British Rowing consultation on trans and NB policy

[cakesandchocolate]

https://www.britishrowing.org/2022/09/british-rowing-announces-revised-trans-and-non-binary-inclusion-competition-policy-and-procedures/

information with a link to feedback form open to all, not just BR members.
An opportunity to offer opinion on sport inclusion policy going forward

I also believe that women still do better than men in some endurance events.

The performance gap definitely seems to narrow considerably the longer the distance (so women are much more competitive against men at ultramarathon distances than at sprint distances) but the numbers competing in these ultra endurance events are tiny so an individual woman winning a particular event only says that she was better than the rest of the field on the day, not that women as a sex class are better than men as a sex class at ultra events.

So far, no women have won these events when the current top male competitors globally are at the same event.

It might be the case that women ARE better at ultra distances (possibly due to our greater fat stores and being better at getting by with less sleep!) but it’s going to take a while to scientifically confirm that as there just aren’t that many women with enough free time, funds and the inclination to train and compete in multi day events spread all over the world.

The problem with that is that there is a whole cohort of liberal feminists who argue that we should not have sex-segregated sports because to do so is to concede that women are weaker - and they object to that on ideological grounds. We need to challenge that barking mad perspective, as it ends with women losing at every sport, just so a bunch of non-athlete women don't have to contend with reality.

We cannot fight a denial of biology by ourselves denying biology. The fact is that women are weaker, when it comes to the determinants of sport. That doesn't mean that women are inferior: it means that our bodies are adapted to perform other functions, notably pregnancy. There is a trade off between those and sporting performance. But we should not downplay the physical differences between male and female athletes: that is undermining the most powerful argument for sex-segration in sport.

I recall some fascinating research into how post pregnancy there may be some benefits for elite athletes participating in endurance events. Of course, this is mitigated by the immense impact growing a baby can have on our bodies.

MissLucyEyelesbarrow - I think you may have missed the point of my post. I'm not disagreeing with this. I'm simply referring to the narrative and why we need to have the debate at all (i.e. - it was foisted on us).

Apologies if I have. I thought you said you were agreeing with this?

Personally I'd prefer not to emphasise the "women are weaker" arguments quite so heavily - my suspicion is that this is playing right into the hands of the MRAs that many posters seem to think I align with

While I do get where you are coming from - in an ideal world, we would be celebrating women's strengths, not stressing their weaknesses - I also think that is dangerous at the moment, because it plays into the hands of those wishing to pretend that there are no physical differences. I don't know whether you are on Twitter or Tic-Tok, but there are a staggering number of people on them who genuinely believe that mixed sports are a good thing because the competition will inspire women to try harder (and, by implication, the only reason they don't already beat men is that they don't try hard enough).

Apologies if I have. I thought you said you were agreeing with this?

The key is the word 'prefer'. I'd prefer not to (have to) and I think it will have unintended consequences.

I also said

It's the way our narrative has been crafted in response to an agenda set by others. Yes, we are not as strong as men but without all the current gender ideology we would not have to shout about it and we could focus on our positives instead.

In other words, I was emphasising that we are responding to a narrative - it's not our agenda.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow

While I do get where you are coming from - in an ideal world, we would be celebrating women's strengths, not stressing their weaknesses...

I understand entirely; perhaps there's a better way of phrasing it, men on average have greater physical strength and resilience to knocks than women do on average.

Saying weaker does come across as somewhat pejorative. We should emphasise that women are also fit, strong, co-ordinated etc and perfectly able to achieve and to entertain spectators.

Saying weaker does come across as somewhat pejorative. We should emphasise that women are also fit, strong, co-ordinated etc and perfectly able to achieve and to entertain spectators.

Which of course are the arguments advanced for equal sponsorship and prize money...

@ManuelBensonsLeftBoot
Women's sport matters it's not just an excuse to get out of the wash up
😂

The comedian Jo Brand used a have a little section in her act which went a bit like this:
Some men think women's football is when the wife pops the ball in her handbag and asks her husband to give her a lift so she can drop it off at the goal.

Within a biological sex people will choose a sport for different reasons. Some will choose a sport they are good at and want to excel in. Some will choose a sport because they enjoy it and like the social side. The first group will be attracted to sports that suit their physique and competition matters less to the 2nd group. The first group are grossly disadvantaged when men gender dope. Both groups are endangered when gender doping occurs in any sport where there's physical contact.
Has that cleared your confusion?

