Kara Goucher's The Longest Race

I recently finished reading Kara Goucher's new book The Longest Race. Setting aside the more shocking details described in the book for a quick moment, I was touched by the story she told about her family, the unconditional love they share, and the support they continually provide for each other. 

If one thing stands out, it's that Kara is tough, not just as an athlete but as a survivor. She mentions struggling to find her voice at times, especially after her coach, Alberto Salazar, touched her inappropriately and ultimately sexually assaulted her while giving her a massage, but she eventually did find and use her voice in the best ways possible. 

Many people, especially women in situations involving older men, can relate to being confused, scared, and unsure of what to do in a moment when something doesn't feel right. During traumatic events, humans don't always know how to process what's happening and might use disassociation or even try to normalize the situation as a way to cope. We question whether or not our experience is accurate, if it happened at all, or if it happened exactly the way we remember. 

I'm reading Catch and Kill by Ronan Farrow, the story that helped uncover Harvey Weinstein’s abusive escapades in Hollywood, and the author stresses that it's not uncommon for women to be intimidated with methods of gaslighting or worse after a man in a position of power takes advantage. Sometimes it doesn't take threats, and the fear of reaching out for help or even verbalizing what happened comes from within. We are products of a society that doesn't encourage victims expressing themselves, and sometimes when those who have been abused do come forward, there can be harsh consequences. 

There's so much shame associated with sexual assault, and quite often, judgment is misplaced to the point where the victim feels guilty. In the end, Kara, despite facing various threats and lawsuits over the years, stood her ground and told her story, one that is bound to help others in similar situations find the courage to speak up. 

It's encouraging to see the support Kara is receiving after coming forward and exposing the underbelly of our corrupt sport. That underside is not pretty. Today's female athletes are a new kind of pioneer in the running community, true heroines of the sport. No longer are they trying to prove that women can run (they have already demonstrated this); they are fighting for equal or better salaries, a better environment, and a healthier future for younger girls moving up the ranks.  

In 2017, Alysia Montano brought attention to the difficulty of competing as an elite female athlete when she showed up for the 800 at the USATF Outdoor Championship and ran while she was not just pregnant but a very noticeable 34 weeks pregnant. It was a standout moment when people were slapped with the reality that something needed to change. Had she not toed the line, her Nike contract and, as a result, her income, would have been suspended. This was a turning point. Just as much of the world was beginning to accept that women shouldn't be forced to choose between their careers and becoming a mother, we learned that this applies to being a professional athlete, too. 

Kara wasn’t alone in facing similar situations when she was injured or recovering from giving birth. In her case, she was even pressured to prepare for a race shortly after her son, who was an infant at the time, had been operated on and was still in the hospital. The situation eventually pushed the new mother to leave his side in an effort to restart her salary that had been suspended because she was, in Nike terms, "absent from the competition" due to her "medical condition" i.e. being pregnant. Fortunately, her husband, Adam, was there to take care of their son, but it doesn't take away the heartbreak of a mother being forced to make such a painful choice. 

Because Kara's book describes so many obstacles she had to overcome, it's easy to forget what a decorated and outstanding athlete she truly is, and because of her many accomplishments, it's easy to forget how young she was when she was running so well. Running isn't as extreme as gymnastics when it comes to youngsters being on top, but kids just out of high school, or newly in or just out of college often compete on an international stage. 

Kara started doing well in running when she was just a child, and by the time she was in college, she was a champion several times over. Her list of personal bests and wins is impressive, jaw-dropping, even. She comes across as down-to-earth, self-reflective, compassionate, and at times a little bit insecure in her book, and she doesn't boast about the many accomplishments she achieved. Any wins that are mentioned are stated in a matter-of-fact way, but there's no doubt about how hard she worked for her goals. I've always admired Kara as both an athlete and a person, and reading her book only made that admiration stronger. 

