Park run email today - "Living as myself"

[wantmorenow]

blog.parkrun.com/uk/2022/07/27/living-as-myself/

Today of all days after Allison's victory!

Another form asking us to choose a gender or prefer not to say when I just want the word sex. Or non-believer in gender identity woo.

Who do we email to put our protected beliefs to?

I think in a nutshell, I'll still support parkrun and focus my sex segregation efforts on competitive sports, contact sports & more spaces specifically for females.
I think we need more of all sorts of approaches and parkrun have chosen their lane and I'm happy with that.

@TopKnotch I thought that was a great post and I found it really interesting because we're very much in the same side of the overall debate, but I'm not too bothered about the route parkrun are taking, I wonder why that is? I think it's definitely my own interpretation as I would fight endlessly for womens rugby.
Perhaps I just see parkrun as an example of compromise, dunno. Interesting, I shall dwell on it some more.

The whole idea of rankings in a category is not consistent with the idea of it being a true fun run - there are fun runs that exist that don't provide times and don't publish results. If it isn't a race, why don't they delete the rankings data and just provide individual results?
Parkrun walks an uneasy line between inclusive participation and competition, in part because of the event's origins. However it's a formula that has been successful because it is free, it is timed and it is generally not intimidating to start attending. It's a potentially fragile balance though, to me this is just another example of where the internal tensions in parkrun's successful formula can begin to pull themselves apart. For sure at a local level the approach is capable of discouraging female participation - I have quite a few parkruns locally I can choose between. Sometimes I just jog round them enjoying the feeling of moving my body and getting some exercise, sometimes I go for a course PB, sometimes I go for a placing. If I was running for a placing and found myself being repeatedly beaten by a transwoman I'd try to go to the events where that didn't happen and if it became widespread, i would just not bother with parkrun any more, because it would just feel pointless to me.

I thought when you said grading, you meant the grading (%ages) not how they present a parkrun's results and how it can be interrogated.

So if I am female I choose female, if I am male I choose male, that has not changed and I am still free to do that so it does not affect me. If I don't think of myself as male or female I now have the option to choose other, which in that situation perhaps makes me more likely to register and take part, which surely is a good thing, and if I would rather not say, I choose rather not say.

Btw @Ihaventgottimeforthis I understand why you take that view as parkrun never aimed for the same level of fairness within a category in the way that say, England athletics licensed races do. E.g running with dogs canicross style provided an advantage (interestingly they have got rid of this, ostensibly on safety grounds but a lot of people opposed it on fairness grounds; course records set with dogs were not allowed), people cut the corners of the course etc. I guess I oppose a world where the categories are essentially meaningless as that disadvantages only one group - women.

So why post results? Why not just tell everyone to record their own times and compare them privately with other runners if they want to be competitive?

I think the majority of parkrun participants are only racing their own time and/or doing the ridiculous challenges, very possible I'm wrong about that though.
Perhaps getting rid of the rankings & records data altogether would be a good thing? Would really test the commitment of parkrun to this approach and get a genuine response from the community.
Not having rankings & records wouldn't bother me at all, but I'm probably not typical.

AuntieStella
This is why I think that it is so important to write to parkrun now so that women retain the correct competitive categories

Recommend you find a different way to phrase it. parkrun does not consider itself competitive, nor is it run under competitive athletics rules, so that's the sort of response you'll get if you are asking about competition. As they say every briefing 'it's a run, not a race'

So why post results? Why not just tell everyone to record their own times and compare them privately with other runners if they want to be competitive?

To be clear, this is a question for parkrun, not @AuntieStella !!

Lets see

The blog is talking about how a male human with a penis has decided that his mental health is improved by being called her and that medication suddenly makes his male sex invisible.

Or should I type
The blog is talking about how a male human with a penis has decided that her mental health is improved by being called her and that medication suddenly makes her male sex invisible

But I should be a kind assistance human and pretend that the male human with a penis is more important than me?

