USA Cycling changes transgender policy

[ZeldaFighter]

But don't worry - women are just men with the wrong amount of testosterone so as long as men keep their testosterone low, they can race against women 😀 (sarcasm)

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/usa-cycling-unveils-new-transgender-athlete-participation-policy

Yes 'cause it's just about testosterone* not the benefit of going through male puberty and having longer reach bigger muscles better lungs.....
*even though this level is higher than women have naturally

and sexism in general, not even anything to do with physical ability (see Chess tournaments)

I like how they said they are adopting the UCI regs for any UCI races running in the US - as if they had any choice 🙄

The real elephant in the room is the US gravel racing scene, which now dwarfs the domestic road racing and CX scene in terms of the money involved - it has no governing body and no regulation as it’s all run by for-profit companies, they don’t even dope test and of course it’s a gender free-for-all.

How is allowing males - with all their physical advantages - being inclusive when they could compete already in their own sex events, and are therefore excluding women as a result (taking their rankings, podium spaces and women leaving in disgust). ‘Inclusive’ seems to only cut only one way.

So they will make this new modification and then in a year’s time when all those male are still winning have to adopt the UCI regs. While complaining it is hard to get female people into the sport and ignoring those who have left because of this ludicrous notion fed by senior male cyclists in the female comps and embedded in their media.

So the USA reduces its pool of female cyclists who are competitive at an international level.

Will the USians then moan when the USA wins fewer podium places at UCI international events than previously?

It isn't. Inclusiveness is never actually about inclusiveness, it is all about pushing the wants of a minority and because they are a minority, doing so is 'including' them.

A "balance between fairness and inclusion" is an admission that it's unfair to women.

@PorcelinaV

Quite...

It's never explained how trans cyclists are being excluded from participation in the first place, they are free to compete alongside those of their sex. There isn't a lack of inclusion to be solved!

I honestly don’t know whether what happened with BC, where we had a whole group of current and retired elite women riders, quietly beavering away behind the scenes, supported by volunteers and coaches right down to the grassroots (holds up hand) could happen at US Cycling.

BC, for all its (many) faults, is a true grassroots sports governing body with 150k members and over 2000 affiliated clubs. USA Cycling has only 60K members who are basically only members because it is a requirement for the race licence.

Even if there was a groundswell of opposition among women cyclists in the US (which is unlikely given how captured young women are there) I just don’t think they would listen. I have lovely friends in the racing community in the US but I just don’t go there. The typical female racer in the US is a 20-something in Colorado (Boulder is the epicentre of US cycling) and they are all full-on TWAW. Even ones that might have mixed feelings about it are going to keep quiet after the Chloé Dygert incident.

It seems that male transgender cyclists are divided into two groups. The more elite group (in performance) requires proof of lower testosterone values, the rest don't seem to require anything but a statement of what their desired gender is?

This, then, means that at the beginner levels men can fairly freely compete and so gain whatever points etcetera the sport assigns for those who wish to rise up through the ranks? Wouldn't this reduce the chances of women rising up?

OK so there is a need to "balance fairness with inclusivity". The only way that they can be "inclusive" is to allow male bodied cyclists to complete in women's races. This means that there is a requirement to address "fairness" to eliminate male bodied advantage. The opportunities here are endless. They could apply any of the following to male bodied competitors:

Your tyres cannot be inflated to more than 1psi.

You have to wear an anti-gas respirator throughout the race.

You are not allowed a bicycle seat.

You have to wear a 30Kg backpack throughout the race.

Your bicycle must have octagonal wheels.

You are only allowed one bicycle pedal.

I'm sure that a fair solution can be found.

@nepeta I’m very confused by this too. It seems to be saying that national level elite racers need to submit a priori evidence that they are below 2.5nmol for 24 months. All other racers can “self identify” but presumably the 2.5 limit still stands for in season testing just as it does for females?

A balance between fairness and inclusion? It's completely illogical, because if men are included in womens' events, it's neither fair, nor balanced. It's entirely unfair to the female competitors and the balance is tipped in favour of the men.

I am not certain. My reading is that the less elite cyclists don't have to do anything but state their identities? If that is the case, then there are now women's categories until we get to the elite groups.

@nepeta what I don’t understand is how that would work with doping control. Maybe I’m the US they don’t bother with doping control in non-elite cats?