Results: New Zealand National DH Series Round 1 - Fourforty MTB Park

 U19 still faster

 She broke her neck last season... being back on a bike is good enough I guess?

 @nateisgrate: I saw that too, wondering if it was the same course?

 @LaurensVR: 2019 actually. I know, the covid year confuses everything

 scared the rest away

 Good to see Kate riding again.

 When are thE XY and YX being created

 @stinkball: seems like we are downtvoted for a reason I don't understand

 Surprised there are no female riders in NZ.

 Totally agree with you OKdeeboy as your comments are bang on the money. The younger women stick to their age grades or if they are really good jump into Open Women’s.

 I doubt he’s an utter insufferable twat like Louis Hamilton.

 @jclnv: Lewis Hamilton

 @Escaflowne: Indeed. Sorry.

 Living in a country where you can actually go riding would be welcomed at the moment.

 @Davec85: you can ride locally but make sure its not too far locally but remember no far no gnar but also make sure you don't drive there but you can drive there if its local but don't cross county boarders but go for upto an hours exercise but if you do drive make sure you have £200 spare for the fine but don't think you can use your forestry pass to pay the fine but also make sure that you wvpiwjbprruvbwpjkvbpancm,cn.zcbzvznbcvkjwfebgvpriuhwpruhwjvbskdvlvcb;av;ajdbvfubvblllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

 Just make chums with a conservative mp and they’ll sort you out.

 @fatduke: just read up on your restrictions on the www.gov.uk website. My condolences, seems a bit much eh?

 @dubod22: I'd rather not ride

 @Bushmaster123: don't feel bad, no one is listening to them. LOL

 @conoat: and that is why we're resorting to riding on tarmac on MTB it is nothing short of sacrilege.

 @fatduke: who is "we"? lol

 @conoat: well currently I and others have to cycle on the road to get to the nearest bridleway way. Never seen the boggy muddy horse shit plagued trails so busy (there's maybe 5 others mtb'ers)

 @fatduke: just drive. Corona doesn't really care your method of conveyance. lol

 perhaps they should just all race in the same category!? I would rather get smoked in a race after cating up than to cat down and sandbag myself the top step.

 @conoat: I agree, I’d much much rather have really hard competition than none at all. Sandbagging isn’t fun at all and neither is racing yourself.

 Having the vibrate on the phone in his pocket turned up to max helped bring him to the finish line in such good time.

 BAT!

 @Steventux: I was trying to think of a way to work in “yes I hear you, Clem Fandango” but couldn’t quite get there

 Even Michael Jordan had some struggles playing baseball.

 @Snfoilhat: I agree with what he is saying and it is in reference to Kate Weatherly being able to compete in the women’s category despite being biologically male with all the advantages that brings. Minimum testosterone levels have been set way higher than most women’s, but even if you totally disregard testosterone there are still many other advantages that remain; bone structure, more muscle nuclei etc the whole thing is just totally unfair on women despite what the whole crowd are telling us

 @Wincobankchef: careful, that kind of talk will get you banned from Pinkbike because they "follow the lead of the UCI"

 @Wincobankchef: Thing is, my degree is in biology, my graduate research was on regulation of sex hormones, and I make my living teaching human physiology. And what you're saying about so-called biological sex is incorrect. You make it sound like there is some scientific consensus on whom exactly fits into either of two sexes, which is totally unsupported by the evidence. That's not how chromosomal sex determination works, it's not how sex differentiation works. In my experience, people using the phrase 'biological sex' are non-scientists trying to somehow co-opt the authority of science to make some ideological assertion they have no evidence to support, or don't understand, and hope their audience doesn't understand either. These topics are complicated and no one should be embarrassed not to have a thorough grasp of them. Happy to help in any way I can

 @Snfoilhat: It sounds like you are underqualified to comment on this matter, hence all the downvotes from the experts.

 @Snfoilhat: Cispeople are often more than ignorant to the trans phenomenon and the medical implications and treatment options. There are no real standards of care in the sense that everyone gets treated with the same meds and dosages. Some hrt regimens can reduce testosterone levels below female levels so on an individual level trans athletes can also have disadvantages and the whole thing is blown out of proportion by right-wing agenda fear-mongering to scapegoat transpeople once again.

 @KalkhoffKiller: FFS. Projecting much.

 @KalkhoffKiller: Please don't refer to biological men as cis. I find it extremely offensive.

