Fina stops transgender swimmers from competing in women's elite events

[Kendodd]

Common sense.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/swimming/61853450

Wondering if using RMbW will catch on (Robin Moira “bundle” White) ...

I think the theory here is that women are by definition disadvantaged in sports so we should just suck it up and stop objecting to males having any advantage as if they get any physical measurements to equal the female range that means they are in even a worse position than the females, because male born people don’t deserve this disadvantage just because they are now women. Presumably their ideal goal state would be no hormones or medication or physical transition at all required to compete in the womens and it’s outrageous they have to and did I hear someone say it’s not fair? On the menz?

Presumably their ideal goal state would be no hormones or medication or physical transition at all required to compete in the womens and it’s outrageous they have to and did I hear someone say it’s not fair? On the menz?

That is Veronica Ivy/McKinnon’s argument: that Ivy is female, has a female body and female testosterone levels, and it’s an infringement on Ivy’s human rights to have to suppress anything on that basis.

The increasing irrelevance of Ivy is heartening, although there will always be room for this video:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1514210644349919232

Initially I thought the age 12/tanner stage puberty was a cop out by FINA but actually, having read the last couple of pages, it could be a very tactical move. So, FINA are not discriminating against transwomen per say, they are saying male puberty embodies physical characteristics that give an advantage. So the starting point is that men have a physical advantage - duh, of course we know that, and it can be easily proved by comparing world records for men and women in lots of sport - so then the discussion and legal cases would be, if they go that far, how much disadvantage reduced testosterone impacts men. team sports like rugby should have an easier case to make on the basis of safety for women, so the big focus will be on individual performance sports.

Joanna Harper's trials and research would seem to be so biased and not able to be peer tested to be worthless.

So then the question is, how do you really test that reduction. There are two options. Let transwomen compete in womens sport and see how they do - the Joanna Harper approach - and then assess the impact on women. Alternatively, the transwomen have the option to compete in their biological sex category and assess how they do on lower testosterone over, say 10+ years.

And then we are back to the key point - do you include a very few entitled transwomen and disadvantage all women, or do you have fair sport and have a level playing field for women, and make those very few TW make real life decisions of whether to delay transition while they play sport at a higher level. In the same way women defer motherhood while they compete- or try and time pregnancy with other goals and hope they can regain that elite level when they return.

Cycling currently are sitting on the wrong side of the fence- only wanting meaningful competition, not fair competition - but I am hopeful, especially if athletic change their policy following comments made by Lord Coe.

Add in the fact that TW like Lia Thomas and Emily Bridges conveniently transition when their success in their biological sex category is waning ..............

It is beyond unlikely that I will ever meet rmw, however this will stick in my mind and if I were ever that lucky, I'm going to do exactly this.

That is Veronica Ivy/McKinnon’s argument: that Ivy is female, has a female body and female testosterone levels, and it’s an infringement on Ivy’s human rights to have to suppress anything on that basis.

Yes, this is the endgame. It's not that many logical leaps away from where we are now. Thankfully we seem to be rowing back a bit at least in this area.

Cycling currently are sitting on the wrong side of the fence- only wanting meaningful competition, not fair competition - but I am hopeful, especially if athletic change their policy following comments made by Lord Coe.

As Ross Tucker keeps pointing out, of course pitting a man against a woman in a physical competition isn't meaningful, any more than finding an adult with comparable performance to a 10-year-old and having them race either other is meaningful. Or getting a very unskilled heavyweight to box an elite featherweight.

The outcome might be uncertain, sure, but that's not the same thing as "meaningful". Finding out whether some mediocre, chemically-impaired male can beat a female is a Top-Gear style gimmick, not a sporting endeavour - seeking excellence.

"...Add in the fact that TW like Lia Thomas and Emily Bridges conveniently transition when their success in their biological sex category is waning...."

I've always dismissed any suggestion that anyone would medically transition for sporting reasons as a nonsense, given the seriousness of this step, but after listening to that Bridges podcast interview, in which she very plainly seemed to regard herself as a cyclist first and anything else second, I'm far less sure.

That is very true SallyLockheart! Tying it to male puberty rather than the word 'women' is absolute genius!

It avoids all the linguistic acrobatics, all the emotion of the fight over the word 'woman', but more than that it clearly identifies what makes the difference in sports, and what is needed for that separation to achieve what is intended.

