- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Emily Bridges racing for British Cycling (Instagram)Emily Bridges calls British Cycling "failed organisation", says trans women have been "banned" as new 'Open' category announced
Transgender cyclist Emily Bridges has launched a scathing attack on British Cycling, calling it a "failed organisation" and raised concerns that trans women have been "banned" from participating on the same day that the governing body announced a new transgender policy that will see the introduction of a new 'Open' category for all transgender and non-binary individuals in competitive events.
British Cycling announced today morning the introduction of a new 'Open' category alongside the women's category. This means that the current men's category will be consolidated into the Open category, with the female category only open to "those whose sex was assigned female at birth and transgender men who are yet to begin hormone therapy". This will only apply in competition.
However, Bridges released a prior statement in response on her Instagram, saying she was "done with this whole conversation being on their terms, and being controlled by them."
> Participating in cycling as a transgender woman: a cyclist's experience
"British Cycling has just banned us from racing," read her post. "They have no authority to control this conversation anymore. Does it surprise me that the same organisation funded directly by a state that ships vulnerable refugees to Rwanda, violently clamps down on any political dissent that they disapprove of, or starves their people? No, of course, it doesn't."
"The same organisation with actively homophobic coaches, who encouraged eating disorders and did nothing about any bullying between its riders. The same organisation where elite riders influence their policy when it doesn't fit their entitled and narrow worldview, with no ability for nuance or any desire to question the view that they've been told since birth."
She continued: "British Cycling is a failed organisation, the racing scene is dying under your watch and all you do is take money from petrochemical companies and engage in culture wars. You don't care about making sport more diverse, you want to make yourself look better and you're even failing at that. Cycling is still one of the whitest, straightest sports out there, and you couldn't care less."
> British Cycling + Shell discussed on the road.cc Podcast
"This is a violent act," she said. "British Cycling are supporting this, they are furthering a genocide against us. Bans from sport is how it starts, look at what is going on in America. It starts with sports bans, then youth and general healthcare and then bans from public life through bathroom bans. Just look at the situation, and who is on your side. When literal Nazis, conspiracy theorists and those who want our eradication are on your side, surely that should give you pause?"
> Transgender cyclist Emily Bridges breaks silence to question “alleged ineligibility”
Bridges had been cleared by British Cycling for racing at the National Omnium Championships last year in April her testosterone levels were sufficiently, but then suddenly the organisation made a U-turn on its decision and suspended its transgender policy with immediate effect. It said that the system was “unfair on all women riders and poses a challenge to the integrity of racing,” and thus a nine-month review was initiated.
Today, the national governing body has announced two new policies — one for competitive activity and another for non-competitive activity. For the latter, British Cycling says that it will not discriminate based on gender and allow riders to participate in the category they identify as.
However for competitive activity, it introduced the new Open category, alongside the Male and Female categories. All transgender and non-binary individuals (except those whose sex was assigned female at birth) can now only compete only in the Open category.
Existing Race Licences held by transgender women will continue to be valid until the new policy comes into force. British Cycling said that it is working closely with these individuals to support their continued participation in events following the change in policy.
British Cycling apologised to all transgender and non-binary for the "uncertainty and upset" that they felt due to its actions.
"Our aim in creating our policies has always been to advance and promote equality, diversity and inclusion, while at the same time prioritising fairness of competition. This aim has not changed: it has been central to our review and we remain committed to this vital work," said British Cycling.
British Cycling CEO, Jon Dutton, said: "Our new policies are the product of a robust nine-month review process which we know will have a very real-world impact for our community both now and in the future. We understand that this will be particularly difficult for many of our trans and non-binary riders, and our commitment to them today is twofold.
"First, we will continue to assess our policy annually and more frequently as the medical science develops, and will continue to invite those impacted to be an integral part of those conversations. Second, we will also continue to ensure that our non-competitive activities provide a positive and welcoming environment, where everyone can feel like they belong and are respected in our community, and take action to eradicate discrimination from the sport.
"I am confident that we have developed policies that both safeguard the fairness of cyclesport competition, whilst ensuring all riders have opportunities to participate."
British Cycling also asserted that a full medical science review, followed by an assessment of the practical changes and support needed to ensure the policy’s successful implementation was conducted, alongside a targeted consultation consisiting of 14 focus groups.
