Katherine Deves is a Sydney-based lawyer and mother of three daughters. Over the past few years she became concerned at the erasure of sex in policy and legislation in favour of gender identity, and what this would mean for the rights of women and girls.

In October 2020, Katherine joined forces with women in NZ to cofound Save Women’s Sport Australasia.  Her motivation came from realising that no one in Australia was speaking up for the little girls, teenagers and women whose rights to safe and fair play were impacted by inclusion policies.  If you are wondering what an inclusion policy is – it is a policy that extends eligibility to biological males to compete in the female sports category. Appearances in the Australian and international media as the spokeswoman for Save Women’s Sport raised awareness of this issue and gave her a public platform.

Related: https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/the-malcolm-roberts-show-andrew-orr-child-gender-dysphoria/

Transcript

Malcolm Roberts:

This is the Malcolm Roberts Show, on Today’s Newstalk Radio, TNT.

Malcolm Roberts:

Welcome back, and it’s a pleasure to do another show for Today’s Newstalk Radio, tntradio.live. Thank you for having me as your guest, whether it’s in your car, your kitchen, your lounge, your shed, or wherever you are right now, TNT Radio is where the only thing that’s mandated is the truth. There are two themes to every one of my shows. The first is freedom, specifically freedom versus control, the age old battle among individuals, among societies, amongst groups of people, and secondly, personal responsibility and integrity. Both, in my opinion, are fundamental for human progress and people’s livelihoods and safety. And we’ve got two diverse guests today, there’s that word, I’ve hit a politically correct word, diverse. We’ve got two wonderful guests, diverse guests, approaching a very difficult topic, but a topic that is extremely important.

Malcolm Roberts:

Transgender women competing in women’s sport is an international issue of considerable contentious debate. Should it be allowed? Is it safe and fair? What about inclusiveness? We going to discuss this as an issue that’s hurting children in many ways, affecting women and hurting women in many ways, destroying sport, affecting society, and it comes back to the children in particular. But transgender women competing in sport as an issue, came to a head last month when FINA, swimming’s world governing body, voted to bar transgender women from elite female swimming competitions if they have experienced any part of male puberty. And that’s pretty clear, it’s taken them years, but they did it. Fairness and safety have triumphed. The reality that fairness and inclusivity do not always overlap is a harsh reality that we cannot ignore, nor should we shrink from it, especially for the safety of our women and girls.

Malcolm Roberts:

FINAs was not an arbitrary decision that reflects the latest ideological narrative and therefore is subject to change tomorrow, it’s not. This decision was based on three expert committees, one medical, one legal, and one comprising athletes. The medical experts were able to demonstrate without any equivocation that once a male child enters and experiences puberty, the male will forever have physical advantages over women. These structural advantages such as larger lungs and hearts, denser muscles, broader shoulders, longer bones, bigger feet, and hands cannot be changed with hormone suppression. We all know this, don’t we? It’s a fallacy to think that post pubescent males can use hormone suppression to create the equivalency of strength and stamina of a female body. FINA, the world swimming body, has recognised this biological fact in this decision, which received over 70% of support from the 152 voters. But that also raises another question, what was going through the minds of the 30% of the committee members who did not support this vote?

Malcolm Roberts:

But FINAs decision is not new, world rugby barred transgender competitors from international competitions in 2020. So FINAs decision is advancing a momentum. And it is important to understand and reflect on what happened immediately after FINA, there was a rush of other sporting bodies coming out in favour of protecting women and girls from transgender athletes, who became transgender after puberty. Netball and athletics are just two of many other sporting bodies that are now reconsidering their positions on transgender women. I think the national rugby league came out against it, in support of FINA, similar decision to FINAs. Now I agree that every athlete should have the right for inclusion and the right to safety and fairness, FINA has suggested an additional open category to accommodate those who don’t fit the traditional categories. So how and why has this gender fluidity emerged? Who or what are guiding our children through it? And what is the medical profession’s response to this ideological momentum?

