- The Washington Times - Tuesday, June 22, 2021

A former Olympic medalist in swimming harshly criticized the participation of trans women in the female divisions of the Olympics, saying biology matters.

British medalist Sharron Davies decried in a series of tweets Monday and Tuesday the case of Laurel Hubbard, a biological male who now identities as a woman, making the Olympics in weightlifting representing New Zealand.

“We have men & women’s separate competition [for] a BIG reason, biology in sport matters,” the British swimmer said. “Separate categories give females equal opportunities of sporting success.”

In a series of retweets of others’ posts, Ms. Davies noted a chart showing Ms. Hubbard’s performance routine for a male weightlifter but far above the norm for the sport’s women, a post saying women were being cheated out of medals, and the fact that the Olympics goes after steroid users who get a far smaller PED advantage than what maleness gives.

“Those who stay silent are complicit, now is the time 2find your voice 4fairness. If you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem. By demanding open respectful debate backed up by scientific fact we can find solutions females, 51% of this world deserve #sexnotgender,” she wrote Tuesday.

She also reposted a tweet quoting NFL Hall-of-Fame quarterback Brett Favre reacting to Ms. Hubbard with “If I was a true female and I was competing in weightlifting and lost to this person, I would be beside myself.”

Ms. Davies won a silver medal in the 400-meter individual medley at the 1980 Olympics in Moscow and also won two golds for England at the Commonwealth Games — an Olympics-style festival contested by countries that were once part of the British Empire.

Ms. Davies also reposted a signed letter from Fair Play For Women criticizing the involvement of biological men in female sports.

The International Olympic Committee “are to blame for unfair rules,” the tweet says. “We wrote a letter signed by 60 world-class athletes in 2019. We met with them in 2020 telling them why the rules were not fit for purpose. It was glaringly obvious this would happen. Why did they carry on regardless?”

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2021 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide