The Athletic tries to make a 51-year-old male sprinter (ha) in the female category seem reasonable

Once again, the New York Times’ sports arm, The Athletic, exercised their ideological muscles in lieu of doing journalism. Headlined Valentina Petrillo, the transgender sprinter at Paralympics—the rules, the science and the future, writer Charlotte Harpur’s purported FAQ asked the wrong questions of the wrong sources, and left out important information. I don’t care if The Athletic wants to embarrass themselves by pretending to have a reasoned discussion about a 51-year-old male sprinter competing at the top level of women’s para athletics, but it chaps my hide that they mislead readers by belittling the most important demographic in this story—women. It’s not only not journalism, it’s willful misogyny, and promotes erasure of women as a separate class of human being. You have to throw around a lot of words to make this sideshow seem worthy of debate, which is why the article went on so long. Readers might have had some common sense to add, but as always on the topic of males in women’s sports, the comments were disabled. Below, I add some context and facts to Harpur’s biased, ideologically driven piece. I edited the original article for length.

*******************************************************************************************************

On Monday at 10.48am local time, Valentina Petrillo, a transgender athlete, will line up on the white line of Stade de France’s purple athletics track ready to run in the first round of the 400m T12 race at the Paris Paralympics.

Petrillo’s presence has attracted particular attention and will likely attract more if she medals. At last year’s World Para Athletics Championships, she won bronze in the 200m and 400m T12 events.

Sport, at times, is at the centre of debates and when the world’s biggest competitions take place, the scrutiny is immense. In this case, arguments have raged over transgender athletes, their inclusion and competitive advantage.

We’re three paragraphs in and we don’t know what’s really going on here. Let me help Harpur out: It’s not that Petrillo is transgender that’s causing the “scrutiny” and “arguments,” but rather that Petrillo is male running in the female category. If all media correctly reported that a trans-identified male was lining up in the finals of a women’s race, it would be much easier to see that the story is that the women’s category has been defiled, invaded. The writer is trying to make it seem that transgender athletes automatically draw controversy because of their identity. This is blatantly false. Female athletes who identify as transgender (male)—such as mid distance runner Nikki Hiltz and boxer Hergie Bacyadan—competed in the Olympics in their sex category without “scrutiny”or “argument.” Harpur spends the next million or so words pretending to be objective about a lie. She could have saved herself some trouble by reporting that people with eyes are outraged that a 51-year-old man is being allowed to take the places of women who have dedicated decades of their lives to compete at the highest level in the female category. Against other women. They’re being told by the Paralympics that this is the women’s category, not a mixed sex category. Women are being lied to and denied fair sport. That’s the story, Charlotte Harpur. That’s why there’s “scrutiny,” as there should be.

The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) says it “welcomes” Petrillo, while World Para Athletics (WPA) rules state a person who is legally recognised as a woman is eligible to compete in female categories. However, Katrin Mueller-Rottgardt, a German Paralympian racing in Petrillo’s 200m T12 category on Friday, has spoken out about Petrillo’s advantage having gone through male puberty.

Harpur sets up the conflict as between two gigantic organizations, who, because of their size and world influence, must be right in backing our man Petrillo. And on the other side, one puny undoubtedly transphobic woman, a competitor who’s probably just sour grapes. As if Katrin Mueller-Rottgardt is the lone voice in the world who sees Petrillo’s participation as unfair. Harpur makes no mention of the massive preponderance of data, both studied and observed, that support the fact that male advantage in sports is real and cannot be mitigated by testosterone suppression. No mention of the fact that World Athletics, the able-bodied version of WPA, has banned trans-identified males like Petrillo to protect the fairness and integrity of the female category.

This article is not looking to fan the flames but answer key questions readers may have regarding the rules, the science and the future…

What the holy mind slave is Harpur talking about, fan the flames? Ten years ago, there were no “flames.” Only women competed in the women’s category. The flames of outrage were set when trans-identified men started demanding to compete as women, and ideologically captured media abandoned their duty to report. By writing biased, factually incorrect tripe like this, Harpur is actively sloshing the accelerant.

Who is Petrillo?