> “Trans rights are human rights,” says Rapha – “all athletes should have the opportunity to race”
However, Bridges argued that while she agreed that there needs to be a nuanced policy discussion and continue to conduct research, it hadn't happened. "Research isn't being viewed critically, or any discussion about the relevance of the data to specific sports. Any discussion is inherently political and driven by bad faith actors, and the whole discussion is framed by the media who are driven through engagement by hate and funding from far-right ultra capitalists," she said.
Bridges also added that for the last two years, she has "given up her body for science", and that "new, actual and relevant" data will be coming out soon.
There is no science that supports any decision to ban. BC know that, as do others including World Governing bodies. These decisions ARE purely motivated by politics, purely and simply.
— Sandy 💜💙❤ 🏳️🌈 Ally She/Her (@sullivansa1) May 26, 2023
In April last year, Emily Bridges' mother commented on British Cycling's treatment of her daughter, simply saying "dumped by email", after the national governing body's decision to suspend its transgender policy.
UK's largest network of LGBTQIA+ cyclists PRiDE OUT had also accused the body of "bending to political pressure and cowing to the transphobic gender-critical movement".
Bridges finished her Instagram post: "It terrifies me to exist at the moment, I have friends getting hate crimed all the time, and my reality is that I can't look ahead to the future or make plans because I don't know if I'll be allowed to live that long.
"Do you have any idea what that does to someone psychologically? To constantly see your existence being put up for debate, and the other side openly calling for our eradication? I don't even know if I want to race my bike any more, the danger and everything that would come with racing makes it a pretty hard thing to justify to myself. But you have no right on telling me when I am done. This is my decision and mine alone."
Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after graduating with a masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Wales, and also likes to writes about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.
Latest Comments
- the little onion 6 min 21 sec ago
I agree on the ineffectiveness of prison in many instances with regards recindivism. But a one year revocation of a driving license is an insult....
- chrisonabike 12 min 6 sec ago
But but increase in cases of high blood pressure (possibly after going online)?
- Capt Sisko 51 min 4 sec ago
I can't comment on how easy it is to change the batteries on the Fly 12, but I have just changed one on the rearward Fly 6 CE (Gen 2). The only...
- OldRidgeback 2 hours 20 min ago
It doesn't seem to be the most efficient piece of design. But I don't see why the police should bother about it, given that it's highly unlikely to...
- lesterama 2 hours 45 min ago
It was only the Euros, after all - and some epic racing across the categories
- HoarseMann 2 hours 52 min ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crr97dl4740o Mother and child escaped unharmed; unclear who was driving.
- mark1a 12 hours 52 sec ago
I understand what you're saying, but I think when you get north of £10k, for the average amateur road.cc reader who maybe in the market for a so...
- brooksby 6 hours 48 min ago
They (wheelywheely) haven't been seen for ages- did they get banned?
Add new comment
157 comments
An utterly sensible decision, at first sight. In practive however, nobody is going to see the Open Category as open, but as the men's category, and any odd trans athlete as an ... oddity. So I really sympathise with Emily Bridges, because in practice, she is being told to accept the humiliation of either racing with the men, or not to race at all. I can't begin to understand how upset she must feel to basically have bike racing being taken from her, it's a huge part of one's identity for anyone racing at that level. I don't have a better solution either. Except for the cycling community to come together and make the sport outside of elite competition as welcoming and inclusive as we can make it. For those here saying that she brought that exclusion onto herself etc: You can and have to do better.
Did you also consider the matter from the perspective of female athletes who must have felt that there was no longer a point in competing when facing a competitor whose biological makeup (power/weight ratio etc) gave her a biological advantage that went far beyond what could be achieved by hard training or genetics?
I have nothing against trans people at all and everyone is free to consider themselves a man, woman, underterminate or whatever.
Nope, females don't matter is their viewpoint.
Of course, which is why I said that I don't have a better solution either. I absolutely understand why several CIS female professional riders threatened to boycott upcoming races. I also understand that BC can't put our a press release saying they are de facto excluding trans women from professional racing, but I think that the cycling community including on this forum can just be honest and acknowledge that that's what's just happened, and how hard that must be for some including Emily Bridges. The vast majority of cycling is non-professional, and what we can do is come together and be kind and intentionally welcoming. From my experience at club level riding, this would hugely benefit everyone inside and outside a culture that is still far too often white and cis male.
The vast vast vast majority of trans-women would never have been able to cycle professionally to begin with. They do not have elite, professional level physiology.
