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

[Kendodd]

Common sense.

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

“Overseeing the reforms - which promised to put the interests of athletes first - he soon discovered a whole range of issues that were not properly covered by the existing policies, including inclusion and fairness.

So he decided to take a deeper look, especially into the transgender debate, which had come up in other sports, so began assembling top international experts with no ties to the sport’s murky past.

“There was no preconceived notion. If anything, there was a desire to learn as much as we possibly could and figure out what does science say, what does it mean?” he said.

“I wanted an all star team where everybody’s a free agent.

“I wanted to know what it was. What is being transgender mean? What does it mean scientifically? What does it mean, chromosomally? What does it mean socially? What does it mean mentally?

“It’s not just being transgender that makes you transgender. There’s more to it than just the label you put on somebody. It was our duty to figure that out, educate ourselves.”
By November last year, the first group had already been chosen.

Comprising medical and science experts, it included Dr Sandra Hunter, an Australian-born professor at the Department of Athletic and Human Performance at Marquette University.

In early 2022, the science group had finished its report and handed it to Nowicki.

The full report has not been published but the architects addressed the Congress before the vote, explaining how competitions between male and female athletes are no longer fair once puberty kicks in because of the differences in testosterone values.

What’s more, the scientists showed how biological and physical changes can’t be undone, which was one of the decisive factors that convinced FINA to prevent transgender women from competiting in elite women’s events if they had gone through puberty - essential rejecting the idea that level playing fields can be created through testosterone reduction.

“In a very simplistic look on the street approach…where we drew the line was where the impact of testosterone meets between girls and boys,” Nowicki said.

“At that point, it’s arguable that the legacy effects of testosterone start to develop and you can’t undo that or you can’t undo all of that.”
Once it became clear what the science was saying, Nowicki set up a second working group, comprising legal and human rights experts, to look at how to frame the policy.

The five members included former Federal Court of Australia judge Annabelle Bennett and James Drake, an Australian barrister and CAS Arbitrator, now based in London.

Nowicki also began talking to athletes, sending out questionnaires to over 300 athletes around the world, to find out what they wanted.

The response was overwhelming.

More than 83% said eligibility for events should be decided by birth sex. And over 63% said they wanted to see an additional ‘open’ category created to ensure everyone can compete.

A separate taskforce, yet to be decided, will begin work on that soon, and is expected to report back at the end of the year.

Nowicki also held one-on-one interviews with a smaller number of elite athletes, whose identities remain confidential, other than Australia’s Cate Campbell and American Summer Sanders.”

Still of graphic depicting swimming teenage male records vs adult female records (2).

“Presented with the scientific report, they both agreed to speak at the Congress before the vote was taken, and urged delegates to support what the science was saying.

“Women, who have fought long and hard to be included and seen as equals in sport can only do so because of the gender category distinction,” Campbell said.

“To remove that distinction would be to the detriment of female athletes everywhere.”

A COVERT MISSION

Almost a year in the making, the policy draft was completed in time for the Congress, but was kept secret to all but a handful of people, because of the high sensitivity around the issue.

“Obviously as we went on, it was very important for me to protect the conversations I was having,” Nowicki said.

“I didn’t want anyone to have pressure put on them because it was leaked.”

The covert operation largely succeeded. It was only on the eve of the vote that the news of what was coming was leaked to an unsuspecting sports world.

When the Congress voted 71% in favour of adopting the new policy, it lit a fuse that exploded all around the world.

FINA’s decision - the most comprehensive of any major sporting body on the planet - has been widely applauded but also criticised.

Other sporting bodies are now scrambling to play catch up, facing increasing pressure to follow FINA although Nowicki said that was never the intention.

“The media has said it was a very aggressive policy,” Nowicki said.

“But we went as far as we needed to go to meet the legitimate objectives we felt were necessary for competitive balance, for fairness in our sport.

“We had such a sound body of evidence, we had a sound body of voice, we felt comfortable in our legal skin and we were prepared to go forward.

“We weren’t worried or concerned about what impact it would have on other federations.

“We’re taking the best decision we can take based on the evidence that’s presented by us, by our chosen people.

“It’s probably safe to say the policy’s never going to be complete. It’s a living document, it’s going to evolve with scientists and evolve with time.

“I can’t sit here and tell you that we got it 100% right. I can (just) say we got 100% right based on the science today.””

Thanks Luna. I'm confused by the freestyle chart- it appears to show males getting slower as they approach their peak. But the article is very interesting.

Thank you Luna. Such a good read.
Hopefully even the most Stonewall captured anti woman zealot in a sport like Rugby must have an eye on the consequences for them when they're sued by a woman maimed by a man in a game. Or a class action by a group of elite sportswomen bounced out of elite competition by the likes of Thomas.

No matter how much they rail, they still can't remove the facts and science - only pretend it doesn't exist.
All credit to FINA.