The 50-year-old sprinter [Petrillo recently turned 51], who was assigned as male at birth, is a parent of two. She started running as a child but stopped when she was diagnosed with Stargardt disease, a degenerative eye condition, at the age of 14. Her vision is limited to one fiftieth of the normal range and she began para athletics aged 41, competing in male categories. Petrillo won 11 national titles in the male T12 visual impairment class between 2015 and 2018.

Fifty-one-year-old-sprinter is an oxymoron. Fast twitch muscles are the first to succumb to age, which is why you rarely see elite level sprinters in their thirties much less fifties, and why all of Petrillo’s female competitors are at least 10 years younger than he is. As George Perry wrote in his analysis, Petrillo’s male advantage was enough that he was able to beat able-bodied women in his age group at 100 meters, 200m, and 400m (so his maleness overcame his visual impairment), and he has won a bronze medal against para athletes 10 to 15 years younger than he is (his maleness overcame age). Petrillo has never had to deal with periods or childbirth, and now, when many 51-year-old women are experiencing the disruptions of menopause, he’s training, well, like a 51-year-old man.

Harpur uses the incorrect language of gender ideology in saying that Petrillo was “assigned male at birth.” Petrillo was male at conception, observed as such at birth, and despite testosterone reduction, remains male. He fathered two children which his wife carried and birthed. Harpur calls him a gender neutral parent, instead of the father that he is. Using incorrect language blurs the fact that Petrillo is still male, and therefore does not qualify for the female category.

Valentina, supported by her wife, started living as a woman in 2018 and received hormone therapy, including testosterone suppression, in January 2019. After transitioning, she ran her first official race as a female para-athlete in 2020, winning gold in the 100m, 200m and 400m T12 events at the Italian Paralympics Championship. At last year’s World Para Athletics Championships, she won two bronzes and has also competed against non-disabled women.

So, let’s get this straight—in his first race in the female category, at the age of 46, Petrillo won gold at a top level competition in three events. Quite an achievement. Considering the women he raced against were at least 10 years younger and had spent years, decades, training to get to that level. Harpur does not remark on the long, long chances of this being anything but a demonstration of male advantage.

“For 44 years I had no tools, I thought I was the only one in the world experiencing this situation,” she told Italian site Odiare non e uno sport (Hate is not a sport) in 2021. “I was born in Naples in the seventies, where the femminielli were considered the ‘scum’ of society.”

Petrillo’s running times decreased six months after starting her treatment. She was 11 seconds slower in the 400m and 2.5 seconds in the 200m. She told the BBC that, as an athlete, accepting not sprinting as quickly was difficult, but the compromise was for her happiness.

If you read the BBC article that Harpur linked to, you’ll find lots more detail about who Petrillo is. That it’s better for him to be a “slow happy woman” than a “fast unhappy man.” Spoken like a real man. Nice backhand to the sisters dude. And when 30 masters women signed a petition saying they were happy to have Petrillo train with them, but not compete for titles, Petrillo told the BBC, “I asked myself, 'Valentina, if you were a biological woman and had a Valentina, a trans, racing against you, how would you feel?' And I gave myself answers - astonishment, confusion and doubt. I would have those things as a woman.” But Petrillo dismissed women’s feelings. His happiness was all that mattered. Petrillo told the BBC that, as a man, he was “a tough guy who’d speak dismissively of women and then be a woman in his private space.” He also told reporters he wore first his mother’s clothes and then his wife’s. All of these behaviors and attitudes fit the definition of transvestic fetishism.

The BBC also reported that Petrillo considered the 2021 Paralympics his last chance to compete, but never underestimate male advantage—he’s still got it three years later at age 51. The BBC noted Petrillo started out in para category T13, less severe visual impairment than the T12 category he now races in. Unlike most of his competitors, Petrillo does not race with a guide.

Is she the first transgender athlete?

No, she is the second. Dutch transgender athlete Ingrid van Kranen, who died in 2021, finished ninth in the women’s discus final at the Rio 2016 Paralympics.

The circumstances were different with Van Kranen though. Her transition was not widely known or reported at the time, meaning there was not the scrutiny on her — either from fellow competitors or the media — that we have seen with Petrillo.

