[Closed] Singletrack World Response to Nadine Dorries' Comments on Trans Athletes

Trans women are women, Trans men are men, and sport is for all.

Succinctly put.

Odd isn't it that in the name of fairness there seems to be a drive to the unfair and exclusionary treatment of people.

I've just finished reading Richard Herring's book "The Problem With Men", and one of the areas he touches on which translates (no pun intended) quite well in this area was this:-

"Most logical people are sceptical about horoscopes. Surely you can't really divide the whole human race into twelve (now thirteen apparently) personality types based on the month they're born in? Yet people seem happy to divide the world into two kinds of people based on whether their genitalia is an inny or an outy. (Even though gender is much more complex than that.)"

I've always been very puzzled about any links between competitive sport and sport for recreation, and whilst I was just quite happy that I just got back from my run around the woods 1min faster than last time I did it, this was also probably due to the fact I didn't bang my head on a tree, or stop because I got shouted at for jumping over a wall. More than anything I was glad to have just gone for a run, even after a big curry for lunch at Kebabish Original in Blackburn.

Anyhow.

Bravo for posting something with some conviction. Great to read here.

I'll put my hands up and admit i really struggle with this issue. I find i totally agree with the singletrack statement but then talk with some feminist friends who make a very strong argument that those born male (as sex not gender) will be genetically stronger and that this disadvantages those born as women (as sex not gender).

Will follow this thread with interest and an open mind.

Well said stw team

Yet people seem happy to divide the world into two kinds of people based on whether their genitalia is an inny or an outy. (Even though gender is much more complex than that.)”

Which is an argument for only having one category for sport - let's call it "Open". Or perhaps categorising by gender. I think Ireland now recognises 7 genders (or is it 9 now?). It's certainly a lot more than 2 which is all we currently have in most sports.

I think this is an easy issue for an institution like STW. Recreational sport should, obviously, be a completely inclusive place for people - like wider society. Aside from probably a few bigots, I don't think anyone is really doubting that.

Whilst I applaud STW for making this statement, it's not like there's much on the line for them. In this case, talk is cheap.

Competitive sport at elite level is a different thing, though. We covered most of the arguments in the recent FINA thread so there's little point covering the same old ground. But suffice it to say it's not as simple as saying we should just be more inclusive, since doing so will necessarily exclude others.

^this.

It’s an almost impossible problem to solve at the elite level. If as a woman I’d trained for years in swimming say and suddenly one of my previously male team mates decides to become a competitor then I’m going to feel aggrieved, even if I support them in all other ways.

I support the FINA stance.

Yup, fina have this right

What superficial said.

I’ll put my hands up and admit i really struggle with this issue.

Recreational sport should, obviously, be a completely inclusive place for people – like wider society.

Competitive sport at elite level is a different thing, though

Even talking with a trans friend, I'm never sure quite how this can be fairly - in terms of elite athletes - be resolved.

Will follow this thread with interest and an open mind.

I agree with fina on this, to argue there is no performance advantage is rather myopic

I think this is one of few cases where it is not possible to be fair to everyone.

I can't agree with the magazine's view, on the basis that it denies the rights of (born female) women to compete on a fair footing in respect of profesional sport. I am fully in support of inclusivity in all other aspects of life.

Yeah, there's no one truly 'fair' way of handling this, it's a really tricky, knotty issue.

I'm not going to pretend I know what the solution is.

I can't agree either.

Singletrack World supports inclusion, equality and diversity, not just when it comes to riding bikes, but in daily life.

I agree with this but what is the Singletrack World position on competitive sport categories? That is what I’m struggling to see an answer to and if you’ve stated the mag’s position in there somewhere I missed it

I think the only fair way in profesional sport is for transgender men or women to compete in a class of their own.

"I agree with this but what is the Singletrack World position on competitive sport categories? That is what I’m struggling to see an answer to and if you’ve stated the mag’s position in there somewhere I missed it"

Those are the difficult questions to which we don't have the answers. To be distinguished from the position that trans women are women and trans men are men. Which in of itself is not to be conflated with a position of believing all trans women and men should blanket be allowed to enter their gender categories without any policies and rules in place.