Male puberty/age 12 might not be the right boundary for all single sex spaces. No one said figuring this out would be easy!

But they're showing the right way forward.

• think really clearly about why discrimination is needed, specifically in this situation, weighing up the benefit (the why) vs the inevitable downsides
• find the most inclusive boundary which still fulfils that purpose.

Exactly what the Equality Act says.

That is Veronica Ivy/McKinnon’s argument: that Ivy is female, has a female body and female testosterone levels

Similarly, Transwomen might claim that since they are female, they have actually undergone female puberty rather than male puberty. . But FINA have specified tanner stages, and that does differentiate between male and female, so hopefully no loophole there.

Is that a female body with 'extra bits n bobs'?

I'm still finding it extraordinary that grown people, in a position of authority, are pandering to the idea that men are women. The fear is rife. There's no other explanation for it. They don't believe it, they don't agree with it, and they don't want it to impact on their sport, or their decisions.

But they still can't say it.

TRAs have gone all out, for years, to tie people up in linguistic knots, so they cannot state the truth. And even when these people's sports, their integrity, their morality, and their duty, relies on them saying the truth, they still can't.

They have to fight with fire and parry with their own linguistic gymnastics.

I'm glad they're doing it, obviously, but seriously, you will have to 'gymnasticise' every single pushback in all the other areas. All the other places where males are encroaching on women's rights.

Instead of just saying no. No males. Full stop.

Regardless, it isn't actually a female body, now is it? Quite how the gas lighting has gone on this long is anyone's guess.

But I agree that rooting this in male puberty is very useful, because it lifts the debate away from all the destabilisation of the word 'woman' that's been going on.

Transwomen might claim that since they are female, they have actually undergone female puberty rather than male puberty

Hopefully, definitions of male/female puberty are so rooted in the sex based changes in the body, they won't have a leg to stand on here. It's a smart tactic, the TRAs didn't think to lay the groundwork for this one.

They’re going for a different tack now:

Comparing male and female performance in sport is not an accurate comparison because transwomen aren’t men and after transition do not have 'male performance'.

Yeah, they do still have male performance because they are male. It may not be the same level of male performance due to GAHT, but it’s still not female performance.

Indeed. And you have to hand it to Nic Williams. From the very beginning she refused to get bogged down by what constitutes a man and a woman, and just kept talking about bodies.

"We're talking about bodies, and the difference in them" is her opening gambit in almost every interview.

and yes, TRAs struggle to counter that.

I've already seen a conversation turn elsewhere to "but how can we possibly enforce this without sexually abusing women athletes by having to examine their genitals"

If only there were a document that noted someone's sex when they are born, that they carried with them for life, that was unalterable and as such trustworthy and they could produce as proof of their sex as well as their name, age etc... hmmmm. Imagine such a thing.

Why was chromosome testing stopped? I've forgotten the story with sex testing of athletes and how it actually worked.

I am endlessly entertained by the idea that apparently no-one can tell Lia Thomas et al are male just by looking.

But I agree that rooting this in male puberty is very useful, because it lifts the debate away from all the destabilisation of the word 'woman' that's been going on.

Yes, I agree. A step back to reality.

Well, quite. 😂

Ooops cross post, was responding to SirSam... out of practice!

It must be something else to turn up to compete and just have to swallow any feelings about the unfairness of it

Tg not any more

and more importantly, these are rules for elite level competition, athletes aren't just going to pop up out of nowhere, the likes of Thomas and Bridges both 'came up through the system' as boys and young men and in doing so became known by sight by huge numbers of coaches, other competitors, etc.

Why was chromosome testing stopped? I've forgotten the story with sex testing of athletes and how it actually worked.

Paragraph F 1 b of the new FINA policy says that "FINA may ask the athlete to provide further information and documents and/or to submit to one or more medical examinations".

Paragraph F 2 requires the athlete to "certify their chromosomal sex with their Member Federation"; the Member Federation to "confirm their athletes' certifications of chromosomal sex when registering their athletes to compete in FINA competitions"; and "FINA reserves the right to conduct a chromosomal sex screen in its anti-doping protocol to confirm such certification" .

So I think they've got it covered? But IADNAL.

It’s done through a cheek swab, isn’t it!

Of course the irony is chromosomal checks wouldn’t be necessary if males weren’t trying to insert themselves into women’s sport.