Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

UCI world cyclocross championships under fire due to anti-trans laws in host state Arkansas

Cycling journalist Tara Seplavy has boycotted the event, saying she doesn’t “feel personally safe going to Arkansas right now as a visibly trans person”

As the world cyclocross championships come to a close this evening, the UCI’s decision to stage the event in Fayetteville, Arkansas has come under fire due to the state’s anti-trans legislation.

In April 2021, Arkansas became the first state to ban gender-affirming treatments and surgery for transgender youth. Later that month Brook Watts, a longstanding cyclocross promoter in the United States, resigned from his role as organiser of the Fayetteville world championships in protest against the new law. 

“The situation in Arkansas remains problematic and unfortunately, I don’t see any satisfactory resolution,” Watts said at the time. “I have sincerely but unsuccessfully attempted to work out my concerns and differences with constituents. However, regrettably, we were not successful”.

At the US national cyclocross championships in December, anti-trans activists representing a group called ‘Save Women’s Sport’ staged a protest, shouting and holding signs opposing transgender participation during the women’s race. 

USA Cycling was heavily criticised for not taking adequate action to prevent the protest taking place at the event in DuPage County, Illinois, with trans rights supporters saying that the governing body did not facilitate a safe and inclusive environment for all competitors and spectators.

> British Cycling launch consultation on transgender policy

Tara Seplavy, the deputy editor of Bicycling Magazine, referenced the protest in Illinois when she announced on social media yesterday that she was boycotting this weekend’s world championships.

“For several reasons I don’t feel personally safe going to Arkansas right now as a visibly trans person,” she wrote. “I also do not feel comfortable rewarding USA Cycling for its continued lack of action or follow-up for allowing a hate group to attend US national championship events to harass athletes. I am not even sure if I will tune in to watch the races online at this point to be frank.

“The ship sailed moons ago on any type of boycott or direct action of the event. Instead of attending Worlds, I urge friends and followers to donate to organizations fighting against hate legislation in the state, doing work for the queer community in the region, or advocating for the rights of trans athletes in cycling.”

Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.

Add new comment

299 comments

Avatar
sparrowlegs replied to nosferatu1001 | 2 years ago
0 likes

If I read that right, Caitlyn is saying someone who transitioned before puberty is ok to compete but someone who transitioned after puberty isn't? So a distinction between pre-pubescent trans women and post-pubescent trans women? Again, pointing to if someone has or has not been exposed to testosterone.

Caster Samenya is DSD or intersex, she was born "46 XY DSD", a condition that causes the growth of testes and therefore a higher testosterone level. You are conflating gender and sex.

So if the way forward isn't easy for ways to define the boundaries and keep sport fair for everyone then surely it's better to keep it as it is until the fairest way forward is found. Until then, athletes will compete in their biological marker defined catagories. Also, every athlete is tested to see if their testosterone levels (amongst other PEDs) are within fair limits already. 

Also, we have weight divisions in boxing, that is correct, again, it's fairly crude but it's a way of creating fairness. We do not allow males to fight females, so that argument is mute. You might as well say, here's a car with 4 wheels (car A), here's another with 4 wheels (car B). Let's race them on a smooth tarmac track and the winner recieves lots of money. Car A is a F1 car, car B is a F2 car. Which is more than likely got the advantage? Is that fair?

Avatar
mdavidford replied to sparrowlegs | 2 years ago
1 like
sparrowlegs wrote:

that argument is mute.

Seems like it's anything but...

Avatar
sparrowlegs replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
0 likes

Haha! I put that in there to test you are reading that far down  1

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to sparrowlegs | 2 years ago
0 likes

https://theconversation.com/ten-ethical-flaws-in-the-caster-semenya-deci...
item three may be of interest, to point out the flaws in this rulin and your position. 

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to sparrowlegs | 2 years ago
0 likes

"Moot", not  mute. 

she is now, having lost, trying to row back on her position seemingly taken due to the gop being, amongst other issues, transphobic. 

Caster semenya IS a woman, she is legally female, was identified as female at birth, and has always lived as a woman. You are the person confusing sex and gender, as I am talking gender, you again want to try to involve sex when that's a different topic. 
 

again, still waiting for you to define "biological female", or as you are now confusingly trying to call "biological marker defined categories" when you already know - because we've shown you - there is no such thing. That rather inconvenience fact is one you keep on pretending doesn't exist, as it rather destroys your argument. Only a truly ignorant bigot would think a pair of chromosomes adequately defines biological sex or gender, yet you appear to be doing so.  
 

Yes, we can keep it as it is if you want! That means a woman competes with women, and men compete with men, and NB compete with....ooops. GF compete with... oops. So the actual route is to keep applying pressure to work out how to define sports in a way that is more fair to all.  Not just the mob rule we have now. 
 

it seems the point about boxing went over you, again. There, we have a division based not solely on gender, but on weight. It is crude, but it's acknowledging not everyone is equal even with a supposed gender binary that doesn't exist and never has existed , and has only been forced upon by a mostly white patriarchal western society, usually Christian of some form. Your point about eh F1 car works for me, not you....

