Dr Rachel McKinnon has successfully defended her 35-39 age group women’s 200 metre sprint title at the UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Manchester, reigniting the debate over whether transgender athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s sport.
The 37-year-old Canadian, who lives in the United States, also set a world record in the heats for the event at the National Cycling Centre on Saturday – with The Times reporting “loud cheering” for her opponent, Dawn Orwick.
McKinnon’s successful defence of the title has seen renewed calls for the UCI to excluded transgender athletes from women’s races from the pressure groups Fair Play for Women and Save Women’s Sports, as well as from Jennifer Wagner-Assali, aged 39, who took bronze in the event last year in Los Angeles but did not participate in Manchester.
Speaking of when she was beaten by McKinnon last year (she is pictured alongside her on the podium above), she said: “It was an unfair race and I accepted that when I pinned on the number, and I tried to do my best to overcome the unfairness.
“I do feel that hard-fought freedoms for women’s sport are being eroded. If we continue to let this happen there will be men’s sports and co-ed sports but there won’t be any women’s sports.”
Wagner-Assali denied that prejudice against transgender athletes lay behind the calls on the UCI to exclude them from women’s events.
“We have nothing against the trans women personally or that they want to ride or race their bikes,” she said. “We just don’t think the female category is the right place.”
However, McKinnon today accused British masters cyclist Victoria Hood of expressing “an irrational feel of transgender women,” adding that “an irrational fear of trans women is the dictionary definition of trans phobia” and that “transphobia has no place in sport.”
Hood had claimed in an interview with BBC Sport that some riders decided not to enter the event since “they don’t want to compete” against McKinnon.
She said: “The science is there. The science is clear – it tells us that trans women have an advantage,” she said.
“The world record has just been beaten today by somebody born male, who now identifies as female, and the gap between them and the next born female competitor was quite a lot.
“The world record was two tenths of a second. I know that doesn’t sound like a lot but it is.
“The gap between them and the next female competitor was four tenths, which to put into perspective in a sprint event like this, that would be 15m of the track, when sprint events are usually won by centimetres.
“It is a human right to participate in sport. I don’t think it’s a human right to identify into whichever category you choose,” she added.
According to BBC Sport, Hood missed the championships due to injury, although a response posted on Twitter to her comments suggests that McKinnon was under the impression that the British rider did not take part because she did not want to race against her.
She also pointed out that Hood falls into a different age group she has turned 40, and that she could find no record of the pair ever having raced against each other.
Her statement (see below) also pointed out that under UCI and IOC rules she was entitled to participate in the event, and that she “supports trans people’s rights to compete in their legally recognised gender.
“Fairness in sport means inclusion and respect of every athlete’s rights and indemnity,” she concluded.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: “DR. RACHEL MCKINNON RESPONDS TO BRITISH CYCLIST VICTORIA HOOD”#PressRelease #SportIsAHumanRight pic.twitter.com/jzDuW53aUj
— Dr. Rachel McKinnon (@rachelvmckinnon) October 19, 2019

48 thoughts on “Transgender debate continues as Dr Rachel McKinnon retains world title”
Please don’t recognise any
Please don’t recognise any records set by this sort of athlete. Biological women may as well just throw in the towel if they start doing it.
Is this a bloke comverted to
Is this a bloke comverted to woman?
If so, no records should stand or compete in women’s competitions
I’ve no problem calling her a
I’ve no problem calling her a woman. But there comes a point where someone’s feelings and wishes are not the most important thing. That point is women’s sport.
I expect I’ll be told by someone that, as a non-trans person (the chemist in me refuses to use the word ‘cis’), my opinion counts for nothing. But most people who watch sport aren’t trans either. Women’s sport will appeal to very few people if it continues down this path.
