However, others argue
The BBC’s reporting on it is of course ridiculous.
British Cycling is to ban transgender women from the female category of its competitions following a nine-month review and consultation. Under a new participation policy that the governing body said was “predicated on fairness”, such athletes will compete in an ‘open category’ with men. Female races will be “for those whose sex was assigned female at birth”.
The changes will prevent riders such as Emily Bridges potentially being part of the British women’s team.
The Beeb goes on to quote at vast length from Bridges’s “who gives a fuck about women” statement. Oddly enough there is no matching statement quoted at vast length from one of the women harmed by Bridges’s invasion of women’s cycling.
Critics of transgender athletes’ participation in some women’s sports argue that gives them a disproportionate advantage over their peers and limits opportunities for their rivals.
However, others argue there is not enough detailed research in the area, that the science is not clear, and that with very few elite transgender athletes, sport should be more inclusive, with open categories criticised for being discriminatory.
Utter bullshit. We don’t let adults do this to children and we don’t whine that the science isn’t clear that adults have an advantage.
So tired of “those whose sex was assigned female at birth” and similar drivel. Everyone knows this, but too many just ignore it rather than using clear language… just say “females” ffs.
That’s the whole point though. Pretending women are just one sub-category of women is the whole point. Language games work.
You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
thank God! the British journalist.
But, seeing what the man will do
unbribed, there’s no occasion to.
That bit about there not being “enough detailed research” annoyed me, because anytime a serious researcher proposes actual research into these things, she’s immediately declared to be transphobic and the entire trans community rises up to get it shut down.