Malcolm Roberts:

So my first guest today is Katherine Deves, who I spoke with a year ago about transgender women competing in women’s sports. Katherine Deves is a Sydney based lawyer and mother of three daughters, so she knows a bit about women and girls. Over the past few years, she’s become very concerned at the erasure of sex in policy and legislation, in favour of gender identity and what this would mean for the rights of women and girls. In October, 2020, Katherine joined forces with women in New Zealand, to co-found Save Women’s Sport Australasia. Save Women’s Sport Australasia. Her motivation came from realising that no one in Australia was speaking up for the little girls, the teenagers and the adult women whose rights to safe and fair play were impacted by inclusion policies. Yes, they have rights too, little girls, teenagers and women have rights for safe and fair play.

Malcolm Roberts:

If you’re wondering what an inclusion policy is, it’s a policy that extends eligibility to biological males to compete in the female sports category. Appearances in the Australian and international media, as the spokeswoman for Save Women’s Sport, raised awareness of this issue and gave Katherine a public platform, and we’re forever grateful for that. She used it well. Katherine ran unsuccessfully in the 2022 Australian federal election, as the liberal candidate for the seat of Warringah in New South Wales. Welcome, Katherine. It’s wonderful to chat with you again.

Katherine Deves:

Hello, Malcolm. Thank you so much for having me on the show, and hello to all your listeners.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, we always start with appreciations. Tell us something you appreciate, anything at all, Katherine.

Katherine Deves:

Malcolm, I think it would be the fact that I am an Australian citizen. I’ve travelled the world, I’ve lived in the United States for years, and I am immensely grateful for having been born in this country and being able to raise my daughters here. It’s a country that is prosperous, secure, and we have a functional democracy, so that’s very important to me.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, I’m getting goosebumps because that’s the first time that I’ve heard that answer, and I love the answer. That’s wonderful. Why do you appreciate Australia? You’ve you’ve told us about some of the features, but what is it in you that makes you feel so appreciative of our country?

Katherine Deves:

Well, my roots in Australia go all the way back to the first and second fleet. So for someone with European heritage, I’m as Australian as you can be. And I look at democracy and look, of course, it’s not perfect, but when you look at what’s happening in the rest of the world, when you look at say the rights of little girls in many countries, the fact that they can’t even go to school, and we live in a country that is so blessed, we are wealthy, we have universal education, healthcare, it is beautiful country. And by and large, every day when we get up, we’re safe, we’re not having to flee the country like the people of Ukraine. I think we are very, very lucky, and I think that sometimes we really forget how lucky we are when we look at what’s going on in the rest of the world.

Malcolm Roberts:

And that’s why I start with appreciation, because quite often we forget just how fortunate we are. Sure, we’ve got some problems and I’ve been very much disgusted with so much of what’s been happening at state and federal level in the last two years, but the basics are good. We’ve got wonderful people, wonderful resources. But our society is being torn apart in so many ways here in Australia, and what you’re doing is saving our society. So I want to thank you, first of all, Katherine, very much, for what you’ve been doing over the last two years. Thank you.

Katherine Deves:

Thanks Malcolm.

Malcolm Roberts:

The FINA decision last month to bar transgender women from competitive women’s swimming events, was remarkable. It came out of the blue. Can you capture what that landmark decision has meant for supporters of Save Women’s Sport, Katherine?

Katherine Deves:

Well, this is really a watershed moment in this debate. Women and girls have the right to a dedicated female sports category in elite swimming. World rugby made this decision a couple of years ago, however, it simply didn’t get the reach and coverage that this decision has with FINA. And essentially it is saying to men and boys who want to claim a trans identity, that they are ineligible to compete in a female sports category. It’s the first time that, well, aside from rugby, it’s the first time that a major international federation, and this is the first federation after the IOC handed down their guidelines to do with trans and gender inclusion, that have stood up and said, “No, we are acknowledging the importance of biological sex in sport.”

Malcolm Roberts:

So it’s a wonderful decision because it’s really triggered an avalanche of associations, sporting groups, I think globally, as well as in Australia, that have followed. That’s what I can see anyway. And it’s so encouraging to know Katherine, that so many people, despite your best efforts and our efforts in the Senate and our efforts publicly and socially, our efforts have all been for naught, because the avalanche of political correctness just swept everyone away, and people were silent. Once FINA and the rugby union changed two years ago, that didn’t break too much, but once FINA changed, there’s been an avalanche of people now changing and people suddenly realising, oh, it’s okay to say what we really think.