 It blows my mind that grown adults do everything they can to justify allowing men to compete against women, and delude themselves that it can somehow be made fair competition. There are studies showing sexual dimorphism in fetuses that differentiate the sexes by physical performance. Like I said, I have daughters, and I want womens sports to exist when they become teenagers. No one will watch uncompetitive racing.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: google the term

@hamncheez: so a male fetus will outperform any grown female athlete? You guys are so dense. Yes there are differences before puberty but they are minimal and equalized if hrt or puberty blockers are started before puberty, which is becoming the starting age in most countries. So in the long run, there won't be many problems because older transitioners will become rare and regulations of hormone levels more sophisticated.

 @Snfoilhat: It’s not incorrect, and you haven’t provided any evidence otherwise. It’s a fact that m2f’s bone structure and muscle nuclei remain the same amongst other factors. If someone is born male they can’t turn themselves female in biological terms. Only in terms of ‘gender’ which is a concept literally made up by a paedophile ‘sexologist’ named John Money

 @KalkhoffKiller: Doesn't matter what Google states. I'm a man simple as that . No reason to add the adjective cis. Like I said it offends me.

 @KalkhoffKiller: you think it’s ok to give puberty blockers to young children who are too young to consent to sex but somehow consenting to go on puberty blockers is ok? How can a child be allowed to make such life changing and potentially harmful decisions? How is it not better to treat with therapy and encourage kids that it’s ok if they don’t fit in with ‘gender norms’, that it doesn’t mean they are somehow a boy or girl born into the wrong body, it’s insane that puberty blockers are even allowed let alone the first port of call

 @Snfoilhat: and don’t accuse me of not understanding the subject matter, then condescend to me with ‘happy to help’ pretentious is an understatement for and just about anyone who opens with ‘ I actually have a degree..as if that somehow makes you completely infallible and me some sort of moron

 I have a daughter who loves riding her BMX, I couldn't give a flying fuck if she one day decides to race BMX and one of her competitors is transgender. But then I don't have an underlying problem with trans people that I'm trying to mask as a valiant defense of 'fairness'. Let's just be honest about our prejudices here, racing is rarely fair given privateers go up against supported riders etc.

 @Steventux: I’m not prejudice, people can do what they want, it doesn’t bother me..but people born male should stay out of womens sport and safe spaces. Don’t accuse me of being prejudice just because my opinion differs from yours.. I would never be unkind or abusive towards a trans person, but I would be upset if my daughter lost out on a podium or position on a sports team to someone born male. Just take a look at some transgender ‘female’ rugby players and you’ll see how ridiculous it’s getting. It all started with good intentions but now people are taking advantage of it

 @KalkhoffKiller: what are you talking about? My point is that studies like this www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5313487 find that well before puberty and the onset of testosterone, male and females exhibit unique differences that make inter-sex competition unfair, even before puberty, even if a man was on puberty blockers or has artificially reduced testosterone.

Puberty blockers don't just "block" puberty. They sterilize the patient and have overwhelming negative health effects. Even if all they did was somehow delay puberty, puberty itself is a necessary stage of life for physical wellbeing. The removal of healthy tissue, like sex organs, either surgically or chemically, is bad medicine and ruins the patients life.

 @Snfoilhat:

Male: small gametes
Femaile: large gametes

There is ZERO scientific debate of this FACT in mammalian biology. Your word-soup tries hard to confuse an issue that has NO confusion.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: nah you're just a bigot like most trans-hostile posters citing their 'biological facts' claiming to 'protect womenz from da evil trans-propagandists who inject children with hormones´ simple as

 @Wincobankchef: so you're suggesting conversion therapy instead?

 @KalkhoffKiller: You know nothing about me you self righteous douchebag. I have absolutely no issue with people wanting to change their gender . I have a problem with them competing against women when they have a clear advantage. Just like I have a problem with anyone taking steroids. Wake up.

 @KalkhoffKiller: i think euthanasia would be better for u pal

 @Wincobankchef:
I appreciate you are not prejudice against trans people and that you took the time to state this here.

As regards the issue of fairness, I suppose it's up to the sport's governing body to continually investigate scientific evidence of the advantages a trans person may gain in a female sport and set the rules accordingly while still trying to be inclusive within the limits of fairness.
If the UCI have done this (I assume they have) I guess the only reasonable way to oppose the current rules is to petition them with scientific evidence of the advantages a trans person gains in this sort of scenario.

