- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Emily Bridges racing for British Cycling (Instagram)Emily Bridges accuses Rishi Sunak of “normalising violence against trans people”, as she prepares for British Cycling legal challenge
Emily Bridges, the transgender cyclist whose controversial participation in female events prompted British Cycling to review and update its transgender and non-binary participation policies, has confirmed that she will continue to challenge the governing body’s decision – despite conceding that “elite sport is over for me”.
In a wide-ranging interview with ITV which aired last night, Bridges claimed that British Cycling’s creation of an ‘Open’ category for races and events to run alongside the pre-existing female classification has effectively amounted to a ban for transgender women, as well as constituting a “violation” of her human rights.
She also criticised the recent comments made by Rishi Sunak during Prime Minister’s Questions, which attacked Labour leader Keir Starmer’s “definition of a woman” and which were made while the mother of murdered trans teen Brianna Ghey was attending parliament, with Bridges arguing that by “trying to win a political game” Sunak was “normalising violence against trans people”.
> British Cycling updates transgender policy, introduces new "Open" category
In May 2023, over a year after it suspended its transgender policy with immediate effect in the wake of Bridges’ controversial exclusion from the women’s British Omnium Championships in April 2022 and following a nine-month review, British Cycling announced its decision to introduce a new ‘Open’ category for competitive events, consolidating the existing men’s grouping and running alongside the female category, which is restricted to those born biologically female.
British Cycling CEO John Dutton said at the time that the updated policy would “both safeguard the fairness of cycle sport competition, whilst ensuring all riders have opportunities to participate”.
However, Bridges – whose exclusion from the Omnium Championships catapulted her into the spotlight and made her one of the world’s most high-profile trans athletes – accused the governing body of “furthering a genocide” against transgender people, while her mother, Sandy Sullivan, later confirmed to road.cc that a legal challenge to the policy was being prepared.
> Emily Bridges set to mount legal challenge against British Cycling’s transgender policy
And this week, while speaking to ITV, Bridges says she is prepared to take the case to the European Court for Human Rights – despite acknowledging that her own days of competing at an elite level are almost certainly over.
“It’s not something I allow myself to think about too much because that part of my life is gone now, and it’s not something I really want to do anymore,” she told ITV News.
“If we were allowed to compete, if I was allowed to compete, it would be a different conversation, but I can’t compete… I can’t do something I used to love.”
Agreeing with the interviewer that her human rights had been “violated” by British Cycling’s policy update, she continued: “I don't care if I never compete again. It’s for other people who want to compete and it’s just about what’s right.”
Bridges also disagreed with British Cycling’s assertion that trans women are still free to compete in the new open category, insisting that a “ban is a ban”.
“You can say you can compete in the open category, but we’re women, we should be able to race in the women’s category,” she said.
Bridges added that she would not feel safe racing alongside men and that she was uncomfortable with the thought of trans women being “forced” to out themselves in order to compete in the open category.
“Obviously I have a past in cycling, I have previous results and people know me,” she said.
“But for another trans woman who hasn’t competed in the past, she’s trans but is seen by the world as a cis woman, how is it fair to ask her to out herself and compete in the open category? That’s not fair and it’s not safe either.”
The British cyclist, who has participated in research at Loughborough University to assess the fairness of current trans participation policies, also disputes the peer-reviewed studies cited by British Cycling which claim that trans women who have suppressed testosterone retain a competitive advantage compared to cis women after puberty.
“How many of those studies are done on athletes?” she asked. “I have been part of a study, and the data will be coming out soon, and opponents of my inclusion, have been trying to discredit all of the data.”
In a statement, British Cycling said: “Our revised policies have been designed to safeguard the fairness of cycle-sport competition, while continuing to ensure that all riders have access to welcoming and inclusive opportunities to participate."
“We remain fully committed to listening to our communities and working with other sporting bodies to monitor changes in the scientific and policy landscapes, and will be reviewing our policies annually or more frequently if required.”
