More inclusive
New athletic policy announced:
U Sports has brought in a new policy aimed at creating a more inclusive environment for transgender student-athletes. It takes effect at U Sports‘ 56 member institutions immediately.
The policy allows student-athletes to compete on the team corresponding to either their gender at birth or their gender identity, provided they comply with the Canadian Anti-Doping Program. They are still eligible to participate in U Sports for five years, and they may only compete on sport teams of one gender during any single academic year.
So that policy is aimed at creating a more inclusive environment for transgender student-athletes while it creates a much less inclusive environment for female student-athletes. Why is the former more compelling and necessary than the latter?
In keeping with similar policies in other organizations, hormone therapy is not a requirement for competing as an athlete’s identified gender.
So in other words a male athlete can simply decide his “gender identity” is female in order to compete with women rather than men. It won’t matter how tall or massive he is, his declared “gender identity” is all he needs.
The policy, developed by U Sports’ equity committee in consultation with the member institutions, has been in the works for two years, and relied on guidance from the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sports’ (CCES) report entitled “Creating Inclusive Environments for Trans Participants in Canadian Sport” and from the Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women and Sport and Physical Activity (CAAWS).
I’m not seeing how this policy does anything good for the the advancement of women and sport.
It’s very unfortunate for the women involved, but the specter of all-but-in-name men dominating women’s college sports in a whole country might end up being the catalyst that leads to real change a few years down the road. Requiring a number of years of hormonal therapy, etc., obscures how unreasonable this is.
It’s not their goal, but with this decision USports will end making it quite clear how damaging this is to women’s sports.
On a somewhat related note, I sometimes think pushing competitive athletics is not the right approach to achieve the generally accepted goals (stronger, fitter, more confident women). As I’ve seen more kids competing at higher levels, it is really striking how many negative aspects there are. There’s often very poor life balance as it becomes clear you have to practice for an insane amount of time to keep up. Injuries, with often lifelong effects, are rampant. People who aren’t naturally good at sports get pushed out entirely.
I’m certainly not saying get rid of college sports, but for the vast majority of people maybe there’s a better way to motivate them to instill confidence and encourage fitness. Not tying it to elite athletics would also make it immune to nonsense like this U Sports decision.
Ah but it doesn’t require a number of years of hormonal therapy – it doesn’t require any. It’s purely self-identification. See the second quoted passage.
I largely agree with you about sport but I also think my view is shaped by the fact that I hated sports as a kid (which in turn was probably shaped more by hierarchies and personalities than the activities themselves), so I always feel as if I’m just insensible to the joys that other people get out of it.
Women. That’s the reason.
We all l
know that there is little likelihood that a large number of women will want to compete on male teams, because of the size advantage of males in so many sports. This is being done to make the men happy, because they can get themselves on a team where they can be top dog…at least until all the women’s teams are overrun by “female-identified” men and they’re back to where they started.
The notion that school sports were for the benefit of students, in the quaint Tom Brown’s School Days sense, doesn’t even stir the surface of Big Sport. I don’t know if the schools in Canada are as corrupt as the big American football/basketball factories, but the idea that varsity programs have ANY connection to the fitness and overall ‘development’ of individual students is long dead.
‘at least until all the women’s teams are overrun by “female-identified” men and they’re back to where they started’–I hadn’t thought of that, but you’re right that these men are exploiting a positional good, which by definition is a situation that isn’t going to last.
I’ll mention again that I’m totally shocked and dismayed at the lack of female-identified men flooding into women’s gymnastics and figure skating.