As with any emperor’s new
As with any emperor’s new clothes, the fact of expressing dissent is itself enough to impugn the dissenter and disqualify their dissent:
[i]However, McKinnon today accused British masters cyclist Victoria Hood of expressing “an irrational feel of transgender women,” adding that “an irrational fear of trans women is the dictionary definition of trans phobia” and that “transphobia has no place in sport.”[/i]
The way to deal with this is
The way to deal with this is for female competitors to boycott events where McKinnon is taking part. McKinnon’s participation makes a mockery of women’s sport.
I identify as an android.
I identify as a cyborg. Records I set with a motor are valid.
Wow. Not much tolerance and
Wow. Not much tolerance and inclusion on here.
Dr. McKinnon has followed the UCI rules, etc. If you’ve an issue with the rules take it up with them. Don’t take it out on the brave woman who has been through more challenges in her life than most of us ever have to deal with AND still managed to be a Dr and a world champion.
She qualified, she raced, she won. This is no different to Nils Eekhoff being disqualified – it’s the rules.
Fix the rules if you don’t agree with them.
flat4 wrote:
Whilst you are right that the problem here is with the rules I don’t think it’s fair to accuse anyone of a lack of tollerance and inclusion. This is sport and it has to be played on a level field, otherwise it makes a total mockery out of having women and men competing in separate events and we should just ignore gender entirely.
Yes Flat4, So brave. So
Yes Flat4, So brave. So inclusive. So actually unfair to those born as women.
But it’s obviously just the rules at fault. Pesky rules.
Rick_Rude wrote:
Is it not just the rules, then? Seems a perfectly reasonable point that the debate should be about those rules, not about attacking any individual.
Hate the game not the player, no? What am I missing?
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
You will be missing natural women in sport. If women don’t want to stand up for it then so be it.
At this point we may as well just say ‘fuck it’ and have genderless sport.
Rick_Rude wrote:
You will be missing natural women in sport. If women don’t want to stand up for it then so be it.
At this point we may as well just say ‘fuck it’ and have genderless sport.— Rick_Rude
Yeah, don’t care, not interested in competitive sport, I’d scrap the lot if it were up to me. I’m merely asking whether you arguing for changing the rules or for something else? Because your posts seem inconsistent on that point.
Great step forward for
Great step forward for transgender rights. Now to tackle ageism in sport. I have a good feeling that I’m going to ace the over 90’s hour record.
There definitely needs to be
There definitely needs to be a ‘ladyboy’ class. It’s absolutely not fair to have an ( essentially, great big man ) who ‘identifies as a woman’, or has had the full on nip / tuck / fold op done, racing with proper biological women. There has to come a point, where the regulating bodies for the given sport, say “shove your P.C. / snowflakey bullshit, enough is enough” There’s enough opportunity for the ‘trans athletes’ to have their own categories, if they wish to have a crack, I really don’t think they should be allowed to race with the naturally biologically assigned athletes.
Judge dreadful wrote:
Using phrases like ‘ladyboy’ makes it impossible to have any meaningful discussion about this issue. Disagree with the rules/physical inequality of trans athletes competing in women’s sports all you like but this phrase is akin to homophobic slurs and I think road.cc mods need to have a think about letting their website be a platform for this type of language.
benm wrote:
There definitely needs to be a ‘ladyboy’ class. It’s absolutely not fair to have an ( essentially, great big man ) who ‘identifies as a woman’, or has had the full on nip / tuck / fold op done, racing with proper biological women. There has to come a point, where the regulating bodies for the given sport, say “shove your P.C. / snowflakey bullshit, enough is enough” There’s enough opportunity for the ‘trans athletes’ to have their own categories, if they wish to have a crack, I really don’t think they should be allowed to race with the naturally biologically assigned athletes.
— benm Using phrases like ‘ladyboy’ makes it impossible to have any meaningful discussion about this issue. Disagree with the rules/physical inequality of trans athletes competing in women’s sports all you like but this phrase is akin to homophobic slurs and I think road.cc mods need to have a think about letting their website be a platform for this type of language.— Judge dreadful
get a grip.