Meanwhile, beyond the world of cycling and sport, Bridges also took aim at Rishi Sunak, after the prime minister was roundly criticised for a jibe directed at Keir Starmer during PMQs, which called into question the opposition leader’s stance on the “definition of a woman”. Sunak refused to apologise for the remarks, which were made while murdered trans teenager Brianna Ghey’s mother was attending parliament and just a week after two teenagers were sentenced for killing her.
“It normalises violence against trans people,” Bridges said of Sunak’s PMQs remark. “At the end of the day, that is the impact. In court the judge presiding over the trial of Brianna’s murderers has said that transphobia was a factor, that transphobia is directly linked to the normalisation of these comments and, and the media pushing, pushing these debates and everything.
“And it's just like, people are getting killed – we are still getting killed and it's an incredibly scary time to be trans at the moment. If you leave the house and you’re thinking, ‘I’m not going to come home, because someone doesn’t like who I am’, and that's a very real conversation that we’re having.
“It’s not safe anymore, but it’s never been particularly safe, but it has gotten worse. [Sunak] is not thinking about it at all. He’s just trying to win a political game. There’s no thought at all.”
Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- andystow 4 sec ago
Don't worry, we've got your 40,000 actually killed over here in the USA. Hell, we had over 1711 in 2023 just in Georgia, a state with 1/6 the...
- wtjs 12 min 19 sec ago
Roger. Thanks for the correction
- HarrogateSpa 13 min 17 sec ago
He did use the word 'driver' when talking about his mum's death....
- andystow 19 min 44 sec ago
Here's the video referenced, from a year ago.
- andystow 47 min 43 sec ago
"Work to rule" comes to mind. I think that if somehow every UK cyclist did that one day, this commenter's response would be "no, not like that!"...
- andystow 55 min 23 sec ago
Why does the shopping centre even need two entrances? There appears to be one planned for Herries Rd / A6102, it would only be 0.4 miles / 0.6 km...
- Chris RideFar 1 hour 9 min ago
You can't trust those weights to be perfect. You don't know what type of BB each total includes, cassette/chainring sizes, etc. It's always hard to...
- Kristie_Schroeder 1 hour 42 min ago
Much obliged for the video Quite a good option. I even was thinking of getting hold of it
- mrml 1 hour 57 min ago
I don't know this for sure, but I suspect that there was thought to be something innovative in the idea of providing removable batteries on each...
- rdaddict 2 hours 2 min ago
Am I the only one who thinks the prices for these bikes is utterly ridiculous? For an item with not that many components compared to a motorbike...
Add new comment
49 comments
Don't get me started on the sexism of it being entirely normal for women in the UK to be labelled by our marital status. In France and Germany adult women are automatically called Madame or Frau (Mrs) without any changes on marriage, unless they have an academic title. They love using academic titles and post nominals in Germany.
We have a 'they' at work. Not in my department, but the discussion in my team about how we should try to respect their choice was littered with us calling them 'him' out of habit.
They/their is tougher, but I'm usually OK with names/pronouns if I didn't know the person by another name or pronoun first.
There are times, such as a person saying they identify as a woman just after they've been arrested for a sexual offence, when is harder to take seriously, but we must be careful not to let that cloud our views on the majority. It doesn't help that some activists refuse to do nuance, but again, that's not the fault of most trans people who just want to live their lives in peace.
I know loads of women who are married - none have gone from being an individual to a plural.
Firefighter: "did you make the call about the burning building? Do you know who is in there?"
Me: "I don't know their name but they are in there". (When it's one person).
Fireman: "we won't stop looking until we find them" (it's still one person).
etc.
Fireman: I can't help noticing you said 'their' (plural) but 'name' (singular). Can I clarify how many people you think are in there?
And what are the chances that you know their preferred pronoun but not their name?
I would like to ask her "why are you not comfortable competing against men?" And she'll say its because she deeply believes it's not fair. And then I'd ask is it not conceivable to you that other women in a field with you deeply believe it's not fair. Why should her desire to compete fairly trump other women's desire to compete fairly?
I take her point about forcing trans people to come out when competing, that is a difficult one to solve. Still, I don't think the answer is steam-rolling over all of women's sports is the solution.
