Emily Bridges calls British Cycling "failed organisation", says trans women have been "banned" as new 'Open' category announced

Vo2Maxi wrote:

The cold reality is that it's not fair on cis women if you compete in athletic competition with them.

Nice post, considered and genuine. However I have to disagree with the quote from your post above  - it's clearly not the cold reality, as the research shows. I

You're absolutely right, it's a huge grey area and while BC have been utterly, categorically shite in most other things they've done of late, with this they're between the biggest rock you can imagine and the hardest place in the world! Whatever they do will be the wrong thing.

Emily Bridges' comments are unfortunate and in unnecessary language but she's clearly hurt, feels victimised by BC and doesn't know where to turn. A more considered comment in the next few days would help, but you have to sympathise with the pain she's feeling on top of what I can only imagine would be the massive mindf*ck of growing up in the wrong body.

First rule of life is that feeling hurt and hard done by is NOT proof you are right.
I have no doubt whatsoever about the strength of her feelings, but she's calling it a 'trans genocide' which is clearly nuts. She's just lashing out and mudslinging, the reference to 'racism' in cycling is utter tosh. Not many black people race bikes, ergo cycling is racist. It's playground politics, and actually offensive.
How about if she gets to compete in women's sport, and then female athletes who've had their sport stolen from them commit suicide? Who's right then?
Hysterical arguments are never good ones, and when you really look at it, it becomes my rights are bigger than your rights. And that's not right!

Part of what's distressing for her here, is the change of mind displayed by BC, which gave her false hope.
But of course that was borne out a desire to 'be kind and inclusive'. That's what's at the heart of the basic bogusness of woke.
Everyone needs to step back and take a deep breath and get real.

You need to read more of the research. 

muppetkeeper wrote:

It appears to me that British Cycling had 2 choices,

1. Let people who identify as women race in the women's category, and not have a single person who was genetically female at birth be able to compete fairly in racing.

2. Create a category for anyone who was genetically male at birth, and allow all of the genetically "advantaged" race together.

Really?  There's half a dozen other options from other sports I can think of off the top of my head.   Golf has handicapping, motoracing has multiple classes in the same race.  Boxing has weight classification.   There are literally dozens of models for non-binary classification in sport.   The fact that neither you or BC considered them is a failure of imagination and will.

Handicapping isn't used in top level golf and it wouldn't work in top level cycling. Top competitive sport is hard and even brutal, it's an expression of human limits, it's about bring the best with no blurring.
The handicapping of which you speak already exists, in having men's and women's events.
I used to be 1st Cat when it meant getting my head kicked in by domestic Pros in Pro/1/2 races, and I loved it. In later life I've loved handicapped circuit racing with girls, boys, adults and old codgers (me) and it's wonderful. Inclusive and rith mentoring. But not for top level sport, and of course that's what Emily craves, to be fully seen as a woman in top level races. But she's trans woman, and there's a physical difference which can't be artificially made 'fair'.
And you can't compare boxing with cycling, bigger guy is always gonna beat a smaller guy, whereas in cycling fat sprinters can compete meaningfully with skinny climbers.
You're comparing chalk and cheese.

But surely where we are considering Emily Bridges we are not in golf handicap territory. She is a contender for top elite competition. Golf is having to confront the issue of transgender golfers taking major women's professional golf trophies. Maybe they don't have an advantage over birth gendered women, but if transgender women start routinely taking major women's trophies then clearly they need a category of their own or compete in open competition.

Great post. Wonder if I know you....? Only kidding! 😉
And I agree with your reference to Shell, it's very easy to demonise an energy company, but if it weren't for them we'd still be living (almost) in the dark ages. ALL of us.
Oil and gas was the energy of then, demanded by all of us, and like it or not, companies like Shell will probably be the clean energy providers of the future. They're not baby eaters?
Again, it's this woke hysteria which seems to hate everything we are and have been. We're a work in progress.

"Oil and gas was the energy of then, demanded by all of us, and like it or not, companies like Shell will probably be the clean energy providers of the future."

You lost me there.

Genuinely sorry for Emily and other transgender athletes who are now facing competion in an open classification where they will most likely be at a hormone induced disadvantage. However, it was always going to be unfair to someone. There is no correct answer, this one seems to be least worst for the majority of female by birth athletes and credibility of the sport.

Exactly that.

No, I think BC have said trans men can compete with men, or even with women (not that they'd want to, I get that) so long as they're not taking testosterone?
It's a minefield and it's a conundrum (unsolvable) in terms of 'feelings'. Just because you have strong feelings about something, it doesn't mean you're inherently right. It's the difference between subjectivity and objectivity?
But ultimately, you cannot have women's sport utterly wrecked by trans women who essentially have male bodies.

No. A trans man is still a woman. And can compete as such right up until the day they take testosterone. At which point they are banned from competition under the doping regulations. 

By definition, in transitioning, trans women have marginalised THEMSELVES, and then demanded everyone else fall into line and pick up the pieces for them. They're demanding special treatment . Special treatment (social acceptance etc) can only go so far. No one forced Emily to transition. She would have known what the gender rules in sport were. She's effectively changed the way she self-identifies and then demanded the rules be changed just for her.
Also worth pointing out that not all trans women feel the same way about this. All we hear from are the very vocal ones. There seems to be no recognition from them that they are effectively putting a bomb under women's sport.
I think bit by bit they'll carve a niche for themselves and trans women will have their own races etc. But it's THEY who'll have to put in most of the hard yards, you cannot simply keep having everything given to you at others' expense.

A great many people are placed at a disadvantage in, or have to give up competitive sport by their choices of treatment for medical or medicalised conditions. I don't see that people having issues with gender dysmorphia have a right for more special accomodation.

I doubt you will hear much. Just the odd crap white middle aged man who would have finished 43rd in a race who now finished 44th. 

muppetkeeper wrote:

I doubt you will hear much. Just the odd crap white middle aged man who would have finished 43rd in a race who now finished 44th. 

The 'open' approach is being adopted only at the elite level, so not even that.

When has sport, especially at an elite level, been fair?  The Olympics, Tdf etc are basically genetic freak shows.

Ah, the old "sport is unfair because there's a winner" argument. Now with the addendum, "therfore make it exponentially unfairer still."

yupiteru wrote:

The correct decision has been made, as post puberty anyone born male will have a mechanical advantage in a sport like cycling, due to the wider pelvis and head of femur changes in post pubescent females to make allowances for child birth.

No amount of testosterone reduction or regulation will change this significant advantage and I am sure Emily is quite aware of all this.

Please provide research to back up your statements?

If you take time to research it there is a lot of scientific evidence to show that makes gain an advantage over females at an early age. Sharron Davies has led the campaign to ensure fairness for women in sport and has a lot of the studies referenced on her twitter account. It makes for a lot of interesting reading and has no doubt contributed to several sports barring trans women from competing against biological women