As many have said they support the Fina stance - personally I also support it from a pragmatic pov but reluctantly so as I believe it is not without it's own issues. But the Fina position defacto makes clear that they also believe that trans women are women and trans men are men. If you allow some trans women to enter womens races albeit under strict conditions then you can't logically believe trans women are not women - that makes no sense.

The FINA position therefor stands in opposition of the Dorries position, as do we at Singletrack.

Thank you for posting this STW.

For anyone unsure on the issue of trans-inclusive pro sport, this interview with Pippa York is a must watch:

There are ways to address "fairness" without calling for a knee jerk blanket ban on trans athletes across whole swathes of elite sports. Taking that kind of absolute approach towards elite athletes will result in exclusion at other levels as well, including for school kids.

Anyway, this has been discussed again and again on other threads. Including many that ended up locked. I fear the "simple" answer will win out in the end, especially when pushed by a UK government who like "simple" answers, no matter the damage they cause.

Well said Singletrack.
For some reason I feel quite emotional about this, not something I was expecting. I have known two people who have transitioned and I can't imagine anybody undertaking gender reassignment to compete in sport. The personal cost of transitioning can be very high, sometimes families do not understand and people loose contact with partners and children. My paddling partner's nephew transitioned at 17 and was disowned by their family.
Sport is unfair, I have never won any sporting event, some people are bigger stronger better co ordinated, richer, better equiped.
Get a grip and give transgender people space to be who they really are. I am not trans, but resent the narrow minded discrimination of the current government. It's time to stand together and support and cellibrate diversity.

I have no real thoughts on this but if a Tory scumbag says something I’m more than likely to disagree with them.

Agree with a lot of what you say, @Bruce and yet... I can't go along with trans women competing in female born women's sport sorry. Women have had to fight really hard to be able to compete in sport at all and to throw this at them seems unfair. I am not at all unsympathetic to trans people and have know a few who have transitioned and know a little at least of what they go through.

And this has nothing to do with competitive sport but seeing as you broadened the debate, I'll leave this here:
https://www.lglf.org/the-cotton-ceiling.html#/

I'm not opening anything from LGF they are, to put it bluntly, a bunch of inhumane bastards masquerading as a concerned group. Many lesbians and Stonewall have labelled them as TERFs.

Re the cotton ceiling thing. That logic would suggest that any man who proclaims that transwomen are women is a liar unless they would also date them.

First of all, people like to play semantics games on this, so lets be clear to use the clear terms for all parties where it concerns to competitive sports: trans women are not females.

I fully support the right of every individual to do whatever they want with their bodies and their lives, while being treated with the respect they deserve by society. I fully support that sports in general should be fully welcoming to every single person. I also fully support STW's right to publish their opinion on the topic, they are fully entitled to it.

I just can't stand attacks on basic science and biology. I can't stand unfairness. Competitive sports are not recreational sports. The livelihoods of females who want to succeed and have a sports career are put in jeopardy.
I'm the father of a little female girl who I want to live in a fair society. Should she want to pursue a competitive sports endeavor, I don't want it to be cut short because a male , with all the inherent biological differences, decided to jump into her competition lineup.

Again, trans women should be treated with respect, but they are not females.
To everyone reading this that happen to agree, don't ever feel like you shouldn't speak your mind.

I have been a loyal reader and forum participant at STW for many years. But as a parent, a husband and a friend of many females, this is a touchy subject to me personally. Not that this bothers STW the minimum, but this is my last post here and I will carry my clicks somewhere else.
Over and out

I don't know anything about LGF but came across it while surfing about trans people in sport.
The appropriate paragraphs read:
In 2012 Planned Parenthood featured a workshop run by Morgan Page, a trans identified male who has since been hired by Stonewall, entitled “Overcoming the Cotton Ceiling: Breaking Down Sexual Barriers for Queer Trans Women.”
This workshop's goals were to help the participants (trans males) “identify barriers” and “strategize ways to overcome them.” The barriers spoken of are the boundaries and sexual orientation of lesbians, who by very definition are not attracted to males; the “ways to overcome them” being strategies to break down the boundaries and resilience of young lesbians by socially pressuring and coercing them to consider males that identify as trans as sexual partners.

