- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Philippa York (via YouTube)Idea transgender people are going to take over women’s sport is "absolutely ridiculous" says Philippa York
Philippa York says she finds the idea that transgender people will take over women’s sport “absolutely ridiculous”. The former pro cyclist, who transitioned after she retired in 1995, points out there still hasn't been an out transgender person who has competed at the Olympics. She believes that being from a country that can afford to sponsor your training is “way more advantageous than your gender.”
The debate over whether transgender athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s sport returned to prominence last month when Dr Rachel McKinnon successfully defended her 35-39 age group women’s 200 metre sprint title at the UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Manchester.
The 37-year-old Canadian became the first transgender athlete to win a world title in any sport a year earlier, but has frequently faced arguments that she should not compete in female competitions.
York, who won the mountains classification and finished fourth in the 1984 Tour de France when competing as Robert Millar, told iNews: “I find this idea that transgender people are going to take over sport absolutely ridiculous. Since the early noughties, there hasn't been an out transgender person who has competed at the Olympics. Out of 20,000 competitors, not one is trans.”
She pointed out that transitioning was not a simple matter of turning up and competing in a different category.
“For young trans athletes, once they start sorting out their hormones, there’s a load of physical and mental changes that alter the way you think. There aren’t that many elite athletes that have transitioned, especially not during their career.
“Elite sportspeople are rare in any community. To reach that height requires such a level of skill, training, and advantage to put you that way. I think it could be another century until we see an openly trans athlete. It's certainly not going to be the next Olympics. Getting elite Olympians is probably the final frontier for equality.”
York dismissed the idea that a transgender woman would retain a hormonal advantage through higher testosterone levels.
“A lot of people think your testosterone levels are high if you are a transgender woman, but in fact, your testosterone levels crash. Competing as a trans person means you will actually struggle to be as strong, or as fast, as a cisgender competitor. But that information doesn’t seem to be out there.
“In my case, I’m a menopausal 60 year old, and I have the same level of strength as a gran. I would been around 30 per cent stronger if I hadn’t transitioned. For athletes at any age, there's a 20-25 per cent drop straight away.”
Nor does she believe that there is such a thing as a level playing field in the first place.
“If we look at how sport can be a disadvantageous playing field, we need to look at the systems some countries have in place to help their athletes.
“If you're a full time athlete with medical backup, a support system and you're from a country that can afford to sponsor your training, then you have far more of a chance to succeed. No-one talks about that, and that's way more advantageous than your gender.”
York also spoke about her experience of realising she was transgender in the 1980s and how she had felt her career as a cyclist was “way too complicated” to start transitioning while still competing.
“Any diversity wasn't looked upon very well. Society had just gotten over gay people existing and not being criminals, and being transgender was beyond most people's comprehension.”
Philippa York would have traded cycling career to have lived as a woman from a younger age
She believes that the sporting world is still, broadly speaking, an unwelcoming place for those who are LGBTQ.
“We all know someone who is gay. Out of 10 friends, there's probably one person who is gay, and out of 20, there will definitely be someone who is LGBTQ. Why the world of sport is pretending to be a homogenous Disney Land is very strange.
“I think that it’s important young people are comfortable with who they are. There’s no shame in being LGBTQ. I think that’s important, and it needs spreading to the sporting world as well. The government and powers that be want people to be healthier, so queer people should be able to access sport without feeling intimidated or threatened, or like they’re unwelcome there.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- newbankgyratory 1 hour 15 min ago
Here's an idea:...
- newbankgyratory 1 hour 21 min ago
A possible answer to the conundrum:...
- Sriracha 5 hours 14 min ago
https://velo.outsideonline.com/road/road-racing/technical-faq-bottom-bra...
- ktache 6 hours 2 min ago
Or lezyne tubeless pro plugs. I've got a set, but had no chance to try them out. I want to use those mushrooms.
- chrisonabike 6 hours 43 min ago
That's a bit forward! But yes; pop up any time you like. Except when the buses have been at the bridges.
