Stephanie Barrett representing Canada

[NancyDrawed]

Such an inspirational story.

Started archery at the age of 37. Is representing Canada in the Olympics in Archery at the age of 42. How lucky that Stephanie just happens to have an Olympic level talent for archery. I wonder what it is that sets this athlete apart from the much younger women in the category, apart from their height?

olympic.ca/team-canada/stephanie-barrett/?fbclid=IwAR3KuaiAwauCilPrpnVPJnHI1EnL8_r_8ZVv32kWBdrw4U0Q6nXL0O4ZUoE

As a cynic, it occurred to me that nations are putting forward 'ambiguous women' because of Covid-19. Perhaps things wont be so obvious, then 4 years from now, we can get rid of women altogether? Then we'll be able to have the men and also men categories.

Yes. How amazing to qualify to represent your country so quickly?
And at that age?

And of course there is so little published about them too considering the huge success story they have.

Heart rate. A lower heart rate is beneficial for target sports.

And probably a body not effected by perimenopause.

I hadn't heard of SB, but the link was on Facebook in a post talking about males in female categories. There doesn't seem to be much about SB online, unlike Laurel Hubbard.

I know that the IOC rules allow this and it is the rules that should be attacked rather than the individual, but anyone competing in a category that they shouldn't be in (and must know that they shouldn't be in) is just morally wrong and any victory must surely feel hollow.

twitter.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1412501654830714891/photo/1

A bit more info on ripx4nutmeg's twitter post above if you scroll down a bit. At least NZ have been open about entering a male in a female category

From reading her bio she's clearly a sporty person, I have friends like that, can turn her hand to any sport and be good after a short time, obvs not on this scale.

However, I think archery is a skill, and you either have it or you don't. Yes you can improve with time, but you cant take a person who is rubbish and have them become outstanding with training and coaching. Good luck to her!

I don't understand the comments about 'ambiguious women' though. Are you saying she's a trans woman? I don't see any evidence of that anywhere.

Not everything has to be about trans rights though.

I don't understand the comments about 'ambiguious women' though. Are you saying she's a trans woman? I don't see any evidence of that anywhere.

From Stephanie's twitter feed.

@TheLovleyChebbyMcGee

From reading her bio she's clearly a sporty person, I have friends like that, can turn her hand to any sport and be good after a short time, obvs not on this scale.

However, I think archery is a skill, and you either have it or you don't. Yes you can improve with time, but you cant take a person who is rubbish and have them become outstanding with training and coaching. Good luck to her!

I don't understand the comments about 'ambiguious women' though. Are you saying she's a trans woman? I don't see any evidence of that anywhere.

Not everything has to be about trans rights though.

TheLovley

I agree that there are some people who are just 'sporty' and can do reasonably well in whichever sport they try - I think mindset has a lot to with it, as well as a good level of fitness. I doubt any of them could go from novice to Olympian in the space of 5 years if they were in the correct category, especially at such a relatively advanced age.

Upper body strength plays a role in archery and of course someone who has had a testosterone fuelled puberty will benefit from that in this sport.

It is unfair to have males competing against females in what should be a female only category (and two males in what should be a mixed category). What would be stunning and brave, would be to have the Laurel Hubbards and the Stephaine Barretts competing as their true selves in the correct category for their sex.

Here's a news article.

www.thestar.com/sports/olympics/2021/07/05/olympic-archer-stephanie-barrett-is-pulling-the-strings-on-a-real-life-fantasy-story.html?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMedia&utm_campaign=World&utm_content=olympicarcherstephanie

@PronounssheRa

I don't understand the comments about 'ambiguious women' though. Are you saying she's a trans woman? I don't see any evidence of that anywhere.

From Stephanie's twitter feed.

Yes. Unless HRT & SRS is code for something else.

Ah, OK - posted before the posts of the Twitter thread were posted.

I see now.

Upper body strength coupled with longer arms means that the archer can use a bow with a higher draw weight - so the arrow flies faster for longer and as a result will be more accurate.

