Trans Athletes Given Green Light To Compete in Female Category.. World Triathlon

Triathlon Forum
1

World Triathlon’s Executive Board has approved the Transgender Policy, following a period of consultation with the Medical Committee, Athletes Committee, Coaches Committee, Legal & Constitution Committee, Women’s Committee and the Equality, Diversion & Inclusion Commission, as well as multiple experts in the field and the transgender community.

The Policy, that will be put in place in 30 days’ time, states:
“To compete in the female category in an Elite or Age-Group triathlon competition, a Transgender athlete must demonstrate that the concentration of testosterone in the athlete’s serum has been less than 2.5 nmol/L continuously for a period of at least 24 months. Also, at least 48 months must have elapsed since the Transgender athlete has competed as a male in any sporting competition”.

The Transgender Policy was approved by the majority of the Executive Board, with the votes against of Vice President Ian Howard and President of the Athletes Committee Tamas Toth.

“We have been studying this matter for over a year, we have listened to the voices of all World Triathlon stakeholders, and I can only thank all the Committees and Commissions for the detailed work carried out by them to inform this policy. We are a small International Federation, but one that has always had inclusion and gender balance in our DNA. The Policy that we have just approved shows that we are prioritizing the fairness principle but showing inclusiveness. It is fully aligned with the IOC’s recommendation, and similar to what other IFs have done in the last months. We will of course monitor the situation and the evolution of this policy, and we are open to reviewing and discussing it as much as necessary over time, as this subject is still evolving and we need to be flexible”, said World Triathlon President and IOC Member, Marisol Casado.

Among the groups consulted in the last month by World Triathlon are sport scientists including Emma Hilton, Yannis Pitsidalis and Ross Tucker; University experts including Dr. Roger Pielke Jr, Dr. Alun Willims and Dr. Ada Cheung; IOC Human Rights expert Madeleine Pape; IOC advisor Daniel Berezowsky, and transgender athletes including Joanna Harper, Chris Mosier, Rachel McBride, Verity Smith, Patty Actually, Annie Lieberman and Veronica Ivy.

https://www.triathlon.org/news/article/world_triathlon_executive_board_approves_transgender_policy

2

Unscientific madness.

3

4 year stand down period is imo is a minimum fair time period on the elite side of sport on women’s side, especially in regards to late transitioning athletes. Is it “completely” fair? No but I think it’s atleast long enough that 4 year in an elite window is a fairly significant portion of their career and so it’s likely the best “meet in the middle” so that both sides can be somewhat happy with a compromise in what I think is still a very sticky situation.

I’m still not opposed to simply being reclassifying the categories so that all “trans” have to compete in an “open” category and all birth females have that as a category…And yes I know I know there are oddity cases, but I think you get the overall gist of that type of classification.

Essentially would turn into an “open” category (male / trans / whatever designation you wanted to classify one’s self) and a “female birth” category.

(And please dont go into some “your discriminating” with that).

4

I am willing to fight hard for the rights of everyone. I do not consider competing as a woman for someone not born a woman a right.
What I would consider is getting rid of the male/female categories and replacing them with “open” and female. That gives everyone the option to compete. Not necessarily being competitive - but again - that is no right.

5

What is the purpose of that rule? Doesn’t really matter when the athlete last raced in the male category.

How is the athlete continually tested/documented over the 2 years in order to insure their T levels are below the requirement? Does the athlete need to tell World Tri before the start of the 2 years so they can be monitored?

6

In four years time Alex Yee could be competing as a professional female athlete, can anyone honestly say he wouldn’t have any physical competive advantage over the female athletes??

7

Basically, it goes under the Passport program for continual testing of levels, etc. Burden is on you to prove eligibility.

The timeout rule is there to protect against someone qualifying as a male in one Olympic cycle and then attempting to qualify as a female in the next one.

For what it’s worth, in the US, it hasn’t changed anything for age group athletes-- USAT’s policy for is “compete as your gender identity.” But it would limit ability to then go to Worlds, for instance.