That they were able to get to elite/pro level *after* transitioning means they are _unfairly_ pushing out other women who _do_ have elite/pro level physiology.
That they are excluded from elite/pro level /womens/ category does not mean they lost anything. For they never had the physiology to justify such a career - other than by using their retained male developmental advantages against those who did not have that.
Emily Bridges is the one potential exception to this. She displayed some talent in male categories, before treatment. Though, it is still _not a given_ that she could have made it to pro level. Maybe, but maybe not.
I haven't raced for years now, but there used to be BCF 3rd Cat road races where women could compete, and even 2nd & 3rd Cat races with special dispensation? Race organisers and the local division blazer brigade would be aware of who would warrant a ride. It used to work well. I often raced against couple of women in 2/3 races in my division, one was Women's BBAR and the other was on the British Olympic squad. If you got in a break with those two you knew about it!
So yes, I think women such as Emily Bridges could very successfully compete in such a way.
But I suspect that wouldn't be enough for her, she'd want to ride in women's races at the highest level, and I think that's just not fair.
Lots of sour grapes in her post, to be expected.
2X chromosomes=biological woman. XY= biological man. The tiny, tiny fraction that deviate biologically from that: to be determined.
That she feels like a woman and identifies as a woman and had surgery/treatment doesn't change that fact.
Besides, she can still compete: either against men or in a separate category that is to be developed. But then, suddenly, it becomes an insurmountable issue and society is no longer inclusive, the government is planning genocide etc etc. Never mind that before the decision, all those biological women simply had to suck it in and get on with it.
Not such category exists and BC have just announced they have no intention of creating one.
I feel for Emily Bridges. I cannot imagine what kind of hell it must be to live feeling trapped in the body of the wrong sex. But she demeans herself and millions of dead by comparing this decision to "genocide.'' She's been told she cannot compete in a certain category of sport. It an effing sport. Sport is full of inequalities. It is, in fact, built around inequalities. It favors those who are biologically blessed. Bridges was biologically blessed as a young male. She changed her gender so it would free herself from that maleness. She is now technologically blessed. The question here is really this: Should a competitor be allowed to be both biologically blessed and technologically blessed? It's basically the same question that has come up with blade runners on the track.
An interesting take on this issue.
A big part of it (but by no means all) is testosterone levels. Bridges has made great play of documenting her performance decline since taking testosterone blockers and reducing her physical level by 'x amount'. She presents it as 'proof' that she can now compete as a woman.
But it's an intangible. Not only are there many other physical factors not affected by loss of testosterone, who is to say at what point her overall performance has now become that of a woman? It's too much of a grey area, it causes too much confusion.
Also worth pointing out that some trans women would be more affected than others, even by hitting the same testosterone target level. Some will have their performances wrecked totally, others will still be competitive in women's sport.
You simply cannot have that level of uncertainty in top level women's sport, all for the sake of inclusion and Bridges personal mission to feel like a woman 100% in every way, on her own terms.
A man cannot become a woman, thats a fact!!! Men should not compete agaist women, end of!!!!
Are you really Ron De Santis posting under a pseudonym?
Objectively what difference does it make to your sad life if someone is transgender? Would you rather they slit their wrists or overdose than live their life for themselves? Because the suicide figures are there.
It's not about them living their lives for themselves, any fair minded person has nothing against that.
It's about them stealing women's sport. They are trans women, NOT women.
And if you think suicide is (always) proof of being hard done by, you have a lot to learn about life
They're women. End of.
They're men masquerading as women. Which is fine, but don't expect to muscle in on real women's sport, or their personal private domains without a backlash.
Rubbish. Says who? You are vastly in the minority with that opinion and the vast majority who have tolerated these crazy views will no longer do so out of a desire to 'be nice'. There's a limit to being nice to people when it starts turning into being nasty to others, in this case cis women.
It's like I take a plane to another country and refuse to leave, on the basis that I now self declare as a national of that country. Are they gonna go, aww OK, you've made the effort to speak our language, we'll just let you in. Oh, and here's a house and a job too.
No they are men. End of.
And you're a c**t End of.
Poor choice of insult, given the context.
What definition of "women" are you using here?
They "identify" as women. They're not women.
Really? Because many of the comments here don't show that, do they!
The large majority of posts don't make any reference to people living their lives for themselves, and many go out of their way to note the hard time trans people undoubtedly have.
What the posts seem to be against is the idea of men (which trans women are) competing in women-only events as they have an innate biological advantage. Look at the records for elite men and elite women if you don't believe that, unless you're one of those who thinks women should just try harder.