Katherine Deves:

That’s right. So with FINA making this decision, I believe FINA was already consulting for these guidelines, prior to Lia Thomas, who is the male athlete in the United States who competed in the NCAA and became a champion in the female category, even though he is … I mean, you look at him and there is nothing female about him. And I think that that really galvanised a lot of people when they saw how unfair it is. And I think Malcolm, maybe for people, such as yourself, for people like me who have been standing up and saying things, in many countries around the world, there are many women who’ve been doing the same thing. Finally, once people saw it, when they saw Laurel Hubbard and they understood what we were talking about, when they saw those images, when you saw that image of Thomas standing there number one on the podium and the three girls who really should have been first, second, and third, huddling together, away from him, that was such a powerful image, and people then understood what it was that we were arguing about.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, let’s just go to the vote, the 70%, more than 70% vote in favour of restrictions at FINA in its committee, is resounding. What were the powerful messages that came from the critical analysis of the issue by FINAs expert medical, legal and athletic committees?

Katherine Deves:

Well, I think they did an excellent job, they heard the athletes. So what came out of that was that competitive fairness must be paramount and that sex specific categories are necessary to address the inequality between men and women in sport. The biological inequality, the inequality with access to resources and opportunity. With the science, so they had the science panel and they said that neuromuscular, cardiovascular, respiratory function, and anthropometrics, including body size and limb size, I mean, the differences in biological sex, they are imutable, they are observable and no amount of nutrition or training or inherent skill can overcome the performance advantages that men have because of those reasons. So there are biological differences linked to sex, especially at elite levels. It also addressed the issue of testosterone. Now, testosterone is a wonder drug and male foetuses start to accrue the benefits of testosterone in utero.

Katherine Deves:

So six weeks after conception, six weeks after birth, those benefits continue to accrue in childhood, and then they become very much apparent at puberty. So the science panel addressed that issue. And also with respect to legal, the eligibility rule for aquatics is very narrow and it had to reflect FINAs commitment to a sex based women’s category, in order to ensure that there is fair competition for women and girls. And there was a woman who consulted on the legal panel, who is the Honourable Dr. Annabel Bennett, a retired Australian judge. Her credentials are impeccable, she’s a tribunal member of CAS, which is the international tribunal for sport. She’s also been on the tribunal for discrimination, here in New South Wales. And she was the tribunal member for the Caster Semenya decision. So when I understood that she was participating in the FINA guidelines, I felt very confident and reassured that the guidelines would be properly given, everything would be given due consideration, because she’s one of the foremost legal minds on this issue in the world.

Malcolm Roberts:

So we’ve had confirmation from medicos, that women are different from men.

Katherine Deves:

Yes, that’s right.

Malcolm Roberts:

Basically.

Katherine Deves:

Yes.

Malcolm Roberts:

And look how long it’s taken. I mean, Senator Alex Antic asked a question of the secretary, the head of our department of health, in federal parliament. He just asked a simple question, what’s the definition of a woman? And they took it on notice, they couldn’t define that. I mean, this is really basic stuff, isn’t it? We’re getting a long way from having a balanced society. When the chief of the department of health cannot define what a woman is and now it’s taken how many years and how much heartache for the medical profession to actually say that women are different from men.

Katherine Deves:

Oh, that was terribly embarrassing when that health bureaucrat couldn’t even say what a woman is. A flip side, I’d like to say to him, well, what is a man? What’s your definition of a man? I don’t think it would’ve been the convoluted answer that they responded with weeks later, that’s for sure. But one thing that I particularly liked about the FINA consultation process was they asked the female athletes. And when the women athletes are asked in a way where it’s confidential and they don’t have to be concerned about the backlash or losing sponsorship or losing their position on the team, invariably they come back saying, “Yes, we want our own category.” So I think that Cate Campbell stood up in defence of herself and other women. So I would hope that in having started this conversation, other women activists who had done that, it empowered her to be able to stand up and be able to defend herself without feeling afraid.

Malcolm Roberts:

So let’s just branch off for a minute, I’ve got some other questions in the line we have been pursuing, but let’s take a quick diversion. My mother, who was a woman, surprising though it may sound, but she’s long said that the women’s movement had lost its way because … and I agree with her entirely. And I came to that conclusion, the conclusion that we need to celebrate women being different from men, we need to celebrate that they bring a different opinion, they bring different qualities, rather than pretending women and men are equal and the same. We have a much better society when we recognise that we need both, at whether it be at corporate board levels or sporting associations, but there are some things that men can do better than women, and there are many things that women can do better than men. And I’m not just talking about physically, I’m talking about mentally, socially, emotionally,

Malcolm Roberts:

We’re different, and we should be celebrating that and hiring people, not on the basis that women are equal to men or that men are equal to women, but that they’re different because it brings a much better balance to whatever an organisation is, whether it’s a sporting organisation or a cultural organisation or a corporation or a social club. What do you think?

Katherine Deves:

Look, I think there is a bit of a difference just saying, “Oh, we need to have equality.” It needs to be quality of opportunity, equality of access to resources. And you’re right, we do need to acknowledge that there are differences between the sexes. We need to acknowledge that women do bear the burden of human reproduction, and for that reason, our bodies are different, that we do have some limitations. It doesn’t mean that one sex is better or worse, but I agree with you, the sexes are different and what we should be striving for is more equity, that everyone has equality of access to opportunity and resources, rather than trying to be exactly the same.

Malcolm Roberts:

Yes, I agree entirely, equity of opportunity, not an imaginary figment of the imagination that we’re the same. It’s complete nonsense. Thank you for being so clear, no wonder you got the result that you got. What about the 30% of the committee that did not vote in favour of the restrictions, were they mainly abstaining or were they against, did they vote against?

Katherine Deves:

I think there were some countries that abstained, but like you, I was quite surprised that it was as high as 30%. It would be interesting to see which of those countries it was. And I mean, I read the guidelines that they did vote on and I thought it was extremely comprehensive, and I think that it’s a real betrayal of women and girls and females who compete in aquatic sports, to have voted against that. Because it really needs to be clear, the eligibility criteria for male and female needs to be clear and that’s simply what the guidelines did.

Malcolm Roberts:

Yes. But does it worry you that 30% don’t see this?

Katherine Deves:

It does.

Malcolm Roberts:

How could they have not voted in support of this? I mean, the issue is so clear cut, why?

Katherine Deves:

I struggle with that a lot, trying to understand why people would think that the appropriate way forward here is to allow men and boys to claim to be women and to compete in women’s sports. I mean, with the FINA decision, obviously this applies to just simply elite sport, but I also struggle with the fact that it’s just elite and the sports bureaucrats seem to think that it’s fine at community and grassroots level to allow men and boys to compete in the female category. I mean, when you look at … I mean, to be able to get to the elite level, you have to start at community level. So the fact that this doesn’t apply at those local levels as well, perplexes me greatly.

Malcolm Roberts:

And there are other considerations there as well, in terms of dressing sheds, I’m going to be talking with my next guest, next hour, about the rowing, about what’s happening in rowing and males and female, biological males, sorry, and biological females having to share the same hotel room, having to share the same change sheds, dressing sheds, this is just absurd. But let’s take a break now, Katherine, and we’ll listen to our sponsors and then we’ll be back to have more of your insights and your opinions. Thank you very much. Stay tuned, we’ll be right back.

Malcolm Roberts:

I was listening earlier, before I started, to Joseph and his guest Mark Wood. Now they had totally different views on Joe Biden. I’m with Joseph on that issue, but Mark had a right to express, have and express a different view, and Joseph welcomed that. So we’ve got the opportunity for the people to say what they really think. So I’m with a wonderful guest today, Katherine Deves, who’s done a remarkable job of standing up where no one else would stand up. Katherine, how important is it that FINA identified that the cutoff point, are males who have been through puberty onwards, would be excluded from competing?

