Andy Mac

@DaveOurPlanet The upside is that the competitive arseholes who see it as a competition would probably stay away and make it pleasanter for the rest of us. Downside is that the competitive arseholes would probably stay away and participation would reduce and parkrun would flounder.

@DaveOurPlanet That means that fairness to anyone becomes irrelevant because everyone is equally in the dark about how they performed relative to everyone else (with the exception of the fastest runners – mostly men - who would easily know that information).

At least 8 males ran in F cat in UK parkrun today. One ran the Great North Run in F cat a week ago - at least the 8th time he’s run in F cat in licensed events since UKA banned males from it. Today he was top in age category. Another got 1st Female. His haul of 1st Female…

@DaveOurPlanet OK. Fair enough, your inclusivity point is valid, but it doesn't really solve the problem that parkrun's critics are pursuing, but i believe the natural endpoint of the antiparkrun campaign is it's destruction, intentional or not.

@rock_odyssey And funnily enough they all hate it. So basically they're all for 'inclusion' until it negatively affects their parkrun. But they have no interest in fairness for women, even though current policy negatively affects parkrun for all women.

@DaveOurPlanet I like the results table even thpugh I'm at the bottom end. Some people *really* value the results table including (clearly) many women and it motivates them to turn up, which by itself is an excellent reason to keep it.

@rock_odyssey The ethos of parkrun is that it is a timed 5K. What's wrong with simply running the 5K and getting your time? That's what it was, originally. But if you don't like it, then it sounds like you'd prefer a change of policy instead, which is what I'd prefer too.

@DaveOurPlanet But you're a man (I assume). The women who complain want fair results, not no results so that solution doesn't work.

@rock_odyssey I think you're getting confused. I suggested that option, not someone else. And I suggested it entirely because the male rights activist lot who see nothing wrong with men running in the women's category get so het up about the most inclusive option.

@DaveOurPlanet So why do they demand fairness for women and girls if they're going to be happy with no results at all? It's a contradiction. And the only person who gets a sense of achievement then is the man who comes first in the vast majority of parkruns.

@rock_odyssey No, getting rid of them is the obvious solution as a response to all the men who claim that men competing as women 'isn't a problem' because it's important to be inclusive. As soon as you point out the most inclusive option - no categories - they all hate it. Odd.

@DaveOurPlanet Changing the wording from 'gender' to 'sex' is fine by me, I wouldn't need to change my answer, but it won't satisfy the Sharrons and Maras of this world without an accompanying dropping of self-ID, which means a verification and reporting infrastructure of the type I described.

@DaveOurPlanet Getting rid of the results and categories is probably the worst possible solution. The anti-parkrun crowd base their arguments on the need for fairness for women and girls, getting rid of them doesn't solve that...

@DaveOurPlanet The vast majority of parkrunners like the results too and see no conflict with having them *and* not treating them as a race result. So everyone loses if they are dropped, resulting in a fall in participation...

@DaveOurPlanet a birth certificate (anyone not doing so would not be allowed to take part). Probably some testing might need to be introduced. Parkrun's core proposition would also have to move from participation to performance. In short, it would probably die, which would be a shame.

@DaveOurPlanet But. If parkrun had to change to ensure that everyone was registered as their birth sex, allowing for credible positions and categorization I'd imagine they'd need to affiliate to a sporting governing body, do away with self ID, get everyone to re-register by submitting...

@DaveOurPlanet Solutions? I'm not an expert on equality law as it pertains to competitive races. That's why I asked the question. If it isn't a competitive race then I suppose those equality laws don't apply and the question of fairness for women, girls, men and boys is irrelevant

@rock_odyssey What do you propose as the solution, given that you consider it to be a race?

@DaveOurPlanet OK. Didn't realize you were going to continue. Many people view it as a race, so let's assume it is. If they get rid of results and categories how is that fair to women and girls who want to compare their performance to each other?

@rock_odyssey And you tell me why it the mantra that 'parkrun isn't a race' is repeated by the acolytes, when it does indeed have positions, categories and times. It is apparently not a race simply because parkrun says it is not a race.

@DaveOurPlanet If it isn't a race, why are there finish positions and categories? What obvious solutions would satisfy UK equality law?

@rock_odyssey Parkrun isn't a race, Andy. But allowing males to take part in the female category means it does not give women the same opportunities as it does to men. The solutions? There are various obvious options.

@DaveOurPlanet Given that parkrun does not provide a fair competitive race for women and girls, what changes do they need to make to comply with equality law?

@itsafrogslife @boswelltoday The law forces organisations not to discriminate on the basis of sex. Parkrun discriminates against women and girls on the basis of sex by allowing males to compete as females. As you know. But repeatedly fail to understand.

R2: 33. Caught in a Como/Reeves confusion. (and wouldn't have got the title anyway) #popmaster

@mclachlan_mat So the rankings and categorization stay. How do they ensure that everyone registers according to their birth sex?

@rock_odyssey I didn’t say removing it was fair. Your question was how does parkrun comply with the law. If they want fairness and to comply with the law, the first option is the only option