Women's cycling - major sponsor pulls out as policies are not 'trans inclusive'

[Xoxoxoxoxoxox]

Helen joice has just put this up on twitter.
A new major sponsor is being sought to ensure that the 6th Women’s CiCLE Classic and 8th Junior Men’s edition of the race can go ahead as planned, following the decision of longstanding sponsor Pete Stanton to withdraw his sponsorship of the races...due to the decision to not include trans atheletes.

• A man tries to use his money to force women to accept transwomen in women's races.

I hadn't thought about the trans activism behind sponsorships deals that fund women's sport that must go on behind the scenes but here is an example laid bare. The men's races are not under threat just the women's races of course.

www.velouk.net/2022/04/12/news-sponsors-needed-for-womens-junior-cicle-classic/.

Interesting news clip from the US territory of Guam, where high school rugby coaches are complaining that girls are being injured by male students, who identify as girls playing in girls' team.
m.facebook.com/kuamnews/videos/716339109536252/?refsrc=deprecated&_rdr

@Datun

Then 'red hand' and 'hands off our rights' is the FPFW logo. It's used in their campaigns. And, iirc from the maya Forstater case, is based on a well known artistic style.

It's not a new thing.

The graphics of the writing etc. are based on Saul Bass: interesting explanation from artist here of her influences.

I once looked up the committee who had decided the IOC guidelines.
If I remember correctly it had 16 men, three women, 1 trans woman (Joanna Harper) and a woman with DSD ie male testosterone levels, who had, from I read quite a traumatic time when it was discovered.

I would love to see the responses from BC’s consultation, and how they came to their transgender policy. I know that a lot of the high profile Sport Scientists responded to it, which makes me think that the policy was written without paying any attention to the consultation.

stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Commissions_PDFfiles/Medical_commission/2015-11_ioc_consensus_meeting_on_sex_reassignment_and_hyperandrogenism-en.pdf

Thank you for posting that Runningslow. Reading it now I'm really struck that they place their top priority as fair competition (not inclusion) and yet make that decision. I wonder if in 2015 there was any effort made to prevent the relitigation of the 2003 decision and how long the meetings wwre both in 2003 and 2015 that produced these results.

Given that there has now been at least one transwoman competing in women's Paralympian events I wonder if there was any Paralympic representative either.

@TheAbbotOfUnreason Umm, a logo with a big red hand alongside a “says no” campaign might just be a wee bit Ian Paisley.

The Red Hand of Ulster originates from hundreds of years ago and was used as their symbol by the gaelic O'Neill chiefs of Ulster. It stems from an era and people that well predate Ian Paisley in that part of the world.

I think the stylised red hand being discussed is different from the 'halt' sign one used by the O'Neills. It is more 'arty'.

How and ever, moot now as FPFW (a women's organisation) is deemed to be too political for women's cycling. Said by the chappie organising the women's cycle race, I believe.

Thanks runningslow. I was on my phone and wasn't about to do a search and post that list.

It is always disappointing when you realise that these things are being decided at such high levels by completely biased panels and then the decisions will take decades to fully extricate, if they can ever be.

I think the stylised red hand being discussed is different from the 'halt' sign one used by the O'Neills. It is more 'arty'.

The explanation from the artist is attached above as the hand is styled on Saul Bass with colours associated with Kali and a "sprinkling of Russian futurism".

I don't want to see pressure groups sponsoring events. Not rainbows, not red hands. Womens sport must be able to attract commercial sponsorship or it can't flourish. A win in this case would be any reasonable commercial concern being brave enough to step up.

My last on it, but I think a story about the red hand itself stems from (pre christian) Irish mythology.

So, you only needed a few invested (or/and mischievous meddling) blokes saying they really were ok to compete against women in the Olympics for rules to be put aside and fairness for half the planet to be dismissed.

However, it now needs a tremendous body of proof to show and convince the Committee that men have any physical advantages over women. You'd wonder why they think there are separate categories for Men and Women in the first place.

@MorrisZapp

I don't want to see pressure groups sponsoring events. Not rainbows, not red hands. Womens sport must be able to attract commercial sponsorship or it can't flourish. A win in this case would be any reasonable commercial concern being brave enough to step up.