Nothing to see here …

I agree that there are some people who are just 'sporty' and can do reasonably well in whichever sport they try - I think mindset has a lot to with it, as well as a good level of fitness. I doubt any of them could go from novice to Olympian in the space of 5 years if they were in the correct category, especially at such a relatively advanced age.

I know absolutely nothing about Stephanie Barrett however Geena Davis, who I think we all know is definitely a natal woman, took up archery in her early 40s. And she came very, very close to qualifying for the 2000 Olympics within about 2 years. She came 24th out of the 300 women who were good enough to compete for an Olympic team spot. Now as a wealthy, prominent person she was able to hire an Olympic coach right off the bat, which most women in the 40s won't be able to do. But even at that it's incredibly impressive to go from really enjoying watching the archery at the 1996 Olympics to nearly qualifying for the 2000 team in your 40s.

The strong jaw line and the Adams apple is a bit of a giveaway too. Once you suspect at least.

This is cheating. Countries sending transwomen to compete in women's sports are cheating.

It is unfair to have males competing against females in what should be a female only category (and two males in what should be a mixed category). What would be stunning and brave, would be to have the Laurel Hubbards and the Stephaine Barretts competing as their true selves in the correct category for their sex.

That's what gets glossed over in all this though. No way would either of these two get a sniff at the Olympics if they were competing in the male category against much younger men.

Every woman in their category will be considerably younger than them. How is it that a very narrow demographic of people suddenly get to have elite sports careers at the age everyone else is retired or is approaching retirement?

I've never won a sporting award in my life. If only I was allowed to compete with 10 year olds maybe my middle aged dreams could all come true.

Oh right, well it doesn't change what I said before, best of luck to her!

@TheLovleyChebbyMcGee

Oh right, well it doesn't change what I said before, best of luck to her!

Shame about the young woman who missed out on a spot on the team who didn't experience the advantages of a male puberty, doesn't have the advantage of 3 decades of testosterone, a longer arm span, wider shoulders and faster twitch connectivity in muscles.

But sure, best of luck Steph

Pandering to male delusions is so much more important than women's rights to fair competition.

@trancepants

I agree that there are some people who are just 'sporty' and can do reasonably well in whichever sport they try - I think mindset has a lot to with it, as well as a good level of fitness. I doubt any of them could go from novice to Olympian in the space of 5 years if they were in the correct category, especially at such a relatively advanced age.

I know absolutely nothing about Stephanie Barrett however Geena Davis, who I think we all know is definitely a natal woman, took up archery in her early 40s. And she came very, very close to qualifying for the 2000 Olympics within about 2 years. She came 24th out of the 300 women who were good enough to compete for an Olympic team spot. Now as a wealthy, prominent person she was able to hire an Olympic coach right off the bat, which most women in the 40s won't be able to do. But even at that it's incredibly impressive to go from really enjoying watching the archery at the 1996 Olympics to nearly qualifying for the 2000 team in your 40s.

Wow, I didn't know that about Geena Davis.

I stand corrected, then, archery may be a sport where if you have a talent for it, you can progress at remarkable speed regardless of age.

I stand by my comment that it is unfair to allow males to compete in female only categories.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/32382911

So in shooting the breast needs to be out of the way of the gun - are there similar rules for archery? If so I wonder if this was borne in mind when choosing the size of the implants?

@TheLovleyChebbyMcGee

Oh right, well it doesn't change what I said before, best of luck to her!

A man competing against women probably doesn't need any 'luck'

@Ekofisk

Upper body strength coupled with longer arms means that the archer can use a bow with a higher draw weight - so the arrow flies faster for longer and as a result will be more accurate.

Nothing to see here …

Or if the draw weight is set, they will be able to hold the bow drawn with ease compared to the female competitors with no tired arms causing shake when aiming.

Barrett has a huge advantage.

Cheaters gonna cheat

If it’s within the rules, it isn’t cheating.

It’s the rules that are wrong.

@IsItShining

If it’s within the rules, it isn’t cheating.

It’s the rules that are wrong.

Although if these individuals had any morals they wouldn't be competing.