What's missing from a lot of the comments here is that scientific evidence, I'm genuinely ignorant but I to some extent trust that a governing body the size of the UCI will have put in a bit of groundwork before ruling on this.

 @Steventux:

Here is some recent stuff Steven. I would also like to state that I have no hate for trans people. I am filled with compassion for anyone who struggles to find their place. I have a trans person in my family and I love them.

I don't believe trans woman should complete against women.

Here is a recent study. Cheers.

www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short

bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/11/06/bjsports-2020-102329

 @Adamrideshisbike: That's really helpful.

The standout paragraph for me is

"Summary The 15–31% athletic advantage that transwomen displayed over their female counterparts prior to starting gender affirming hormones declined with feminising therapy. However, transwomen still had a 9% faster mean run speed after the 1 year period of testosterone suppression that is recommended by World Athletics for inclusion in women’s events."

It would be good to know what the statistics were after 2 or 3 years given the decline in advantage over a year.

The UCI website states the following elligibility criteria:

"All transgender athletes wishing to compete in the category corresponding to their new gender must make their request to the medical manager appointed by the UCI, at least six weeks before the date of the first competition.
The athlete’s file will be passed on to a commission of three international experts independent of the UCI. The commission’s members will assess the athlete’s eligibility to compete in the new gender category and will inform the UCI’s medical officer of their conclusions.
The athlete must prove that their serum testosterone level has been below 5 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to the eligibility date.
Once deemed eligible, the athlete must agree to keep their serum testosterone level below 5 nmol/L for the entire time they compete in the Women category.
The athlete must undergo serum testosterone tests conducted using a benchmark method (mass spectrometry)."

I guess what I am wondering is if there's a point where no advantage is present, and whether rules need to be adjusted accordingly as the scientific studies support it.
It seems arbitrarily restrictive to say trans women cannot compete against cis women ever. Especially IF it is possible to demonstrate any advantage is nullified with time + therapies.

 @Steventux: Well, in my opinion, using testosterone as your only metric is highly simplistic. As a sexually dimorphic species, there are 1000s of difference, mostly small, but the aggregate leads to major difference in elite competition.

Here is something unrelated to testosterone:

Visual acuity has consistently been shown to be better in males (Burg, 1966; McGuinness, 1976; Ishigaki and Miyao,1994; Abramov et al.,2012a)

Is that advantage going to disappear?

Other questions I would hope to see factored in if they truly wish to decide that the playing field is level:

1. Reaction time: Males have better reaction time on average.

journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026141#:~:text=The%20mean%20fastest%20reaction%20time,ms%20and%20121%20ms%2C%20respectively.

2. Muscle Composition: Males have more fast-twitch fibres, crucial to high-speed reactions on a bike.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4285578

3. Pain: "A substantial body of research indicates that women experience greater clinical pain, suffer greater pain-related distress, and show heightened sensitivity to experimentally induced pain compared with men."

Even pain is a different experience between the sexes. What is to say that a trans-womans competitors are even able to train as hard?

4. Grip Strength: We are talking about downhill racing here. If you have stronger hands, you have an advantage.

"Though female athletes were significantly stronger (444 N) than their untrained female counterparts, this value corresponded to only the 25th percentile of the male subjects. "

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19207233

I could go on and on. I did a degree in this stuff.

There are many differences between men and women and I suspect that in 2,3 years, there would be a retained advantage. I suspect in 50 years there would be a retained advantage.

 @Adamrideshisbike: Very interesting and I'm learning a lot, given your scientific knowledge though, wouldn't you advocate for longer running studies which could be evaluated and define the rule book?

I think its a decent argument to say testosterone is a simplistic measure to base rules on, but it surely begs for wider criteria from wider scientific studies rather than a blanket ban?

Challenging my own point, what we do in the meantime if we can demonstrate unfair advantage is another question.

 @Steventux:

You could keep studying it, spend the money to do longer-term studies. It's probably happening as we speak, but it's highly unlikely to lead to the results that the activists are looking for.

Where does that leave us? Likely bans for trans-women in elite sport, which governing bodies are trying to avoid, or avoiding to be the first. I believe at this point, only rugby, boxing, UFC have gone this route.

Let's also not forget, this issue only affects competitive sport. Obviously trans-women should be welcomed as athletes and members of sporting communities.