One other issue Kara addressed but not deeply is her troubled relationship with food. She didn't go into tremendous detail, but it sounds a lot like what Lorraine Moller experienced, dancing on the edge of an eating disorder without falling completely into the abyss. Such is the case with many athletes. I was glad to see her bring it up, though, and she acknowledged that forming healthier eating habits wasn't as simple as eating a fucking Dorito. In fact, when she ate a Dorito that her husband encouraged her to consume while they were waiting to get dinner, it made her uncomfortable, even if it was the best choice for her hungry body at the time. It was good to see that she didn't discount the very real emotional aspect of these illnesses or imply that simply eating is an easy fix. 

As I moved through Kara's book, I spent a lot of time reading between the lines and speculating about drug use, not just in professional running but in the sport itself, and how many coaches and their athletes are guilty of outright doping violations or use more subtle forms of cheating, thyroid medications or asthma inhalers, for example. It would be almost impossible not to speculate given what she implied and outright stated. I have questions that went unanswered and may never be addressed. 

It's so easy to find ways to get an unfair edge these days, and so many results seem incredibly far-fetched, right down to those found at the high school level. I suspect and have said it before that I think most people at the elite level are, at minimum, using methods that aren't kosher, and I'm 100 percent sure these questionable practices ooze into the trail and ultra-running scene.  

What does it all mean now that Nike has once again been exposed as a shitty company that takes advantage of its athletes, supports dopers, and protects abusive coaches? Probably not as much as everyone had hoped in terms of overall change, but that doesn't discount Kara's efforts as well as those who really are working to try to change the running environment. People, even those who claim to support Kara, will still get excited about wearing shoes with a swoosh. On the other hand, already, thanks in large part to Kara, one less abusive coach is able to inflict harm on other athletes. 

I think chipping away at megacorporations and bringing to light their ugly, dark side (and Nike's nadir is exceptionally grotesque) can eventually generate small changes that may, in turn, lead to larger ones. 

Regarding people who are working toward the betterment of the athletic community, I don't include individuals who are simply trying to be seen and boast about being advocates; I'm talking about those who have taken actual steps, shared heartfelt personal stories (not ones that fit a narrative), and have been honest and continue to be upfront about who they are. Even those who are not at an elite level but get out there and encourage others to do the same can be incredibly inspirational and good for the sport. 

Both Kara and Lorraine Moller did a really great job of bringing their books to a nice conclusion. Each one had a way of coming full circle. Kara brings the reader back to her message of the love and support she received from friends, family, and fans alike. There are a lot of people in her corner, but a small coterie of individuals close to her really stepped up to back her through her hardest moments. 

One of the reasons I admire Kara so much is her ability to adapt and change. Both she and Lorraine have this skill in common, and I'm not sure people outside the running community can understand how difficult this can be for some of us. I'll save my more involved thoughts about identity and being a runner for a separate post. 

In conclusion, The Longest Race is an easy-to-read book that's hard to put down, especially if you happen to like and look up to the author. As much as it's Kara's story about her career as a runner, it's about addressing a deeply flawed system that allows athletes, especially women, to be abused. Thank goodness Kara came out the other side of all of this and can continue to feel the love and support she deserves. 

In other more personal news, I'm not going to say much about why I'm no longer employed where I was recently and for many, many years. My job was something I rarely discussed, and I plan to keep it that way. Unlike a lot of people, it seems, I'm not vindictive or malicious so will hold my tongue, even though I think it would do me good to write about it. Suffice to say that I finally expressed my needs and attempted to set some boundaries going into a meeting, and the response was about the biggest fuck you I have ever experienced from any employer, ever. 

What's that saying, though? When a door smacks you hard on the ass on your way out, a window opens? Something like that. I'm pretty sure everything worked out for the best. 

I don't remember where I saw the quote below, but I do like it. I'm not into wishing others any ill will, but sometimes I hope there's a little poetic justice in the world. The best revenge, though, is being able to let all the grisly shit go and move the fuck on without looking back. 

"Karma is a bitch? Oh no, honey....Karma is a classy wise elder who will calmly sit you down and serve you a tea you later realize was laced with the same poison you served others for years."

