More or Less Radio 4 Trans Women in Sport

[TheAbbotOfUnreason]

On Radio 4, just starting now, looking at stats and data on testosterone.

Lia Thomas has gone from being the 462nd fastest college swimmer in 2018/19 in the men's category to the fastest over 200 yards this year in the women's. I just don't understand the gall of this. I don't understand why anyone interested in sport would want to do that. There is no pride in it, no glory. I heard somewhere that the crowd applaud the second placed woman as the winner. It makes sense to me.

2.3: In applying generally accepted standards broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context (see meaning of “context” below). Such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, violence, sex, sexual violence, humiliation, distress, violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language (for example on the grounds of age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation, and marriage and civil partnership), and treatment of people who appear to be put at risk of significant harm as a result of their taking part in a programme. Appropriate information should also be broadcast where it would assist in avoiding or minimising offence.

No explicit mention of pronouns here. I guess some people will say using a sex-based pronoun to refer to transgender person counts as "material which may cause offence". Some will be offended by the use of opposite-sex pronouns, and some by the avoidance of pronouns altogether. Impossible to avoid causing offence to anyone. In any case, the code doesn't ban such material: it just says it must be justified by context.

I'm offended.

I'm offended every time she/her is used in relation to a male.

I'm offended that the state in the form of the BBC is trying to tell us that what we can quite plainly see is reality, isn't - oh and I have to pay for the "pleasure" of being gaslighted too.

I caught this too. Ross Tucker is a very clear and concise speaker. He’s impossible to disagree with ( not that I do!)

Loyal listener here

Thought it was a fantastic article, and thanks to MoL for addressing it.

Ross Tucker was very very clear, an easy listen for the uninitiated of the subject.

The final comments re it could take years to collect the data? Well, my humble suggestion would be to go back to the old ways while we wait for the data to be collected. Good idea, hmm?

I've got a horse sex fact. Which is not a sentence I expected to write.

The pharmaceuticals know which type of horse they need to collect pee from to make HRT.

Some vegan women refuse HRT because of this. Most HRT is made from e.g. yams.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23974785/

Here you go hallouminatus:

www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/195287/Paul-Ellery-in-the-Morning,-Sunshine-Radio,-16-September-2019,-0745.pdf

It was a good to hear, I thought, but so fucking surreal that we are listening to top academics explaining why men shouldn't compete in women's sport...

Later in the programme Tim Harford was talking about "known unknowns" and said, "'How many roads must a man walk down before you can call him a man?', for example." I am probably reading too much into this but I really, really hope he was trolling.

Notice the usual noise makers aren’t here to try to prove that Ross is completely wrong.
Maybe they aren’t quite as smart as they thought.
TWANW proof if proof was needed.

Good point, @Riapia.

And doesn't the conversation flow well without it?

it's also worth pointing out that in races where fillies race against colts they get a weight allowance because it is accepted that the filly is at a disadvantage due to her sex.

Thanks for that - I had always wondered what the deal was. Knowing that there is an adjustment makes it make more sense.

Now, conceivably you could do the same for humans, but I wonder how hard it would be to agree the weight/time/whatever allowance.

It wouldn't be totally unreasonable to let Lia Thomas compete if the women were given a 40-second head start. (But it would be daft given that there is a separate male event already running).

They used to do this in the assault course on the - age and sex handicaps.

Certainly if you allowed mixed-sex with a handicap, you'd have to ask why you weren't doing mixed-age with a handicap, rather than separate "masters" events. Why integrate one thing and not the other?

Not slinking away with shame as the crowd cheers the second place woman, along with being in a female changing room despite making women feel uncomfortable makes me question the motivation. It seems the winning is a bonus but the real motivation something different

Just relistened as there was something I couldn’t remember. And it was this, many sports bodies saw male testosterone levels as the cause of the difference in performance levels between man and women, which by and large it is (see the room analogy) , they then assumed that reducing testosterone might therefore be the solution , which clearly it isn’t because post male puberty the advantage is physically embedded .

It is this simple cause and solution model that must be challenged , it is lazy, inaccurate science that makes assumptions which are clearly not confirmed by empirical examination. The combination of lazy science and Be Kind waffle is set to destroy female sport.

Totally agree, @viques.

The IOC and most of the sporting bodies have listened to people who are trans and to organisations like Stonewall.

They have direct access to actual experts, but they chose to heed the wishes of individuals who are advocating for themselves, some lobbyists who know nothing about sport or women, and dismiss the complaints of women and the EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN EYES.

Fucking idiots.