 @Steventux: Here is the problem- the only real way to "level the playing field" is to essentially demonstrate that the trans athlete has actual performance below a certain level. We already do this in amateur racing, with different cats (sport, elite, pro, masters, etc) which is fine. If Bruni showed up at your local race and entered the Sport category, he would rightfully be called a sandbagger.

However, for world cup/championships, ultra elite level racing, peoples livelihoods are on the line. These are the heroes we look up to. There is no performance cap. If we make a rule that trans athletes can only compete if they have actual results below a certain threshold, then essentially you're saying they aren't allowed to win. No one wants that either.

There is no other way to be completely fair, since the majority of differences between the sexes is independent of testosterone, and can actually be observed in prepubescent children and even in fetuses before people are even born. The only logical outcome is a separate category for trans athletes, or only allowing competition within your actual sex. Yes this sucks, but life sucks sometimes. We have to look for the best solution among available options; usually there isn't a perfect answer.

 @hamncheez: I agree the problem is that we aren't able to demonstrate that a trans athlete has performance below a certain level based on studies of less than a few years. Setting the rulebook forever based on limited evidence is as bad as setting the rule book based on inclusivity alone.

Major global sports generally do not have immutable rules (OK wiki me wrong there's bound to be a ton of exceptions) and it's reasonable to adapt the rules according to new scientific information and cultural changes, we may be at a point in time where we suspect but cannot prove or disprove an advantage (it seems there's plenty of evidence for an advantage which diminishes over time and with therapies) and this puts the rules in a position where they can be construed as unfair, I accept that.

I don't see how it follows that the only logical outcome is a separate category for trans athletes, it might be reasonable to create this category and allow athletes to choose to enter it and continue to evaluate the rules on who can compete in the womens category based on scientific evidence.

As I mentioned earlier the most reasonable thing to do if you have a strong feeling about this is to present evidence to the sporting bodies and pressure them to change the rules.

 @Steventux: Yes, rules aren't immutable. Neither is our medical science. Some day there might be therapies that make a trans person indistinguishable from those who are the actual sex in the category, but thats not today. I didn't mean to say "always and forever", but we shouldn't create rules based on what might happen, but rather what we know now.

The problem is that all the major sports governing bodies, the IOC, FIFA, UCI, etc are incredibly corrupt and bow to political pressure rather than what science says. If you come out with a position that is deemed "transphobic" you are boycotted, sued, threatened, etc. The pressure of activists is incredible. Just look at some of the people in this comment thread. They call medical treatment of a child who thinks they are the opposite sex "conversion therapy" and then wave it around like it has power over us. Look at the UCI right now, the science is overwhelming that no matter how much or how long you use hormone therapy, males retain their athletic advantage. The athletic advantage is present before puberty, before even birth. Yet the UCI ignores science and allows mens to compete against women.

 @hamncheez: I think it's all too easy to have a polarised view on a subject like this, and I agree that we probably need a constantly adapting set of rules as studies uncover more evidence.
This will always mean that some seasons have a rule book which may seem unfair with the benefit of hindsight, the more we know, you'd have to hope the better the rules will be with every iteration.

It's interesting what you say about corruption, if these governing bodies are so corrupt, why would you expect a level playing field at all? Surely the issue then is not with the rule itself but with the rule makers. If systemic shortcomings have led to this situation then we can examine any rule they make with the same cynicism. A change of governance is needed and not a change of rule.

You seem to imply the corruption is exacerbated by pressure from equal rights groups, and this appears to be central to your point about the rules we have - you go as far as to refer to trans women as 'men'. I think this is probably tainted by your own opinion of gender reassignment, I truly respect you have a different opinion from me, so lets leave that there, there's little point in coming at the argument from such different perspectives. There's a lot of polarity in these sort of discussions which rarely leads to an agreeable outcome.

 @Steventux: Yes, its always about who makes the rules, not what the actual rules are.

"you go as far as to refer to trans women as 'men'."

This is the scientific, factual, apolitical way to describe trans women. Mammals are defined by having hair; shaving does not stop me from being a mammal.

We are a sexual dimorphic species, what else is there to say?

 @hamncheez: I suppose the counterpoint would be "What do trans women describe themselves as?"
I think the claim this is scientific and factual is probably cherry-picking the facts to suit the bias.