So, males in female sports are only wrong if people notice, if they get caught. And then it’s the scrutiny that’s wrong, not that the male athlete is wrongly in women’s spaces.

What are the rules for trans athletes in para-athletics?

World Athletics has a different policy from World Para Athletics (WPA). Transgender women are not allowed to compete in World Athletics female categories, but they are allowed to compete in World Para Athletics female categories. If Petrillo attempted to compete in the Olympics or other non-disabled international athletics competitions, she would not be allowed. Under rule 4.5, World Para Athletics states a person who is legally recognised as a woman is eligible to compete in female categories. The WPA added “transgender athletes must provide evidence that their total testosterone level has been below 10 nanomoles per litre of blood for at least 12 months prior to their first female competition, and for as long as they remain competing in female competition”.

Italians can change the sex marker on official documents. This does not mean they have changed their sex. Changing an M to an F on a piece of paper would not fool a five-year-old. It is astounding, and frankly exhausting, to have to reiterate that categories are meaningless unless they are defined and defended. The female category ceases to exist the minute one male with his F-marked piece of paper is allowed to enter. Then there is a men’s category and a mixed sex category, nothing for women.

Furthermore, a testosterone level of 10nmol/liter is within the normal male range. According to this rule, men with male levels of testosterone can compete in the female category. Does that seem fair? No female “transgender” athlete would have 10nmol/liter of testosterone in her blood without doping. So, the WPA is tacitly saying that these athletes are male. Harpur failed to add that context.

What has Petrillo said?

After qualifying sixth fastest for the semi-finals on Monday, Petrillo said: “The atmosphere inside the stadium is just fantastic so for me it’s a dream come true. It’s September 2, 2024 right? Let’s mark this down as a historic day. From this day forth I don’t want to hear any more talk about discrimination or prejudice for trans people.

“There are so many people who die for the mere fact of being trans people, who kill themselves for the mere fact of being trans because they lose their job because the sport doesn’t include them and now I’ve made it so we can all make it if I’ve made it, I’ve done my little bit and we can all make it. …

“But I hope my son is proud of me,” Petrillo said, beginning to cry. “That’s important to me because I’m a trans dad, it’s not everyone’s dream dad. But I hope he will be proud of me.

“I hope he will always stand by me, I hope that he loves me even if I am like this. I can’t help it if I’m like this, I’m sorry. Don’t treat trans people badly. We suffer. It’s not fair. We don’t hurt anybody.

In response to those who believe it is unfair for Petrillo to compete, she said: “This is not a lifestyle choice for me, this is who I am.

“And the way I am, like all transgender people who do not feel they belong to their biological gender, should not be discriminated against in the same way that race, religion or political ideology should not be discriminated against.

“And sport that imposes rules based on a binary way of thinking does not factor this in. It is sport that has to find a solution and excluding transgender athletes is clearly not that solution.”

Petrillo had a lot to say, much of it Grade A victimhood—particularly galling from a person who has gotten every opportunity, every award, every podium he deserved and many he didn’t. “We suffer. It’s not fair. We don’t hurt anybody?” Petrillo told a documentarian, “You can see I am a man.” He knows what he is, he knows he is harming women, and he just doesn’t care. The self-centeredness, tone deafness, the total lack of regard for women—in narcissistic fashion, given enough rope, Petrillo did hang himself. He mistakenly conflates political and religious discrimination with his demands to compete in the wrong sex category.

What have others said?

The IPC said it “wishes all athletes competing at the Paris 2024 Paralympic Games the best of luck with their competition” when contacted by The Athletic.

However, one of the athletes running against Petrillo in the 200m, Mueller-Rottgardt, told Bild earlier this month: “Everyone should live in everyday life the way they feel comfortable. But I find it difficult in competitive sports. She (Petrillo) has lived and trained as a man for a long time, so there is a possibility that the physical requirements are different to those of someone who was born a woman. This could give her an advantage.”

What’s with the “However?” However, one hater didn’t wish Petrillo the best of luck? For the love of god.

On behalf of 30 athletes, the Italian lawyer and former athlete Mariuccia Fausta Quilleri sent a petition to the Italian Athletics Federation and the ministries for Equal Opportunities and Sport, opposing Petrillo’s participation.

