During an interview on Sydney’s top-rated radio breakfast program on the first day of a crucially important election campaign, Scott Morrison wanted to talk about trans people.
Unprompted, the prime minister brought up the defining policy of his handpicked Liberal candidate for Warringah and co-founder of Save Women’s Sport Australasia, Katherine Deves.
“She’s standing up for something really important, and that is to ensure that, you know, when it comes to girls playing sport and women playing sport, that they’re playing against people of the same sex. And that’s, that’s, I know it’s a sensitive issue –,” Morrison said before being interrupted by host Chris Smith, and returned to it after the interjection to say he shares Deves’ views.
Morrison and Deves know exactly what they’re doing when they bring up trans women in sport.
Australians overwhelmingly support the rights of trans people. A YouGov poll conducted for Equality Australia in July 2020 found that four in five Australians agree trans people deserve the same rights and protections as other Australians.
But conservative political campaigners have identified trans people as a potential wedge in people’s support for the LGBTIQA+ movement. At a conference in 2021, Australian Christian Lobby director Martyn Iles called transgender people “where the lie is most fragile”. In the UK and increasingly the US, the rights of trans people have become a bigger and more popular culture war topic.
Trans women in sport specifically has been a target for anti-trans campaigners. Australian anti-trans group Binary published a poll that found a majority of Australians thought trans women shouldn’t compete against biological females — however, it is worth noting that the group did not name the polling firm and it is difficult to assess just how reliable these results are versus an established pollster like YouGov. But we know from credible polls in the US that support for trans women in sport is a lot more contested, like this 2021 Morning Consult poll that found 40% of people supported trans women competing at collegiate level sport versus 42% who opposed.
But talking about restricting trans rights — even if it’s specifically about women’s sport — isn’t as popular as talking about whatever the government is doing on the economy or how it’s recovered from COVID-19.
Plus the number of people who it actually affects is vanishingly small: less than 2% of Australians are trans and not all of them play sport. The deletion of Deves’ Twitter account just before the election and the lack of mention of trans women or sport in her Liberal Party website biography may hint at a campaign decision to steer away from this issue. Punters in the pub, around the dinner table, aren’t spending all their time talking about it.
So why is Morrison talking about it? Well, he has a track record of bringing it up. Less than a month after becoming PM, Morrison responded to an article in The Daily Telegraph about NSW teachers being taught to recognise children questioning their gender by tweeting — again unprompted — his opposition: “We do not need ‘gender whisperers’ in our schools. Let kids be kids.”
Morrison has previously been vocal in his support for an anti-trans sport bill private member’s bill from Senator Claire Chandler, a rising star in the Liberal Party who has staked her flag to campaigning against trans women in sport.
Plus the Morrison government was all too happy to use transgender school children as a wedge when attempting, and ultimately failing, to pass its religious discrimination legislation through Parliament earlier this year.
The sudden appearance of moderate Liberal MPs coming out of the woodwork to “express concern” about Morrison’s comments isn’t proof that this was Morrison freelancing. This is the government’s attempt to be all things to all people: Morrison, Chandler and Deves are sending a signal to a more conservative base worried about gender and the “wokeism” bogeyman, whereas senators Andrew Bragg and Simon Birmingham are smoothing it over by saying that there’s nothing to worry about.
All of this article has been about politics, but debates about trans people doesn’t just concern politicians. It affects trans people. They are among the most marginalised and socioeconomically disadvantaged. They are at higher risk of suicidal ideation, self harm and mental health issues. They’re the ones who have to hear their identity and rights debated by the national media, despite it really affecting very, very few people. They will, no doubt, be chilled by a promise from the prime minister on the campaign trail on Monday: “I’ll have more to say about that at another time.”
Completely intentional and evil.
“…debates about trans people doesn’t just concern politicians. It affects trans people.”
