And the point about non medical transition is very pertinent.

Plus the point of ‘down time’ around times of transition. The thing that struck me when I read about t suppression is that it seems to be unreliable? So, will there need to be daily testing by a registered HCP to test. And if there is a spike, does the person need to wait another period of time to compete? What does a spike of testosterone do to performance if it is for a month and then reduced again?

Please tell us why, with so many unknowns, it has been deemed appropriate to ever include males into female sports until robust and definitive answers can be supplied?

Why was the default set this way? For ‘social benefit’. You would not breach the boundaries of any other competitive category like this, why have women been deemed as not worthy of the protections given for age and disability?

And no, I don’t accept that if women just trained harder they would win against men.

OwningAllMyMistakes

"Nicole Cooke in her cycling career competed against male riders and beat them how is that correct if all women can do against men is lose, just because of their birth of being male."

Nicole Cooke was a fabulous cyclist, but what you have said is totally misleading. She may have beaten some average male cyclists in time trials, but she has NEVER beaten any elite male cyclists.

Nicole Cooke was a fantastic rider and her retirement statement sets out just how utterly dire it was for female cyclists when she started

"There were no British Championship events for Girls. My father and I worked very hard with British Cycling, formerly the British Cycling Federation (BCF). We strived to convince them to hold events for girls and to provide the necessary support to help them progress. We had to do a great deal in so many ways. Cycling was, and continues to be, a male dominated sport and "equality" from many points of view still has a very long way to go"

www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/jan/14/nicole-cooke-retirement-statement

But if Rachael McKinnon’s testosterone levels weren’t in line of the other competitors then there is every reason to be raising objections
What’s not to say that Ms McKinnon had a superior bike and better commitment should the governing bodies allow a handicap for the women who may have busy home lives or children
If that was the case then what about personal commitment to the sport maybe they didn’t train enough or commit enough time
You just dead named ivy. You should probably put that right.
And ivy is very open about ivy's training regime. You can look that up if you were bothered.

Transwomen's testosterone only has to be below 5 to qualify, that is 5times higher than the majority of women.

What gets me is why women have to keep explaining why transwomen should not compete in women’s sport. Why we have to keep fighting to allow born girls to have their own category of sport. Why?

How about transwomen explaining to us what they can offer and why they should be included? Rather than telling us women to roll over. I am fed up. Even at park run where I try to beat as many women as possible I am now having to run against transwomen in my category. I just have to accept that. That I will never be the first women one week as there will always be two born men in front of me.

@Helleofabore

OwningAllMyMistakes

How about you start posting some robust evidence that supports your position that males who have had the benefit of male puberty have those benefits reduced enough to compete in women’s category?

We all agree that everyone should be able to participate in their chosen sport. But as their birth sex. It should never have been allowed in the first place that someone who went through puberty as a male can compete against a female.

You also ignore many other posts because they didn’t focus on cycling. Righto.

Tell us exactly then how to get around the discrepancy of training and coaching opportunities given between the sexes historically for cycling? How does this get mitigated enough to include males with females NOW?

Tell us exactly how the challenges of having menstrual cycles, including menopause, should be accounted for enough to include males. And I would like to see evidence too that menstruation suppression has no impact either (from my personal experience my menstrual cycle was very much in existence in other ways even with suppression).

This includes the late entry of males into women’s age defined categories and is directly relevant to McKinnon’s inclusion. I pointed out a rugby example because I had it, but I see you won’t address any point brought forward that isn’t about cycling.

Thank you Helleofabore you have a actually raised some real and pertinent issues to the issue of allowing trans women into a level playing that I accept isn’t level in favour of women’s cycling.but that doesn’t mean that trans women shouldn’t be allowed to compete but there would have to be some thing to allow for the issue of menstrual cycles in women to that of the non menstrual cycles of trans women.

These are issues and I admit I don’t have all the answers as it’s complex
But I won’t just shut the debate down because I don’t have the answers or ignore posts.

@Feelinghothothottoday

What gets me is why women have to keep explaining why transwomen should not compete in women’s sport. Why we have to keep fighting to allow born girls to have their own category of sport. Why?

How about transwomen explaining to us what they can offer and why they should be included? Rather than telling us women to roll over. I am fed up. Even at park run where I try to beat as many women as possible I am now having to run against transwomen in my category. I just have to accept that. That I will never be the first women one week as there will always be two born men in front of me.

Firstly I don’t think it’s for any trans women to tell anyone what they can or can’t offer to be included in anything, do you go around with a bag full of reasons why you should be included in anything you choose to do or have to justify it to anyone of course you don’t. “ I am fed up. Even at park run where I try to beat as many women as possible I am now having to run against transwomen in my category. I just have to accept that. That I will never be the first women one week as there will always be two born men in front of me”

And isn’t that just the same for anyone at park run and In life that there will always be someone faster it’s life get over it and that has nothing to do with TransWomen taking part but your resentment at them taking part in a park run get over it get over yourself and enjoy your park runs