Judge dreadful wrote:
HOUSE!
You’ve just won Gammon Trans Bingo, please collect your prive of a white sheet and hood at reception!
Judge dreadful wrote:
that would have been a crackin’ good joke in the 1970s. I’m far too old, liberal and politically correct to enjoy it now, but my 13-year-old self would have loved it.
Let them have an independent
Let them have an independent games. They do for para athletes. IF they are popular they separated games will flourish.
Remember. Jarmila Kratochvílová
This is obviously a
This is obviously a complicated debate and we may get to some sort of satisfactory resolution in future but might it be sensitive for Dr McKinnon not to take part until that is the case.
Velomark wrote:
It might be necessary for sports governing bodies to say that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up. This removes any issues of social conditioning, deluded thoughts and choice on behalf of the athlete.
If an athlete does not wish to do this then they can go in the ‘trans only’ category by choice.
However, we must consider athletes such as some of the former East Germans, who were possibly undergoing hormonal transitioning without knowing, but this could be covered by testing hormone levels to make sure they are within normal limits for each gender. At least they were women competing in the womens field. Not blokes who decided to compete against women.
Velovoyeur wrote:
I think that’s the problem, isn’t it?
Trans people consider that their ‘birth person/gender’ isn’t who they really are. I think the term is ‘dead-naming’. So, insisting that athletes compete in the category of their gender at birth rather than the one they chose or believe they are as they grew up would be horrendously offensive to those people.
However, there is a lot to be said for the advantages held by someone who was born with male bits and later transitioned to female over and above the ‘average’ person who was born with female bits and stayed with those female bits.
(To be honest, more and more I think I’m just going to keep my head down and leave this particular Gordian knot for my kids or grandkids to sort out when I’ve turned into an ‘Old Man Who Shouts At Clouds’ (TM). Assuming we haven’t suffered an extinction level event by then…).
Velovoyeur wrote:
Your ignorance is showing. Hormone levels are already tested for athlete who self identify, in awa y they are not tested for those who are cis – which is in itself a kind of discrimination.
exilegareth wrote:
But the argument isn’t about hormone levels at competition time. It’s about the physiological advantages conferred on a person if they grow up with nominal* levels of male hormones.
* – in the NASA sense of the word. Didn’t want to use “normal” in case I hurt someone’s feelings.
Sport is one of the few areas
Sport is one of the few areas of life where society is actively encouraged to discriminate, in the interest of fairness, on the scientific understanding that men and women are not competing on a level playing field.
If we believe in and continue to accept that idea – and, crucially, assuming the science shows an inherent or enduring competitive advantage for trans athletes – then it’s difficult to argue that gender, rather than sex, should define sporting categories.
If the advantages between the sexes is now considered an arbitrary factor then an argument (but not a very good one, in my opinon) could be made for abandoning male and female sports in favour of an open category. After all, we don’t discriminate for those with genetic advantages in their sports, except for those conferred by their sex.
Ultimately I think this issue boils down to:
1) Do we believe in and favour separate categories for male and female sports?
2) Why?
Ultimately I think this issue boils down to:
1) Do we believe in and favour separate categories for male and female sports?
Yes
2) Why?
Because I hate tennis but would much rather watch Sharaprova than Murray in a skirt (them not me)…
Of course the rules need
Of course the rules need changing. As I said before, socially I don’t care. From a competitive standpoint it matters. You seem quite happy to throw women athletes under the bus though.
Rick_Rude wrote:
So first you lie about what you previously said – you responded to someone suggesting the rules were the problem with a random sneer, now you finally relent and admit that the rules are indeed the point. Then you lie about what I said. Seems to be a pattern with you.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Of course the rules need changing. As I said before, socially I don’t care. From a competitive standpoint it matters. You seem quite happy to throw women athletes under the bus though.