Are you aware this debate also affects women and girls? The Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act of 1991, for instance, explicitly allows exemptions for competitive sport to be single-sex. (See here: https://www.qhrc.qld.gov.au/your-rights/discrimination-law/exemptions) Allowing males – regardless of their self identification – into competitions for women and girls renders single-sex sport unisex. Mixed sex. Co-ed, for girls. That is a clear conflict.
Caitlyn Jenner, a transwoman who knows rather a lot about competitve sport, supports single-sex sports. Do you contend Caitlyn Jenner is anti-trans?
World Rugby and the UK’s Sports Councils’ Equality Group are aware of this too: they studied the conflict, consulted sports scientists, women’s groups and trans groups. They concluded that fairness and safety for women and girls is incompatible with inclusion of any males, as a result of the fundamentally unchangeable dimorphism of the two sexes: males gain such physical advantages during puberty that no amount of testosterone suppression can reverse that. Therefore they concluded that segregating sport by sex should continue.
No-one is objecting to excluding adults from children’s sports, and no-one is objecting to excluding able-bodied people from the Paralympics. It would be far more inclusive to do away with those segregations, but no-one is arguing that.
All the pro-“inclusion” people want to do is take away what women have. I wonder if there is a word for that attitude?
I think your post is exactly why this isn’t an issue that should be fought through an election. It does nothing for the day to day for the majority of australians apart from dividing people up.
I think it’s a complex issue and shouldn’t be thrown around as red meat for certain sections of the voting population.
Lastly, perhaps the starting point should be to discuss if this should be something for professional sporting organisations to codify (especially since every sport is different) rather then the blunt instrument of laws made by a state.
Do you think
1. it is a complex issue to exclude adults from children’s sports? If so, please elaborate…
2. women’s rights should not be codified through the “blunt instrument” of law, but through piecemeal, case by case negotiation at every workplace, social space and group?
have a look at the ages of professional gymnasts or even tennis players. Still kids there playing among adults in professional games.
That’s kids choosing (or being pushed by parents, etc.) to compete at the adult level, not adults “identifying as” children. Absolutely the opposite of whatever point you think you are making.
Yet so many are happy for other complex issues such as domestic violence, women’s rights and immigration to be used as red meat against the LNP?
Sure, we all know where Morrison is at – gay hate no, trans hate yeah. It is all about the washrooms.
On the other hand, it is absurd and unfair, for US Lia Thomas to swim against US cis women. Hence the remarks of Jenner.
It is incumbent on AU sports bodies, to arrive at better answers than that, and if they do not, federal laws may be required in due course.
Where Morrison is at is where the majority of the Australian people are at. Not “anti-trans”. Just anti people born with penises and testicles, and in some cases still possessing them, competing as women.
The sporting bodies are dammed if they do or dont. Either they get smashed by the left or the right. I bet none want to be first to broach this issue and suffer the endless attacks and so it gets kicked down the road until it’s taken out of their hands.
Welcome to a society that cant discuss things like mature adults. This is what outrage politics gives us.
It is depressing to see the number of normally rational commenters here who have drowned in the KoolAid, rather than just drink it.
People like you seem to think that there are men who decide to identify as women just so they can compete in women’s sport and have an advantage. This would be so absurd as to be risible except for the fact that there are people nasty and stupid enough to keep repeating it. Trans people are people who are transitioning or have transitioned to the gender with which they identify. This is a complex procedure and usually involves hormone treatment. It is totally absurd to try and argue that males gain physical advantages during puberty that are permanent. What about the weedy teenage boy who never does any sport, and then becomes a woman who decides she would like to play a team sport? There are cisgender women who naturally produce more testosterone than other women. Are you going to ban them from playing women’s sport? There are way, way too many variables in this to make the cut and dried statements that you have made.
