As Glen, a man
Scroll down to the headline Transgender runner row loses sight of what race is all about to read the column I’m talking about.
Glenique Frank ran the London Marathon as a woman, placing 6,160th in a female field of 20,123. Pretty much no one would have known about this had the BBC not singled her out for interview. It then emerged that Glenique had run the New York City Marathon recently as Glen, a man. She is transgender and had been permitted to self-identify. This troubled Mara Yamauchi, a former British Olympian. “Nearly 14,000 women finished in a worse position because of him,” she said. “It’s wrong and unfair.”
Wrong and unfair how? Because “Glenique” ran in the women’s race. He’s not a woman. It’s very simple and easy to grasp.
Certainly, if Frank were denying a place or commercial earnings to professional female athletes, it would be. UK Athletics has issued a blanket ban, excluding those who have gone through male puberty from female events. And that is understandable.
No, it’s not understandable. That makes it sound as if excluding men from women’s athletics were a bad thing to do but understandable because blah blah. Excluding men from women’s anything is not a bad thing to do. Women don’t need anybody’s fucking understanding.
Yet surely there comes a point where competitive priorities are overtaken by the need for inclusion; and if there is ever an event that can accommodate both, it is the London Marathon.
No. No, there isn’t. No, there is no point where wanting to have fair competition is “overtaken” by the “need” for women to include men in women’s sports. Have your own damn inclusion but leave women alone. You need inclusion? Go include someone in your kitchen or bathroom or bedroom, but don’t do this smug vicarious “women have to be inclusive of men so that I can feel generous” thing. It’s revolting.
There may be a woman greatly troubled by finishing 6,161st because Frank participated, but maybe we could balance that with what we know of transgender suicide rates, and instances of anxiety and depression, and recognise the importance of not feeling isolated.
Or, we could not do that. We could go on letting women have women’s marathons because of what we know of women being human beings too just like trans people. We could say no to smug men who kick back and tell women to be inclusive because self-abnegation is what women are for.
“Some people say that if males are on the podium it matters, but not if they finish lower down,” Yamauchi said. “What this effectively says is that women and girls who are not that good at sport don’t deserve fairness.”
No, what it says is that trying to create a sport that is welcoming for all may be bigger than barring a community so that the 6,160th finisher gets her due.
A community? Men who want to race in women’s marathons are a community now?
Here’s a shocker. If they’re a community, so are women. If trans people are a community, so are women. Why does the community of women have to give up women’s rights for the sake of a different community? Why do women always have to be told to be kind be generous be self-sacrificing be sweet be welcoming to all? Why do women have to welcome men in their sports at all ever?
Sorry mate, Glen or Glenique just doesn’t have the same ring to it.
I assume that the London Marathon is like most marathons, with everyone running together but results reported by class. So why is it so important to him to place 6000 or so among women rather than, say, 9471 among men? Isn’t finishing the race the real achievement here?
What a Maroon @2: I had that same thought, and then realized that this would actually be an excellent opportunity for a new category (or, really, two new categories). Let transmen and transwomen run as such, and report their times distinct from the male and female categories. Assuming the 1% rule applies here, that’d be about 200 transwomen and likewise for transmen–surely, that’s a large enough pool to measure yourself against?
And, of course, there’s a further issue, here–if Glenique (seriously, that’s the best ‘feminization’ of Glen the runner could come up with?) had come in first in the women’s category–a position with genuine bragging rights that even this popinjay should’ve been able to perceive–how would the author respond?
Hell, he even notes, accidentally, part of the problem here. Why did the Beeb single out someone with so mediocre a ranking, if not for Glenique’s trans status? The top runners in each category get names in the paper, and usually in big-city marathons, there’s someone doing a story on the grit and determination that it takes to be the person in last place and still push on to cross the damned line. But no one would give two flying fucks about Glenique’s perspective on the race if it weren’t for the ‘ique’ factor.
In some of the races I enter there is a separate class for trans/non-binary, and they are all men. I could be guaranteed a “first” if I registered as T/NB in my age group, but I just don’t feel the need.
I don’t think that would satisfy him, though.
The London marathon is a time-classified race. In order to be considered for entry, you need to demonstrate a qualifying time that meets the class standard. So he is patently wrong that allowing a male body to finish 6000th or so has no effect. It still pulls the standard upward to the detriment of a woman wishing to qualify.