Adam, you'll see that most posts on here are understanding of the trans dilemma, and sympathetic?
Very little here in this thread is actually nasty, or intended to be so. Some are exasperated by the lack of logic in the trans sport inclusion argument, that's for sure.
But I haven't heard anyone call Emily a Nazi, or say that trans athletes want to impose a genocide on women?
As cyclists we're a pretty good bunch I think? I agree, there's utter bile on lots of social media around this debate, but I think Emily and others have used that as 'evidence' of widespread hate. That's a very unnecessary and flawed view I think.
And it's the same hysteria which leads to footballers endlessly taking the knee, like it'll magically get rid of racism. No it won't, the people who throw bananas on the pitch find it hilarious how much angst they cause. Ignore them, ridicule them, and arrest them when they get recognised on CCTV.
Nasty spiteful object interested only in their own little fad.
Yet again traditional Roadcc spitefullness in the replies. Why should someones life be "sad" if they object to transgender. They have as much right to an opinion as you. If you can object to them then they can object to you.
Oh, sorry, that doesn't apply in modern Britain does it?
Two sides to every story, of course. A quick web search for peer-reviewed research into the effect of testosterone suppression treatment in trans-women athletes demonstrates two opposing scientific views in the first two search results:
https://cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/pdf/transgenderwomenathletesandelitesport-ascientificreview-e-final.pdf
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3
What's notable is the number of sensible, considered comments here, and also the number of bigoted, nasty homophobic comments masquerading as sensible and considered comments.
It's really sad to see trans people dismissed in the way that they have been by some posters, in exactly the same way as we complain that non-cyclists dismiss us when they start their comments with 'I'm a keen cyclist but...'
We ought not be judging until we've experienced what they've experienced.
Live and let live, folks!
First day on the internet?
There's nothing remotely homophobic about not wanting men competing in women's sports competitions.
Sexuality (homo, hetero, bi or whatever) is about who you are attracted to. You can't be wrong about it, and nobody can gainsay your honest opinion of who you fancy.
Sex is about whether you are male or female (or for a tiny number of people, which doesn't include Emily Bridges, somewhere in between). It is independently verifiable, and you can be wrong about it. I could truly and honestly believe I was (or should have been) a woman, but I'm not one. As such I have an innate physical advantage over women, and shouldn't compete in athletic events against them.
Gender identity is bullshit. It's about reacting to (or in some ways reinforcing) old stereotypes about how men and women "should" behave. People should be free to act, dress, and generally present themselves however they choose. If I want to wear a dress or make-up (or even shave my legs), that doesn't mean I'm "really" a woman any more than a woman who doesn't do those things is a man.
There are plenty of lesbian sportswomen who are firmly against men being allowed to compete in women's sport. Are they homophobes too?
The problem here is the same as problems elsewhere in society: the vast majority are good people who are empathetic and want everyone to feel included, no one feeling left out. And we hate to think of anyone getting upset through feeling excluded. Our liberal society says people can be who and what they want to be. That's great.
Hence the attitude of many, who say you can have a p***s and be a woman. No though, you can't. You can be a TRANS woman, and apart from a hateful few who'll spew bile about you on social media, everyone else will use your chosen pronouns and be considerate of you and respect your feelings.
Trouble is though, there's harsh reality to consider too: whatever rules you put in place to include trans women in competition, about testosterone levels and all the rest of it, it'll still be a grey area. It's a bit like TUEs, where's the line between treating a medical condition and performance enhancement? We've been through all that with Wiggins' use of Kenacort for his TdeF win. It was by definition legal, but was it 100% ethical and real? (Of course other riders were using it the same, but Russian hackers selectively exposed him, and now we know why).
I feel genuine empathy for trans women such as Emily Bridges, I'll treat you like a woman, you may even be more actually 'feminine' than some women (sexuality is a broad church, for both males and females, with overlap), but ultimately you were born male and went through puberty as male, with all the physical advantages of a male body .
The cold reality is that it's not fair on cis women if you compete in athletic competition with them.
Unfortunately there is utter hysteria over all of this, and to see Bridges flinging mud at a national body simply trying to do right by women is totally unfair, even to the extent of calling out 'racism'. OK then, well is football racist for having 50% black players in the Premiership when only 3.5% of the UK population are black?
Too much hysteria already, people need to calm down and think rationally.
Pages