- TheUntypicals 8 hours 47 min ago
If businesses are suffering on Linthorpe Road it is entirely their own fault, most of the destination type shops moved out long before the cycle...
- giff77 9 hours 4 min ago
So where is the entitlement of wanting to get from A to B in relative safety? The city centre is dire regarding cycling infrastructure and while...
- whosatthewheel 9 hours 9 min ago
I live in a mostly flat town and can maintain 22-25mph. Makes no difference to drivers who still overtake frantically even only to slow down to my...
Add new comment
26 comments
How would people feel if Ms A Joshua rocked up as a female boxer and wanted to box women?
Would that be fair?
Or just tick a box?
The only way to sort this is to have two transgender categories in all sports. One for each sex transitioned.
I may be sportsphobic.
Why if you disagree with something are you 'phobic'? Phobia is a fear. Nobody is afraid of this, It's just being questioned.
sometimes language transitions in ways that you might not like.
I looked up definitions of "phobia" a while back as I didn't think all of the haters were in fact fearful. All those I saw had "irrational fear or hatred", and hence stood corrected. Whether this is because the word has changed or I was just always wrong, I don't know. But I never thought xenophobia was a fear.
Clearly a disagreement with a situation is neither fear nor hatred necessarily. It's not (in my next to worthless view) inherently transphobic to question whether there needs to be a further sport classification to preserve fairness.
Personally I can't see an answer to this that meets all needs. Women's sport should be protected but trans women want inclusion in every aspect of life and those aims are not compatible, it seems to me, despite agreeing with both.
The premise here appears to be "women* be nice!" as always.
*adult human female of the XX variety.
There is an increasing number of trans women taking part and competing in womens' sport. In the States at school and college levels trans girls are competing, beating and will be taking sports scholarships from natal girls. Is this fair?
There is a physiological, social and societal advantage to being born male sex and growing up male. Why should women budge up to allow an unfair competitor in? What about women and girls safety. Why will women want to compete at any level when even a mediocre male would beat them?
There is a greater push to have self-identifying gender (not sex), and many transwomen do not undergo surgery.
It's great if people of all shapes, sizes, appearances etc want to take part in sport but it should be fair and not at the expense of a group who had to fight to compete in the first place. E.g. Kathrine Switzer trying to compete in a marathon.
Compact Corned Beef wrote:
Plus, while a residual advantage in height/weight/bone density may exist
This has been debunked.
A trans woman will have lost the muscle strength and haemoglobin levels she once had pre-transition but now has to schlep big tall bones around with less muscle strength and inefficient blood oxygen transfer.
In most sports, including ours, a killer disadvantage versus a cis woman.
This discussion is mostly just a way of legitimising transphobia. It's a non-problem, as Philippa argues.
Unless the definition of debunked has changed significantly I think you may be mistaken.
Study looking at muscle size, density and strength after transition therapy.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/782557v1
Hannah Mouncey ... Hold my beer!
Just look at Mouncey FOUR years on from transitioning, she probably isn't doing as much weights, she has no need to because of her massive advantage, but the drop off isn't anything like you're making out, not even close! in fact looking at the weights she was doing in training is a bit of a joke, it's clearly for the cameras because I know full well that a (then) 62 year old Martina Navratilova was pushing far in excess of that earlier this year in a documentary about this very subject that was aired on terrestrial.
It would be interesting to see what Mouncey's numbers in the gym are despite the obvious lack of intense training compared to competing at elite male level and being 4 years on.
You talk about moving big bones around and stating what a disadvantage that is for CIS women (upper case please!) yet produce no stats whatsoever about how much loss in muscle etc there is and don't even account for lowered training levels in some cases simply because they no longer need to train as much to be a standout.
This all seems like a wokeness test. Being colour-blind on race, supporting gay marriage and rejecting traditional gender roles isn't enough anymore. So unless you loudly support large people with Y chromosomes towering over women on podiums then you're a bigot and practically on the same side as Trump and the Saudi royal family.
Nothing to see here. Move along without questioning.
