Transwomen in womens sport: advice sought..

[TraumatisedinTwickenham]

I’ve name changed as this may be outing.

As a hobby I play a team sport. I play for a womens team in a womens league.
We played against a team recently which had two trans women in the tram. Both well over 6 ft and faster, stronger than the women on my team.

They were both in the ladies changing room before the game. I wasn’t changing as I had arrived already in my sports gear but there are open showers in there and I certainty wouldn’t have felt comfortable showering in knowing that there was a trans woman in the space.

I’m really quite traumatised about it. I thought a womens league was inherently a single sex league but this doesn’t seem to be the case here. I have thought about going to the governing body of the sport but noticed that their website has an interview with the club for which the team we played represents as part of LGBTQ+ history month.

Incidentally, both of the trans people were very pleasant friendly people, not that this is really relevant, why wouldn’t they be. But it doesn’t change the fact that anyone who has been through male puberty has an undeniable advantage over women. I just don’t think that they should be participating in a womens team in a womens league but don’t know what the actual legal position is.

I was really upset (unexpectedly so) during the game and now half my own team thinks I’m a bigot..

I just don’t know what to do.

Threads about mixed sex where used to be single sex are rarely anything to do with listening.

The threads are started mostly because someone (almost always female) has read, seen, experienced etc something that they are not happy about as they know sex matters. They post to share this info, talk about it with others.

They post because they see something they see (know) is disadvantageous / a risk/ unfair to. Well. Female adult and/ or juvenile humans.

Sometimes the conversation has posters who are not sure/ confused/ have questions about the thread topic/ or who disagree that sex is not relevant or is but not as relevant as the situation for others.

With the people with questions etc there is usually a discussion with listening etc.

Those who firmly disagree well sometimes but not often there is a productive exchange. But generally it's two stances that are totally opposing, no way to meet in the middle.

If you believe TWAW (non binary identities are valid sometimes as well). And that declared gender identity should always be respected in all situations possible. And that anything that was single sex... Was never actually single sex ever in the first place or should be on gender now.

And you also believe that mixed sex things where available are only suitable where the trans person chooses them. And should in no way impact them being able to choose the women's thing because TWAW and it's offensive exclusionary othering to say cannot go with the women.

Then that's a definite firm position based in a certain core belief. That bodies are irrelevant, how people feel is paramount.

The view that sex is what's important, that the few single sex things that exist are due to sex. And that the reason for separation is to do with the differences between male and female people at a group level that until recently (and still are in reality) totally common sense and normal and obvious to everyone (and always have been).

How can there be a middle ground?

Sex > Gender
Or
Gender> sex

And this isn't about the usually stated trans people Vs a tiny group of evil females.

Because loads of trans people think sex> gender. And think that what's happening to female humans, homosexual people etc is just awful.

And those who push back are a disparate bunch of female human people who have a range of views about everything really except this. Oh, and of course while few male human people speak out, obviously the vast majority do not think physical sex is irrelevant. They know it is extremely relevant in loads of ways. And again of a range of views. And certainly it doesn't mean they are generally interested in feminism let alone radical Feminism!

So there isn't a middle is there.

It's about protecting female adult and juvenile humans. Nothing more or less.

On the one hand we have one woman's real experience of marking a male disproportionately bigger, stronger, faster than herself, which no amount of training harder will compensate for, and her resulting frustration, disappointment, anger and despair at the unfairness and concern for the future of her sport.

On the other we have one or more posters keen to argue the toss that well, it's not the Olympics so it doesn't matter anyway and pontificating upon how many males can be on a female team without it becoming mixed sex (spoiler: zero), and putting the onus on women to leave their single sex leagues to set up new single sex leagues (that won't be immune for calls for trans inclusion) as if the cost, time and emotional labour is nothing.

Hours of women's lives spent reading and responding to someone for whom this is all a hypothetical. Meanwhile in the real world a woman was treated like a bigot because she pointed out that the opposing team were at a disproportionate, unfair advantage because of sexual dimorphism. Something that was bleeding obvious to nearly everyone 6 years ago.

She didn't seek out this fight, it unexpectedly showed up on the pitch where she went to play with other women as she has done for years.

I'm sorry, @TraumatisedinTwickenham it wasn't fair and I'm sorry that your team didn't support you even though the problem seems obvious. Maybe they'll feel differently after trying to mark males themselves and find that it is different from marking a female who is a bit stronger and faster.

There was some good advice early-ish in the thread about how to raise it and which organisations may be able to offer support.

I hope this gets resolved before women leave sport in their droves.

Being kind and considerate of transwomen's feeling socially is one thing.But in sport it is their sexed bodies that play, not their gender identity, so they can be included fairly on the team that accords with their body's sex. Or on mixed teams taking a male place, not a female one.

It isn't bigoted or transphobic to want fair sports separated by sex.

And sorry to keep waffling on about this but, personally I don't want to have to strip off in front of a person with a penis if I am not in a sexual relationship with that person. If I am in a communal changing room, or a communal shower area, even at my stage of life I wouldn't want to be naked around males. Why is that so wrong?

If anyone mentions having to strip off for HCP I shall scream!

Oh I know the answer! I've seen-

It's down to prudishness. If you go to Europe/ Scandinavia everyone goes around naked loads and it's fine!

Penis is just skin it's an irrational fear to feel uncomfy around exposed penis in any situation where undressing is happening.

Sex segregation came about because of a patriarchal view that women are weak and need to be protected. It's anti Feminist.

It's discrimatory and wrong to judge women on their bodies. It's the same as excluding women who have had mastectomies, or are very tall, or are not feminine and exclude males will mean loads of female people will be excluded as well!

And more.

Convincing arguments surely.

You are right to be upset. You are playing against men and men are in your changing room. Shocking.

@Ritasueandbobtoo9

You are right to be upset. You are playing against men and men are in your changing room. Shocking.

This.

For the average guy, I would say, imagine you have to tackle a top American footballer, that gives a sense of what it's like being forced to play against men.

In football it's even worse. Because of the huge disparity in the investment in the men's and women's game many of us didn't start playing until adulthood. We're distinctly mediocre, and we know we are, but we enjoy it and it's important to us.

A male who has benefited from male football socialisation (for want of a better phrase) will probably already be more skilful than us before they're a teenager. And then you add the benefits of a male puberty it's a ludicrous performance difference.

Ironically I’m sitting here now with cracked ribs after a guy I train with accidentally injured me whilst pinning me down. He didn’t mean to but his combined weight abs pressure and my ribs just gave way. A real first hand insight into the physical differences between men and women. Would it have mattered if he’d identified as a woman? Not one fucking jot

In martial arts not hockey 👆

@Ritasueandbobtoo9

You are right to be upset. You are playing against men and men are in your changing room. Shocking.

Yes, and also you're not allowed to acknowledge that you recognise this fact without risking social/participatory exclusion.

I have a feeling that some people are keen to minimise the potential for harm to females in field hockey. Having spent quite a bit of time watching women’s hockey, I think the risk while tackling, more power behind a misaimed high ball and the general speed of a ball, a player etc, would be quite an increase of risk for females.

The lack acknowledgment from some posters who would not have experienced it for themselves or who haven’t taken the time to go through the research in depth, but who are determined that women should be kind. Or that women who are not aware of the risks should have the right to make the decision on behalf of all the current and future females playing on that team. It is bonkers.

Women who want to play mixed sex hockey have no right to change the nature of a team that is single sex only. That is in no way kind.

The people who are all for male inclusion in women’s sports seem to be either other men or women who don’t do sports. Funny that.

Helleofabore

I agree. I found a sports medicine page discussing field hockey injuries last night.

Concussions represent approximately 7 percent of all injuries sustained during field hockey competitions. Dizziness and confusion are the most common symptoms of a concussion, although longer-term issues such as headache, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating may also occur.

www.urmc.rochester.edu/orthopaedics/sports-medicine/field-hockey-injuries.cfm

The number of concussions is only going to go up when you have male bodied players against female players, following rules designed on the presumption all players are female.

As I have mentioned before, look at the entry at the top end of this table showing male advantage in sport. It's a field hockey technique! Turns out that male humans can get 50% more power into it than female humans.

Women who want to play mixed sex hockey have no right to change the nature of a team that is single sex only

Well exactly.

Saying "well, there are mixed sex teams, so it's fine" is basically saying "you don't get to choose your own boundaries - you only get to have the boundaries that suit the people with the fewest boundaries, and any additional boundaries you request are selfish and unreasonable by definition".

PurgatoryOfPotholes

Thank you. That is a chart I have seen before but couldn’t remember where.

