Breaking news - Emily won't compete

[Doyoumind]

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/60934099

[quote Truthlikeness]A study in 2018 found that 25% of Olympic-level MALE elite athletes had testosterone levels below the 10 nmol/L threshold.

Testosterone levels are complete distraction.

www.biointeractive.org/sites/default/files/TestosteroneAthletes-Educator-DP.pdf[/quote]
the low male readings are quite interesting, the high female ones less so, with the outliers at the top certainly being intersex or doped, it is literally impossible for anyone to get to those T levels without the aid of pair of functioning male testes or a syringe containing something potent.

Have we all seen the photo of Emily that accompanied the statement? Someone really is talented…with photoshop.

@ResisterRex - I don't really know about that hip angle stuff, it might be right or might not. not really topical to this thread but for me the absolute no-brainers, the most shockingly egregiously wrong examples of male bodied athletes being allowed to compete against women are in those sports where 'being a big person' is really important to an extent that it can easily trump skill, meaning that weight categories are standard. the combat sports are the obvious example, but weighifting too in the sense that the advantage is measurable. the open weight men's lifting record is some 44% higher than the open weight women's lifting record - see en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_Olympic_weightlifting. men are far far stronger 'pound for pound' - the women's open weight record, held by a 5'10", 150kg woman, is less than the men's record for 67kg men, held by a 5'4" guy, but you're really getting into laughable territory when you allow men of any size to compete against women. if six foot-something, hulking, Laurel Hubbard hadn't been so injury prone and so far into middle age she'd have brushed aside the competition at the Olympics, just by being a halfway decent local level men's super heavyweight lifter.

@puffyisgood

I'm no fan of Ms Bridges or her ilk competing in the women's event, but what she says about T levels is potentially interesting, if she's talking about having fallen into perhaps the upper end of the regular female range then, whilst it'd by no means eradicate all objections to her competing against women, there'd be a stronger case than with one of these jokers who's barely scraped under an absurdly lax limit such as 5.0 nmol/L, i.e. below the normal male range but well above the female.

I don't want to go into the technicalities but the literal timing of when a blood test level of T matters. E.g., it's higher after training/exercise or exertion and it's affected by energy availability.

So, if I ever needed to produce a lower T level in a man, I'd make absolutely sure not to have a test drawn around the time of exertion (so, not near a training session). I'd also recommend food restriction or even fasting for a couple of days.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130813201452.htm

I have no interest in finessing T levels that are above the physiological range for women when the discussion is about people who've been through male puberty. Carole Hooven's book Testosterone probably has some interesting discussion of related and relevant issues.

@EmbarrassingHadrosaurus - I'm sure there's something in all of that, but it'd be wrong to say that measured T levels don't matter at all or that medication doesn't do anything - the Caster Semenya case strongly suggests otherwise, she (broadly speaking a male bodied person other than in terms of external genitalia) currently refuses to take suppressants but in the past they've seemingly had a measurable negative impact on her performance in the past. I think intuitively it makes a lot of sense that, either through legacy advantages of the skeleton etc (maybe even the muscles) or measurement error, synthetically reducing T levels needn't exactly compensate for birth advantages, but it clearly does do something, so, other things being equal, a bigger reduction means more than a smaller one.

The reduction in performance is about 5%, still well short of the 10% average difference between men and women and there's some evidence that heavy training in men can mitigate against that loss.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289906/

I'm sure there's something in all of that, but it'd be wrong to say that measured T levels don't matter at all or that medication doesn't do anything

I didn't.

EB does not have a VSD.

As for the rest, people who live with VSDs have repeatedly asked others not to use them and their traumatic medical histories as a rhetorical device or in these discussions. There are many, many threads about VSD, athletes with VSD and sports already on MN. Many of them have discussions about why T is not a magical measurement and is more readily measurable than it is fully necessarily meaningful as a standalone item.

The thing is, no one is stopping Emily competing. Emily is perfectly welcome in the male category, so the pity party won’t wash. If racing was so important, surely competing with the men would fulfil that need. I mean, which is more fulfilling, a fair race or an easy win by cheating?

@Gosports

Have we all seen the photo of Emily that accompanied the statement? Someone really is talented…with photoshop.

Gosh.

Looks like the DM snagged its photo from Emily’s Insta.

If the person who ‘took’ that photo would like to do my work ID, I’d be hugely grateful.

I look like Les Dawson does Cell Block H (the original).

@Gosports

Have we all seen the photo of Emily that accompanied the statement? Someone really is talented…with photoshop.

Not sure if this is the photo Allison Bailey was referring to on her twitter. Which is why I came on to have a quick look.

Frankly I'm sick of the media talking about the science and T levels. Ethically and morally it is not right. They can do all the science they want but the fact remains women's sport is for women. This makes me so angry and I'm not sporty. But I know friends whose daughters train so hard and if this incursion by men into women's sport does not stop those girls have no future in sport.