More on Ignoring The Gray

International Transgender Day of Visibility was March 31st this year. This day, also referred to as Trans Day of Visibility is dedicated to celebrating and acknowledging trans people around the world and is separate from Transgender Day of Remembrance, an event that "seeks to highlight the losses we face due to anti-transgender bigotry and violence." In response to the March 31st celebration, Women's Running published an article of sorts by Erin Strout in which she claims white men emailed her (I'm not sure how she would know unless she actually knows the men who wrote or they announced it in their emails, which seems highly unlikely) and requested she address "men competing against women" meaning transgender women competing in the women's category, a topic she admits she largely ignores, whether questions posed to her on the subject are worded in a less objectionable way or not. 

It seems to upset people like Strout and Lindsay Crouse when men, especially white men, claim to show an interest in protecting women's sports. What they should realize is that individuals speak up about it because they care about the topic. They care about their wives, daughters, sisters, and friends, and they care about fairness. Who is anyone else to decide what's important to others? Condemning others for showing an interest in a topic is a tactic extremists use to steer the conversation away from that very issue. Call opponents insulting names, belittle them, block them, or ignore them, and then make the "us vs them" lines really clear to everyone who's in your little corner. Create a bubble of like-minded individuals and boast about how you're willing to talk about the issues when, in fact, you're so afraid of or so against hearing an opposing view that you shut people out before a discussion can even begin. 

For someone who should be interested in the topic of safety and fairness in women's sports considering her position as a journalist, Strout only rarely contributes to the conversation, and when she does, it's on an emotional level, not a scientific or intellectual one. In presenting the obvious fact that people are people, she demonstrates that she's simply not interested in the data unless it's skewed in favor of her view. That doesn't make for impartial reporting. In this case, her article that's featured specifically in a women's running journal should be focused on some aspect of women's sport without discounting biological females. It shouldn't simply show with whom the reporter is friendly in the LGBTQ community or feature only one side of the debate. "I know people who are....!" doesn't make for a solid argument. The truth is that you can be an advocate for transgender individuals and not deny science while looking for a suitable solution to what's fair in sports participation.

Rather than use anyone I know as a pawn, I'm simply going to address the one-sided, biased article that Women's Running published. While it's great to acknowledge Transgender Day of Visibility, a journalist writing for women's sports who turns a blind eye to female athletes who have come forward including Sonia O'Sullivan, Mara Yamauchi, Emily Diamond, and Ellie Baker, and subtly or sometimes blatantly suggests that anyone who expresses concern about transgender women competing in women's sports is transphobic or a troll isn't doing thorough research and should pull back on her extremely biased takes. This approach is destructive and divisive, and it's not surprising that Strout blocks people like me or shuts down the conversation with people on social media who disagree with her. It's easier for most people to slap others with a label or call them names than it is to engage in meaningful dialogue.  

The term transphobic gets hurled around a lot and often lands on people who are simply pointing out facts or expressing concern. It's a lazy and hurtful insult, a simple way for someone to exit the scene without offering anything of value. There's so much vitriol, often from both sides, that it makes having meaningful conversations nearly impossible, but I really believe there can be a solution when it comes to addressing both inclusion and fairness in sports. Already some running races like the Philadelphia Distance Run are increasing categories to include men, women, and open or non-binary divisions. This is a start at least.

Solutions aren't often journalists' forte, though, especially when it comes to those covering running. It's admirable that Strout feels compelled to publicly show compassion for anyone potentially facing discrimination or hardship. I hope more people do so as well, especially in real life, but right at the start of her article, Strout links to a Human Rights Campaign page that incorrectly states that bills being presented around the country could end up preventing trans student-athletes from playing sports. This is a lie. The reality is that nobody is trying to ban transgender athletes from playing or competing in sports. The main issue is how to allow them to compete in whatever category is eventually deemed appropriate, fair, and safe for everyone. At the moment, though, anyone can compete in their biological sex category, and this won't change. Unlike some who think trans women should never even play women's sports, I think rules around trans athletes should focus more on competition, but, again, nobody is trying to ban participation altogether. 

