Delighted that my research article 'Female Olympians’ voices: Female sports categories and International Olympic Committee Transgender guidelines' is just published in the International Review for the Sociology of Sport:
I would like to thank nineteen female Olympic athletes for taking the time to generously contribute
to this research since without them this work would not have been possible.
'These Olympians agreed with the IOC’s overarching fairness principle but, in common with some ex-elite transwomen athletes, did not think evidence regarding
male advantage mitigation via testosterone suppression supports IOC 2015 transgender
guidelines.'
'Further, they did not accept fairness for females should be subordinated to inclusion for transwomen, and consequently regarded IOC guidelines as unfit for purpose.'
'Justice entails the recognition of females as equal moral agents, also and at the same time with distinctly
female sexed bodies, in order that the fastest highest and strongest females are celebrated at elite and Olympic levels.'
In the words of two athletes:
‘Our human rights to equal opportunities (are) not being protected’
‘Why don’t women matter?’
@iocmedia
The main findings include (1) these athletes thought both female and transgender athletes should be fairly included in elite sport, (2) unanimous agreement there is not enough scientific evidence to show no competitive advantage for transwomen...
...(3) unanimous agreement that the IOC should revisit the rules and scientific evidence for transgender inclusion in female categories, and (4) the majority of athletes felt that they could not ask questions or discuss this issue without being accused of transphobia.
Oh dear.
Four gender identitarian @UN_SPExperts are still attempting to justify the inclusion of biological males in female sport categories.
The misinformation abounds.
Let's take a look.
Claim 1: The 2021 IOC Framework 'remains an important normative reference point.'
Reality: The 2026 IOC Policy 'replaces all previous IOC statements on this matter, including the [2021] Framework'. olympics.com/ioc/news/inter…
Claim 2: Some sports 'have adopted or announced eligibility regimes that rely on mandatory genetic sex testing ... for participation in the women’s category'.
Reality: The women's category is for females. There must be a simple & robust process for determining who is female.
This article is complete nonsense.
Dedicated female sport categories uphold the human rights of female athletes to equality & non-discrimination in sport.
But these 'human rights experts' are opposed to this.
They are advocating for males in female sport. share.google/G2fme2RIjdWWY7…
Claim: 'binary definitions of sex reinforce harmful stereotypes'
Reality: sex is binary, but pretending some men are women erases sex and with it women's rights to equality & non-discrimination in sport as compared with men.
Claim: 'Best available data … shows ... transgender women receiving gender-affirming hormone therapy are not meaningfully different from cisgender women in key performance-related measures such as muscle mass, strength, body composition ...'
Reality: this is just untrue.
Dear @lisanandy, please do your job. 1. As the Supreme Court has clarified, female sport categories must be just that, female only. 2. The gateway condition for eligibility for a female sport category is being female. telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/…
3. Single sex sport is lawful under S195 if the sport is sex-affected. 4. Single sex sport is also lawful under Schedule 3 even if the sport is not sex affected but female people are under-represented, because this is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
'The Culture Secretary said there were some sports in which it was “perfectly possible to include everybody” and still keep competition both safe and fair.'
Yes. Where the horse does the work.
For all others, you have misunderstood the Supreme Court ruling. See above 1, 2, 3, 4.
Misleading article.
Claim 1: 'the Court were tasked with defining the meaning of the words for the strict purpose of understanding the EA in relation to gender representation on public boards'.
Reality: The Court clarified the meaning of sex for the purposes of the Equality Act.
It found:
'The meaning of the terms “sex”, “man” and “woman” in the EA 2010 is biological and not certificated sex. Any other interpretation would render the EA 2010 incoherent and impracticable to operate' pg. 86
The Supreme Court,
'examination of the language of the EA 2010, its context and purpose, demonstrate that the words “sex”, “woman” and “man” in sections 11 and 212(1) mean (and were always intended to mean) biological sex, biological woman and biological man' pg. 83.
TW 'transitioned during lockdown at 62 years old after living the majority of her life as her assigned sex at birth.'
"I need to wear a female swimming costume despite having to compete with the men, which 'outs' me as a woman who is transgender."
Really? readingchronicle.co.uk/news/25241452.…
Is it likely that a male who 'fully transitions' at 62 will 'pass' as female?
I think not.
In any case, I presume the Open category permits females to 'compete up' & so if this TW does 'pass' surely the gents will assume this is the case.
Then:
"I came second in that race."
"The woman who came first was a whole length ahead of me. She broke the European record; she's an excellent swimmer.
"This is not a trans person coming in and nicking places from other people."
What about the woman who should have come 2nd?
'The new rules come in to play on April 1 and allow transgender women to feature in amateur competitions if they have had reduced testosterone levels for at least a year.'
FFS.
Bunch of sexist dinosaurs. dailymail.co.uk/sport/football…
'20 transgender women are currently registered to play amateur football in England, and they can continue to do so if their testosterone levels have been below 5nmol per litre for at least 12 months'.
'Transgender women (male-born individuals who identify as women) with suppressed testosterone retain muscle mass, strength, and other physical advantages compared to females; male performance advantage cannot be eliminated with testosterone suppression'. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sm…