Elite sports people speaking up!

[Signalbox]

There seems to be an increasing number of sports people speaking up about the problem of males completing in women's sports which is positive. Thought it might be useful to have a thread of those who are risking sticking their heads above the parapet. Obviously the likes of Sharon Davies, Mara Yamauchi and Martina Navratilova have been bravely doing this for sometime but now we appear to have a few current athletes as well who are prepared to risk the mob to ensure women have fair competition. Is it too much to hope for that there will be a snowball effect?

I think it depends on how many are ‘striking’. Let’s hope the recent spate of women refusing to play against the male pool player also works as some of the women are following Lynne’s brave lead.

On the other hand, the cycling women in England fed back that they were considering options and got results too didn’t they? I could be remembering wrong. But I thought that pushed the cycling body. But they did it with enough momentum and without having to disclose publicly who they were.

IIRC Dame Laura Kenny was due to be cycling in the race where Emily Bridges was prevented at the last minute from competing. It was reported that LK had pulled out of the race due to sickness. It does make you wonder if there was more to it than that. Also if sporting royalty are involved that must carry more influence than people who are still struggling to make a name for themselves.

I think Katie Archibald has been quite vocal as well - I seem to remember she posted something about women’s events being for females at the time that was reposted / liked by Laura Kenny.

Not quite. Angling (or almost any other sport) isn’t gender impacted, it’s sex impacted (as are almost all sports), it’s a shame they are muddying things with poor language. But the policy they are enacting is sex differentiated, not gender differentiated, which is the more important bit at this point.

And - Yay! For female anglers.

The exceptions for sport in the GRA refers to gender rather than sex. Presumably that is why they are using that language. It's annoying though.

"(4) A sport is a gender-affected sport if the physical strength, stamina or physique of average persons of one gender would put them at a disadvantage to average persons of the other gender as competitors in events involving the sport."

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/19

'gender impacted' is the phrase used in the excellent Sport England guidance to identify sports where a male physique is advantageous. I dislike the muddling of 'sex' with 'gender' as much as the next GC person, but in this context it means sex and the guidance is enormously helpful for sports looking for a clear rational for retaining the female classification.

Thank you both. I had forgotten that phrase from the GRA, which is a such a spaghetti heap of incompetent language use (and that's saying something coming from me!).

Makes a lot of sense that the Angling Trust are using it.

I've just seen this story, it's from Australia. I wonder how it will turn out, as they seem to be entirely captured:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/afl/article-12799941/Girls-footy-match-coach-accuses-boys-abandoned-Northern-Territory-AFLNT.html

Under 14s girls footy match is abandoned after coach accused opposition of fielding boys before pulling his players from the field

I bet that Coach gets sanctioned :(

Good for that coach. And yes, if boys are played as girls, then people are going to be suspicious based on appearance, you can't have one without the other. Just handing your girls over to be used and have their sport abused, or worse be injured in the name of a boy's self expression is appalling.

And bollocks is sport 'gender affected'. It makes no bloody difference whatsoever if you're frostgendered or pixiegendered or demifluidnonbinary, it makes a difference if you are biologically male or female.

Fed up with tiptoing around the fragile feelings of those who have no fucks to give about anyone else.

Thanks sinner.

It really shows what ambiguity in language does to truth in that article. The team insists they are all ‘girls’. Noted. It doesn’t say they are all female though so it is likely the coach removing his team is right. At under 14s, probably getting obviously so. The other bit that was really teeth grinding was that the opposing team feels the behaviour of removing the girls off the field was inappropriate for the age.

I question if that is because that coach believes it is important for girls to be forced to learn that special male’s demands come before their safety or the delusion that boys somehow don’t have an advantage over girls at that age. And that under 14 year old girls should be left in potentially dangerous situations because they are under 14 or just girs?

However, I suspect you will be right about the outcome for that coach. Well done that coach though from me! Thank you for protecting the girls.

Yes, I'm applauding him too, it's a brave stance, even though it's common sense. He's almost certainly going to get roasted for protecting his girls. As we've all said, it's not simply the huge physical advantage of boys over girls, it's the very real possibility of one of them being injured.

All to pander to someone's fantasy.

And for clarity for those who may not have picked it up, it is Australian Rules Football not football/soccer. Therefore it is a tackle to the ground at full speed sport. And a sport of kicking on the run. I can imagine getting a wayward ball kicked by a male at puberty age can easily result in a broken facial bones, just as we saw in that volleyball game.

So, indeed, this is very dangerous to these girls. And the coach who removed his players said he thought there was at least two boys on the field.

Yeah, was going to make that point. Aussie Rules is, if anything, more physical than football, and more akin to the two rugby codes.

Defo duc. It is a very intensely physical game, in a fitness sense and can be rather physical in a tackle sense too. In fact, by the under 14 age, I suspect those boys probably can jump higher too and have more stability kicking on the run. So many advantages that I can think of that is unique to AFL.

A top amateur cyclist is upset that men who claim to be women now have to compete in the same (open) category as men who don't make this claim. He says that calling it the open category "is essentially just a different label being used for the men's category."

It's men exactly like this one who cause so much trouble for women when they move over into the female category.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-67442707

Jones, who defends his Eastern Regional Cyclo-Cross title in Cambridge next month, said: "It's not how anyone in this situation would like to be treated, especially when you consider that current medical science does not provide a convincing argument that transgender women do retain an advantage."

Well that's clearly bollocks, for a start. I guess Jones is just letting his rainbow flag fly, man....

Ah, "follow the science!" Or in other words, ignore the science and pretend that the results are the exact opposite of what they are. I don't know why he feels qualified to expound on the subject, especially as he seems to have no understanding of the very real problems involved.

It would have been nice if they'd interviewed some top amateur female cyclists for balance. Although they'd probably have trouble finding any who would dare to speak out.

I think you're right, Signalbox.

new policies that prevent transgender people from participating in the sport authentically

Since TW are indisputably and categorically male, the open category is the only place for them to participate authentically Josh, you dozy twat.

I see Josh and Emily Bridges ride for the same team, so I guess it’s not surprising that Josh would support the ever fragrant Emily.

I see Josh and Emily Bridges ride for the same team

Oh? Yes, it does make sense now; surely Josh can see that Zachily has suddenly smashed all the women's records and that his ridiculous claim that there's no evidence to support the fact that male puberty confers an unassailable advantage is complete rubbish?

Given the regulation change, excluding some of my friends, teammates and other LGBT+ community members, it's hard not to feel an increased emotional dissociation when watching or taking part in races. It's made me feel more guarded than ever before."

Aww, diddums. Is he getting older and slower and unable to win against men any more? Was he hoping to clean up in the women’s races instead of quitting and now he can’t? Life is so unfair to entitled men!!

Rupert Christiansen
The award-winning choreographer who fell foul of the mob
Ebullient, articulate and eminently sensible, Rosie Kay never wanted to be a martyr to the culture wars.

This is dance as opposed to sport, but this is an interesting article in the Spectator this week. It says (among much else) What disappoints her at this early stage is that so little interest has come from the left and organisations such as Liberty, Index on Censorship and Amnesty, ‘who should be on our side. I’m waiting for the Guardian to ask for an interview, but so far it’s been the Telegraph and the Times.

^^