I’ve just refreshed my memory on this and you have to get all the way up to distances of 195 miles plus in running before the achievement gap closes!
https://www.mysportscience.com/amp/will-women-outperform-men

And perhaps unsurprisingly, competing in distances like that may have negative consequences for female bone health

https://www.womensrunning.com/health/bone-health-in-female-ultrarunners/

Swimming looks to be the best arena for women to demonstrate ultra endurance skills with less risk to health

https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/why-women-have-beaten-men-in-marathon-swimming/

Re: language, I tend to describe women as less-strong and less-fast rather than weaker and slower because it’s clear that when competing against each other we can be strong and fast, we just need our own yardstick to be measured by.

Sadly, it looks like the events we could truly outperform men at (ultra distance) happen to be shit for spectating!

I live near one of the top football clubs and the popularity of the Women’s team has grown enormously of late - it started because ordinary, local people were increasingly priced out of tickets for the men’s games, and club loyalty being what it is, lots of people decided that watching the under 21s and/or the women was better than watching a lower level men’s team. Having been forced into watching the women’s team by finances, many fans are now admitting that they prefer it - both for the atmosphere at the games (more chilled and family friendly) and for the game itself (less centred around the ego of a multi million pound players and brute power substituted for clever team work).

Exactly. Human beings come in two different types. They are both deserve fair sport. You can't predicate campaigns for equal access to coaching, participation and equal prize money etc on the lie that males and females have the same athletic capability. Women deserve equal opportunities because we are equally important human beings. The end.

To fudge the issue is to unconsciously capitulate to the idea that we are inferior. We are not. We are the best and only version of women that there is and we shouldn't have to pretend we are physically just like men to be valued. Girls and women need single sex sports to develop their love of the sport and of winning, to develop confidence and resilience, leadership and cooperation skills. Not to mention the health and physical fitness aspects.

Some people like to claim that Serena Williams in her prime could have beaten top men's players. Serena herself says this is nonsense. The greatest woman tennis player who has ever lived, one of the fastest players ever, the most powerful player ever, could not have competed with male players in the top 200. And I'm being generous here, some think it could be top 400. Those male players might not have her court craft, her will to win, her accuracy, her ability to disguise, her absolutely immaculate serving action or her range of shots. But it wouldn't matter because they could blast her off the court without necessarily being better players. Because they have different bodies with inbuilt advantages in sports designed for their bodies. So I and practically everybody else who enjoys tennis would rather watch Ons Jabeur or Petra Kvitova or Iga Swiatek playing each other because we would be more likely to get a great match.
I can't remember if I said this upthread, but people watch sport because they are invested in the success of individuals and for the competition aspect. Women can have as much sporting intelligence as men, can train as hard, be as technically capable, can be as resourceful, committed and brave. That's what spectators like to see - two competitors or two teams going toe-to-toe and refusing to give way.

Oh, and I'm another one who actually prefers women's tennis to men's.

Exactly. Human beings come in two different types. They are both deserve fair sport. You can't predicate campaigns for equal access to coaching, participation and equal prize money etc on the lie that males and females have the same athletic capability. Women deserve equal opportunities because we are equally important human beings. The end.

To fudge the issue is to unconsciously capitulate to the idea that weareinferior. We are not. We are the best and only version of women that there is and we shouldn't have to pretend we are physically just like men to be valued.

Yes this.

I much prefer to watch women’s tennis and women’s hockey and women’s football.

Not because ‘women are weaker’. But because the skills they need to win are better to watch when it is not just about ‘power’. It is just they are very different games, although usually with the same rules.

One thing that is all too often ignored is the additional wear on the body for female people who are having to compete against male people. For instance, tennis. Non contact? Except for having to hit the ball being hit with the power of a male body and leverage points.

The same could be said for any sport that a woman is handling an object of play that has been hit or bowled/ pitched or kicked by a male. It fatigues the body and can cause injury, sometimes permanent.

Regardless of the ‘new rulings’ to cope. It is an ignorance of the female body that leads some people to demand that there must be ways found to include males because males want to play as female. Let there be mixed sex versions but stop demanding the world as female’s live it be modified to meet male needs. It is highly offensive.

Absolutely. It's fascinating looking at the research on the impact of sport / physical activity on women's pregnant bodies. There are all sorts of potential hazards for the baby and mother that need to be assessed / navigated as well as the benefits of exercise.