Has Hell frozen over? Uncommonly for the UN (think Antonio Guterres with the global warming hyperbole), one of its recent reports is full of common sense. In the last three years, I have been critical of UN performance regarding some high-profile issues, including World Health Organisation failings in responding to the coronavirus pandemic and a power grab for future pandemic management; lawfare against Israel by the world court and International Criminal Court; and UN Women’s betrayal of the raison d’être for its creation and existence with a shamefully delayed acknowledgment of the weaponisation of mass rape, sexual violence, mutilation and public humiliation of Israeli women on October 7th 2023.
Enter Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. It’s a relief and a pleasure to acknowledge her positive report ‘Violence against women and girls in sport‘. Published on August 27th, it was presented to the UN General Assembly last month. She notes that until very recently, the need for a separate category for females “to ensure equal, fair and safe opportunities in sports” was a “universally recognised principle”. Maintaining separate-sex sports is a proportional action that corresponds to legitimate aims within international law. Females also have a right to privacy under international law which is forfeited by compelled mixed-sex spaces in intimate facilities. Alsalem explained to Fox News on October 21st that this is primarily a human rights issue, not a cultural or an individual issue.
Biological advantages for males in competitive sports include strength (162% greater punching power on average!), weight, muscle mass, speed, height, reach and endurance. Separate categories for males and females were created to recognise this biological reality and provide equal, fair and safe opportunities for females to win recognition, prize money, fame and career advancement. Allowing biological males into female sports is unfair and amounts to cheating by males who are simply not competitive in male sports (think swimmer Lia Thomas). It steals women’s dreams, aspirations and rewards. Alsalem’s data show that more than 600 female athletes in over 400 competitions have lost nearly 900 medals across 29 different sports. Other reports document instances of injuries from trans-on-females encounters, including teeth knocked out, concussions resulting in neural impairment, broken legs and skull fractures. Thus safety is yet another another concern.
Despite the unfairness, invasion of privacy, opportunity costs and safety risks, many athletes and coaches who object to trans-inclusion policies are silenced or forced to self-censor at the risk of losing sporting opportunities, scholarships and sponsorships. Many who do speak out despite such formidable hurdles are accused of bigotry, suspended, expelled and subjected to unfair disciplinary proceedings. Many (like Moira Deeming) face hostility if they assemble to discuss how to deal with these issues, violating the fundamental human rights to freedom of belief, opinion and expression. Some have quit sport entirely under the cumulative stress. Because “biological sex is central” to women’s “experiences of discrimination and violence”, countries that permit biological men to compete in women’s sports deny women “their femaleness”. To counteract the “worrisome trend”, she recommends the creation of open categories in sports competition and non-invasive and confidential sex screening procedures to ensure fairness, safety and dignity for female athletes alongside inclusive participation for everyone.
The trans-extremist assault on female spaces in the workplace and sporting arenas has been in the thick of the culture wars. Amidst the wreckage of those wars, the DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) industry has morphed into DIE (division, intolerance, exclusion), promoting resentment, language-policing and unjust outcomes instead of real solutions. Trade-offs are central to public policy decision-making. The last major issue on which this was ignored was the panicked response to Covid and we will be paying for the resulting disasters for many years yet. By putting the spotlight back on the importance of balancing competing and clashing rights through policy trade-offs, this report provides a key to navigating our way out of the wreckage. It’s potentially also helpful in Sall Grover’s appeal in the Giggle v. Tickle case, as is the return of Trump to the White House. Alsalem is right to note that these policies originate from and exist almost entirely in Western countries. Their hold on many parts of the UN system is evidence of the hegemony of Western ideas and practices as the global norm. The adoption of trans and multigender language and the inclusion of trans athletes in international sports is confirmation of cultural imperialism at the cost of women-specific human rights.
Alsalem’s insistence on separating sex and gender has met with criticism, including from within the UN system. In comments submitted to Alsalem ahead of the report, the International Olympic Committee said sex-verification tests “create harmful environments for all women and girls”. Human Rights Watch chimed in to assert that “sex testing regulations” are “inherently degrading and humiliating”. Feminist organisations like the Affiliation of Australian Women’s Action Alliances disagree. Letting athletes choose their own sex categories for competition “compromises safety, fairness, dignity, and participation” for women in sports, the group wrote to Ms. Alsalem.
The trans culture war in sports is far from over and battles continue to rage on many fronts, from the widespread use of the formulation ‘gender assigned at birth’, to the reluctance of many governing associations in sports to confront the belligerent demands of trans activists and the continued aggressive enforcement of ‘hate speech’. In the U.K., for example, in a soccer match against a trans-inclusive club, a 17-year-old girl with suspected autism was left distraught after being charged by the local football association for asking a bearded opponent if he was a man. In another example of the shambolic incoherence, a trans rapist was referred to by the judge and barristers as “she” but on conviction was sentenced to six years in a male prison.
Gabrielle Bauer draws an analogy with adoptive parents. Yes, they are the parents of the adopted child legally, emotionally and psychologically for parents, children, state and society. But this doesn’t mean they are ‘exactly the same’ as the biological parents nor justify efforts, in the case of transgenderism, to induce lactation, simulate periods (and demand tampon dispensers in men’s toilets), explore ways to stretch the cervix to mimic birthing-related cervical dilation, etc. Since the Cass Review report, gender-critical voices have gained ground in the public debate. A woman hounded out of an Edinburgh trans-inclusive rape crisis centre run by a biological male has been awarded compensation for being penalised for her gender-critical beliefs. U.S. politicians up for re-election disingenuously tried to hide their past votes in support of trans rights but it proved a potent weapon for Republicans. Alsalem’s report therefore comes in a more receptive international environment to provide some UN legitimacy to Trump’s looming war on trans rights at the expense of women’s rights.
Ramesh Thakur is a former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Emeritus Professor in the Crawford School of Public Policy, the Australian National University. This article was first published in Spectator Australia.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.