Janice Turner on Men in Womens' Sport

[Igneococcus]

In the Times today:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1f46e2aa-f160-11eb-8f01-2c678acbb979?shareToken=5b3214aca472297d50f8c6b30df50130

Thanks for the link and thank you Janice.
I hadn't realised the female Samoan weightlifters had pulled out.

archived in case the share token lapses or it's useful at a later date: archive.ph/cRHor

Good article.
Basically the IOC have cooked up a loophole that allows men to compete in women's categories whilst setting a bar that would disqualify a female competitor for doping. How can this be fair?

@Beamur

Good article. Basically the IOC have cooked up a loophole that allows men to compete in women's categories whilst setting a bar that would disqualify a female competitor for doping. How can this be fair?

Exactly. It's lose/lose for women. And they're getting away with it.

Thanks OP

The comments are good under the article.

@Beamur

Good article. Basically the IOC have cooked up a loophole that allows men to compete in women's categories whilst setting a bar that would disqualify a female competitor for doping. How can this be fair?

Yep.

Excellent piece from Janice Turner, as always. Everything eloquently stated.

But yes, that mis-sexed pronoun in the middle stands out. In some ways this is so irritating, but in other ways, it is good that it stands out.

Another brilliant piece from Janice. I agree so much with what she says about feeling furious. I still feel annoyed with David Aaronovitch for accusing Helen Joyce of being angry. Well, of course she's angry. If you're not absolutely enraged about what is being done to women there's something wrong with you.

Janice's piece is such a contrast to Gaby Hinsliff's piece on women in the Olympics today. Goes on about the sexualisation, the requirements to wear skimpy shorts etc but completely fails to address the huge man-shaped elephant in the room:

www.theguardian.com/global/commentisfree/2021/jul/30/murky-elite-sport-women-tokyo-games-abuse-sexualisation

I'm so pleased Janice is using her public platform to speak out against this injustice against women. As a credible and eloquent writer she adds a disproportionate amount of heft to our side of the debate.

I don't think there was anything wrong with Hinsliff's piece, though; those are equally important issues, and you can't address everything in every article.

I've done it.

I've just outed myself as a terf.
Shared on social media.
A bit scared, which is ridiculous. But I can't be silent here.

Just waiting for the twaw comments from my friend with a trans child.
Wish me luck.

@SCMocha

I don't think there was anything wrong with Hinsliff's piece, though; those are equally important issues, and you can't address everything in every article.

I agree. It's important to challenge the gratuitous sexualisation of female athletes, but that's a separate fight. Likewise the inequality of opportunity that resulted in Beth Shriever having to crowdfund her attendance at the Olympics. Nobody can tackle everything at the same time.

I bought the Times today for the first time. No more Guardian for me. I loved the article and the tone. Now we need for those brilliant female presenters to speak out: Alex Scott, Claire Balding, Hazel Irvine, Denise Lewis etc please, have courage, speak out!

Well done, TheSlayer. Who could stay silent about this and feel comfortable with themselves?

I’m just so sick of this shit. How sportswomen put up with this I don’t know.

It’s utterly sickening. He’s a man. He’s a male cheat. You can’t change sex. Trans women are men.

Well done @TheSlayer

I did the same a few weeks ago (shared an article about LH and the olympics) on my Facebook. I got a few likes, no negative or argumentative comments, and the sky didn’t fall in. I don’t think anyone defriended me either . I since shared an article about the woman sexually assaulted in prison.

I honestly think most people in my life are genuinely unaware this is happening or just don’t think too deeply about it.

Hope you get some positive response.

Well done @TheSlayer

I hesitated to share a GC article on FB a while ago knowing that some people who see my posts might feel defensive or uncomfortable. But I decided I couldn't always take personal responsibility for everybody else's potential hurt feelings, which is what I've been socialised to do because I'm a woman in a public facing role, and there might also be one or two people who would see it and think, "KP doesn't believe men can become women, and she's not mad, bad or stupid, so maybe it's OK to listen to my own doubts instead of trying to silence them."