Avatar
sparrowlegs replied to nosferatu1001 | 2 years ago
0 likes

So we are now down to pointing out spelling mistakes?

Regardless about Caster Samenya, she is NOT a trans woman, so lets leave her out of any of this. Using her as an example helps me more as she has been exposed to testosterone all her life and we can see the results of that from her results.

Boxing isn't based on sex is it not? Best tell Clarissa Shields as she had "GWOAT" on her shorts. If you think boxing isn't based on sex then you are a fool. Get the best trans male against the best non trans male boxers in any weight and the trans male would be destroyed. And yes, I understand I've used the social constructs of trans male and non trans male and it'll be obvious to everyone why but no doubt you'll argue that point too.

Again, using NB and GF terms is conflating gender with sex and continue to do so.

You still haven't answered my question, do you think it's fair for trans women to compete directly with non trans women in sports? 

Leah Thomas, is it fair she competes against non trans females?

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to sparrowlegs | 2 years ago
0 likes

No, it was simply correcting something that people get wrong. Or are you saying you knew it was "moot" and not "mute"?

No, she is a woman who is a woman, that the IAAF have decided to not let compete with women unless she does something doctors will not do... and you did t even read the article, and this is obvious because it shows that *no one knows if her levels of testosterone have had any effect* at all. That, SHOCK, you don't seem to understand about how different peoples bodies react - or don't react - to testosterone  PROVE here results are sue to testosterone  PROVE IT.  You've made this claim so prove it  

 So, again, your conclusion is faulty! Again, you've failed to actually understand the nuance of a situation - that shock, gender and biology are more complex than you care to acknowledge, and your reductionist viewpoint is hopelessly crude and outdated 

Dear Flying Spaghetti Monster, do you try to be this obtuse or does it come naturally  I have tried every way I can think of to show that sport already acknowledges gender is not the only way to categorise competitors and that they have tried to use some crude measures - literally, weight - in an attempt to do so. Yet you just show absolutely no ability to comprehend that fact  it's stunning.  
 

NB and GF are not conflating gender and sex. You're the one crudely trying to talk about sex. In this context, the IAAF have since 2000 used gender, and not any concept of "sex", for which area a competitor competes in.  Except when they don't .

How do YOU define a "biological female"? What are these "biological marker defined categories" ? Come on, answer for once. Give it a try  

I think it can be fair for someone to compete against someone else, and sometimes it is unfair. That precisely answers your question, but sadly for you, I've added nuance to make it less offensive and stupid. 

Avatar
peted76 replied to sparrowlegs | 2 years ago
0 likes
sparrowlegs wrote:

I've been called bigot, anti-trans, TERF and genital fetishist. That was a new one but I'm sure I'd seen it somewhere else and then it occurred to me...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385.amp

You can say you agree with trans people having the same rights as the gender they identify as in every way except sports but that's not good enough. 

That BBC published article seems to be publishing an 'ideal' where individuals can be criticised for free thought. 

I have never read anything like it. 

I believe it's promoting (by publicising) that if I  were to rebuff another person's advances I can be accused of being 'whatever-phobic' and being predjudice against that person's 'tribe'. 

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
1 like

That article has been widely criticised, mostly because they deliberately selected an anti-trans group (the LGB alliance, who's stated aims are anti+trans ) to draw their "sample" from. 
 

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/lesbians-stand-trans-women-open...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/british-media-your-bigotry-is-kill...

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19695689.bbc-removes-lily-cade-article...

hate group info: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGB_Alliance

 

Avatar
peted76 replied to nosferatu1001 | 2 years ago
0 likes

Glad to see it criticised, not glad to see it still available online and used on other sites to promote further news around whatever point they are trying to make. 

Regardless of the poor excuse for journalism, I'm reeling that the article published is suggesting by content a world of censorship and repressed speech.

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
0 likes
peted76 wrote:

Glad to see it criticised, not glad to see it still available online and used on other sites to promote further news around whatever point they are trying to make. 

Regardless of the poor excuse for journalism, I'm reeling that the article published is suggesting by content a world of censorship and repressed speech.

they gave a terrible response to the criticism as well, defending the decision to pick an anti trans group in a bizarre way.

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... | 2 years ago
3 likes

And just to chuck another one in... when did the world get so weird about toilets and changing rooms? In the 90s when the trendy clubs started building unisex toilets, me and my mates didn't feel unsafe in them AND the queues were shorter.

The problems were being grinded from behind by someone with erection on the dance floor and working out if you could slap them and grouping with your mates in the taxi queue so some random bloke couldn't pick off the drunkest.

To my recollection, these incidents were generally carried out by individuals presenting accoutrements culturally associated as male though as rule I didn't perform a chromosome test, check their genitalia (though there was a clue with grinding), perform an internal scan to check their internal machinery or request blood hormonal tests. So could not be sure.

Edit. Yes, I needed to find better clubs. And I did. Gay clubs and metal clubs had a much better vibe.