Divisions and categories in sports competitions are there for a reason. There are sex, weight, class, and age categories. Ross Tucker notes that "women’s sport exists to exclude people who do not experience androgenization during puberty and development.” I'll add that this kind of exclusion is fair, otherwise, why have categories at all? Inclusion of one group shouldn't mean unfairness to any other group of athletes. You would never want to see someone from the heavyweight category compete against someone much smaller in boxing, for example. Is it possible that a lightweight could win against someone in a different category? Possibly, but it wouldn't be a fair fight. It's a point that some people are resistant to acknowledge, that having an advantage doesn't always mean winning. Regarding sex categories, any displacement of a cis woman with a selection of a transgender woman in her place in a limited space is unfair. Some of us are trying to defend women's spaces while others like Strout promote inclusion over fairness but refuse to admit it. 

Strout states:

"The thing is, we can talk about the fairness, the policies, and the still-developing research when it comes to inclusion of transgender women in elite sports, but in the process, it’s unnecessary to misgender people or show them an utter lack of dignity. I won’t allow it in any space that I occupy—nobody should. And we can stand up for kids who can’t stand up for themselves by learning more, voting, advocating on their behalf, and showing them that there are adults out there who care about their wellbeing. It doesn’t take much to show a child what love looks like in the face of so much hate, just as it doesn’t take much to approach complicated issues with curiosity instead of confrontation."

It must be tiring being everyone's moral superior, but, as a journalist, you need to at least attempt to understand the other side. I will do my best to call people by their preferred pronouns, but, even if it makes me uncomfortable and I don't agree, I accept that other people won't, not because they are transphobic, necessarily, but because they are determined to keep women's sports from becoming an open category and don't want changed language to cause confusion or interfere with that. By the way, slinging insults and calling people transphobic and blocking them without knowing who they are or what they stand for is also unkind. I'm going to keep saying that. 

Back to the issue, either Strout and others like her don't know about the research that shows there is a definite hangover benefit from having been born male or they are intentionally ignoring it. There are thirteen different studies supporting the fact that trans women retain a biological advantage, and if you're going to challenge the science that addresses this, do so. Don't just claim that research is ongoing without specifically addressing what about the published studies would lead anyone to believe it's not accurate. 

 

As far as Strout's take on depression in trans individuals, the statistics she presents are similar to those for anorexia. Both communities are at higher risk for suicide and suicide ideation and at similar percentages. This is troubling, but we can't draw specific conclusions based on general statistics around mood. What she presented doesn't reveal if this is a baseline feeling as is often the case with other conditions or if it's unique to certain situations transgender individuals face. She's also relying on additional statistics that are universal, not unique to transgender individuals. For example, most people benefit academically when they are allowed to exercise or participate in sports. It's the same with violence, which has increased overall. In fact, the murder rate in the United States increased by 30 percent in 2020. Statistics taken out of context don't really illustrate much.

Avoiding exchanges relevant to women's running and focusing on more trivial aspects of running actually takes attention away from the sport rather than contributes to it. It's difficult to understand why the same writers who demand we avoid all "body talk" encourage audiences to look at the sexual preferences of athletes and influencers, their overall appearance, and what they like to eat. It's a distraction from what these athletes are doing in their training and their performances and any deeper messages they're trying to share. There's a way to successfully cover lifestyle, advocacy, and running, but too often the running itself or important messages get dropped in the process. The perfect example presented itself on Instagram recently where Latoya Snell addressed issues around feeling safe, and one commenter ignored the post entirely and said, "You look fucking amazing!" which is a compliment, but discounts the content of the post. It's a shame because there is so much incredible women's content that actually relates to sport in a more substantial way, but our attention is drawn elsewhere. 

I actually believe that most rational people want to see transgender individuals treated fairly and with respect, and as hostile as any dialogue around inclusion can be, I believe we are gradually moving toward workable solutions in sports. I just don't think that we will get there if we remove cis women from the conversation.