— FluffyKittenofTindalos So first you lie about what you previously said – you responded to someone suggesting the rules were the problem with a random sneer, now you finally relent and admit that the rules are indeed the point. Then you lie about what I said. Seems to be a pattern with you.— Rick_Rude
What are you ranting about? The rules are indeed a problem AND the point at the same time. THis person isn’t a biological woman. End of.
You say you don’t even like competitive sport, so why are you even arguing about this when you’re not the sort of person that likes to see it? I like cycling and l like seeing the elite of cycling compete, I don’t care if you just like bimbling about but the fact you hate competitive sport tells me something. Go and read some Lovecraft and calm down.
I would like to see her
I would like to see her competitors rocking up to events wearing obviously long pink socks as a protest. We’d then have the wonderful sight of the judge kneeling down and measuring their socks and then ruling that their extra sock inches is an unfair advantage. Everyone would understand the protest without needing captions.
just here for the comments.
just here for the comments.
Will book mark it.
Not hard to see the demograph of road.cc readers, middle aged, male…….just like me
There is an old American
There is an old American riddle which was quoted by President Lincoln which says:
“How many legs does a calf have if you call a tail a leg?”
You may not like the answer, but it is as true now as when Mr. Lincoln quoted it.
I heard this rider twitter’d
I heard this rider twitter’d something like they haven’t produced testosterone in a decade.
But lets ignore the fact that this person was a man and retains much of the muscularity of a man, which immediately disadvantages the true women competition
CXR94Di2 wrote:
Yes, she did. However, that seems somewhat disingenuous since she’s in her thirties (IIRC) and that seems to be ignoring any physical advantages gained by producing testosterone from (say) 13/14 until whenever she transitioned.
As I’ve said before on this: “It’s difficult”.
brooksby wrote:
Yes, she did. However, that seems somewhat disingenuous since she’s in her thirties (IIRC) and that seems to be ignoring any physical advantages gained by producing testosterone from (say) 13/14 until whenever she transitioned.
As I’ve said before on this: “It’s difficult”.— CXR94Di2
McKinnon transitioned in her late 20’s. So by that stage her skeleton was fully developed. As for not producing testosterone I find that debatable as no suppressant fully shuts down testosterone. McKinnon may have experienced some muscle loss through drugs but looking at pics she is definitely much more muscular than her competitors and her build is definitely masculine.
The authorities have to look at this, bite the bullet and come up with something to protect women’s sport. Otherwise everything that has been achieved by women over the years will count for nothing. As Transwomen inspite of what McKinnon claims will always have the edge. And while they may not be setting records left right and centre they will most certainly dominate the fields they are in. It is interesting that Transmen are not as successful in sports and usually retire shortly after transition.
giff77 wrote:
“Transmen”? Is that like the Cybermen?

It’s not difficult though. If
It’s not difficult though. If society decides (and it clearly hasn’t, yet) that sex, gender and genes are three separate things, then all sport, not just professional sport, needs to redefine its categories. Given that one’s chromosomes define one’s physiology, it probably needs to be based on those. An XX category and an everything else, or even an open category.
I would be interested if anyone can point me to a trans athlete’s reaction to such a suggestion.
There is a way to end this
There is a way to end this argument in terms of whether someone born a male, goes through puberty, gets the muscle mass increase and then decides to be known as a female competing against born females is fair or not, its this:
This isn’t fair and although live isn’t, we separate male and female sports for the precise reason that they are unequal and to compare apples with apples.
I’ve no problem with anyone who isn’t born the sex that there brain aligns to, however, they have to realise that it does not mean they can be included for the sake of inclusion in [womens] sports.
We have the para-olympics so that disabled people can compete with other disabled people for a reason. What next, someone who identifies as being disabled, being allowed to enter the para-olympics! (Before anyone shoots me down for saying that I need to physically be disabled to be categorised as disabled, why does that not apply to Dr McKinnon, as he/she still has male sex organs.)
