Women's sport (again)

[niadainud]

I just wanted to share a couple of gems from a WhatsApp group that I'm part of, during a discussion relating to an article about female athletes and trans-identifying people in sport. (Ostensibly the group has little to do with trans rights or activism, but it's a topic that arises quite frequently.)

"I think any subdivision of people in sport is essentially arbitrary."

and

"Rather than a question about ‘are trans women (it’s always the women) a problem for cis sport?’ shouldn’t it be ‘why are cis people such a problem when it comes to trans people taking part in sport?'"

When I suggested it was fairly obvious why trans-women rather than trans-men were the issue, the man (of course) who wrote the above suggested it was a question of misogyny. I don't think he appreciated the irony of this statement.

Any thoughts?

The fact that they use the term ‘cis’ would be enough to make me leave the group! I’m not a subset of women I’m just a woman and I don’t recognise that term. Men accusing women of misogyny is always a howler.

Just post back if you let a men compete in a women's event it ceases to be a women's event. No Males in Female Sports. End of.

Arbitrary... Hmm.

So why exactly do they divide boxers into classes by weight?

Would it be fair to race a thoroughbred racehorse against a bunch of Shetland ponies? Especially if there was a lot of prize-money at stake.

What could be more arbitrary than grouping people for a physical event according to the gender feelings they have in their head? You might just as well group people by whether they prefer Star Wars, Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones. Or cornflakes or Weetabix.

But sex is relevant; there are real physical differences and a lot of them are not cancelled out by taking hormones etc.

Good luck @niadainud !

You could share a statement about the biological differences between men and women released bybthe American College of Sports Medicine.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37772882/

Emma Hilton is good on the differences between men and women in sport and why women need a separate sports category.
https://emmahilton.substack.com/p/sex-differences-between-men-and-women

There is a great photo of two male and two female elite swimmers standing together which makes it incredibly clear why men are faster than women. The blokes are massive. Unfortunately I can't find it online but a picture does speak a thousand words in this case.

This one - all 4 are Olympic swimmers

How about “yes, though I’ve found women are fine with trans men in women’s sports teams, obviously unless they’re on extra hormones. How can men work to be more accepting of trans women on their teams?”

That's the one 😁

Why are they using the term ‘cis’? This is already gender woo giveaway. Are you sure there’s no one on the group with less than pure aims?

‘When I suggested it was fairly obvious why trans-women rather than trans-men were the issue, the man (of course) who wrote the above suggested it was a question of misogyny.’
😂😂🤦‍♀️ What a prick.

Which ones are the women?

It's so hard to tell. 😂

Exactly. What a moronic comment to make! Arbitrary my arse.

The group is completely "captured". It's ridiculous.

How about ‘are you campaigning to remove all classes in sport then, so no mens or women? Interesting, let us know the details of your campaign!’

Ask why men are so transphobic they can't cope with makes of different genders on their sports teams?

What did the bloke make of the photo?

send the group the picture and this:

“Ah, the old "sports categories are arbitrary" argument-because of course, decades of sports science, physiology, and biological reality are just minor details to be ignored. If you genuinely can't see the difference in size, strength, muscle mass, and lung capacity between male and female athletes, l'd recommend a quick refresher in basic human biology.

This isn't about "cis people being a problem." It's about fairness. Female athletes train their whole lives to compete in a category designed because of male physical advantage. Pretending sex differences don't matter doesn't make you progressive—it just makes you willfully ignorant.”

I read this somewhere… in 1921 the men’s 100m world record was set at 10.4 seconds. Despite all the advances in training and fitness in athletics, the only woman who has ever come close to that is the current record holder Flo Jo, in 1988, and even that result has been questioned, for various reasons. I think this year’s gold sprint was 10.7 in the women’s. The very best female athletes of today aren’t as fast as men from 100 years ago. Their bodies are amazing, but different. So the fact that a very average male runner could come in and swipe all of that success from them, just because he is a man… it’s massively misogynistic that anyone could back that - or value fair, competitive sport in any way. It shouldn’t even need saying really, but I know it does and I’m v glad you are OP - even if they don’t listen

"I think any subdivision of people in sport is essentially arbitrary."

Sure(1). And so like any arbitrary division, some will fall just one side of the line and lose out, and sone fall just the other and win. So let's say you move the arbitrary line that arbitrarily keeps trans women out of women's sports and instead arbitrarily allow them in. How does that impact people? Well, the people who gain because they now sit just inside where they before sat just outside will be male-bodied, and all the people who lose because a higher achieving cohort has been included are female-bodied. As someone with a female body, I don't think that's fair. Do you?

(1) obviously I don't actually believe dividing sports by sex is an arbitrary line on an evenly distributed distribution of ability. But even if it were, I don't think a change that arbitrarily disadvantages one sex to the advantage of the other is reasonable.

I prefer to be led by data when arguments have strong emotions on both sides.

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/58/11/586.abstract
This is a small study, but was funded by IOC. It concentrates on performance data

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02640414.2024.2326354#abstract
this is a larger study, and concentrates on attitudinal response

What I get from this is that there is a disparity between observable advantage and perceived advantage, and we probably need more information before legislation makes wide ranging judgments.

I do think its interesting, though, that the vast majority of athletes favour inclusiveness at levels below "elite" competition. That doesn't seem to be mirrored in the wider public discussion.

we probably need more information

Why? Transwomen are male, all of them, and therefore can be tidily included in the male category.

I do think its interesting, though, that the vast majority of athletes favour inclusiveness at levels below "elite" competition. That doesn't seem to be mirrored in the wider public discussion.

evidence for this sweeping statement?

I do think its interesting, though, that the vast majority of athletes favour inclusiveness at levels below "elite" competition. That doesn't seem to be mirrored in the wider public discussion.

Like Martina Navratilova and Sharron Davies?
That statement has been pulled out of your arse.

‘why are cis people such a problem when it comes to trans people taking part in sport?'

I'd actually engage in "good faith" with this one. Say you agree, we wouldn't be in this position if cis men were more welcoming to trans women in their sports. That mens sport should allow some players to wear more feminine clothing and sort out the male changing rooms so trans women felt safe and comfortable there.

Agree with him that it's misogyny, men not being comfortable around GNC men that's pushing this issue onto women, so they have to sort out the mess men are making.