Women's Running And Transgender Athletes

I'm going to drop a little trigger warning here and note that this post discusses transgender athletes, and some might find it offensive, even though it's not my intent to cause anyone harm. 

******

There's an image an author once described of a clean stretch of sand, no footprints, with the caption, "Do I dare?" Do I dare rock the boat, risk rejection, put myself out there, disrupt the sand or snow? Do I make tracks? I've been thinking about this post for a long time, years actually, but every time I go to write it, it's overwhelming. Where do I even begin? 

When I first started running, I had this naive idea that maybe eventually women could run as fast as men. I was a young teenager and occasionally beat the boys, but as I improved, I realized that a woman winning a race outright wasn't as simple as her training and working hard. 

When I set the record at the Pikes Peak Ascent (clean), my time placed me just slightly outside of the top 15 men that year. After being blocked by an arrogant guy on the trail for a short stretch early in the race, specifically because I am a woman -- actually a 16-year-old girl at the time -- I finished not too far behind Scott Elliott, who later went on to win the race something like eight times. We are both still listed in the top 20 all-time bests. If you look at the all-time records, the top woman's time is 2:24:58, while the man listed as 20th on the list ran 2:09:28. This is not unlike the comparison between men and women using flat marathon times. There is a gap between what the best men and the best women can run. On a side note, the woman who is listed as the second-fastest at Pikes was given a little slap on the wrist for using a fertility drug a few years earlier because she was trying to get pregnant at the time, and drug testing was implemented for the mountain race a year after the women's record of 2:24:58 was set. 

Over the years, it became more apparent to me that men have an advantage. There will always be "Yeah but," exceptions, a woman winning a race outright, especially in longer distances, for example, but generally speaking a man will almost always run faster than a woman, even if their training is basically the same. It bothers me that this is so, but it just is. Some characteristics that people don't often address when discussing the difference between men and women are lung, leg, and heart size. In addition to having more muscle mass and longer legs, in general, men's oxygen consumption is higher due to both bigger hearts and bigger lungs. And, of course, there is testosterone to consider. According to Healthline, by adulthood, a normal, healthy man will have a testosterone level of at least 300 nanograms per deciliter as compared to an adult woman whose normal range will be between 8-60 nanograms per deciliter. This article does a good job of going into the biological advantages men have over women and how testosterone plays a role. I'm sure readers can figure out where I'm going here, and I should note that in this post, I'm only addressing running, not other sports in which there are even more concerning issues when athletes with great physiological differences participate. 

Author Kathleen Megan mentioned the division transgender sports has caused among women's advocates. I'll add that the division is quite apparent in the general public, too. In one article, Kathleen quotes Donna Lopiano, sports consultant associated with the Women's Sports Foundation:

I don’t know of a woman athlete who doesn’t want trans girls to be treated fairly,” said Donna Lopiano, who led the Women’s Sports Foundation for 15 years and now runs a Shelton-based consulting firm that works with clients on Title IX and other sports management issues. “But the cost of treating her fairly should not come at the cost of discriminating against a biologically-female-at birth woman.

This is basically my stance. People are so concerned about not offending anyone in the LGBTQ community that many shut down and don't say anything. I did for years. Others who think that there should be a different way to approach trans athletes in competition are often discounted or attacked. Anyone who's not fully supporting trans women competing against the gender they identify with is called transphobic or worse. After recently saying that I donate to the ACLU because they support racial equality, I'm rethinking where I will put my money after one of their lawyers lied, posted questionable tweets, and also suggested on Twitter that trans women are biological women. In the linked article, Glenn Greenwald notes:

ACLU lawyer Chase Strangio decided to spew this extremely grave accusation about J.K. Rowling and Abigail Shrier, both of whom oppose the inclusion of trans girls in female sports: 

As I’ve written before, I’m not in agreement with those who advocate this absolute ban. I’m open to a scientific consensus that develops hormonal and other medicinal protocols for how trans girls and women can fairly compete with CIS women in sporting competitions. But that does not entitle you — especially as an ACLU lawyer — to just go around casually branding people as “closely aligned to white supremacists” who have never remotely demonstrated any such affinity, just because you feel like it, because you crave the power to destroy your adversaries, or are too slothful to engage their actual views.