 @hamncheez: Aren't we a sexually dimorphic species with the ability to engineer bodily changes which cross the dimorphic boundaries? Hence this whole discussion.
This sounds again like "things are fixed and they can't be changed", evidently they are changing as we're here discussing that. This whole thread is commentary on how things are changing both for the human body and the sporting world.
Are you asserting that despite this, a person born a woman can never be a man and vice versa? If so by what criteria?
I thought we were at issue merely with the criteria of who should be allowed to compete against one another but you appear to be widening the discussion with larger assumptions about the human race as immutable fact.

 @hamncheez: youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us?t=1582

 @Steventux: Thoughts on this:

www.npr.org/2018/11/08/665592537/69-year-old-dutch-man-seeks-to-change-his-legal-age-to-49

Yes, we can medically alter someone to either appear, or take on many physical traits of the opposite sex. However, this technology is in its infancy. It can not come close to making a female "male" or vice versa, and most of the treatments have severe side effects that dramatically reduce quality of life, life expectancy, overall health, and nearly all of them result in sterilization. We might be there someday, but that is not today nor in the near future.

Why can't that guy legally change his age? Why can't I compete in the Juniors? If I strongly identify as a youth, I take drugs to make my hormonal profile more along the lines of a 17 year old, and lose a lot of weight, would it be ok for me to compete in the Juniors? No. There are social, legal, and polite reasons why we segregate people based on age. It is inappropriate and illegal for me to date a 15 year old in my 30s. It wasn't when I was 16 and dating a 15 year old.

This same logic applies to the sexes. There are reasons why it is inappropriate for me to hang around in a womens dressing room (like what Trump did when he was running the Miss Universe or whatever it was). Medical technology cannot yet fully bridge the physiological gap to make it appropriate yet. That is not "cherry picking", thats the current state of medical science.

You keep saying I say "never", and "can't be changed". This is a clear misrepresentation of what I'm saying. The burden of proof is not on the girls wanting to compete against only women, the burden of proof is on you- you have to prove that a man can be physiologically changed enough to make it a fair competition. If you are proposing something that will upset peoples entire livelihoods, you better have dang good evidence.

 @hamncheez: Well not me personally, scientific studies are needed to provide this proof I agree.
Yay for more science and less rigid rules!

 @Steventux: Agree with the first part, disagree with the second. Sports need very rigid rules to keep the competition fair. No one will watch if the rules are tossed around like a ship at sea. You can evolve a sport (like allowing mullets) while still remaining fair and consistent.

 @hamncheez: I mean that the rules need to adapt to the scientific and cultural landscape, hence we shape rules around these sort of issues.

Interesting that you say "the burden of proof is on you- you have to prove that a man can be physiologically changed enough to make it a fair competition" when the current rules are such that the reverse is true, you have to prove that any advantage for trans athletes makes competition unfair.

I suppose we could go on and on about this, there are evidently differing opinions about whether the UCI and other sporting bodies have made the right decision with the current rules.
You evidently don't think they have made the right decision, and I genuinely don't know, I've learned a lot talking about it though.
Thankfully whichever side of the debate you are on the rules can always be changed with enough supporting scientific evidence and societal pressure. That much at least is fair.

 Well I got some bad news for ya. Our great new president has just guaranteed that this will keep happening to more young women.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: Whereas the previous prez had a great rep with women.

 @Steventux: what does that have to do with the current topic? Absolutely nothing.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: You're right, he's old news.
How has Biden guaranteed this will keep happening to more young women though? I'd heard about the armed forces changes but didn't realise this extended to sport too. Excuse my ignorance, genuine question.

 @Steventux: Biden made it illegal for any sport to exclude trans athletes.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: So what?

 @KalkhoffKiller: You know " so what". Don't play dumb.

 @BeerGuzlinFool: Ah that's nice and inclusive of him. Good Job!

I'm trying to find the women athletes here commenting that this isn't fair but it seems to be the usual sausage party.

 @Steventux:

"Rawson, 19, went public with her frustrations, saying the lack of a stand-down period between Weatherly's change of categories was confusing and unfair and was one reason only five women turned up to race.

She posted on Facebook that cycling had always been a gender-specific sport, "not a competition among individuals around hormone levels or physiological advantages".

She said she'd worked hard and committed her life to the sport "but never did I imagine I would be faced with this", signing off #brokenbutnotdown.