Hannah Mouncey, former men's national handball player who was competing in the Australian team that were attempting to qualify for Rio, started hormone therapy in 2015 and was banned from being allowed to be drafted into the AFLW in 2017 citing 'safety' for other athletes, there was one article saying she was under and another saying she was over the testosterone level uas prescribed by the IOC.
At his peak he (referring to the person previously) was 100kg and looking at this video from the women's handball she doesn't look likely to be much less if at all less https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1198382923373662211?ref_src=twsrc%5...
that said the people in favour of allowing Mouncey and other transgender athetes to compete with/as women are using this lady as an example as to why it's a nonsense to be against. Australian women basketball player Liz Cambage, however just looking at the photos they obviously miss that whilst Cambage has a not disimilar weight to Mouncey (if Cambage's weight is to be beleived 98kg/200cm, the muscle mass particularly around the upper body and upper legs is massively different as is the fat around the hips/glutes, in a physical contest (aside from jumping higher for a basketball) Mouncey would destroy Cambage every single time IMO.
The difference is one woman was born the way she was (as with Caster Semenya and others), the other woman is, well, er not, there's no equity I'm afraid.
Capture.JPG
So if it’s all about testosterone give a good femal cyclist the same testosterone level as a man and she’ll be able to cycle in the world tour and hold her own. Probably not so men must have further advantages due to being a man and suppressing testosterone doesn’t level born a man vs born a woman, it’s not what people want to hear but people want to hear what they want to hear and not what they don’t.
I don’t know if it’s typical, but a friend of mine who’s had top surgery as part of her transition has been told no sparring (fencing club) for 6 months, and that’s just one element, so ‘back to the top of their game in 6 months-1 year seems very optimistic, and even more significant given the comparatively short duration of elite level careers.
My personal position is as long as the guidelines for trans people competing are evidence based and fair then no worries - they may need to change over time. As Philippa York points out, that there are no trans olympians is enough of an acid test. People might point to Rachel McKinnon’s wins as evidence of residual advantage, but for me that doesn’t hold water unless you also accept the reverse - that her losses are evidence against, and few people I’ve seen arguing that trans people competing (at all) is unfair are happy to accept that.
Trans-people keep talking about testosterone levels, but it's not just about that. Trans-women who have been through puberty as a male retain most of the muscular architecture, lean body mass, bone density and strength of a male. And obviously all of their size as well.
There are very few sports where these things won't make a difference, but to pick out some obvious examples, should trans-women should be able to compete against women in sports like basketball, rugby, boxing?
This is a really informative talk on the topic.
A lot of the chat about testosterone from trans people that I’ve seen focusses on rebutting the idea that it’s the be-all and end-all that some make it out to be. Plus, while a residual advantage in height/weight/bone density may exist, the transitioning process can be a very big deal in terms of surgeries and hormonal intervention, which hardly primes a competitor for elite level sport. And in our sport, how many people are looking to bigger/heavier/taller as an advantage? (With apologies to any Conor Dunne fans).
The article says: "York dismissed the idea that a transgender woman would retain a hormonal advantage through higher testosterone levels." She did not talk about any of the other physical advantages that trans-women have. This is very common.
So they might not be competing immediately after transition, but six months or a year later, they will still have those physical advantages they obtained as a result of passing through puberty as a male.
So let's take cycling. Does a bigger lung capacity help? Does reduced body fat help? Does greater muscular strength help? The list goes on.
I was picked last, or not at all, and sent to "exercise" with the girls. I'd then do a bit of it and bugger off to climb ropes or ladders or exercise otherwise on my own. I was just a bit overweight, I couldn't (and still can't) kick, dribble or throw balls, and was quite unfit. Today I can ride hundreds of kilometres at one go, outpace people 20 years younger and generally keep going when others are falling by the wayside at almost any discipline. I might have been a far better sportsman if only the school did not force stupid team sports like football, basketball and so on. So yeah, it's unfair.