“Every federation can choose between the concepts of inclusion and sporting fairness,” Quilleri told the BBC when asked about Petrillo’s Paralympic selection. “World Athletics has chosen the principle of the Olympic spirit: they have stayed true to the idea of fair competition. On the other hand, the Italian Paralympic Federation has chosen inclusion.

“It is the visually-impaired athletes who will be beaten by Petrillo that will have to take up the protests with their federation. Unfortunately, it is those at the top of the federations who have allowed this to happen.”

Harpur appears to have taken all of her sources from the 2021 BBC article, and done zero research on the many organizations who are and have been speaking out for women’s only sports. Fair Play for Women, ICONS, International Consortium on Female Sport, Women’s Sports Policy Working Group, Save Women’s Sport—these are just a few sources for those who support women’s only sports. Harpur also failed to note that a large (69%) and growing majority of Americans have said people should participate in sports in their birth sex, not gender identity.

One powerful voice of support for transgender athletes in sport is the former soccer player Megan Rapinoe, who appeared 203 times for USWNT during her career. In an interview with Time magazine two years ago, Rapinoe made a strong case for inclusion.

“Show me the evidence that trans women are taking everyone’s scholarships, are dominating in every sport, are winning every title,” she said. “I’m sorry, it’s just not happening. So we need to start from inclusion, period. And as things arise, I have confidence that we can figure it out. But we can’t start at the opposite. That is cruel. And frankly, it’s disgusting.”

Harpur continued to fan the flames of confusion, misinformation, and discrimination against women by referring to “transgender” inclusion, something that’s already happening when trans athletes compete in their correct sex category, when she actually meant inclusion of male athletes in the female category. Which is exclusion of women from their own category.

And, oh how unfortunate, she chose Rapinoe to be the voice for including males in women’s sports. That quote was incompatible with reality at the time, and has really really not aged well. In light of the two male boxers who just won gold in the women’s category, in light of Petrillo with his 51-year-old man gut and lycra-outlined junk taking the place of women in the Paralympics, in light of the five high school boys who won state championships in track this past spring, in light of the Flying Bats Australian soccer team with five trans-identified male players who won the women’s championship, in light of the scores of men who scoop up women’s awards every single weekend in US cycling, “things” have arisen and Rapinoe’s confidence that “we can figure it out” is grossly misplaced. Unless by figure it out, she meant women just accept unfairness, that they are not worthy of it, that they are second class citizens. Which starts to look like old fashioned, cruel, disgusting misogyny.

Are there any plans to change the rules?

World Para Athletics, in a statement to The Athletic, said any future changes to their rules would only be considered following “appropriate consultation with teams and athletes and taking into consideration the rights and best interests of all those involved”.

The International Paralympic Committee told The Athletic it is up to the international federations to “develop their sport-specific rules”. Earlier this month in Paris, however, the IPC president Andrew Parsons said sport has to be “guided by science, come up with better answers for transgender athletes”.

Parsons said he was prepared for the criticism, but emphasised the need to “respect our rules”. “For the moment, World Para Athletics allows her (Petrillo) to compete, so she will be as welcome as any other athlete.” He noted the need to treat transgender athletes respectfully, but also added: “Science should give us the answer because we also want to be fair with the other athletes in the field of play.”

Science has given a very definitive answer. Males, regardless of surgery or hormonal treatment, retain sports advantage. Sports organizations have chosen to ignore this robust evidence. A more relevant question is why are those organizations ignoring the science.

Is there evidence to show whether trans women hold any physical advantage in athletics?

To answer that, [Professor Alun] Williams considers two steps: before and after an athlete transitions. “Before they transition, trans women are genetically and biologically no different from other men,” Williams says.

“Do men have an advantage over women at that stage? There is an overwhelming mountain of evidence saying very clearly, yes. It might be 10 to 15 per cent in running events, a bit more in those involving upper body strength. That’s why traditionally almost all sports have two categories for male and female.”

The advantages stem from male puberty.

