Emily Bridges told idea that trans women have ‘no advantage’ is ‘absolute NONSENSE’

A leading women’s sports lobby group has previous rules for trans women competing in women’s sports categories to ensure fairness is ‘absolute nonsense’ in the wake of British Cycling’s decision to ban transgender women from racing in women’s competitions.

The decision by the governing body is intended to instead change their current men’s category to an “open” category, where transgender women can compete against other male-born riders, while the female category will be reserved for those who were female at birth.

The policy decision, which will take effect at the end of 2023, will apply to all competitive activities and will put pressure on the international sports federation, the UCI, to establish their own rules around the controversial subject.

British rider Emily Bridges, who has been at the center of the debate over her attempts to race in 2022 after previously riding as a male at junior level, posted a statement on Instagram in the wake of the news claiming that British Cycling was ‘a genocide’ against trans athletes.

Speak against GB Newssaid Fiona McAnena – Director of Sports Campaigns at Fair Play for Women: “I think it’s time for women to become more honest in cycling. I think it took a long time.

Fair Play for Women director Fiona McAnena has spoken out about British Crycling’s ban on transgender competitors in female categories, as has cyclist Emily Bridges

Bridges (pictured left in August 2018, competing as a male) had set a junior men’s national record over 40 kilometers in the same year. Now known as Emily Bridges, she was supposed to race against women including Laura Kenny in March last year but this was discontinued

“These rules were introduced so casually years ago to drop certain men into the category of women and it has been quite a struggle to restore what we all know with a common sense approach to sport, that is, if you are a woman if you were born female and you don’t have the benefits of male puberty, then you need a protected category, otherwise you don’t stand a chance in the sport.’

McAnena described claims that trans women had “no advantage” as “absolute nonsense,” adding that the previous requirement for riders in the female category to have a testosterone level of less than five nanomoles per liter for 12 months did not guarantee fairness.

She also stressed that Bridges was not “banned from participating.”

“There are now 16 or 17 studies published around the world that show that if you reduce testosterone in a male body, you reduce their performance a little bit, but you don’t in any way take away the performance advantage of men, because not much changes if lowers your testosterone. And that’s why an open category is a great solution,” McAnena said.

“Emily is not allowed to participate in competitions. Emily was a very good cyclist and was a junior GB record holder as a male and is free to continue competing in the open category. And so it should be. But it means women and girls won’t hurt their chances by having to race against men.

“So when people say there’s no evidence that Emily has an advantage or that we need to do more science, we all know you can’t reverse male puberty and that’s why this is the only fair solution.”

“We must not jeopardize the honesty and safety of women. Why do we start with a compromise where we have a certain percentage of men who can access women’s events? What I’m saying is that there should be open events.

“But if you’re promoting a women-only bike ride, as British Cycling does, then it should be for women only. And I think it’s a silly approach to say that, as they’ve done, non-binary people are welcome in the women-only wind rides. Why would a non-binary person want to be in an all-female event?

“We hear from many women who have good reasons to participate in a women-only event. And I think they should have that. So no, there is more work to be done to restore what is a reasonable expectation for women and girls?’

British Cycling defended their policy, with chief executive Jon Dutton outlining the “robust” research the organization had conducted to reach their decision.

“Our new policy is the product of a robust nine-month evaluation process, which we know will have a very real impact on our community both now and in the future,” said Dutton.

British Cycling CEO Jon Dutton said the organization had “confidence” in their updated policy

“I am convinced that we have developed policies that both ensure the fairness of cycling competition and ensure that all riders have the opportunity to participate.”

British Cycling’s ruling is the latest of a number of similar moves across disciplines.

World Athletics, UK Athletics, World Aquatics and British Triathlon have all issued bans as they opened their men’s categories.

While no decision has yet been announced, in May British Rowing invited their members to vote on their preferred policy.