Paul Kent: Transgender ban in women’s sport can’t be sidelined by weaponised words

Those arguing for the inclusion of transgender women on the basis of equality are either deliberately distorting the argument or lost in a hopeless state of denial, PAUL KENT writes.

Of course FINA was correct to ban transgender women from competing against women.

Of course the IAAF and FIFA should be reviewing their policies.

And why the NRL has not already come out and announced its own ban, on the back of the International Rugby League’s confirmation that it was banning transgender players from this year’s World Cup, makes you wonder whether the NRL is as agile on its feet as it claims to be.

As for the rest of us, all those arguing for the inclusion of transgender women on the basis of equality are either deliberately skewing the argument, lost in a hopeless state of denial, or are still proudly displaying their participation ribbon from the primary school sack relay.

Elite sport is not a participation exercise.

International Rugby League has banned transgender players from the World Cup, but the NRL is yet to announce its stance.

If this whole issue was really about an equal opportunity in sport, that men transitioning to women have no physical advantage over men, as they claim, then why aren’t women who transition to men also finding a place on the podium?

If the opportunities were equal, shouldn’t it go both ways?

Too often now the advocates for this ideology weaponise their words, intimidating those who dare speak against them.

They put themselves at risk of being labelled a bigot, in a world where only the accusation needs to be made nowadays.

Equality Australia boss Anna Brown, for instance, argued the decision to ban transgender athletes was a dangerous precedent, an increasingly common phrase designed to drive an emotional response.

For whom?

I would argue the decision allowing transgender women to compete against men is the dangerous precedent. Potentially it could corrupt women’s sport forever.

Brown’s entire argument had little connection to the reality of sport, which is very different to society’s realities.

Equality Australia boss Anna Brown. Picture: Keri Megelus

As World Athletics president Sebastian Coe said, “We have always believed that biology trumps gender.”

FINA has opened the door for other sports to walk through. Cate Campbell, if she wasn’t already, is something of a national hero after her FINA speech seeking to protect the competitive integrity of her sport.

It was a brave moment backed by nothing but the knowledge she was right.

Campbell knew like much of the rest of the sporting world the inherent advantages transgender athletes possess.

American Lia Thomas was ranked 554th in the 500-yard freestyle in the NCAA college system when she swam as a man.

She transitioned, though, took the hormones and won the NCAA 500-yard freestyle gold in March, beating US Olympic silver medallist Emma Weyant by 1.75 seconds.

Thomas can still swim competitively in FINA events but must now swim in the “open” category, which is where men will compete.

Transgender women who have been through puberty as a male have significant physical advantages.

They have greater bone density, greater muscle mass, greater lung capacity, and, in the case of swimming, bigger hands and feet which act as paddles through the water.

Olympic champion Cate Campbell amplified her standing as a national hero with her speech. Picture: Josh Woning

Brown and her advocates overlook all this, in the name of equality.

Simply, the dictionary says equality is: “the state of being equal, especially in status, rights or opportunities.”

Organisations like Equality Australia fight the battle on status and rights with no thought to opportunities.

How many women, born a woman, will be denied a place in a final, or a place on the podium, because they failed to have the physical advantage of being born a man?

It is a selective argument built on selective classifications.

If it was really an equal opportunity, let’s ask it again: why aren’t women who transition to men also finding a place on the podium?

When has one even made a final?

Already FIFA and the IAAF have announced they will review their policies. Cycling’s governing world body, the UCI, has already passed rules allowing transgender women to compete in women’s events.

Rugby league is different to all those, though, given it is a contact sport.

Transgender swimmer Lia Thomas.

It adds an extra dimension to the argument, although one that should make the decision easier.

World Rugby already acknowledged this in 2020. A commissioned study showed there was a “20 to 30 per cent” increase in injury risk if transgender women were allowed.

The report, though, was not accepted as a scientific paper.

Still, transgender women were banned from playing women’s rugby.

Whenever I have asked NRLW players their thoughts on playing against a transgender athlete the response is always the same.

Firstly, they blanch, momentarily pausing for words as a dozen ugly headlines swiftly wash across their faces.

They are terrified of being quoted and attached to a controversy they don’t need, from a game yet to support them.

Then they say it would be kind of a safety issue, and that transgender women would have a significant advantage in the physicality of the game, and well …

You can say it ain’t so, but Gorden Tallis in a sports bra with a shot of oestrogen, would still be Gorden Tallis.

Originally published as Paul Kent: Transgender ban in women’s sport can’t be sidelined by weaponised words