Male advantage does not come solely from puberty. It’s unlikely that Williams would have said that, so it seems like a misunderstanding of the writer. From the moment of conception, XY chromosomes drive physiological and skeletal differences in boys’ bodies that translate into sports advantage well before puberty. Puberty merely magnifies those advantages.

How does an athlete’s body change during puberty?

Testosterone levels increase during male puberty, which has an impact on physical attributes and can affect performance in sport. “Testosterone is the key driver for the increase in bone length and mass, longer arms, legs, and thicker bone, so they’re heavier,” Williams previously told The Athletic in an article on transgender footballers. “An increase in muscle mass gives a lot more strength and power. Larger organs, like a larger heart, are key for pumping blood around the body, especially in endurance-type performance.

“If you have more haemoglobin, the protein that grabs oxygen from the lungs and carries it to the muscles, circulating in the blood, you can better transport oxygen around the body to muscles when they work, which helps endurance performance.”

Is the male advantage removed or reduced when an athlete transitions?

“It’s hard to make definitive claims about exactly what trans women do and don’t do athletically,” says [Joanna] Harper. “The real question is, in this case, what happens after said athlete undergoes a supervised gender-affirming hormone therapy, which in Petrillo’s case involves testosterone suppression.”

According to Williams, “the perfect study doesn’t exist”, while Harper adds the data are “sparse” and the science is in its “infancy”. …

Harper acknowledges that “anyone who goes through a testosterone-fueled puberty gains substantial athletic advantages over those who don’t” and compared to cis women, trans women are, in her words, “taller, bigger and stronger, even after hormone therapy”. She notes, however, that those qualities are advantages in many sports within all male or all female categories. A taller basketball player may have an advantage over their competitors, for example.

“The question isn’t whether somebody is absolutely stronger in terms of moving their body, but if they have a greater relative strength,” she says. Harper points to the paper, Strength, Power and Aerobic Capacity of Transgender Athletes: A Cross-sectional Study by Hamilton et al. published in April, which suggests trans women do not have higher relative strength and so would not have an advantage in sprinting, but would do in discus throwing.

“We don’t have definitive answers at this point. The data I’ve seen so far would lead me to conclude that it’s reasonable to have her compete.”

Harper, who is a trans-identified male with no formal training in sports science, is a troublingly compromised “expert.” Harper repeatedly says the science is in its “infancy,” which would seem to preclude advising something as radical as allowing males in the female category. Though the science is “sparse,” and even contrary (she admits trans-identified men are bigger, stronger, and faster), Harper advocates for inclusion of trans-identified males in women’s sports. There is an axiom in policymaking that if there is a chance of harm the evidence need not be perfect—change should not be made. Harper ignores that principle.

“Most scientists in this area would pretty confidently infer from the studies, even with their limitations, that when someone lowers their testosterone when they transition, that is not going to slow them in those kinds of races to the extent of the advantage they would have got from previously going through male puberty,” says Williams. “Trans women hold a physical advantage in any athletic or para-athletic event.”

Is it fair for trans women to compete in female athletic events, therefore?

No.

Although Harper does not dispute trans women were developed under the influence of male levels of testosterone and emphasises the importance of gender-affirming hormone therapy and testosterone suppression, she does not think it is “problematic for her (Petrillo) to be racing”.

“From the data I have gathered, plus my own personal experience, therapy and testosterone suppression makes enough of a decrease in performance that is reasonable to allow her to compete.

“In most sports, testosterone suppression mitigates — doesn’t eliminate — the advantages of going through a testosterone-fuelled puberty to the point where trans women and cis women can engage in meaningful competition.”

“My own personal experience?” The hell? Trans-identified man who personally has transgressed women’s spaces says it’s “reasonable” and “meaningful” for other trans-identified men to compete in the wrong sex category, despite admitting they have an advantage. What’s Harper means by reasonable and meaningful is that women must accept unfairness for the sake of men’s feelings. Tech swimsuits were banned in 2008 for providing a miniscule advantage. We don’t know exactly how much advantage EPO, or for that matter, exogenous testosterone, provide athletes, but it’s some so they’re banned. When races are won by hundredths of a second, is a small advantage reasonable? Interestingly, when advantage, no matter how tiny, affects males, no one suggests it’s reasonable or meaningful and should be accepted. That advantage is eliminated, stat.