Rawson has stepped back from discussing the issue; her father Ash, says she's received flak for speaking out."

interactives.stuff.co.nz/2018/03/a-level-playing-field

 @Larkey1: Thanks, that's really good to see some actual cited evidence of this. I wonder what a poll of women racers would produce in terms of opinion on this matter.

I just want to be clear that having no medical training and no scientific knowledge of the supposed advantages Kate would have over other female competitors I'm genuinely ignorant here.

Seems like something a sporting body would investigate and legislate on, have the UCI done this? If so it seems like the authorities have set the rules.

 'Sexual dimorphism' doesn't mean there are two sexes, it doesn't establish or in any way provide some evidence or authority for claiming there are two sexes. I means that _if_ you separate a population into only two groupings according to some _agreed upon convention w/ respect to sex_, that you should expect to see differences in the distributions of one or more morpological characters, like size. Distributions are sample level or population level, and do not tell you anything about individuals. Y'all have this exactly backwards, on top of the little elision of the work "weakly" in the phrase 'weakly sexually dimorphic.' Dimorphism isn't a definition that you get to swing around and get to define people. Dimophism is a hypothesis that lets you make informed guesses about what you might see when the pre-conditions of the hypothesis are met. Jesus wept

 @Snfoilhat more precisely sexual dimorphism is a _model_ that may generate a number of different hypotheses when the conditions of the model are met. Please get it right if you're gonna talk on the internet. -yourself

 I remember there were protests when Michelle was racing. One was the second place finisher wearing a t-shirt saying something like '100% woman champ'

 @iamamodel: If one of the women wore that today they would be bullied out of the sport . Shame

 I am unsure if the boycotting is true or just a rumour, but if it's true it would be because Kate is trans.

 @skiandmtbdirtbag: I cant speak for the women but I would say its not true. While there's plenty of women riding here, theres very little that want to race dh, especially at elite level

 I’d like to understand this issue more. Why is there only one entrant in the E women category? Genuinely curious

 @rrsport: Like I said, I have no idea if it's true or not, but the question I was answering was what is the reason if it is true.

 beep/bop/boop

 @skiandmtbdirtbag: Its related to the disclaimer in the box at the bottom of the article before the comments section. Possibly

 @skiandmtbdirtbag: Ohhh, I didn't even know who Kate was. I sure hope that rumour is not true. That would be sad. Everyone I met while living in NZ was so inclusive. I feel like it's more likely that 440 is a small (but awesome) bike park and there's not many elite level female riders in the region.

 Why are there comments saying women boycotted the race? Because PB comments are 50% speculation, 20% knee-jerk reaction, 10% trolling, 10% jesting (me) and 10% facts. On any topic.

But that's just my opinion, man.

 No boycotting, most women stick with Open Women’s, or age group. maybe Elite comes with UCI points and regulations ???

 @conv3rt: probably because NZ only has a population of about 4.5 million and DH just isn't that popular.

 @PhillipJ: so there wasn't boycotting?

 It's basically a fact that they don't like racing against Weatherly. But they're not allowed to express that sentiment these days. I'm so sorry ladies

 So I looked up Weatherly and now understand more. Too bad that open inquiry is met with ad hominem response again and again. I'm not sure how shouting down opinions helps advance any solutions. As she is free to transition and then enter and compete in sports, so are people free to express their curiosity and/or disagreement. Sounds like her history is filled with struggle. If she's come this far, then she's strong enough to get past this too.

 @conv3rt: i don't know for sure but I really doubt it. There's usually a decent womens' field for enduro events but very little turnout for DH.

 @shawnca7: How close is "basically a fact" to actually a fact? Closer than "alternative fact"?

 @PhillipJ: I've read actual instances where other born female competitors have complained, so I'm going with it coming directly from them as factual, at least to some extent. I don't have anything against her, but I also can't discount real frustrations the other girls feel. I don't feel its fair to disregard their feelings either. Tough situation.

 Probably at McGazzafest in Queenstown on the same weekend. Majority of the big names would have gone to that instead.

 Yep but it was much wetter for them, tracks are clay so it was a little more peanut butter. Wind got up in arvo and dried it out some. Guy's practice time was fastest of the weekend. Think it was about 2.22 or so.

 @conoat: You thinking it's one island shows how in depth you went with your digging.

 @conoat: yes ever since horse (jacinda) was prime minister it's been pretty feminine here