There’s also video.

Bridges at 0.30 says “if it was safe for me to compete” but doesn’t go on to explain how it’s not safe for him to compete. Of course it’s safe for him to compete against other men, apart from the risks all competitive cyclists take on. The claim that it’s unsafe for him in particular is just more of the maddening reversal all male trans “activists” go in for – pretending they’re vulnerable, they’re at risk, they’re unsafe, they might face physical violence.

Then he says “I can’t compete” and Scott says, rather unsympathetically, “But you can compete in an open category.” This flummoxes the lad a bit. He pauses, then asks with a girlish tilt of the head, “Can I?” Flirtatious pause, then “Would it be safe for me to compete in an open category”? Then there’s a jump cut, so we don’t know how Scott replied. Why would it be unsafe for the oily manipulative sly Bridges to compete in an open category? Is he suggesting an angry woman would violently attack him? And win the fight?

Then he says it’s not fair to make a trans woman compete in the open category, “and it’s not safe, either.” He doesn’t explain why. He of course never explains why he thinks it is fair to let men compete in the women’s category.

Scott asks him if in elite sport fairness is non-negotiable. Bridges, slightly flustered, claims he understands why fairness is important. Scott asks him if he thinks his human rights have been violated and Bridges says “Yeah, I think they have.” No follow-up. Violated how? What human right is there for a man to pretend to be a woman and compete in women’s sports? What is the wording?

Bridges says it’s part of a bigger picture of “banning trans people from public life.” By that of course he means not letting men invade women’s toilets and the like.

To finish up we get a clip of brave “Emily” riding down an empty road among t’moors and an assurance that he will continue his heroic struggle. Of course he will.