Katherine Deves:

Well, my understanding of the reasoning for that decision is that it’s to do with the accruing of the benefits of a male puberty. So where they put the cutoff point, it was at 12 years old for males, provided they haven’t entered into [inaudible 00:25:03] stage puberty, which is when puberty starts to commence. In my view, it actually doesn’t go far enough, the policy, it really should be you’re excluded on the basis of being born male, observed and recorded at birth. And even FINA research itself demonstrates that boys start outperforming girls at eight years old. And I think any parent who stands on the sidelines of sports in the afternoons or on the weekend, you can see the difference between boys and girls from a very early age. Even my daughter in the under sixes for rugby league, there’s a difference in how they perform.

Malcolm Roberts:

Yeah. And when I was a boy, which is 50 years ago, we didn’t have girls playing rugby league, just wasn’t on. And so it seems a bit strange when they started playing rugby league some years later, but now it’s an everyday occurrence and you don’t think anything of it, it’s just a natural occurrence, but you want some protection against … and let’s face it, we have boys maturing at different rates themselves. And so in some areas, they didn’t have an age limit on boys, they had a size limit on boys. You played, up to a certain age, you played according to the size because some people mature so much more quickly than others. So there is an important need to understand that boys and girls are different, sometimes kids are different, but as you’ve just said, boys will outperform girls in a physically active way, from a very early age.

Katherine Deves:

That’s right. And Dr. Carol Hooven, who’s a lecturer at Harvard, she actually wrote the book on testosterone. And she said that the dose that male neonates get about six weeks after birth, contributes to how boys rough house. So even with respect to how competitive they are, how willing they are to be … when I watch the rugby league under sixes play, the boys are much more interested in tackling, the girls usually hold back. But when we’re talking about like, it doesn’t so much apply to swimming because it’s not a contact or collision sport, but when we’re looking at contact, combat collision sports, this starts to become very important. And we’re only even beginning to understand how concussion affects males and females differently and females experience worse concussions at lower impacts, with worse outcomes.

Katherine Deves:

So it’s very, very important that we acknowledge the sex differences. And in my view, it really should begin younger than 12. I think probably about eight might be the right age to start separating them into the different sexes. And I mean, a lot of sports, particularly team sports, they will have the girls category, and then they have the boys category, which is also open to girls who are able to play at a really high level. But even once they start getting to about 12 or 13, the girls just can’t keep up, and it starts to be a bit of a safety issue as well.

Malcolm Roberts:

Boy, you’re not afraid to tackle the issues, are you, Katherine? Because you’ve just indicated, the way I read it, correct me if I’m wrong, that there’s a difference of an approach between a boy and a girl. The boy will be more physical and more aggressive, is that my understanding? I certainly agree with you if it is, but if it’s not, then correct me please.

Katherine Deves:

Oh, look, I think we have stereotypes for a reason. And I’m not saying that this is for every single boy or every single girl, of course, you’re going to get girls who like to rough house, of course you’re going to get boys who prefer to be gentle and don’t want to involve themselves in collision sports. But I think by and large, there are sex stereotypes for a reason.

Malcolm Roberts:

And we wouldn’t be here today, because our ancestors would’ve been eaten by some sabre tooth tiger or whatever, some years ago, if we didn’t have males doing the protecting. Now, if push comes to shove, don’t get between a woman and her child, that’s wonderful, that protective instinct is there, but the males are the more aggressive and the more physically assertive. And so we need to recognise that, and we need to celebrate that, providing the male doesn’t dominate unfairly because of that.

Katherine Deves:

Oh, that’s right. So, I mean, if you’re going to apply this to sport, if we don’t have sex specific categories, then women don’t have the opportunity to shine. All we have to do is look at the history of sports records and we see how much men outperform women, whether it’s speed, which we get outperformed, I think is 10 to 12%, all the way up to punching power, which is 260%. So if we don’t have sex specific categories, women just simply would not be able to compete.

Malcolm Roberts:

Now there’s been some criticism of FINAs decision and it seems absurd to me, I’ll just put it out there now, but I’d like your opinion of it because FINAs decision would potentially push boys as young as 10 to start considering puberty blockers, and sex hormones, to get in early, before the puberty starts, or they risk never meeting FINAs regulations. In American states like Texas, where it’s outlawed to have this type of medical intervention in young children, it means that FINAs ruling would exclude any transitioners during or after puberty. What do you say to that criticism?