I don't think that anyone is insisting on that!
The reason she doesn't want to compete against men is because she believes that she is a woman. Not being allowed to compete would require her to admit that she isn't 100% a woman.
Hence it's a conflict between identity/ideology and biology. The problem is that people who actually transition are a few per 1000 and women are 51% of all humans. Practically the argument has to come down on the side of what is more favourable to the larger group.
Given cycling is non contact I would suggest that genetic males should be able to compete but just can't take home prize money or medals.
The only reason why this is even getting a hearing is because trans people are a super concentrated interest group, if you go as far as transitioning with all the risks and implications that come with it you have to be pretty committed hence the zealotry.
Competitors may not (greatly) influence each others' times in time trials, but in bunch racing they do. Draughting and the tactics around using it to save and deploy energy at just the right times are a _huge_ part of bunch racing. The TIM is inevitably going to affect the outcome.
Which in of itself is ridiculous. I am not French no matter how long I live there or how much I enbrace their culture, language etc. I was born in the UK. Most people have zero issue with trans people doing their thing and getting on with their lives. They simply don't care. The idea that you can change your gender and become indistinguishable from a biological woman is absurd. Indulging people in these delusions isn't helpful to anyone.
How would that work? They race, win and then are just ignored at the end? That doesn't sound like a good solution and I would be utterly astonished if the trans lobby would even entertain the idea. Something something genocide.
There are restrictions placed on people all the time and for whatever reasons. You cannot compete in the masters categories until you are old enough. You cannot compete for a country unless you meet the requirements to do so based on your ancestry. I simply don't understand why this is such a massive issue. Yes it sucks but making it suck for over half the population to pander to a tiny minority is madness. Its not hyperbole to suggest it would kill elite sports for women and women have enough crap to deal with when it comes to elite sport.
Two obvious problems with that, cycling – or at least road racing – is a contact sport, especially in the sprints, so chucking 180cm 80 kg riders in the mix with 150 cm 55 kg riders is going to present a hazard (and yes I know that there are very large female riders and very small male ones, but I'm talking about an average) and also, what about the assistance a transwoman could offer cis female teammates in such circumstances? It would actually be worth a team recruiting a couple of transitioned riders to give the ones who could take prize money or medals a tow/leadout.
Is this the indiviudal that said british cycling was committing genocide?
The idea that not allowing people who have male sized lungs, male bone structure (hip angle not compromised by need to give birth, longer limb size), male muscle density, etc., to compete against others who are 100% developmentally female is akin to sanctioning violence against transwomen is.... batshit.
Emily is completely self-absorbed.
If she had any respect for women she would accept that her from birth genetic advantage will never allow her to compete fairly.
According to some experts this is entirely what drives transgenderism. It's a form of narcissistic behaviour in which the person is in love with themselves but as the opposite gender.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxDaiyREBPw
Unless trans got 10cm shorter (the average height difference between men and women) after their hormones changes, that is how I see it.
I really don't understand what is wrong with the open category.
She doesn't want to compete against men is the crux of it. You know how there are crazy people in society. There are also plenty of crazy trans people as well who see anything but complete adherance to their doctrine that "trans women are real women" and should be treated identically as an act of war, violence, genocide etc. Whatever ridiculous hyperbole they have decided is the most apt on a given month.
Pretty sure that most level headed people appreciate that its not ideal for people to not be able to compete as their gender identity but its far less ideal for biological women to be competing against trans women.
Life isn't fair and making it really unfair for the massive majority so it suits a tiny minority is crazy. Hopefully common sense will win out here but you never know. Get the right group of people who understand nothing of physiology to make the decision and she could 100% get her way.
This.
Broadly supportive of trans rights but Emilys gone at least as extreme as Sharon Davies (but in the opposite direction) and is just making herself look rather silly (and ironically hysterical) and undermining the Trans cause in general.
Also I dont know how she managed to say the below without all the Irony alarms in the building going off. (TBF this could be a journalistic artifact)
I thought the difference was 6" (or 150mm)
Six foot?!
How about the simple fact that it's not the women's category?
Pages