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to JustTryingToGetFromAtoB | 2 years ago
3 likes

Thus, really!

metal clubs are well known for not tolerating the crap that more mainstream clubs would, and with gay clubs they don't usually have the same consent issues re women, although some do for men when it comes to being hands-y just because yiu don't have a top on...

A favourite quote for me is "if you know the genitals of the person in the cubicle next to you, they're not the one with the problem" 

There is a problem in sport with the perceived default split and, rather than trying to shoe horn peopl,e into one or the other it's time for a ground up rethink of the outcome you're trying to achieve and devise a system to implement that. 

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... | 2 years ago
1 like

Dammit, responding to a Godwin's Law thread but fuck it, here's my head above the parapet. Yes, I'd support desegregation of prisons. It's way down the list of changes that are needed in prisons but if the specific question is whether I would support it it then yes, I would. There would be a lot of advantages to the prisoners and to society as a whole.

Of course women's prisons are not fully desegregated right now. Do you think women prisoners are more scared of trans-women prisoners or cis-Male guards?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to JustTryingToGetFromAtoB | 2 years ago
1 like
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote:

Do you think women prisoners are more scared of trans-women prisoners or cis-Male guards?

Probably either Queen Bea or Joan Ferguson

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
1 like

True dat

Avatar
brooksby | 2 years ago
0 likes

Two hundred and fifteen comments??? 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to brooksby | 2 years ago
3 likes
brooksby wrote:

Two hundred and fifteen comments??? 

Wrong! Two hundred and sixteen now

Avatar
mdavidford replied to brooksby | 2 years ago
5 likes

Only about 25 comments, but some of them lots of times.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
2 likes
mdavidford wrote:

Only about 25 comments, but some of them lots of times.

Is it "everything there is to be said has been said - but it hasn't been said by everybody" or just the Paxman interview (the same question and same answer repeated with minor rephrasings)?

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to chrisonabike | 2 years ago
1 like

Rich asked the same irrelevant question about ten times, and is now running off somewhere in a huff. 
235 comments I believe. 

Avatar
mdavidford replied to chrisonabike | 2 years ago
0 likes
chrisonatrike wrote:
mdavidford wrote:

Only about 25 comments, but some of them lots of times.

Is it "everything there is to be said has been said - but it hasn't been said by everybody" or just the Paxman interview (the same question and same answer repeated with minor rephrasings)?

Well it now seems to be more like:

"You're a farty-pants!"

"No - you're a farty-pants!!"

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
0 likes
mdavidford wrote:
chrisonatrike wrote:
mdavidford wrote:

Only about 25 comments, but some of them lots of times.

Is it "everything there is to be said has been said - but it hasn't been said by everybody" or just the Paxman interview (the same question and same answer repeated with minor rephrasings)?

Well it now seems to be more like:

"You're a farty-pants!"

"No - you're a farty-pants!!"

Old but still good, Gary Larson.

 

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... | 2 years ago
3 likes

When Godwin's Law has been met, it's definitely time to close the comments.

Though I'd argue we were well past that with the 'in what way are trans-women women' commentary.

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to JustTryingToGetFromAtoB | 2 years ago
2 likes
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote:

When Godwin's Law has been met, it's definitely time to close the comments. Though I'd argue we were well past that with the 'in what way are trans-women women' commentary.

its sadly an accurate comparison to make - a large amount of the European based research in this area was destroyed deliberately in the 1930s and 40s. It's an especially sensitive topic as sometimes it feels like the forgotten victims are those wearing the pink triangle. 

Avatar
peted76 | 2 years ago
1 like

Well after two long days and six pages of mainly the same people having a good'ol fashioned internet punch up, I've learned three things. 

1) The meaning of the term cisgender and the history of the term. And that the word 'cisgender' was put into the Oxford English dictionary in 2015 (it made me feel old and or blinkered that I just learnt this).

2) The amazing insult 'TERF' and it's very woke meaning, knowing this makes me feel like I'm down with the uni kids. 

3) That we're not quite the hive mind or echo chamber that I sometimes think we are here at road.cc, (which is absolutley a good thing because we'd never learn or grow otherwise). 

.. anyway.. I find agreeing with Badgers is probably the best way forward as they are ferocious little buggers. 

Avatar
nosferatu1001 replied to peted76 | 2 years ago
3 likes

TERF was actually coined by the hate group, and they've since decided it's an insult.  Or they're proud. It's hard to tell. It is however a useful piece of short hand for a group of bigots. 

Avatar
MsG | 2 years ago
0 likes

Are the road.cc mods taking bets on which side will give up first? Have you run out of popcorn yet?

Avatar
mdavidford replied to MsG | 2 years ago
1 like
MsG wrote:

Are the road.cc mods taking bets on which side will give up first? Have you run out of popcorn yet?

Probably having a sweepstake on how many comments it can get to before the whole site goes for a few hours lie down.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to mdavidford | 2 years ago
1 like
mdavidford wrote:
MsG wrote:

Are the road.cc mods taking bets on which side will give up first? Have you run out of popcorn yet?

Probably having a sweepstake on how many comments it can get to before the whole site goes for a few hours lie down.

Got a hot tip for ya....

Pages

Latest Comments