Good point i_scoff_cake and yet it feels like trans bashing which I don't want to do.

Anyhow, this is about competitive sport and I've derailed so apologies.

I welcome STW making its position on this, and Mark's follow up.

Clearly competitive sport is going to be tricky to resolve. The absolute essential here though is to ensure that discussion of this does not cloud the waters about the situation for the vast majority of us regardless of gender - that recreational participation in physical activity is a brilliant thing. And that it is beholden on those currently doing it to make it as welcoming and accepting as possible for newcomers, or those currently involved who fear rejection. It is all too easy for the narrative to be consumed by the conundrums faced by a frighteningly small elite concern. The bigger issue is not at that level.

This is where personally I think the catch all word 'sport' can do a lot of harm and is easily misinterpreted. I ride a bike - I used to do it competitively as a sport. Now I do it for the joy of it. To rip off Alpkit's slogan - to go nice places and do good things. I'm not sure that what I do now is sport. See also my swimming. I'd hate to think someone would be put off doing my version of biking or swimming because of the UCI and FINA's stance at elite level and thinking what I do is the same 'sport' and they are not welcome.

I'm afraid that I'm also with Fina on this. I'm totally for equal opportunities, but have to admit that this is a lose -lose situation in my head, and only has potential to drive a stake into the heart of equality.

Should she want to pursue a competitive sports endeavor, I don’t want it to be cut short because a male , with all the inherent biological differences, decided to jump into her competition lineup.

Of course it's as easy as just jumping across.

While accepting the potential for someone's birth gender to give them an advantage if they transition, no one transitions just to win a bloody trophy.

at the risk of rehashing the fina thread, on balance I also support their stance, I think on balance being born male and going through puberty does provide sufficient advantage such that cis-women are at a disadvantage.

But just because I think fina are right does not mean all sports taking the same position is correct. It is more complex, and more understanding and study is needed.

And yes, watch that Pippa York cafe ride interview.

This is where personally I think the catch all word ‘sport’ can do a lot of harm and is easily misinterpreted. I ride a bike – I used to do it competitively as a sport. Now I do it for the joy of it. To rip off Alpkit’s slogan – to go nice places and do good things. I’m not sure that what I do now is sport. See also my swimming. I’d hate to think someone would be put off doing my version of biking or swimming because of the UCI and FINA’s stance at elite level and thinking what I do is the same ‘sport’ and they are not welcome.

Hear hear. I actually really like this. Accepting that elite sport is 'difficult' perhaps we all just need to make an effort to make it clear that what 99% of us do for sport is just for fun. In that context, all this stuff is actually not all that difficult and we'd welcome anyone who wants to enjoy it in the same way.

Not at all surprising to see another male dominated site throw women under the bus.

You realise our Managing editor, who wrote that story is a woman. As is our art director and subs manager.

https://singletrackmag.com/about

Open question as I've not researched it...

How many born women who have transitioned to male have gone on to compete at elite level ?

Singletrack World takes the position that Trans women are women

What definition of 'woman' is Singletrack using then?

In reply to Superficial
But even there, there's a problem. Women and girls have long been excluded from sport and have excluded themselves usually because of societal pressures and expectations. So while trans women mtbers would of course be welcomed by most riders riding for fun, there's a barrier to them participating. As there is women. Things are changing but it's a long slow process. It's a tricky one alright!

This feels like taking Mad Nad's bait hook line and sinker.