Should I ignore that the language takeover argument has moved from TWAW to TWAFemale?

Sorry (👀see I can be Kind! ) but its that shit logic that the Irish Government is using to legislate women out of pregnancy protection.

I think deleting the rankings & records would have a big negative impact on participation but it would be an interesting experiment, I expect it's something that HQ has considered in the past. I think the success of parkrun is entirely based on that uneasy blend of competition/inclusion - it's such a broad church, it appeals to subelites, club runners just as much as it appeals to people who just want to complete a 5k in a scenic location (some people at one of our locals use it to walk their dogs because the course is on private land and is not usually open). Reckon getting rid of the rankings would result in it being abandoned by the club runner types - but would be an interesting experiment for sure.

@ferretface But specifically in the case of parkrun, there is no disadvantage, in fact a more diverse cross-section of participants (in ability, identity, appearance) might be exactly what some women are looking for if they want to get into physical exercise?
An over emphasis on times, placings, results, ability puts a lot of women off getting into sport. So less of that and more of 'we don't care about who you are as an individual, everyone is welcome, call yourself what you like, walk, skip, sprint, jog, whatever, you're all welcome' IS very much the parkrun ethos.
And perhaps then more women & girls will get into running and want to progress into a space where there is fair, sex segregated, competition with proper female facilities etc etc .
We should be able to provide it all.

Cross posted @ferretface 🙂
I think parkrun hq definitely favour the mass participation newbies and fun runners over the competitive elite end of the spectrum and I whole heartedly support them in that.
Timings are always going to be motivating for many people, but the records and rankings not so much. I'd support ditching them, it would be interesting to see what would happen.

@Ihaventgottimeforthis it's a fair point and agree that many women are deterred by excessive focus on rankings etc, I think parkrun currently does provide this excellent grassroots bridge to other forms of competition which you can either choose to take or just focus on exercise for the sake of exercise (which is equally valid!).

I guess my concern comes for the women and girls who I have seen get into running, get a bit faster, suddenly realise hey I am starting to be a bit competitive now and I want to see how well I can do in my category. Would include myself in this group as I never used to think I had a hope in hell of placing in races, I now have a very modest collection of trophies from small local races, they mean nothing really but I am so proud of them and the effort they represent. Parkrun was part of my journey to realise that I could be competitive in some circumstances and I know it has been similar for others (occasionally at running club you'll get chatting to someone, often a new member, who will talk about their parkrun performances and how it spurred them on). It's the "bridge" aspect of parkrun that I think is at risk of being lost.

@Ihaventgottimeforthis I think why I feel so strongly is because it's not a neutral act in the wider context of women's sports and the issues surrounding that. With 2 daughters who are just reaching a competitive phase, who train hard in several sports and really find it useful to get a sense of how they're doing by looking at rankings etc, I don't want that obfuscated and I don't want there to be any lack of clarity in any sport.

There is an issue that is bigger than park run here. If they're saying that for some sporting events you can choose which category you go in but others you can't...it's just a constant push and erosion fo.boundsries. it becomes something they can say, "we've been doing this at parkrun and it's all fine" about and use that to also do it at the best thing or level. And why, if you are a TW, would you want this category change so much that you shout about it but be fine about sex categories in other sports and races. You won't be, you will also find that difficult/offensive and that will become the new battleground.

It is easier, fairer, more accurate and completely possible to say, "dress how you want, be called what you like, run however slowly or fast you please, but only register in your biological sex category" throughout sporting events at any level.

Strongly agree with this

It is easier, fairer, more accurate and completely possible to say, "dress how you want, be called what you like, run however slowly or fast you please, but only register in your biological sex category" throughout sporting events at any level.

That is a good point but if my argument is that biological sex categories are vital for safety and fairness, how strongly does that stand up in a non-contact non-competitive scenario?
I think we can & should allow nuance into discussion around inclusivity in sport.