Katherine Deves:

Well, it’s really false to claim that these boys are being excluded, it’s making them ineligible on the basis of their male sex. However, they would be able to compete in the male category or in a mixed category. So there are absolutely opportunities for them to participate in sport. I suspect FINA maybe didn’t think through the decision to cut off at 12 years old, and I can only speculate their reasoning at the time. But I think that we are also being rather naive if we do not acknowledge and accept that there will be bad actors who will try to exploit this loophole. We only have to look at the history with the east German female swimmers, also the Chinese swimmers who were doping, whether they knew that they were being given testosterone or not. And I think that this decision has definitely highlighted the moral and ethical issues around the medical transitioning of children.

Katherine Deves:

It really must be noted that countries like Finland, Sweden, France, the UK are urging extreme caution in transitioning children. There is a lot of evidence coming out now of the harm that’s being done to the bodies of children when you put them on these medicalized pathways. And some of these countries are even saying, we are just simply not offering medicalized pathways anymore, we’ll offer psychological support, like in Finland. So I think they’ve really opened a Pandora’s box with this one.

Malcolm Roberts:

Yeah, it seems to me that the whole thing was conjured up, it’s a concoction, a fabrication to somehow stand between the sexes yet again, because we’ve seen this policy reflected in many other areas, this type of policy reflected in many other areas, and it’s really confusing. Sex is breaking down families, breaking down males and females, that’s the way it strikes me and this push back saying that, “Oh, boys as young as 10 will now start considering puberty blockers and sex hormones to get in early.” That really is clutching at straws for me, they’re really not coming up with a solid argument and so they’re trying to get their way using a nonsense. And I mean, I’m not asking you to agree with me, but the whole thing is basically a nonsense that’s been fabricated, to my way of thinking.

Katherine Deves:

Well, I think if they were going to rely on the accrued benefits of testosterone, and based on the existing evidence, and they had to have a cutoff point from 12 years old. However, now with the emerging evidence, showing that, as I mentioned before, male embryos get doses of testosterone in utero that female embryos do not, then I think it just needs to go back to your sex observed and recorded at birth.

Malcolm Roberts:

Yep. So let’s continue Katherine and thank you for your blunt answers, it’s so refreshing. How viable is FINAs suggestion of an open category, will this be sustained, are there enough competitors, will it hold the same prestige?

Katherine Deves:

Well, my concern has always been for the women and girls and provided that they continue to have a dedicated female or female only sports category, I would not object to any solution proposed to accommodate these men and boys who claim to be women, who want to compete in the female category. If that’s an open category or a specific transgender category, of course I would support that, provided that the women and girls don’t have to give up their own opportunities or give up any of their own resources.

Malcolm Roberts:

So you’re in this battle and that’s what it is, for protecting women and girls, and it’s really up to other people to come along and put their case for what they want.

Katherine Deves:

That’s right. I mean, they’re the ones making the demands and it really should not be put on women to solve this problem. I mean, women’s sports are not at parity with men’s sports as it is, with respect to scholarships, resources, media coverage, pay parity and so on. So we haven’t even achieved equality in this area yet, so I don’t think we should be expected to solve this problem for others. If they’re going to come in making demands, then they should also be bringing solutions. I think an open category, a mixed category, transgender category is more likely the way forward. And I’d also put it to men to be more accommodating of gender nonconforming males, instead of expecting women to make accommodations.

Malcolm Roberts:

So I’m with Katherine Deves, who’s doing a remarkable job of being blunt and concise. So I really appreciate the way you’re answering questions, Katherine. Now let’s extend beyond swimming. Rugby’s already made that decision in 2020, and there are more sporting bodies reconsidering their positions. Do you think FINAs decision will hasten the growing movement to safeguard women’s sport?

Katherine Deves:

Yes, I do. I think there needed to be one prestigious international federation to stand up and protect women and girls sports, and obviously FINA has done that. World rugby did it, as we mentioned before, but maybe because it’s, I don’t know, it’s a small sport, it was two years ago, the landscape has changed a lot. We’re also in the post Lia Thomas, Laurel Hubbard world, so people have had the visual on what it looks like when you have men who are essentially … I mean, Laurel Hubbard was in his 40s, and he had 10 years off weight lifting, I believe, and there he is standing there with the world’s best young women who were teenagers and women in their early 20s. And same with Lia Thomas, when we saw him, he was ranked, I think, around about 500 and then all of a sudden he’s a national champion.