It's is a fairly niche culture war issue to keep us all stuck in while they crack on with really wrecking the country. There are no clean tidy answers to this issue, and the STW opinion seems just as guilty as mad nad of bringing slogans and absolutes to a nuanced issue.

A very tricky subject so kudos to STW for this article. I’m of the opinion that most recreational sports should be mixed. I honestly don’t envy anyone trying to resolve the impact on professional sports participation. I think Fina made the correct call, but equally think this needs to be an ongoing conversation.

Hear hear. I actually really like this. Accepting that elite sport is ‘difficult’ perhaps we all just need to make an effort to make it clear that what 99% of us do for sport is just for fun. In that context, all this stuff is actually not all that difficult and we’d welcome anyone who wants to enjoy it in the same way.

also +1 but with another caveat. Take non-elite, fun but still serious team sport. Decent echelon local league say. Would a transwoman be allowed to play in a women's football team? You'd want to play at the level you are capable of, wherever that standard is, and maybe that might mean you are closer to the top of women's local sport than you would be in men's. But you'd be a similar standard to the women you are in the team with.

Are you taking a woman's place? Someone who's worked hard to get to that standard. Does it matter? Would the exclusionists insist she only plays in a trans team (where do you get enough trans-women footballers to form a team, let alone a league of appropriate standard?)

[and that's without the people who would want her excluded because of the fear she's gone through all that just to have the chance to maybe glimpse a hint of bottom in the changing rooms after the game]

Timely

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/62002890

Singletrackworld are wrong! But there's nothing unusual in that...

Tom Downie - this 'culture war' was really not started by the right. It comes from the praxis of Queer Theory. See, for example, “Overcoming the Cotton Ceiling: Breaking Down Sexual Barriers for Queer Trans Women.” Their political goal is to destabilize the normal, and by that, I mean established identities such as man, women, gay, straight, child, adult, etc.

Now that doesn't mean we can't treat transpeople with respect and afford them reasonable accommodations. Just being trans doesn't make you a Queer Theorist (i.e, political Queer). By rejecting any accommodations for transpeople in resisting the lunacy of Queer Theory we would be doing the inverse of what Singletrack is suggesting, which is rejecting the reasonable protection of women's elite sport in the name of resisting the spectre of the 'extreme right'. Both are equally silly stances.

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.”

This the first time I've agreed with anything Nadine has said.
Only today two elite women champion cyclists have stated they have lost races, purely on the basis that who beat them were Trans. Fairness cuts both ways. Trans have a biological advantage in some sports. Nothing is going to change that. Social inclusivity is an entirely different matter, and the two should not be conflated.

Yeah that all seems a borderline conspiracy theory. Nadine knows fine well that at least 99.9% of her voters have no direct skin in elite sports, 9/10 have never met a real living trans person yet most of them think the world is going to hell in a handcart pushed by immigrants / gays/ cyclists/ transpeople. It's the perfect dead cat - pushes the buttons of her voters, costs nothing and affects directly only a few people (although if you are affected clearly it's a very big deal). It's an issue that needs compassion, cool heads and a bit of thinking.

I subscribe to STW for nice pictures of mountains, stories of places I'll never get to ride unless I'm still functioning by the time the kids leave home and bikes I can't afford. This can GTF (from a broadly recreational cycling mag) along with all the other culture wars of our time,.

Nadine knows fine well that at least 99.9% of her voters have no direct skin in elite sports

You have a point but otoh we make a big fuss about elite sport particularly its integrity. See for example the high drama over alleged doping in Team GB/Sky, etc.

A very tricky subject so kudos to STW for this article.

I have to applaud STW for this too, it's a subject that I know very little about, so my opinion is probably irrelevant - FWIW, I've a mate of thirty years standing who is transitioning, my throwaway opinion is that I don't believe that gender identity is necessarily binary. That said, I can't even begin to navigate the complexities of the pre/post puberty trans-women arguments.

I do think that sport should be inclusive though. We should find a way to make this work.

You say a transwoman is a woman. There is a clear biological difference between a transwoman and an adult human female. Given this, what does singletrackworld believe a woman to be?

