Earlier this week I wrote about Rachel McKinnon, the transgender professional cyclist who recently won a gold medal at the 2018 UCI Masters. I was far from the only one pointing out that a man (or “biological male” as some prefer to say) competing against women in most any athletic endeavor is patently unfair and professional athletic organizations need to address this situation before it spreads further. Well, it turns out that McKinnon wasn’t impressed with the feedback he was receiving and lashed out at his critics in typical social justice warrior fashion. (Washington Examiner)

As expected, the controversial win was met with a fair amount of denunciation from actual women, including third-place finisher, American Julie Wagner. But the champion dismissed all of it and labeled detractors as nothing but “transphobic bigots” on social media, according to the Gladstone Observer: McKinnon hit out at the criticism immediately following her victory both on social media and in interviews. “I think there is absolutely no evidence that I have an unfair advantage…” “People who oppose transgender inclusion in sport put us in the double bind. It’s the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” scenario. “If I win, they attribute it to me being trans and having an unfair advantage. If I lose, the same people think I must not be good anyway. People will never attribute my winning to hard work which is what I think I deserve.”

American cyclist Julie Wagner (who took bronze in the event) declared that it was unfair for the association to sanction McKinnon’s participation in the first place. That much should have been obvious, but it’s worth noting that McKinnon’s response misses the point entirely. Nobody has to be bigoted to point out that this situation is completely unfair to all the actual women who work and train for years to earn a chance to compete at that level, only to have a potential victory taken from them at the last moment because a man was allowed to compete against them.

McKinnon is also totally off base when he says there’s “absolutely no evidence that I have an unfair advantage.” For one thing, you only need to look at a picture of McKinnon standing next to his competition.

For clarity – this was the WOMENS world championships. I repeat. Women’s. Congratulations to the brave faces of silver & bronze. The world is gripped by a febrile madness. pic.twitter.com/P6VkaNFeyy — Katie Hopkins (@KTHopkins) October 14, 2018

The guy has vastly more muscle mass than those two women, particularly in the legs and back. But if you want more detailed scientific proof, look no further than the Olympic cycling records. Even in an event as short as the 200-meter sprint, the men’s record is more than a full second faster than the women’s record. In longer races, the gap widens exponentially. That’s not some random roll of the dice, either. It’s the same in all the events.

Beyond these patently obvious facts, the Examiner’s Kimberly Ross points out that this issue goes beyond fundamental fairness. Allowing men to compete against women in athletic events ignores the underlying reality of biology.

[T]hose who view the inherent differences between men and women as negative traits that must be overcome cheer on any endeavor to blur the gender lines. In their minds, we aren’t supposed to notice the strengths and weaknesses of males and females; we must eliminate them. At the heart of transgenderism is a delusion that rejects DNA in favor of feelings. It is quite literally a dismissal of reality in place of emotions. This is a mental illness that should be carefully treated, not celebrated and encouraged through surgical mutilation and hormonal manipulation. Instead, in modern-day America, transgenderism has quickly become the next gendered trend, and it is finding wide support.

This trend of blithely accepting men who identify as women to compete in women’s sporting events is bad for actual women and undercuts their work and achievements. But it’s also bad for society as a whole, as it undermines basic science while ignoring the issues of people who are very likely in need of serious emotional and mental health support.