British Rowing - Imminent Announcement?

[SabrinaThwaite]

The Telegraph is reporting that British Rowing to ban transgender athletes from women's events after members urge policy change in a policy announcement expected tomorrow.

… the governing body has decided to follow the majority view of its 31,500 members, more than 80 per cent of whom are understood to have urged a change in approach that would ensure the fairness and integrity of the female category.

… under the revised rules, these events are to be protected exclusively for rowers who are biologically female.

Rowing is the last of the big Olympic sports in the UK to have been sitting on the fence about allowing males in the women’s category.

Fingers crossed that this happens.

You can put the following link into an archive service to read it.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rowing/2023/08/02/british-rowing-transgender-athletes-womens-sport/

Quinn’s specialness didn’t make much impact since Canada are off home already

Just sticking my oar in to place mark.

Sorry, non binary! All the ‘first open trans player’ headlines (I’m in oz) mean I keep forgetting that it’s actually non binary not. Transman, since it just doesn’t really follow.
it shouldn’t be a non story though, it should be a headline! ridiculous as it is, kids need that kind of role model, not the cheating entitled men kind. I remind myself of that every time I see it and think: really??

Anyway, no need for anyone lay into Quinn’s playing. That’s starting to sound personal and uncalled for.

Quinn as a female player playing on a female team is the non-story part as far as I’m concerned.

As far as role models go, I’d be a lot happier if Quinn was being a gender non-conforming woman, rather than someone who has undergone radical cosmetic surgery in order to validate their special identity. I don’t think that’s a message we should be sending out to young girls and women.

^ This

this one's a no-brainer, in such a physical rather than technical sport as pointed out by a pp. I suppose maybe if I was being very generous (to trans, and ungenerous to women) I might be a bit more lenient in lightweight rowing, but only barely. and the open weight category is a slam dunk.

Here is the new policy

https://www.britishrowing.org/2023/08/british-rowing-updates-competition-eligibility-policy-and-procedures/

Open and a female only event for British teams ie: national representation, and for English competitions. Scotland and Wales may have different policy.

Although it is 'assigned female at birth'.... I do wonder whether this will be tightened in the future.

They're going to have to define "assigned female at birth", aren't they?

Do they mean "We will need to see your birth certificate, it will need to say "female"?

If so, what about biological males who get a GRC and a new birth certificate saying "female"?

I feel that they will have to tighten that up and quickly.

Disappointing to see they are still using the misleading "assigned at birth."
Sex is observed and recorded. Assigned suggests the midwife/doctor can put the baby in a category that may not necessarily accord with the observation.

That was my first thought too, but as you have people like Emily Bridges calling himself Trans Female (and IW likes to wave a passport with an 'F' as a sex marker) it might have to stay for now.

Are new legal fiction birth certificates distinguishable from regular ones in any way?

Is giving a cheek swab too invasive?

@puffyisgood I wouldn't I'm afraid. A male person under 9 stone, or several under 8.5 stone, is still going to have all the other physical differences affecting rowing. I particularly think about hand size, shoulder and hip configuration, along with V02 max and the rest.

What is nuts is that mixed sex sport is increasingly common and it's great. I've had some great times in mixed crews. Just that you can't say you're a different sex than you are for sport.

Its difficult to get the language correct and clear.

I'd prefer them to say observed female at birth, rather than AFAB, but either way, it would exclude men with grc.

Yes, but AFAB could still allow in males with DSDs. It will need further tightening in the future I feel.

I wonder how common that is now, in this country?

It will need tightening, though, i agree.

Whether it is common or not, it has the potential to exclude women at the moment. Potentially, if it is a loophole an older male with a DSD could very easily enter the older categories.

What a staggeringly sensible policy.

It makes it clear that all transmen, transwomen and non binary people can compete and have an appropriate category to compete in.

Agree that ideally the language wouldn't be using the vocabulary of the faith of the gender magic woo (ie "Assigned At Birth" for something that is materially and immutably factual from about 40 weeks before birth) but I think it's a case of picking the battles to fight and that's not the one to pick.

you are right, but a 9 stone man (on oestrogen) vs a 9 stone woman would at least be less egregiously unfair than a 16 stone man against a 12 stone woman (the TRAs' dream match-up).

The headline on Sky news is reasonably sensible.

British Rowing bans transgender athletes from women's category to ensure 'fair competition'

The words fair competition need to be without quotation marks, though. That's not an opinion, that's fact.

If I recall correctly a few years ago at Marlow town (maybe wrong regatta-one of the ones in the build up to HRR) GB woman's boat was beaten by a crew of J15 schoolboys.

Agree with PP about the quotes around "fair competition" -it is indeed a fact-not an opinion!!!

Oh for fucking fucks sake 'assigned at birth'. It's so RUDE to medics, as if they're randomly deciding. If being trans is as traumatising as the 'most vulnerable' narrative likes to make out, then it's basically saying medics are making decisions randomly that affect a child's whole life. It's an appalling (and groundless) accusation.

I suspect they hope to pacify the tantrumming narcissists with this concession but parents paying fees (like me) and clubs up and down the country won't be happy. Strongly worded email to follow, the cowards.

They've had to do this because the vast majority recognise reality and to misquote the words of the wonderful John Cleese this is 'symbolic of their struggle with reality' because they're scared of MRAs.

And reality will keep on existing. Here's the Godfrey website.

https://godfrey.co.uk/rowing

On the front page they currently have pictures of rowing seat pads. Notice any difference between the two (not 500+ or however many genders there are) types? The holes are in totally different positions, very clearly visible.

Female pelvises are different to male pelvises.

Godfrey is AWFULLY TRANSPHOBIC if you click through with some types clearly labelled 'women's' although I note the males are just default and not labelled 'males'. In fact one is labelled 'original seat grip' with the women's 'women's seat grip'. Which is pretty misogynistic. Discrimination against women is FINE though.

If you get the wrong seat pad for your sex I wonder if it results in a sore arse.

Maybe I should ask for a reduction in DDs British Rowing membership fee concomitant with the reduction in human rights they think she should be afforded compared to males. Because, yes, I suspect this is their way of letting men still compete against women if they have a GRC.

It's always those in power who do this misogynistic, woman-hating shit. The male and female coaches at my DDs club I am sure do not agree - they are very clear on sex differences, they need to be for safeguarding reasons.

All sports that are sex segregated should remain sex segregated. It's such a common sense approach. Women are entitled to their own sports. That's it. We don't need endless arguing over lung capacity or hormone levels.

There's a really easy way to classify whether or not someone is eligible to play in women's sports. In fact, there's only one requirement and that is that they are female.

TRAs are losing their minds over this and frantically trying to change language again so that that 'female' includes males. It's nonsense. It's gone on too long now and sensible people are getting impatient. They need to let it go now - that ship has sailed.

Why should women accept any unfairness at all? Given that the source of the advantage is the same, whatever the size of the athlete - maleness. Lightweight males are as male as their heavyweight brethren.