In denying women the ability to compete in sex based competition you work to exclude women from women’s sport. The denial of sex based rights is a part of the ongoing erosion of women’s rights around the world.

I think it’s very honest that ST is prepared to take a position on this subject. It would be far easier to ignore the subject entirely.

I firmly believe that trans women are women and trans men are men, and that sport should be open to all, and that people should be excellent to one another. There are no easy answers to balancing this with the need to maintain a fair competition in sport.. but if people approach it with the principles of respect and kindness then there is surely a solution out there.

For the record I have worked with a number of trans people, I don’t believe that I have 1% of their bravery. This is a debate that in my opinion has been hijacked by the media to create a moral panic and sell ink and clicks.. and damn the human cost

As with other similar subjects, it's been hijacked by more than just the media, also by those who can afford their luxury beliefs with very little thought for those whom the issues actually affect.

Clout, status, clicks, likes, retweets; it's all the same.

This is a debate that in my opinion has been hijacked by the media to create a moral panic and sell ink and clicks.. and damn the human cost

 

And what has it cost Singletrack to put themselves firmly on the side of the Angels? They don't run elite women's sports so don't actually have to deal with the inherent conflict.

"And what has it cost Singletrack to put themselves firmly on the side of the Angels?"
At least £20, as I've just cancelled my subscription.

@Esme, why would you cancel your subscription? Would you stop watching the BBC if they put a TV programme on that you didn't agree with?

The BBC is a bit of a special case as we have to pay for them regardless. A newspaper might be a better comparison. I guess it's a bit like STW blocking links to the Daily Mail because Mark disagrees with the editorial team. There's a bit of a difference between publishing an opinion piece and what comes from the editors/owners themselves.

And here was me thinking that we hadn't heard from enough women in this debate.

A good article which seems to stumble at the very end

“Trans women are women, Trans men are men, and sport is for all.”

This is a massive oversimplification of the current position that sports are finding themselves in. Sport is indeed for all, but changes have to be made, and not everyone is going to be happy or, possibly, included in the way they’d like to be

I think they say that they don’t know the answer to this. But surely the principle should be to try and create fair inclusion rather than defaulting to exclusion?

Interesting debate, but I would think if you avoid all the emotion it boils down to someone having an unfair competitive advantage, whether that be an athlete taking illegal drugs to enhance performance or having an advantage due to physique as a result of birth gender.

I have never thought it fair transwoman competing against biological women but never interested too much as does not affect sports I watch. Although I was certainly surprised a few weeks ago taking my 16 year old to school and her pleasure and mine at the Fina decision. We had a great conversation about women's rights etc and I cant believe how much I know about the suffragette's now.

I believe women have and are discriminated against since the history of time due to their gender. The thread also seems to have mainly men commenting who are not really affected as much as women and that piece about the 2 top females riders says it all, how can you think that is right shocking.

Interesting debate, but I would think if you avoid all the emotion it boils down to someone having an unfair competitive advantage, whether that be an athlete taking illegal drugs to enhance performance or having an advantage due to physique as a result of birth gender.

Do they though. Really? Before forming an opinion I think some of you need to go and read some of the previous debate on both sides, and look at eg: the Pippa York cafe ride interview linked earlier. I don't mean to be rude or dismissive, everyone is entitled to an opinion but some of the opinions being expressed are quite uninformed. I don't remember who it was on the fina thread, but they said when they'd actually gone and looked, they then came back with quite a different understanding.

that piece about the 2 top females riders says it all, how can you think that is right shocking

Yet look at the Pippa York article, and then wonder if these unnamed riders really only won because they were transwomen.

There may be several reasons why these riders got beaten; gender at birth may be one of them.