8

It says 4 years have to pass since last time you raced as a male in any “sporting competition”. I’m guessing that is any national or sport recognized event.

I would assume it’s the athlete’s responsibility to show their values are within the limits for the 2 year window. IE- WT isn’t going to chase them around, If the athlete fails to show the correct documentation, that’ll be easy for WT to deny.

This especially is at elite level, now every AG athlete in the world? Meh I’m sure some will fall through the cracks, but I think it at lest is an compromise that likely will limit a lot of “high profile” cases being shown to be unfair to women. Ie the Penn swimmer who suddenly raced against the women and won in a very short transition time period (did I read correctly it was one year racing male, next year racing as female). That type of “fairness” controversy is all but eliminated with these types of stand down periods.

9

He absolutely would, but he’d have much more advantage if he competed next year as a woman.

Look I’m all for reclassifying the categories so no T athlete can compete as a birth identified female. I think in our world today this however is about as “fair” of a policy as it could be.

4 year window at elite level is a huge amount of time.

10

Just when I thought we were getting agreements across all forms of athletics on this - with FINA making the first bold step - World Triathlon goes and does this. Madness…

I’m all for people self identifying as what they want, to live the way they want, to feel respected for who they are / who they feel they are - fill yer boots…

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

11

He absolutely would, but he’d have much more advantage if he competed next year as a woman.

Look I’m all for reclassifying the categories so no T athlete can compete as a birth identified female. I think in our world today this however is about as “fair” of a policy as it could be.

4 year window at elite level is a huge amount of time.

I’m agreeing with this take.

Do I prefer the Britain Triathlon policy that is based on chromosomes, with a female (XX) division and an open division? Yes, I do. I think it is more fair and clear cut.

But is this World Triathlon rule a move in a direction toward inclusion that is likely going to help avoid a wild-west situation like the Lia Thomas debacle? Also yes.

12

Just when I thought we were getting agreements across all forms of athletics on this - with FINA making the first bold step - World Triathlon goes and does this. Madness…

I’m all for people self identifying as what they want, to live the way they want, to feel respected for who they are / who they feel they are - fill yer boots…

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

Thank you.

We discussed this topic many times. My suggestion as a female stakeholder (still going for that kona slot) would be that the first-place transgender woman share first place on the podium with the first-place biological female. Someone suggested in the past that there be an asterick placed next to the transgender woman. Both are included, and no one is pushed off the podium or loses out on a world title, gold medal, kona slot (have an extra slot for the transgender women if she placed high enough for one). I realize there is no easy answer, and someone will have a reason why my suggestion doesn’t work.

13

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

Thank you.

My suggestion as a female stakeholder (still going for that kona slot) would be that the first-place transgender woman share first place on the podium with the first-place biological female. Someone suggested in the past that there be an asterick placed next to the transgender woman.

This is the proposed solution that I never see happening.

Either it will be the Britain Triathlon model (no XY humans in XX races) or it will be the World Triathlon model (XY can race with XX humans but they are going to jump years of hoops first), but once they are let into the field they won’t be treated as second class by sharing podium spots or having asterisks next to their names. Once they are in, there will be no scarlet letters. Not as a matter of policy, anyway.

14

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

Thank you.

My suggestion as a female stakeholder (still going for that kona slot) would be that the first-place transgender woman share first place on the podium with the first-place biological female. Someone suggested in the past that there be an asterick placed next to the transgender woman.

This is the proposed solution that I never see happening.

Either it will be the Britain Triathlon model (no XY humans in XX races) or it will be the World Triathlon model (XY can race with XX humans but they are going to jump years of hoops first), but once they are let into the field they won’t be treated as second class by sharing podium spots or having asterisks next to their names. Once they are in, there will be no scarlet letters. Not as a matter of policy, anyway.

“second class”, “scarlet letters”. That is not the intention. A transgender woman is not a biological woman. No one is saying the TG woman is second class. It just means she is not a biological female. It means she has different chromosomes, different genetic makeup, different anatomy, different heart size, different lung size, different bone density, different aging process (no menopause), etc etc. No one is saying a transgender woman is less of a person, just not exactly the same as a biological female.