Williams, however, disagrees and thinks it’s “probably not” fair. “There are two reasons why I would say probably rather than definitely not. The evidence, although pretty convincing, could always be better. “The only other argument for saying it would be fair is the philosophical standpoint on the status of trans women: some insist they are women, in which case they should be eligible to compete in the women’s competition, separate from any evidence of physical advantage.

As staggeringly stupid as it sounds to let men compete in women’s sports because they insist they are women, this is the current policy. See resident “expert” Joanna Harper’s foot stomping insistence, farther on.

“For me and most other scientists who research these topics, the evidence is strong enough to justify not allowing trans women to compete in the women’s category.”

Can’t trans women compete with men or in an open category?

The obvious answer to that question is yes.

This question was addressed by my colleague Nancy Froston in her excellent piece from a couple of years ago on trans footballers. She wrote: “Trans women identify as female and suffer from gender dysphoria, which makes asking them to compete in male categories inappropriate. Open categories are under consideration in several sports as a possible solution to allow transgender women to compete, although it remains to be seen how that could look in various individual sports such as swimming or athletics.”

Harpur’s source for this question is an uninformed, incoherent ideological mess. Those suffering from gender dysphoria need compassion and therapy, but that does not give them license to invade women’s spaces. It’s outrageous that this writer thought it was inappropriate to “ask” a male to compete in men’s sports but apparently completely appropriate to demand that women accept males in their category. Huh? Has the writer never considered why trans men who are suffering from gender dysphoria are not being asked, or indeed, asking to play on men’s teams?

World Aquatics established an open category in their 2023 World Championship meet. No one entered. Many road races offer a nonbinary or prefer not to say sex category, but these measures have not stopped trans-identified males from competing in the women’s category.

We asked Harper her thoughts on this and she was very clear:

“Trans women do not belong in men’s sports because trans women aren’t men,” says Harper. “Trans women are women. It’s important when creating rules for trans women in sports to consider the physical differences between trans women and cis women. At the heart of this matter should be that trans women belong in women’s spaces. It shouldn’t be a question of whether trans women are allowed in women’s sports, but under what conditions?

Ahhhh Harper shows his true colors. It doesn’t matter what science says. He’s an activist, not a scientist. Trans women are women, trans women belong in women’s spaces—he’s spouting religion. When the IOC and other sports organizations claim to follow the science yet employ Harper as their scientific advisor, we get a 51-year-old with his gut and his junk hustling around the track, excluding women, taking awards that were meant for women, and making a bad joke of sport. Harper should be nowhere near women’s sports or any sort of policymaking.

“If an ‘open’ category is where everyone in that category is male except for trans people, then you are othering trans people and not in any way honouring who trans people are. You’re just saying they can compete with men and we’ll just change the name. But that doesn’t fool anyone.”

Harper’s tone deafness is truly remarkable. Guess what else doesn’t fool anyone?

Where do we go from here?

“Who knows?” says Harper, who vows to continue her research. “I don’t know where we go from here. Where do the sports governing bodies go? I don’t know. So many sports are doing different things. How do we get to a place where this won’t be controversial? I just don’t have answers.

A biased, lazy writer who “doesn’t want to fan the flames” asked a trans activist who stomped his foot and intoned the mantra that trans women are women and that they belong, because they feel like it, in women’s spaces even if it’s unfair, and bing bang, that’s the future. No way out of this “controversy.” As long as women keep insisting on their own sports and spaces, on being a unique class of human being that men cannot identify into, and as long as bigoted people keep noticing that there is six kinds of wrong about a 51-year-old dude playing out his fantasies at the expense of women, yep, controversy. It’s almost like, when I staggered to the end of this “explainer,” Harpur and Harper had decided that women not acquiescing to men in their sports were the problem. Or women not accepting unfairness and just being nicer.

I can’t imagine why Harpur didn’t put this question to Alun Williams, or policy specialist Cathy Devine, or Sharron Davies. Or, why didn’t she ask any of the trans-identified female athletes who are competing without controversy in their sex category? Could it be the answer isn’t really that tricky?