I generally subscribe to the view that people should be able to do and live as they please up until the point where it actually or potentially adversely affects someone else. This situation is one of them. Sport is played with bodies, not feelings or identities. It seems logical that any categorisation a particular sport requires should therefore be based on bodies, particularly the bits that are a factor in sporting performance (skeletal structure, bone density, muscle mass, fat distribution etc. - clearly different between male and female bodies)

Some sports don’t need any categorisation based on physical attributes - darts, snooker etc. Some require categorisation based on more than one physical attribute - anything with weight classes, or age groups.

I appreciate that might make it hard for someone who’s body doesn’t match who they feel they are, but it doesn’t exclude them from sport entirely, it only excludes them from the biologically incorrect category.

Respectfully STW, saying that "Trans women are women" in this context is not helpful to the debate of how this issue should be handled in competitive sport. It's an enormous over-simplification of a very complex issue - which seeks to intentionally shortcut the debate. I know your position is more nuanced, but by beginning the discussion with the most emotive issue (literally in the first line of your article) virtually guarantees disagreement from the start, instead on focusing people on what they can agree on (which is a lot). For example, it think most people probably agree on the following:

Sport is for everyone
Accordingly, efforts must be made to ensure that barriers to the participation of minority groups are identified and removed, including in competitive sport.
However, competitive sport must be fair, and where a necessary distinction between male/female exists, whether somebody is cis/trans must be a consideration in that distinction.

While we figure-out how to achieve that fairness, I'm not sure if I agree with a ban on transgender competitors...... but potentially you are talking about the exclusion of a relatively small number of people in order to keep the competition fair for everybody else, and so maybe the "least bad" option here is all that we can hope for in the short term while we figure-out something more?

My own view is that trans women should be treated as women, and trans men should be treated as men 99.999999999% of the time. The only exception I can think of is competitive sport, where the differences between a Trans and a Cis competitor could (reasonably) confer an advantage. BUT, a way must be found for Trans athletes to complete - a ban is not acceptable in anything but the very short term.

But make no mistake - we are being manipulated. This is straight out of the GOP playbook (they focused on which public/school bathrooms trans people could use) and is designed weaponize this issue. The Tories position is carefully calculated to appeal to people who find the whole debate around trans rights to be just too complicated to understand, and just want a simple slogan/position which will then allow them to ignore the issue. Meanwhile Labour (and the Dems in the US) tie themselves up in knots trying to actually be inclusive.

We have the black and white views, STW and Nadine Dorries. Fairness is somewhere in the grey between and sport dependant.

This is straight out of the GOP playbook (they focused on which public/school bathrooms trans people could use) and is designed weaponize this issue. The Tories position is carefully calculated to appeal to people who find the whole debate around trans rights to be just too complicated to understand, and just want a simple slogan/position which will then allow them to ignore the issue. Meanwhile Labour (and the Dems in the US) tie themselves up in knots trying to actually be inclusive.

And Batfink, you'll remember how this played out for Katherine Deves in the Australian Federal election.

I do a bit of support work for LGBQTIA+ groups and admit it quite bamboozled me at first. However knowing what I know now, I'd like to think if I had a daughter that had to compete against a trans woman they'd make them feel welcome, regardless of what position they finished - after all "Of the last 71000 Olympians, only two were trans women. One came last, the other 37th/42." (taken from the Twitter thread below).

One of the things i note with these kind of 'debates' though is that we make some very big assumptions. Many assume that if a trans woman used to be a man they still have the same biological advantages. Why? Do they just think there's a nip and tuck a change of clothes and some make up?

I'm attempting to post a twitter thread here (first time so hopefully it works), from Associate Professor Ada Cheung, principal research fellow in endocrinology at Austin Health. She leads the Trans Health Research program in partnership with the University of Melbourne.

https://twitter.com/DrAdaCheungAU/status/1517021793554677761?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1517021793554677761%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Fnews%2F2022-04-27%2Ftrans-inclusion-womens-sport-participation-politics-election%2F101015082

Thanks Reeksy, not seen that before.

I seem to be repeating myself a lot but I'm not apologising, because (new) poster after poster is jumping in with opinions. I don't mean to have a go, but as Reeksy says, take a bit of time to get informed and then see if your opinion is the same.