(I think I will identify as female for the likes of Strava, then go out and win all of the local QOMS, that will cheese off a good majority of women around here.)
jigr69 wrote:
How would you classify people who are born intersex? (e.g. ambiguous genitals, having XXY or XXX chromosomes etc.)
hawkinspeter wrote:
Personally think it would be worth investigating similar classification to para-sports, e.g. banded events, time/distance/whatever scaling where mixed groups compete together and so on. The devil would clearly be in the details but it might be better than the simple black-and-white split we have now.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Intersex / hermaphroditism is a totally different thing. The athlete in those cases, has no choice, they are playing with the cards that nature dealt them. It’s a very rare thing to happen, in the grand scheme of things. If a ( true natural )intersex athlete wishes to use the ( naturally assigned ) advantage, I’ve got no problem with it at all, that’s just the way it goes. It’s such a rare occurrence, it’s not going to influence much at all in reality. But having someone who has used surgery / therapy / treatment, to assign a new gender, and take on the assumed gender, is completely wrong, and rules need to be put in place to prevent it. I’d go as far as to say, any titles ‘won’ by such an unfair advantage should be retrospectively stripped, and that ‘athlete’ gets a lifetime ban, from any events designed for, and competed in by the gender, which is artificially assumed, by said ‘athlete’. It’s all fine and well having people have these sorts of procedures, but there should be rules and boundaries, regarding certain activities, from which the person involved is excluded, should they wish to go through such an artificial procedure. There are certain jobs, which are legally withheld from certain genders, so why should sport be any different?
Judge dreadful wrote:
Erm – I think you’d be hard-pushed to find a trans person who did it as some sort of fashion statement. It’s major surgery and treatment, undergone as a last resort.
Trans people, er…, ‘trans’ because they believe that the cards nature dealt them are from the wrong deck.
brooksby wrote:
The issue is that a high number of trans people, going from male to female, still retain the male sex organs and don’t undergo major surgery. I’m sure that I read that Dr McKinnon hasn’t had such a procedure, merely the hormone treatment. Therefore it is very plausible that Dr McKinnon could well decide later on, to become male again.
Judge dreadful wrote:
Do you mean that it would be okay for intersex children to be assigned a gender by their parents/surgeon shortly after birth, but not okay for intersex children to later on decide which gender is more appropriate?
Ahhh
Ahhh
“However, McKinnon today
“However, McKinnon today accused British masters cyclist Victoria Hood of expressing “an irrational feel of transgender women,” adding that “an irrational fear of trans women is the dictionary definition of trans phobia” and that “transphobia has no place in sport.”
Errm, no, I don’t think there’s any “fear” here, and nothing is “irrational” about it. There’s a perfectly rational case of someone taking umbrage at getting beaten, by an athlete with an obvious ( from the margins involved) unnatural ( for the class ) physical advantage.
Would it not be simpler just
Would it not be simpler just to split the men and the women’s events by sex rather than by gender. So McKinnon can assume the female gender, but would have to compete with the male sex.
Then no one need feel discriminated against. McKinnon’s right to go by a female name, dress code, etc is respected, and is free to compete on equal terms with other competitors.
McKinnon’s ranking might slip of course, but it’s the taking part that matters, no?
The waters get muddied
The waters get muddied between transgender and intersex individuals. The later should feel hard done by, because their genetic make up advantages them (as usually they are physically characterised as women, but are perhaps more genetically male than female). One thing that could make up for their intersex status would be sporting dominance as often these individuals are infertile.
With transgenderism I don’t really understand where the scientific data back ups that someone who ‘identifies’ as another gender has to be that other gender in a physical sense. It may mollify them to be that way, but if genetically you are clearly your birth sex medical enhancement to be another sex is a choice, one which wasn’t available before the 20th century. So if you choose to try to be another sex I don’t think that means you can compete as another sex. It’s your choice, you may feel and think that it should be different, and people may accept you for transitioning, but it doesn’t mean your choice changes the reality of your genetics, so why trans athletes allowed to compete with their genetic opposites?!