15

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

Thank you.

My suggestion as a female stakeholder (still going for that kona slot) would be that the first-place transgender woman share first place on the podium with the first-place biological female. Someone suggested in the past that there be an asterick placed next to the transgender woman.

This is the proposed solution that I never see happening.

Either it will be the Britain Triathlon model (no XY humans in XX races) or it will be the World Triathlon model (XY can race with XX humans but they are going to jump years of hoops first), but once they are let into the field they won’t be treated as second class by sharing podium spots or having asterisks next to their names. Once they are in, there will be no scarlet letters. Not as a matter of policy, anyway.

“second class”, “scarlet letters”. That is not the intention. A transgender woman is not a biological woman. No one is saying the TG woman is second class. It just means she is not a biological female. It means she has different chromosomes, different genetic makeup, different anatomy, different heart size, different lung size, different bone density, different aging process (no menopause), etc etc. No one is saying a transgender woman is less of a person, just not exactly the same as a biological female.

100% agree, however some people lose their minds over this scientific fact! Can’t have hurt feelings…

16

What’s interesting in our world is, which is more important fair play or inclusion? I honestly think this is simply organizations best response to the pressure and anxiety of being marked as non-inclusive. So I think this is the best middle ground that sorta covers both side of the fence all while organizations can then say how inclusive they are, and all rejoice over it.

And again that has nothing to do with suggesting anyone can’t compete or that T athletes are second class citizens. I think the idea of “fair play” most certainly should be part of the conversation in terms of sports.

17

What’s interesting in our world is, which is more important fair play or inclusion?Interesting indeed. Philosophically, there’s a lot to unravel there. Not to mention, who gets to define “inclusion”?

18

4 year window at elite level is a huge amount of time.It serves to diminish the likelihood the transitioner is an opportunist, but it’s still fundamentally unfair. There’s no way to Harrison Bergeron this into something that works.

Also, the guidelines around testosterone would seem to imply that biological women with naturally higher testosterone levels that exceed the guidelines should be competing as males. Doesn’t seem like a desirable outcome, but I’m not one of the giant science-minds dreaming up this transparent nonsense.

19

But when it effects the outcome of racing, when biological females are pushed off the podium, miss the team cut off etc due to a biological male taking that spot - its not on.

Thank you.

My suggestion as a female stakeholder (still going for that kona slot) would be that the first-place transgender woman share first place on the podium with the first-place biological female. Someone suggested in the past that there be an asterick placed next to the transgender woman.

This is the proposed solution that I never see happening.

Either it will be the Britain Triathlon model (no XY humans in XX races) or it will be the World Triathlon model (XY can race with XX humans but they are going to jump years of hoops first), but once they are let into the field they won’t be treated as second class by sharing podium spots or having asterisks next to their names. Once they are in, there will be no scarlet letters. Not as a matter of policy, anyway.

“second class”, “scarlet letters”. That is not the intention. A transgender woman is not a biological woman. No one is saying the TG woman is second class. It just means she is not a biological female. It means she has different chromosomes, different genetic makeup, different anatomy, different heart size, different lung size, different bone density, different aging process (no menopause), etc etc. No one is saying a transgender woman is less of a person, just not exactly the same as a biological female.

Yeah, competition is no place to be sorting people based on ability, genetics, and life choices. I don’t get to stand on the podium because I believe I should. I don’t get to pick my age group based on my testosterone levels. It’s absolute insanity that we allow a choice in the most fundamental division in competition, especially given the consensus view of retained advantage no matter the length of testosterone suppression.

I’m not belittling someone by asking them to race in their age group, or saying they’re not allowed to race the pro start if they’re not a pro, but as soon as I ask them to race as their biological sex then that’s unfair?

20

that makes sense…wonder what Heather Swanson’s testosterone levels were two weeks from transitioning:
.