I admit I'm playing devil's advocate here a bit

It's also the uneasy feeling that if parkrun report gender identity only then other sports and community physical activities will point to it as a shining example of "you see - they did it and parkrunners all love and support it!" which leads to more unfairness everywhere else. It erodes boundaries of fairness for the sake of 'being kind' and is a typical 'budge up, women, make some room!' technique.

Absolutely it's the wider context and potential implications. Like putting she/her on an email seems innocent enough in itself.

"if my argument is that biological sex categories are vital for safety and fairness, how strongly does that stand up in a non-contact non-competitive scenario?"

Because we know that girls and women are less active, take part in less sport and physical activity as they get older (the drop off rate for teen girls is staggering) and we know that this in turn has implications for disease risks like type 2 diabetes and osteoporosis later in life. We know that playing in sports teams and taking part in communal activities is a key part in staying mentally and emotionally well, getting good sleep and for friendships and meeting people. If girls and women are regularly given the message that because they're not/until they are elite athletes competing at a high level they are not allowed to participate with and compete/compare their achievements with others in their sex (and age) categories then they won't stick around to ever get there.

My daughters train in athletics in mixed groups, they run park run with boys, but their sense of achievement and belief in their abilities comes from seeing that they are X placed female in that event. They already know that even at primary school age, the first 8-10 runners back at junior parkrun are boys/biological males. Why should they be told that because it's not an official athletics event it doesn't matter? One of mine wouldn't even have had the confidence to attend the athletics club training if it wasn't for the knowledge that she was regularly in the top X females placed at park run.

I can see that point, but still my opinion is that when it comes to parkrun specifically, I consider the inclusivity (even though I hate that term) outweighs the competitive element.
It's about creating more opportunities for everyone. My daughter competes in rowing, in single and mixed sex crews, with recognition & records & rewards for different categories.
I think it's perfectly possible to demonstrate that in some scenarios different rules can apply, for example that the results in fun activities don't matter as much. And I think that many women & girls would appreciate a different atmosphere to an activity, not so focused on performance.
Running clubs may benefit and parkrun may gradually become even less about the running and more about the people but thats up to the participants.

So record sex and gender, then you include everyone not exclude women.

I would say that there is no way parkrun could police this and putting pressure on them to do so would only open a can of worms and divide the parkrun community. It would be awful to make anyone feel unwelcome and completely against what parkrun is about.

It is not supposed to be competitive, although I know it can be enjoyed that way, and the rare trans woman identifying as female and having first finishes or course records would be annoying. But for the vast majority of us it is about PBs, ‘ridiculous’ challenges (as someone called them above - personally think they are fun) and mostly community.

The article is mainly pointing out the option for using ‘prefer not to say’ which is a third category that gender critical people are calling for - good on them - this means less people in the sex category that does not match their biological sex.

"The article is mainly pointing out the option for using ‘prefer not to say’ which is a third category that gender critical people are calling for - good on them - this means less people in the sex category that does not match their biological sex."

Yesss, but....it is also eradicating the notion that sex has been recorded here. It's making a huge assumption and assertion that we all have a gender identity and that that is the category we are running under. I don't believe in gender identity, don't have one and want to be recorded as a female, because I am one.

It's also sending a v clear message by the mass social media and email push, that anyone not on board with cheering a TW on as women and joining her in congratulating herself on doing well in the women's rankings is unwelcome, guilty of wrong think and that they're happy to lose us.

"for example that the results in fun activities don't matter as much"

I think that's the direction parkrun has been taking for some years now.

The parkruns practice initiative, the various support groups for runners with particular conditions, 5k Your Way and the celebration of the average time getting longer all point that way.

Plus the fundraising (eg donate your PB to Alzheimers Research) and the lifestyle initiatives (wider range of clothing, the ethical contra range which goes up to v large sizes and with exception of capris, offers same garments for both men and women, the magazine, the podcast)