I wouldn't care if someone said I can't participate because I was shit at sports until almost my 40s, or if they insisted I have to compete with women because I grew up "exercising" with girls. So if trans-people want to participate as their gender, I say let them. Once, or rather, if, it ever becomes a problem, then let's think about it. I don't think it will. So live and let live.
I bet you wish you were a little bit taller.
Surely the only opinion that counts is that of female athletes who compete against trans women who were previously male. And I am making the sexist assumption here that women who tansgender to men are not going to be competing at the top level of male sport, or does that argument shoot holes in the assertion that female athletes who previously developed a male body have no inherent muskuloskeletal advantage? I'm now confused...it was all so much easier when the length of competitors socks was what the UCI could focus their attention on.
Surely in saying that's the only opinion that counts, you are pretty much stating an opinion yourself? I'd have thought the whole basis of the argument for including trans women is dependent on the idea that their opinion also counts? If one doesn't think it does, then one logically doesn't think they should be competing?
I don't care about the whole business, though. It's all based on a fiction that there is such a thing as a level playing field in the first place. There are a million reasons why some people might be at a disadvantage and others at an advantage in competition, gender is just one of them (e.g. life long chronic illness or just the wrong genes, or growing up in poverty with poor nutrition, your parents were heavy drinkers before conception and during pregnancy, etc, etc). Why the need to pretend success in such competition is some sort of sign of virtue or worth for everything except gender?
(And, before someone says it, I wasn't picked last in school team games...It was second-to-last, just ahead of the obviously undernourished uncoordinated kid who barely spoke English)
"I see a fairly easy solution" ....." Transgender people could have their own sporting committee...."
simples/easy but for people at the pointy end does it give them "easy" access to play/compete?
Very interesting and thought provoking. I see a fairly easy solution.
Human gender is determined by one's chromosomes:
https://www.britannica.com/science/sex-chromosome
XX people are female whereas XY people are male. A number of intersex variations exist*.
I would propose that in addition to the usual Male and Female classes in sport that we also have Transgender XX and Transgender XY. Transgender people could have their own sporting committee and decide upon a set of rules and guidelines for competition. Something they might want to consider for instance is whether a woman who has transitioned to male and is taking testosterone has an unfair advantage over one who does not.
Good luck to Philippa.
* The former Jethro Tull keyboardist David Palmer was born intersex and his parents decided he should be male. Palmer felt uncomfortable with this all his life and he later transitioned to female becoming Dee Palmer.
They said that about people with disabilities not so many years ago, those who wanted to compete on a level playing field, that enabled greater inclusion than trying to compete with able bodies athletes and indeed greater awareness and understanding and expansion as a whole. Para athletics has moved on massively, why can't transgender in its own right? Look at how the organisers are very particular to group athletes within the categories so there is as level a playing field as possible. Would it be okay to put a T38/38/36 athlete in with a group of T35s knowing full well the T35 athletes would rarely get a look in, no it wouldn't, so this is no different, it's also a genetic choice, not something you're born or have no control over so even more important to classify to have an equitable playing field.
The latest suggestion is that one in every 137 13-17 teen in the US would be considered to be transgender, so around 150,000 just teens alone, so frankly your statement doesn't hold water, not just now but in the future there are more than enough. Also define what 'elite' means, elite in the sense of of what, outright performance?
People with disabilities can be elite athletes but not reach the same numbers as able bodies athletes, though in some cases they exceed their able bodies counterparts. Why does any competition need to be deemed to be elite for it to have validity?
Actually that comes back to my point - there is no 'level playing field' for people with disabilities (or chronic illnesses). The Paraolympics just emphasises that - there must be countless people who are disadvantaged and unable to compete equally in non-disabled sport due to illness or disability but whose conditions don't fit into the specific categories for the paraolympics, being either too severe, too mild, or just too different.
Those categories themselves are constantly disputed and argued over, because of the obvious difficulty of judging which "degree of disability" should compete with which.
I still think the whole problem of 'fairness' is irresolvable because the whole project - of competitive sport - is incoherent and ultimately nonsensical. You'll be arguing over it forever, sports-fans, because you've created a problem with no solution.