I agree with another poster when Bridges declares t levels are way below the 5 level - on what scale? Is 4.9995 way below or is it at 0.5. what a stupid misleading statement to make.

No one wants to stop men who say they are women from not doing sport and of course that would be discriminatory. Bridges is not being discriminated because of being trans what a ridiculous thing to say.

Also when all those sports bodies get together I am concerned that it is so they can all agree on a simple rule that will men in women's sport. One to watch.

Emily says rules were broken to stop Emily competing:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b9874f1e-b1e8-11ec-8570-b43daaf58ea1?shareToken=16e1f33970a5db38db16a633a6adc3b2

@ChateauMargaux

The use of the words... 'well within the testosterone limits' is distraction... designed to illicit sympathy and make you think that maybe... if Bridges did approximate female levels, it wouldn't be so bad.. she did come last in that race in Wales after all.. maybe she is not a threat.. it's only one rider..

DO NOT FALL FOR THIS!! The evidence is clear, the advantages cannot be reversed by reducing testosterone. I hope the Equality in Sport Guidelines are shared widely.

Very true. Despite being "well within the testosterone limits", Bridges won the men's points race, came third in the men's team pursuit and 4th in the men's individual pursuit at the British Universities and Colleges Sports Track Cycling Championships in February.

@CaveMum

I do hate it when these governing bodies say - “there needs to more research”. The science is out there and it’s very clear! What more do they need?!

Also if they’re proposing yet more research that will take time to conduct and analyse. I’d be concerned that they will say “well we’ll carry on with our current rules until the research shows us otherwise.”

It doesn't even need science. All the records for all the sports since records were kept show that men are faster than women (obvious exceptions like dressage and a few others) it's right there in the archives.

Men in 100m, 200m, 400m running.
Men in 50m/100m/200m/400m freestyle, and on and on, all faster than the fastest women.
Just look up an Olympic event, shot put, triple jump, long jump, skiing etc, worlds best are men. Says it all.

It seems that at the moment the lure is for all of these men to be seen as the trailblazers. I wonder if it will be so tempting to be the second trans cyclist? With the current media, the so-called "I just want to live my life quietly" brigade can make a lot of money from the notoriety.

Watched some entertaining racing tonight. Both the men’s and women’s omnium were great to watch, but very different. The men were just so much faster.

No one should have to choose between being who they are and participating in the sport that they love.

Did anyone prevent Emily from participating in (and winning medals) the BUCS track champs in February?

Thought not.

Very true. Despite being "well within the testosterone limits", Bridges won the men's points race, came third in the men's team pursuit and 4th in the men's individual pursuit at the British Universities and Colleges Sports Track Cycling Championships in February.

Yes, Emily's recent successes seem to prove that lowering testosterone has little or no effect on the male athlete's ability to perform at the level of other male athletes. Seems pretty conclusive that trans identifying male athletes never lose the advantages of male puberty.

Bridges should get better advice before releasing entitled statements about how awful everyone has been to the person from a vulnerable minority in the sport they love. People just don’t see it that way. Male inclusion in female sport will be a disaster for the trans cause.

Bridges has been participating in a study at Loughborough University to track her own power data with reduced testosterone levels - and says they show a 13-16% drop in her power outputs across six-second, one-minute, five-minute and 20-minute durations.( BBC article)

This " loss of power" doesn't seem to be affecting Emily now, given Emily's recent successes in men's races. With that "drop" Emily should not have placed amongst the men.

@tabbycatstripy

Bridges should get better advice before releasing entitled statements about how awful everyone has been to the person from a vulnerable minority in the sport they love. People just don’t see it that way. Male inclusion in female sport will be a disaster for the trans cause.

Either Bridges has been so surrounded by people telling them how wonderful they are that they really believe they have been hard done by in this instance. That their desire to compete against Olympic champions is actually the most important thing.

Or Bridges is a performance artist/terf plant who has infiltrated the trans community and British Cycling specifically to bring this issue to light.

I'm a huge fan of Bridges either way, EB is doing wonders for women's sport.

‘Either Bridges has been so surrounded by people telling them how wonderful they are that they really believe they have been hard done by in this instance. That their desire to compete against Olympic champions is actually the most important thing.’

I think it’s this one.

Nothing in the statement about other competitors. Just ordinary narcissism.

@tabbycatstripy

‘Either Bridges has been so surrounded by people telling them how wonderful they are that they really believe they have been hard done by in this instance. That their desire to compete against Olympic champions is actually the most important thing.’

I think it’s this one.

Nothing in the statement about other competitors. Just ordinary narcissism.

Agree. It’s all about EB, isn’t it?

Although I do accept that being told the competition will allow participation under conditions X, then, with conditions X met, being told no, must be very disappointing.

My issue is more that it should be obvious to Bridges that it wouldn’t be fair under any circumstances.