Maybe some posters are also unaware that females have more delicate brain fibres (as well as more delicate skulls) and therefore are more prone to concussion and future issues caused by concussions. It was a rugby study that discovered this but is very applicable in field hockey, as you have pointed out.

Fine if rules reflect having a male player on the field. Not fine if no allowances made for the differences.

Of course, let’s also not forget that males have faster reaction time because their brain processes visual cues faster too.

But the reality is, having more stability due to pelvic configuration, power due to different types of muscles and just more powerful output from those muscles makes a very fast and more stable opponent that has a higher risk. And it simply doesn’t matter whether elite or first time playing. The science is clear.

Yet the ‘be kind’ brigade are also now happy for either misinformed or uninformed people to shape the future of women’s sports.

As I said, maybe this poster censuring women for their tone has some new research. I look forward to seeing it.

Women are also far more susceptible to suffer whiplash injuries and the research I've seen indicates that this is due to the smaller size vertebrae in female necks as well as a smaller neck size overall. In MMA, for example, there's a huge risk of whiplash injuries and women are now having to fight against males in MMA.

As a pp put so well, it doesn't matter a jot how they identify. They have male bodies.

@Doubletoilandtrouble

The people who are all for male inclusion in women’s sports seem to be either other men or women who don’t do sports. Funny that.

Unfortunately that's not the case. Female players are as likely to say it because of the strength of the narrative of transwomen being fragile and vulnerable and needing to be accommodated and protected.

Of course, they're perfectly entitled to say they're happy to complete against transwomen, but they're not entitled to say that for everyone else.

Ironically several of those in my football team who said they were happy to include transwomen already struggle with the physicality of the women's game. I suspect they would quit if the league started to include even a small number of male players.

Ok, so that is interesting. Some women already struggling with the physicality want to help others they perceive to be struggling then?

And tough luck for female players who are competitive and play to win (against other women)?

I’ve found the female players who allegedly don’t mind playing with/against trans women are young, naive and believe TWAW so to exclude TW would be the equivalent of excluding Sikh women (for example). They are unable to think through the long term impact of such absurdity.

I think there are also quite a few women who don't want to admit that women aren't just as strong etc as men.

It depresses me to hear people say 'it's only amateur, what does it matter?' Being involved in sport, especially team sport, is so great for health, mental well being and confidence building, plus the social aspect. It's difficult enough getting women and girls involved, why should they now also be put off (or even self-exclude) because of the demoralising effect of having to play against male bodied players, or even risk serious injury?
It's so unfair that you're facing this horrible situation OP

I think 'it's only amateur sport' when it comes to this topic actually means 'it's only women's sport'.

I read most of this thread yesterday morning and coincidentally had to do an online England Hockey safeguarding course last night.

One of the sections was a "good practice" / "bad practice" questionnaire on safeguarding and changing rooms (which was mostly aimed at protecting children in adult changing rooms).

So the statements are:

"Ensuring supervisions of young players aged 10 and under at all times in the changing room by two adults who are the same gender as the players"

"Pressurising young people to change or shower in the presence of others when they are uncomfortable doing so"

"Informing young people and their parent/guardian of the club/organisation's policy on changing arrangements"

........ with the "correct" answers being that the 1st and 3rd are good practice and the middle one is bad practice.

But the first statement refers to gender not sex........ so, England Hockey, if two natal males could supervise a 10 year old girl in a changing room, what exactly are you trying to prevent????

There's so much wrong with the whole situation and because at the moment it's still mostly a small/theoretical problem, the #BeKind brigade don't think it's a problem and are sleepwalking into wiping out women's sports or wondering how come the entire "women's" team from Anytown HC which they are playing against is in fact its male team. For what it's worth, I think what it actually needs is the whole male team to do just that (if they actually cared/understood enough about it) and then see if everyone still thought it was OK.

I would be asking their Safegaurding for clarification on that. Do they mean gender as in sex? Or gender as in gender identity?

If they are the minority within the club, or the league, as, even by the OP's account, seems to be the case, then yes.

Erm. You know who is really the minority in the women’s league? Biological males.

This is just like Hampstead Ladies’ pond where the biological males now have the choice of mens’, mixed and the (formerly single sex) women’s pond and the women have no dedicated provision. It’s particularly egregious where a mixed option already exists where no one would pay any attention to a male in women’s attire on the pitch. But perhaps that’s the point.