It seems logical that any categorisation a particular sport requires should therefore be based on bodies, particularly the bits that are a factor in sporting performance (skeletal structure, bone density, muscle mass, fat distribution etc. – clearly different between male and female bodies)

It does seem logical at first sight, because we all know a bit of biology after all. But is there a clear and MATERIAL difference once you consider transitioned bodies. I'm not so sure.

second post to make distinct. A question for you.

My son is TG, I may have mentioned. FWIW he was a good sporty girl but chucked it in because he has to be true to his identity.

His other love is performance, theatre, and musical theatre in particular. He participates in a nationally recognised theatre group. He auditions for and wins male roles. As a result some boys don't get to play leading roles. This has never been an issue and his colleagues, colleagues' parents, creatives and everyone else is nothing but supportive. It would be ridiculous for anyone to suggest he can only play TG roles!

I know it's not competitive in the same way as sport, and there aren't prizes and medals in the same way, but on audition day it is - the kids want the role they're going for and aren't getting it. I know as well that it's not the same because does being born into a F body give any advantage in the way he performs.

But the question is about inclusivity. Why does theatre have not one single problem with this. Sport says they are inclusive but the talk is cheap, as soon as it 'costs' sportspeople something then barriers are going up. There are still tiny numbers of out sportspeople, particularly in some sports, is the issue really actually deeper than who won the medal?

It does seem logical at first sight, because we all know a bit of biology after all. But is there a clear and MATERIAL difference once you consider transitioned bodies. I’m not so sure.

it’s a completely logical position. As is an assessment being required to ascertain whether those differences could confer an advantage for each sport, and in light of that, rules/classifications set accordingly.
I don’t see anything particularly controversial in that.

But the question is about inclusivity. Why does theatre have not one single problem with this. Sport says they are inclusive but the talk is cheap, as soon as it ‘costs’ sportspeople something then barriers are going up. There are still tiny numbers of out sportspeople, particularly in some sports, is the issue really actually deeper than who won the medal?

Sports has always been divided by sex. In theatre, men have commonly played female roles, and occasionally vice versa.

Sport is about determining who is best (highest, fastest, etc). Theatre roles given on who best suits the multitude of aims / goals / feel the performance is hoping to deliver. They are not comparable in that respect.

I'm a feminist, as should be the default for any decent human.
There are plenty of hateful transphobes out there, no doubt.
There are anti women trans people too, such as the bearded lady attackers of Julie Bindel.

The reality is that the majority of people are quite happy to live and let live, without hate for any marginalised group. Disagreement is not hate.

Elite women sports should be protected from trans women competitors though, there's a clear advantage in the overwhelming number of cases. Comparing it to theatre is, with respect, a bit daft.

Anyway, I'm just another pale, stale male so my opinion counts for little. Here's an opinion from an actual elite runner of the womb bearing type.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/29/ministers-fairness-females-sport-swimming-policy

But the question is about inclusivity. Why does theatre have not one single problem with this. Sport says they are inclusive but the talk is cheap, as soon as it ‘costs’ sportspeople something then barriers are going up. There are still tiny numbers of out sportspeople, particularly in some sports, is the issue really actually deeper than who won the medal?

Respectfully - this makes no sense.

Theatre has no single problem with this for exactly the reason you mentioned - that him being Trans has absolutely no impact on his suitability for the role, and gives him no advantage when "competing" to win it vs the other kids auditioning. This is just one aspect of his life where him being trans makes absolutely no difference.

Any competitive sport which categorises competitors/participants according to sex is now considering the issue of how to be inclusive to trans people, whilst maintaining fairness in their competition. It's a legitimate question. That is not to say that there aren't other issues/prejudices that coexist, just that the balance of inclusivity / fairness is legitimate

Disagreement is not hate.

I think this needs repeating - a lot of us are uninformed, research isn't always clear cut, we are all (mostly) seeking the best/least worse solution. Disagreeing on the current situation does not automatically make you a anti-trans.

