Judy Murray and “I’m not transphobic“
Out canvassing for the Labour Party before this year’s General Election, I often encountered a common phrase – “I am not racist, but.”
Then came a monologue about stopping the boats, how people from other countries were a drain on our economy and were intending to “steal our jobs”.
So, when I read an article published in The Telegraph with Judy Murray (mother of the tennis players Andy and James Murray) calling out trans women in female sport while insisting she is not transphobic, I wondered if she knows what the definition of transphobia is?
For new readers to my blog, let’s clarify the definition of transphobia from the United Nations Free and Equal website. It reads: “Any form of prejudice or hostile attitude towards transgender people, including denying their gender identity or refusing to acknowledge it”.
Judy is then quoted as saying, “I feel the same way about our spaces in general. Yet, as soon as you speak out, you get jumped on by some trans activists who will accuse you of being transphobic, which I’m certainly not“.
OK…sorted. Judy says she is not transphobic. Let’s leave it there, but….
Firstly, who is Judy Murray talking about?
Firstly, who is Judy Murray talking about? For the fact is no trans women are competing in elite sports in the UK or, indeed, as far as I know, globally. So why bring the subject up at all?
Testosterone-suppressed, estrogen-induced trans women are effectively banned from pretty much all sports at an elite level simply because they can’t physically compete in the new “open category” that many sports have introduced to be “inclusive” – LOL.
The label “Open Category” is short-hand for the men’s category but with a new name.
Sure, the odd trans woman gets to kick a ball around in a five-a-side, but that’s pretty much it. There is loads of science available proving that testosterone-suppressed trans women who have taken estrogen for more than two years have no (or at least minimal advantage) over cisgender women, but getting the sports federations to listen is another issue – and is the public ready for trans women athletes yet?
Sadly, not.
Society is not “ready” for trans people ‘full stop’. There are no trans women or men MPs, none in the House of Lords, and none leading big business….the list goes on and on and on. Indeed, many trans people can’t even get a job. Being trans carries a stigma, just like people with HIV, and the sad fact is one in three employers admit they are unlikely to employ a trans person.
Trans people are the pariahs of society, third-class citizens, just like gay folk were in the 1970s and 80s – that is precisely why the country needs trans activists fighting for acceptance – trans liberation.
Apparently, Judy Murray is suggesting that competitors in women’s sports should be swab tested to check their biological sex – the problem being that in the 1990s, that method was abandoned because it wasn’t reliable. Nor did it ever “discover” a trans woman, but it did ensure that women with DSD (all black, needless to say) got eliminated from competing.
Training for years only to find you “not woman enough” must be gutting.
And exactly where do you draw the line?
And exactly where do you draw the line? What about women with PCOS who produce more performance-enhancing testosterone than other women? In tests of ninety Swedish female Olympians, 37% (some four times the national average) had PCOS – do they get banned too?
The problem with sports is the words “fair” and “unfair” are subjective, and in reality, we pick and choose what suits us best – turning “a blind eye” to the biggest cheat of all, that of “financial doping”.
The UK is a master at that; we have been buying Olympic medals since 1996 after a disastrous performance in Atlanta, which resulted in just one gold medal – skip forward to 2012 and the Olympic Games in London, and we won twenty-nine. This was thanks to the National Lottery and those words we dont EVER mention – “financial doping.”
Our preferred term is “investment” – in India, with a population twenty times that of the UK, they have only ever won IN TOTAL, forty-one Olympic medals. In India, they call investment “cheating”.
And let’s not forget that trans women have been eligible to compete in the Olympic games since 2004. Since then, nearly 100,000 people have become Olympians. Just ONE was a trans woman, and she came….er last. An unfair advantage does not have to produce winners to be unfair, but how can it be deemed ‘unfair’ when any retained advantages do not even result in qualification, let alone competing for medals?
Judy says, “I’m all for inclusivity in sport, but we’ve always had categories for a reason: to make it fair and to keep it safe“, and in this, I would agree.
Sadly, though, just now, there are no categories for trans women to compete in “meaningful competition” in virtually ALL sports.
However, if Judy Murray wants to campaign for additional categories at the Olympics and elsewhere based on ‘ability’ rather than ‘sex’, then by all means, let’s talk – because women with DSD and trans women will then be able to compete in sport and be celebrated for who we are.
And that, Judy Murray… is a human right.
……………………………………………….