Katherine Deves:

So I think Lia and Laurel both did us all a favour, in giving us [inaudible 00:37:03] around that, but I would really hope that due to the consideration that FINA gave to their guidelines, that this might serve as a template for other sports, and I would really, really like to see that adopted by the national federations here in Australia. Unfortunately, we are still getting quite major pushback. We had Kieren Perkins, who is now the CEO of Sport Australia, who came out saying that these sorts of policies protecting women and girls would end up in human carnage, which I think is very extreme and hyperbolic and incredibly-

Malcolm Roberts:

What did he mean by that? Could you explain what he meant by that, please?

Katherine Deves:

I think it’s to do with if men and boys who are claiming to be women are excluded, I’m not entirely sure that it’s going to result in human carnage. I mean, I would hazard a guess and say, does that mean that these people are going to be suffering depression and anxiety or committing suicide? I’m not entirely sure what was in his contemplation at the time, but I think that that was a very extreme comment to make. I would also say to Mr. Perkins, that had he had to compete against someone who was enjoying a 10 to 12% advantage, say a fellow swimmer who was doping, he certainly wouldn’t have won his gold medals, and he certainly wouldn’t be sitting there as the CEO of Sport Australia because he would’ve likely not enjoyed such professional success.

Katherine Deves:

And we’ve also seen that sports federations here in Australia, who’ve signed up to a group called pride in sport, which is part of ACON, that used to be known as the Aids Council of New South Wales. Now pride in sport receives very generous government funding to go and lobby government departments and sports organisations, with respect to having sports categories based on gender identity instead of sex. So we are rather behind some of the other countries like the UK, in terms of this debate. In the UK, their sports council did a wide ranging review that came out last year, that said that it is impossible to have both fair competition, player safety for women, as well as inclusion of men and boys who claim to be women in their sports categories. Whereas in Australia, our mainstream media and many of our sports federations seem to still be going along with the gender identity being prioritised over sex.

Malcolm Roberts:

Okay. I’d like to broaden the discussion after the break, but before we go to the break, can you just tell us how listeners can find out more about Save Women’s Sport? Is there a website, are there advocacy roles, do you need volunteers, how organised is it? Can you just tell us where people can go for more information about what you’re doing?

Katherine Deves:

Sure. So with Save Women’s Sports Australasia, we are on all the social media platforms, we also have a website where you can subscribe. Coach Linda Blade has written a book on this issue called, Unsporting, if you really want to educate yourself on this issue. And also if you follow Senator Claire Chandler, she’s very active in this space, she’s doing fundraising, she has her save women’s sports bill in an effort to clarify this issue at the federal level in Australia. So go and look her up, follow her on social media or at her website. So there’s some good places to start.

Malcolm Roberts:

Thank you very much. And I’ll endorse that Pauline Hanson and I, we don’t worry about someone being in another party. Claire Chandler has done a very good job in this area, full power to her, we support that, we have supported her in the Senate, we’ve spoken up very strongly in the Senate, we will continue to support Claire doing that. So thank you very much for that. We’re with Katherine Deves, having a wonderful conversation. We’ll be back, Katherine, after the ad break. And let’s talk about the avalanche that may be coming now that FINA has broken the dam wall, right across our society. We’ll be right back with Katherine Deves.

Malcolm Roberts:

Welcome back, with Katherine Deves. So Katherine, what we notice and one of the ladies, of course, in our office team … and by the way, we’re 50/50, not because we have any mandate for that, because I don’t believe in mandates, or positive discrimination, we’re 50,/50 male and female in our office because based on merit. But one of the ladies said, “Look at all the people folding in, look at how quickly the news media picked this up.” So this was a bubble waiting to be pricked, wasn’t it? It’s based on nonsense. And so once FINA stood up, the media actually changed very, very quickly.