Sports are usually categorised to ensure some degree of fairness, weight being the obvious one. IF research says that trans athletes are left with an advantage over CIS athletes in a particular sport, that sport needs to find a way to make top level competition fair, while ensuring inclusion and access at the grass roots level.

I don't have the knowledge or wisdom to pretend to know the answer, I'm just expressing what I believe the way forward might need to look like.

I don’t mean to have a go

It doesn’t in any way come across that you are. I’m well aware of your son’s situation and admire the way you approach these discussions. For what it’s worth, I’ve been following the transgender/sport debate for a few years, since RM/VI set a TT world record, and more recently the wider societal TRA/GC conflicts that are going on regarding what kids are taught in school, womens rights and the whole conversion therapy/exploratory therapy argument. As the father of a sporty daughter who asks me what I think about this subject, I’ve spent a fair bit of time thinking about it - I haven’t just clicked on the thread and decided to chuck my 2p worth in just for something to do.

“And what has it cost Singletrack to put themselves firmly on the side of the Angels?”
At least £20, as I’ve just cancelled my subscription.

Agreed.
I started here paying the subscription then stopped paying due to the way STW promoted scam websites. I was thinking of getting my account deleted as the atmosphere is so toxic from so many people but was giving it a chance but this has tipped me over so I will ask for my account to be deleted.
I can see the small amount of female contributors STW has leaving too, probably silently. But as can be seen by STWs stance on this subject, no one around here cares about what they think anyway.

https://boysvswomen.com

https://law.duke.edu/sports/sex-sport/comparative-athletic-performance/

If fully grown adult females are largely uncompetitive against pre-pubescent boys, how does HRT change this picture? How does a post-puberty adult male who has transitioned to being a woman offer fair competition?

Respectfully STW, saying that “Trans women are women” in this context is not helpful to the debate of how this issue should be handled in competitive sport. It’s an enormous over-simplification of a very complex issue

I think there's some clarification needed here. I did allude to it in my earlier post. I disagree that the view that trans women are women is an oversimplification. It's a starting point and nothing more. If you disagree with that position then there is literally no debate to be had. If you believe the opposite then I put it forward that THIS is the oversimplification as logically you do not believe there is any place in womens' sport for trans women and therefore the Dorries position is the default - the debate is over.

By taking the position we have does not mean we believe all trans women should be accepted in womens' sport by default with no conditions. That's where policy and requirements from governing bodies, like BC and FINA come in to play. These policies are necessary in order to negotiate the best possible path to inclusion. For us the default position should be to try and find a path to inclusion, accepting that this is not a simple path and in many cases extremely difficult to reconcile with all sides. This is our position, which I suppose can be described as anti-exclusion by default.

It's difficult. It's nuanced and it requires a hell of a lot of empathy and understanding all round. But still, the starting point is clear to us. Trans women are women. Trans men are men.

Some in this debate have linked to resources that have helped them in their understanding, which is nothing but good in any debate. here mine.. https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-transgender-issue/shon-faye/9780141991801

ps. While I think that elite sport is the focus and the obvious place to consider these issues I contend that the line between elite sport/competitive sport/recreational sport is not as clearly defined as we would like to think. Can a transwoman rider claim a QOM in Strava? Vice versa? Should Strava have a policy on this?

Also, it's been reasonably questioned as to whether we have any actual skin in the game here beyond just putting out a statement of position. In fact we do in so much as we've been approached for help in a dispute about the inclusion of trans competitors in a small mtb event that I will not name here. We could either claim total neutrality on the issues or take a side - for better or worse (I note some subs cancellations) we decided on the latter.

Many assume that if a trans woman used to be a man they still have the same biological advantages. Why? Do they just think there’s a nip and tuck a change of clothes and some make up?

While some have already asked for a definition of "woman" then I'm going to suggest we need a definition of "trans" too. At least some of the sporting bodies are trying to resolve this with science.