Saying shitty lies about women aside, Strangio's take on biology is not accurate either. Kevin Beck will always get to the point more creatively than I, but I’ll press on here. 

There is a biological component when it comes to gender identity, but that isn't the same as addressing an individual's biological sex. I'm not suggesting that one should call those who identify as women anything other than what they prefer, but when it comes to competition, I would like to see fairness. I see quite a few people quoting an open-access neuroscience article from 2019 that states, "gender is multi-dimensional" without fully understanding what this means. It's complicated, no doubt, but, when it comes to biology and neurology, there is a distinction between sex and gender. In very general scientific terms, sex is based solely on biological factors including chromosomes (DNA) and gonads (testes or ovaries). Gender is far more complex and is based on how an individual identifies, how genes are expressed (epigenetics), and how the brain is influenced in the long- and short-term by experience and epigenetics. In short, one (sex) is determined by biology while the other (gender) is influenced to a degree by biology. There's a big distinction there, and gender identification is not the same as an individual being born with a specific kind of genetically determined advantage like a runner with exceptionally long Achilles tendons. 

Examining testosterone or the biological influence on gender reinforces the fact that transgender athletes who identify as female have an advantage, one that lasts over a year after hormone therapy has been implemented. Hormone therapy does not address other characteristics like lung size, leg length, and oxygen consumption. Recently, three young girls filed a lawsuit in Connecticut in an effort to block transgender athletes from competing in girls sports. One can imagine how difficult it must be for these youngsters to come forward with their concerns, simply asking for a fair chance in their sport.
From the Associated Press article, attorney Christina Holcomb states:

 

 “Forcing girls to be spectators in their own sports is completely at odds with Title IX, a federal law designed to create equal opportunities for women in education and athletics,” attorney Christiana Holcomb said. "Connecticut’s policy violates that law and reverses nearly 50 years of advances for women.”

When it comes to transgender athletes, what I would love to see is a solution, one that's fair to both biological females and those who identify as female. I think there's a way to do this, but I don't know if it will ever happen, partly because there's not a whole lot of excess money in running and also because most people take a win-at-all-costs approach to life, meaning few people want to have a civil conversation if you disagree with them. I find it shocking that many who claim to want inclusivity are so militant when it comes to others holding a different opinion. 

Some ideas that have been presented include:

• Let it be a fucking free-for-all with everyone competing against each other with no divisions at all between the sexes. This wouldn't be fair, especially to biological women, and I don’t think it's really what most people want, though, oddly enough, this seems to be a goal of some.  
• I think I saw this on the Ultrarunner Podcast Twitter feed at one point, though I could be mistaken, but the idea would be to compete as your sex; identify as your gender. As much as I agree here, this might not seem fair to trans women or trans men, for that matter. Unfortunately, trans men are so often left out of the conversation when it comes to competition in sports.
• Measure testosterone levels, and make sure that trans women are competing with levels of hormones that are considered normal for female athletes. I also agree with this, but it seems like a tricky task in terms of privacy and implementation of testing. Also, this doesn't address physical characteristics that give transgender women an edge (see above).
• Compete as how you identify but rank and award money in three or even four separate categories. For example, transgender women would compete against other women but would be scored separately and awarded equal pay for placement. This is actually my suggestion, but, again, it's unlikely when it would take money and effort to make these kinds of changes in sports.  

I honestly think that most people in the running community would like to see a solution that is fair to everyone. The problem is that bringing up transgender athletes is kind of like bringing up religion or politics. Few people are willing to see anyone else's point of view, and if you express even the slightest dissatisfaction with having transgender athletes compete against girls and women, be ready for some harsh criticism.