New guidelines for transgender participation unveiled by UK sports councils

[Highwind]

Reported by the Guardian....

www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/sep/29/new-guidelines-for-transgender-participation-unveiled-by-uk-sports-councils

Sean Ingle has Tweeted about his Grauniad article. MN’s favourite cycling parent has already complained that “the interviews were transphobic” and that Sean “won’t get the real story behind the story”.

Brilliant news - but is the final point about international competition a nudge to let TW in? (Because other rules are different and we will need to pick them for international squads?). Genuine question

@CatsOperatingInGangs

Me me me me me! It should all be about me!

@Ekofisk

I do wonder to what extent it will open up litigation, in a good way - a woman injured playing against a biological man has a clear case that her club chose inclusive over safety for women and put her at risk.

The risk assessments are going to be interesting.

Yep. It’s not just ‘women’, it’s pregnant women, breastfeeding women, prepubescent women, women who are ttc, post menopausal women with less bone density, blind women etc.

Why on earth should it be immoral for women to have sports without males?

But Pippa transitioned after her cycling career ended, when performance had already dropped!

Why does a former elite sportsman think they're the go to person to consult oabout non-elie women's sport's guidance? And why should subjective, personal opinion be elevated over measurable facts?

I heard this on R4 headlines at 8am.

Listening to the report which basically said trans women retained advantages and was this was unfair on women, I was imagining a National chorus of “No Shit Sherlock”.

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

Why does a former elite sportsman think they're the go to person to consult oabout non-elie women's sport's guidance? And why should subjective, personal opinion be elevated over measurable facts?

Well, this. You were a male athlete Pippa. Relevant studies would be on trans athletes. Not you.

I was pleased to read this last night, and yes kudos to Sean Ingle who I think has consistently dealt with this topic very well.
I'm feeling positive a way forward can be found, and am happy that there is also recognition of the value of sport & activity for everyone's health & well-being, and that mixed sex sports can be a great thing, if done properly! I've been part of mixed sex teams in touch rugby and rowing and it's a great experience.

I might even consider starting up my ladies-only cycling sessions I used to lead, IF British Cycling change their minds & permit me to run them on a sex based basis.

I think this is good.

It demonstrates that it is possible to acknowledge the reality of sex and competing rights. It creates some of the framework for the debate that Keir Starmer waffles about but refuses to have.

Other organisations should take note.

I think it is a good report. I think most sports organisations will decide to protect the female category or have very good reasons why they prioritise inclusion over safety and fairness or new forms of the sport in a non contact way ( although that might improve safety it doesn’t improve fairness)

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

Why does a former elite sportsman think they're the go to person to consult oabout non-elie women's sport's guidance? And why should subjective, personal opinion be elevated over measurable facts?

York would still be extremely competitive in the women’s elite road racing even at York’s age.

Also you could have a protected female category and then male or mixed categories e.g in cycling

I think the report is well written, and has taken a good look at the latest research. Reading the Guardian and the BBC they've done their best to discredit it - for example the Guardian quickly says that trans groups insist the research indicates that trans women do not retain any advantage - but then the article notes that the report author refutes that. However, even they are unable to get away from the core fact that inclusion of transwomen in female sport is unfair.

At first I was annoyed at pushing it on to individual sports to decide but then I read it properly, and it says each sport must decide on inclusion, fairness or safety. With clear information on what each of those means. So actually it is up to individual sports, and I'm interested to see which one prioritise inclusion over fairness or safety.

@merrymouse

I think this is good.

It demonstrates that it is possible to acknowledge the reality of sex and competing rights. It creates some of the framework for the debate that Keir Starmer waffles about but refuses to have.

Other organisations should take note.

Wasn't it only yesterday that Angela Rayner stood up at conference and said there is no rights conflict? Someone should ask her about these new guidelines.

That is huge! I am also very impressed that that this was happening seems to have flown beneath the radar - I'm sure if it'd been known that the sports bodies were looking into this it would never have happened.

It's so refreshing to see people being sensible and pragmatic and basing decisions on robust data rather than who shouts loudest.

@Chrysanthemum5

I think the report is well written, and has taken a good look at the latest research. Reading the Guardian and the BBC they've done their best to discredit it - for example the Guardian quickly says that trans groups insist the research indicates that trans women do not retain any advantage - but then the article notes that the report author refutes that. However, even they are unable to get away from the core fact that inclusion of transwomen in female sport is unfair.

At first I was annoyed at pushing it on to individual sports to decide but then I read it properly, and it says each sport must decide on inclusion, fairness or safety. With clear information on what each of those means. So actually it is up to individual sports, and I'm interested to see which one prioritise inclusion over fairness or safety.

I'm not going to hold my breath for British Cycling. They've been especially awful to women.

@RedDogsBeg

On the back of this I can't see any Insurance Company willing to risk insuring sports teams or individuals if males are included in female sport.

Ah, that's a very good point, and quite likely what will swing it in women's favour.

Any sports org including males in any female contact sport will be open to cases if/when there are injuries.

Any sports org including males in any female contact sport will be open to cases if/when there are injuries

And presumably as they have been warned about safety, if TW are included with women the person making that decision will have to be very clear on how they arrived at that decision.

@sashagabadon

I think it is a good report. I think most sports organisations will decide to protect the female category or have very good reasons why they prioritise inclusion over safety and fairness or new forms of the sport in a non contact way ( although that might improve safety it doesn’t improve fairness)

Unfortunately I think that’s very optimistic

This gives me cause for optimism.

I wonder if Alison McGovern knew this was coming out, hence her careful waffling on WH yesterday with frequent repetition of the word “safety”.

@Olderbadger1

Like that clarity Arabella. Given the options are fairness (and safety) for women or cheating for men I do wonder which one they will go for.

Indeed, its a real head scratcher, isen't it

I genuinely cannot understand why they don't compete in the male category but under their new female names, female clothes, etc. We'd soon get used to seeing the odd female name in the list of males.

That's what our local boys' football team does. Stern warnings to the other boys not to take the piss and to remember that 'Ollie' was now 'Katie'. Job done. The worst that seems to happen is that they sometimes yell the wrong name when passing. That strikes me as proper inclusivity.