Just once. Just once can women be allowed to be political? To have angry responses to the shitty things men do in order to control them?

Just one race, one season and then back to 'commercial' sponsorship!

Fuck being so bloody prim and proper all the time!

I don't want to see pressure groups sponsoring events. Not rainbows, not red hands. Womens sport must be able to attract commercial sponsorship or it can't flourish. A win in this case would be any reasonable commercial concern being brave enough to step up.

While I agree on many levels with this, the fact is that this sponsor pulled out giving the event less than one month to find another sponsor. If it was simply a matter of all of us being able to put the money in and a ' cycling club that was for females only' directed those funds to keep the race going, all well and good.

But if no other sponsorship is available at such short notice, what are the alternatives right here, right now.

This was a political decision by this male. And so, they made it political in nature and even more so due to the timing.

Please also consider that any commercial sponsorship now also has to withstand the barrage of hate and negative publicity to sponsor female sporting events.

That is the environment that has been created by males insisting that they are righteous in participating in female sport.

It will take a very brave sponsor to front up and give funding to a cycling event for females right now.

So, should the event simply be cancelled and probably never truly revived in its current format again?

But in this case, not only are the study group aware, but they actually have a vested interest in behaving a certain way to get a result that rewards them.
Add to that, that the researcher running the study also has a vested interest in getting that same outcome and has expressed belief in that being the true outcome.
It makes for incredibly unreliable results, no matter the topic.

I’d never thought of that. Thank you. Depressing.

Yes. The amount of pressure on Harper to produce the results that backed up their ludicrous study that influenced the OIC to take that extra step is HUGE!

Considering they have had to back track to a large degree, they are really needing this study to save whatever professional reputation they have left.

Am I correct in my understanding that the decision to include trans women in women's sports across the board was based on the findings a single study of 8 people? That's truly shocking if so.

I also agree that pressure groups sponsoring races is problematic - suppose Stephen Yaxley Lennon wanted to sponsor Yorkshire cricket...

British Cycling could however put out a neutral crowd funder and the race could be run under their name.

@Theeyeballsinthefuckingsky

Apologies they is a they/them

😂😂😂

@Aspiringmatriarch

Am I correct in my understanding that the decision to include trans women in women's sports across the board was based on the findings a single study of 8 people? That's truly shocking if so.

If I remember correctly, it was the change away from demanding surgery to compete, to allowing the reduced testosterone instead at IOC level which then filtered down.

There was provision for surgically transitioned males to participate previously.

Ah, ok. Thanks.

filtered down to other sporting bodies.

Sorry, I didn't finish my sentence.

2003 - ioc decision to allow transwomen to compete as women following surgery - Dr Harper's 8 distance runners study contributed to that.

2015 - ioc decision to scrap the surgery requirement. Transmen to compete as men without restriction. Transwomen to declare their GI as female and suppress testosterone levels for 12 months. Dr Harper had a different multi sport study for that one which was bigger than the n=8 one and included more sports, and Chris Mosier was the face of that change.

I also agree that pressure groups sponsoring races is problematic - suppose Stephen Yaxley Lennon wanted to sponsor Yorkshire cricket...

Are you seriously conflating groups campaigning for the rights of a group suffering discrimination in our society with the English Defence League? How dare you!

Yes I suppose I am. I'm daring to say that there are restrictions on political and pressure group advertising on this country for a reason.

British Cycling could however put out a neutral crowd funder and the race could be run under their name.

Exactly. Or whoever the race organisers were. We all would have funded it regardless.

Stanton pulled this in the political realm and the race organisers still have the chance to gracefully use the momentum created by us all to fund the event to diffuse the political aspect of Stanton's decision.

@PermanentTemporary

I also agree that pressure groups sponsoring races is problematic - suppose Stephen Yaxley Lennon wanted to sponsor Yorkshire cricket...

British Cycling could however put out a neutral crowd funder and the race could be run under their name.

You are probably right but I think it’s a bit late for that. LGBTQ+ groups have been sponsoring sports for years.

www.stonewall.org.uk/teampride