One person who has a lot of personal skin in the game stepped up with a bit of name calling and that's when I realised that "TERF" didn't even make it on to the lists of insults that could hurt me, which was quite liberating in itself. I think they've blocked me.

The first two paragraphs:

"Samoa has a name for boys who prefer “feminine” clothing, games and roles: “fa’afafine”, meaning “in the manner of a woman”. Allotted traditionally female crafts and household duties, this “third gender” was revered for combining nurture with physical strength. In modern Samoa, there’s no stigma if your son is a fa’afafine: they are warmly accepted, even celebrated.

A fa’afafine, Jaiyah Saelua, was the first transgender footballer to play in a World Cup qualifying game. She was centre back for the American Samoan national team: the men’s team. Samoans understand that changing gender does not affect a person’s immutable biological sex."

That seems clear enough until '“... boys who prefer “feminine” clothing, games and roles: fa’afafine”, meaning “in the manner of a woman”... and "Samoans understand that changing gender does not affect a person’s immutable biological sex" suddenly becomes '"third gender"'... 'the first transgender footballer' and 'She'.

That suggests to me rather that the Samoans know they are boys and not girls but the writer is putting a different interpretation on it and using terminology from here, not there. On the face of it there is no obvious justification for translating it into these terms or meaning.

@Beamur

Good article. Basically the IOC have cooked up a loophole that allows men to compete in women's categories whilst setting a bar that would disqualify a female competitor for doping. How can this be fair?

It seems to me that since this is the case

"Behind closed doors, a meeting attended mainly by trans activists, with no input from women’s sporting bodies, devised a new metric for fairness: testosterone.
"Now the IOC rules state that any male who wants to punch female boxers or run the women’s 100 metres must simply get their testosterone below 10 nanomoles per litre for a year. The normal testosterone range for women, including elite athletes? It’s 0.12-1.78 nmol/L. So even when applying this one paltry measure of fairness — the level of rocket-fuel male hormone — they didn’t try for parity. Five to ten times the female norm was just fine. And what if a woman athlete used drugs to raise her testosterone to 10nmol/L? She’d be disqualified for doping"

the way to make the metric fair would be to state that anyone with say more than 3 nanomoles per litre for a year was not allowed to compete against people with fewer than 3 nmol/L. And taking drugs to raise that nmol/L limit would mean automatic disqualification just as it does now.

"And what if a woman athlete used drugs to raise her testosterone to 10nmol/L? She’d be disqualified for doping."

"Anyway, lowering testosterone was not chosen as an entry requirement because it’s fair but because it’s achievable. Whereas the advantages of male puberty are irreversible. Just listing them — height, weight, muscle bulk, lower body fat, hips that aren’t designed for childbirth and thus give a stronger gait — makes me livid."

Brilliant key point about Richard Budgett and the IOC board ignoring what males can't change; hips, skeleton, bones, muscle, fat distribution, bulk, weight, male puberty, height, thigh length, limb length etc etc etc... and obtusely singling out testosterone, and cruelly choosing a bar10 times that of a woman.

bodies play sports, not testosterone levels.

Hannah Roberts (USA) in the BMX

hmmm....

There doesn't seem to be any evidence Hannah is trans and apparently she has personally denied it on social media. The US BMX reserve, Chelsea Wolfe, is openly trans, though, so apparently the rules do permit it for that sport.

Having seen pictures of Hannah and heard her speak, I believe she is in the correct category.

It’s very sad that someone is having to discuss if they are or aren’t trans publicly like that.
But this is the environment that has been created.

Trans Athlete Bridges was welcomed in the men's team - that's inclusive. The Samoan approach of simply including trans athletes in their sex category feels like a good option. FPFW have talked about an open category and a female category.

But now British cycling are including a Bridges in the female category, who's 2 minutes faster than any adult human female, including olympian Dame Laura Kenny.

Given the news today for female cyclists, the Samoan approach needs more consideration doesn't it?

here's the article again
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/be-more-samoan-to-avoid-olympic-injustice-s22rkn0rw