Another excellent programme from MoL. They did one a couple of years ago about the presence of DSD in the population and the "intersex is as common as being a redhead" myth.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06yhhjj

There was a thread about it here at the time
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3482851-More-or-Less-Radio-4-now-prevalence-of-intersex

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Totally agree, *@viques*.

The IOC and most of the sporting bodies have listened to people who are trans and to organisations like Stonewall.

They have direct access to actual experts, but they chose to heed the wishes of individuals who are advocating for themselves, some lobbyists who know nothing about sport or women, and dismiss the complaints of women and the EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN EYES.

Fucking idiots.

Isn't this the issue everywhere? That self interested individuals & organisations have been given privileged access to the law, government, the civil service, medicine unions, sport, the media and everywhere. They've have been able to influence policy solely in favour of their own very narrow niche interests. It's bloody awful in terms of society as a whole but in terms of child welfare & safeguarding, the practice of ethical medicine and women's rights to safety, it's catastrophic.

I love More or Less. I'm hoping they will eventually look at the much-repeated claims around trans suicide and murder rates.

@QueenPeony

I love More or Less. I'm hoping they will eventually look at the much-repeated claims around trans suicide and murder rates.

Yes, we should all contact the programme and ask them to do this.

it's also worth pointing out that in races where fillies race against colts they get a weight allowance because it is accepted that the filly is at a disadvantage due to her sex.

It's also the case that when mares race against geldings they still get a weight allowance. Chopping off the testicles hasn't reduced the male horse to a quivering filly.

Interesting discussion of the weight allowances here.

www.surreyracing.co.uk/the-buzz/are-weight-allowances-needed

I await @CaveMum to explain the introduction of a weight allowance for female jockeys. I bet a few male jockeys would have been unhappy about that since they struggle and sweat to get their weight down.

When I was nursing at Addenbrookes Cambridge a long long time ago we used to get jockeys in with kidney stones due to all that sweating in a sauna and denying themselves fluids to get their weight down. I hope they are a bit more health aware these days.

@FannyCann the female jockeys weight allowance has been contentious, and currently there are no plans for other racing nations to follow France’s lead. The main reason for the introduction is not because female jockeys are per se weaker than male jockeys, but because there is a perception (it’s a very old fashioned industry!) that they are. The thought being that if there is a weight allowance more trainers/owners would be inclined to give a female jockey the ride in order to give their horse a better chance of winning when carrying less weight.

My understanding is that the weight allowance doesn’t apply in certain (top end) races as quite often at that tier every lb counts.

Another reason the weight allowance has been controversial is because, historically, equestrian events are one of the few where men and women compete on equal terms and the split has been pretty fair in terms of results.

Regards the sweating, the British Horseracing Authority have just announced that saunas will continue to not be allowed this year, having been banned during Covid. Weight management had always been an issue for jockeys and some dodgy practices (like “flipping”) still happen, but much more work has been done with nutritionists to give jockeys the tools to make healthier choices than the veteran jockeys like Lester Piggott who often claimed to live on cigarettes and champagne!

I thought that part of the mare's weight allowance in horse racing was to allow for the "toll" on the mare's performance due to her female reproductive system ie. Coming into season every three weeks which can account for some very out-of-character behaviours in non thoroughbred mares.

As for female human athletes why is so little mention made when talking about equality with males that females have to deal with menstruation and the effects of hormonal contraceptives?

If anyone's interested in more depth about the testosterone debate, the book Trans by Helen Joyce has a detailed chapter about it. The whole book is a history of where we are and how we got here, it's definitely worth a read if you haven't already. Full of data and excellently researched.

@gailforce1

I thought that part of the mare's weight allowance in horse racing was to allow for the "toll" on the mare's performance due to her female reproductive system ie. Coming into season every three weeks which can account for some very out-of-character behaviours in non thoroughbred mares.

As for female human athletes why is so little mention made when talking about equality with males that females have to deal with menstruation and the effects of hormonal contraceptives?

That may be a small factor in in but it is mainly down to the size and muscle tone of fillies v Colts/geldings. Many trainers won’t run a filly if she is in season (they used to give a drug called Regumate to delay a cycle but that’s been banned now), and sometimes in a race report if a filly has not run as well as expected there is a note from the trainer reporting that she was found to be in season.

@bishophaha

If anyone's interested in more depth about the testosterone debate, the book Trans by Helen Joyce has a detailed chapter about it. The whole book is a history of where we are and how we got here, it's definitely worth a read if you haven't already. Full of data and excellently researched.

Also "Testosterone: The Story of the Hormone That Dominates and Divides Us" by evolutionary biologist Carole Hooven.