And, in fact, this is what the UK Sports Councils’ Equality Group found. You have, unsurprisingly, cherry picked it, which is exactly what we would expect from someone like you. Here is what was actually said:
‘ As a result of what the review found, the Guidance concludes that the inclusion of transgender people into female sport cannot be balanced regarding transgender inclusion, fairness and safety in gender-affected sport where there is meaningful competition. This is due to retained differences in strength, stamina and physique between the average woman compared with the average transgender woman or non-binary person assigned male at birth, with or without testosterone suppression. Sports, however, are incredibly diverse and there can be no ‘one-size fits all’ approach. This review has concluded therefore that, for many sports, there may not be a common single competition model which will meet the needs of full transgender inclusion while retaining competitive fairness, particularly in female sport. We are therefore encouraging and advising NGBs and SGBs to define the best options for their sport and determine whether it may be possible to offer more than one version of their sport to achieve the different aims. NGBs and SGBs are encouraged, and will be supported, to use the decision-making framework set out below, in which they can consider how gender affected their sport is, and if appropriate, consider how this might be modified and adapted to offer multiple competitive or participation models. The Sports Councils are committed to facilitating and promoting the education and decision-making process to enable NGBs and SGBs to make the best decisions for their sport and for their communities. This Guidance also sets out the underlying principles which NGBs should consider when developing policies in this area, which are designed to create opportunities for sport to increase inclusion and the breadth of sport for everyone in society. ‘
Thanks VJ for this informative post. Seems reason is coming back into fashion in UK sporting circles. It’s interesting that discrimination is ok when it suits females.
This pretty much aligns with the angry protectionist view points expressed by old guard feminists here in past posts, to the point that Crikey had to turn off the comment sections for fear of wedging their subscriber base.
I wonder when the same ‘it isnt cut and dried’ response you make will be the norm when it comes to general gender discussions. At present, what I’m hearing is that there is no reason other than vile gender discrimination for women to be under represented or suffer a “pay gap” in ANY vocation or other activity.
Yawn. I seriously don’t know why you bother commenting. You have nothing of value to add. I guess that’s how you got your moniker.
By my last count there are <4 subscribers left in Crikey who are willing to give LNP or conservatives credit where occasionally it is due. To be objective. The rest of the commentariat are so rusted on that it's mindnumbing to read the comment sections now. The discussion used to be as good as the articles. Now it's just churning out the same anti LNP, anti murdoch and anti white conservative male one liners day after day.
Suggest something/anything for which to “…give LNP or conservatives credit where occasionally it is due.”
Nothing leaps to mind.
Possibly because the Coalition and Murdoch churn out the same toxic garbage every day.
Of course, Strawman, you could always unsubscribe from Crikey. Since you find the “anti LNP, anti murdoch and anti white conservative male” stance of Crikey readers so objectionable you should stick to reading (and commenting on) the pro LNP, pro Murdoch and pro white conservative male commentary available in almost every other publication in this country. Me, I find Crikey refreshing – I am reminded that decent people still exist.
As opposed to the trans men who are winning at their sports?
At all but the most elite levels, beyond college level in the USA, a year of hormone therapy suffices to erase any advantage outside the range of female norms.
This is repeatedly found by inquiry after inquiry. Jenner’s opinion is just that. A single opinion.
Trans men such as who? Competing in what male sport?
Utterly untrue – musculature, body size, lung capacity/oxygen transfer rates are undiminished.
Musculature is reduced by testosterone-reducing treatments.
With massive doses the mass may be reduced slightly – a temporary effect similar to a cessation of hard training – and recovers quickly when the overdosing ceases or training resumes.
The extra attachments to skeleton and other effects of puberty such as lung capacity are unaffected.
Just for the record – Jenner retains full male genitalia and has no intention of changing.
Using vulnerable children for transparent political purposes is absolutely disgusting. Does it infuriate Christians to see their high profile proponents drag its ethics through the mud like this? And, thank you for writing about something that matters, there’s less than usual of that in Crikey today 🙁
Another chapter in “Morrison – Dog-whistling 101”
Virtue-signalling to the smug shameless.
Vice signalling.