They've definitely gone about this the right way. A shining example to other sporting bodies.

I was walking behind a woman who was off to rugby training I assume (by her clothes and sports bag).

She had a big rugbys player build - but she has the softness and curves or a woman. You just couldn’t mistake her for a man. A man the same size and build would just not be be mistaken for a woman. He would have more strength and the benefit of stronger/larger muscles, heart and lungs.

The two graphics are reversed. You have to read them in the direction of the little swimmers

That's a great article. Shows comprehensive insight and fairness.
I hope these guidelines become the template for all sports

If it rains this weekend, I might have a go at doing the comparisons for British swimming. It is easy enough to do from swimrankings, if a little tedious.

As a swim parent the whole "but it's fair" is so ridiculous.

That's a great article, Luna.

Thanks. On my phone even magnified i can't see the swimmers clearly. I wonder why they did that - reversing it reduces clarity.

This isn't especially scientific, and the approach is open to criticism, but here goes:
50m freestyle ( a popular race for younger swimmers)
In the past 12 months the fastest GB female swimmers is Anna Hopkin DoB'96 with 24.84 seconds.
There are 282 male swimmers who have swum faster than her in the past 12 months. a 13/14 year old boy swam faster than her with a time of 23.90 seconds

100m freestyle
Anna Hopkin is again the fastest GB female in the past 12 months with a time of 52.75 seconds.
There were 119 male swimmers faster than her in the past 12 months. She would have been beaten by a 15/16 year old (DoB 2006), who swam 51.93 seconds

200m freestyle
Freya Anderson is the fastest GB female swimmer in the past 12 months with a time of 1:56.96
There are 141 male swimmers who have swum faster than her this year. A 14/15 year old male (DoB 07) swam the race in 1:54.58.

That's the thing about swimming - competition times are readily available and have been for years.

Perhaps I ought to have gone back to 2019 since I suspect that it was only the elite athletes were able to get any pool time when public pools were closed (so the young boys would have been at a comparative disadvantage).

thank you Luna - very informative. Essentially as soon as puberty kicks in for boys, their physical advantages over adult women accelerates. It's the boiled egg example again, isn't it.

I'm pleased to read that FINA have been so through in their assessment of the situation as then, if challenged, the process will be transparent and clear.

Thank you Luns.

I think it some people confuse it with the time when testing relied on visual inspection. There's a an interview/transcript here based on interviews with female athletes who had to undergo this in the 1960s. There's no doubt that was demeaning as it involved standing naked holding your passport waiting to be pronounced 'normal' or not.

www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/rearvision/a-question-of-gender-the-sex-testing-of-female/7664118

I think there are some people who aren't particularly worried that this sort of testing ended before the Mexico Olympics. They just want a knee jerk reaction and it suits them to imply that testing can't be done in a way that doesn't compromise people's privacy or dignity.

Thank you Luna and Madcats for your work.

What is utterly amazing is that Swimming needed the science. When it’s clear as day that men will outperform women. How was this ever even in question. All sports will have to follow. Like a house of cards.

Meant to thank LunaLights for posting the interesting article and madcats for the swimming data.

The Culture Secretary dragging all the sports organisations in to a meeting on Tuesday to lecture them on the bleeding obvious :
Only women competing in women's sport.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10953049/Nadine-Dorries-demands-sports-chiefs-unite-ban-male-born-athletes-competing-against-women.html

Then the NHS, the MoJ, the DfE, the Civil Service , the Home Office, Schools and Universities..... 😑

Yes MrsOverton the pressure needs to be kept up, keep removing the bricks and the wall will fall.

I will confess, I was quite late to noticing that this had happened
How and why did all these government bodies so totally capitulate to the Stonewall agenda? btw using Stonewall as a overarching representation of the trans agenda in this context.

‘Sex has biological consequences. If you’re born a male, and you go through puberty as a male, your body develops natural physical advantages over a woman’s. That makes you stronger and faster. I’m setting a very clear line on this: competitive women’s sport must be reserved for people born of the female sex. Not someone who was born male, took puberty blockers or has suppressed testosterone, but unequivocally and unarguably someone who was born female. I want all of our sporting governing bodies to follow that policy.’

See, I am really bloody sick of the Tories at the moment. But until any other party starts talking like this, I'm going to have to hold my nose and vote for them anyway.

Fuck me.
Nadine Dorries actually talking sense.
The world's gone mad

So far this year Nadine Dorries has consistently shown that she barely understands the policies she's attempting to implement a lot of the time. I'm quite concerned that she's going to get something dramatically wrong in public. I would guess it will be about VSDs.

I see Tom Daley is ‘furious’ apparently that males came compete against women in swimming. I wonder what his female team mates think of this. Silly chap.

Oh well, I guess he'll just have to get over it.