Katherine Deves:

That’s right. If you’ve been following this debate, the IOC put out guidelines back in November that were frankly, dreadful. They were saying that the categories for sport were to be based on gender identity, they were saying that a male could compete as a female, and under the privacy principles, you couldn’t challenge that, you couldn’t ask about that. And then in an act that, in my view, was incredibly craven, then said, “Oh, we’re going to pump this to all the international federations to sort out.” So everyone’s been waiting for one organisation to be able to stand up and be brave and acknowledge the difference between the biological sexes. So I think that now that that’s happened, it really started a bit of an avalanche because I mean, it’s just absurd, when you are seeing these men who are aged out or mediocre, competing at an elite level and women’s sport really should not be a plan B or a retirement option for these men. We really want to see the elite women.

Katherine Deves:

And I think now that we’re starting to have female athletes, ex Olympians, Sharon Davies over in the UK, she’s been incredibly vocal, we had Dawn Fraser, even standing up, Cate Campbell, a number of athletes here, parents, grandparents, women, and girls who play sports, we were looking for someone with very high profile to stand up and start talking common sense. And I think for those who are being critical of women standing up and saying we want to have our rights here, I mean, during the course of the election, I even had my opponents, Zali Steggall, who herself is a former Olympian, who likely would not have been an Olympian had she had to compete against men, and she referred to the parents who had concerns, as transphobic.

Malcolm Roberts:

I know, it’s disgusting.

Katherine Deves:

I think that when we are seeing the arguments of the other side, that is simply predicated on, well, I just want to be included, I’ve got hurt feelings and so on, I mean, it just doesn’t stand up in the face of say what FINA did, where they’re consulted with the scientists and the lawyers and the female athletes themselves. There’s just a real disparity in the quality of the arguments, and the other side just really falls over when it gets challenged, it just simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Malcolm Roberts:

And yet Katherine, we have the media, we have the activists, we have some politicians, many politicians who promote this Bullshit, pardon my French, who promote this rubbish, and it spreads right across society. And very few people have the courage to stand up and tell the truth and stand up and speak in a common sense way, about facts and data. And you’ve done that, and it’s so refreshing, what you’ve done and what you’ve led. So this is not just a campaign to bring sense back to swimming, to protect girls and women, this is about the values of our society. This is about making sure that people in the remote halls of New York and Geneva and UN buildings, who are trying to smash the family, are actually put back and said, “Get the out of our country. We believe that women and men are different, boys and girls are different. We applaud that, we celebrate that, we welcome everyone, but for goodness sake, just come at us with the facts, instead of your busted ideology, trying to divide our society.”

Malcolm Roberts:

So, Katherine, thank you so much for what you’ve done, because I see it, as I just said, as a matter of your protecting our values and I applaud your courage. What was your motivation to get involved? Why were you standing up for young girls in sport? What were you seeing that made you think that shouldn’t happen? Why did you stand up?

Katherine Deves:

For my daughters, Malcolm, they play sport and no one in any of this was speaking for the little girls. And I was seeing, it’s wide in sport with the transgender inclusion guidelines here, it was all done with great fanfare, lots of resources, people who are being paid nice full time salaries, the top nine sports in Australia had signed up to this. And then going and having a look at the guidelines and seeing that sex wasn’t a category in sport anymore, it was all gender identity and all a man or boy had to do, they don’t need hormones or surgery or anything, they just had to register as a female and say that they were a female.

Katherine Deves:

And I understand you’re speaking to another guest, but that was extending to change rooms, overnight accommodation, the parents weren’t to be told, if we were to send our daughters off on a sports camp, we weren’t to be told that another athlete who was male might be billeted in the same room as them, or the coach or the umpire might be in the same room as them. And I just thought that was a safeguarding failure, and I thought, why is no one challenging this? Why is this all being promoted as brave and stunning and inclusive? But when you’re putting these men and boys in there, you’re making it dangerous for little girls and they are the ones being excluded, and I felt that someone had to simply speak up for them.

Malcolm Roberts:

Well, thank you for doing so. And I want to actually compliment you on something else and draw to people’s attention, your argument. Your argument has never been anti transgender. You’ve never slagged anyone who’s changed their sex, you’ve never done that. You’ve never put them down. Because I’m sure you would probably know, just like I know, there are people who are born in the wrong body, but they’re very, very few and far between, and I will support those people, and I’m sure you would too. But this is about fairness, it’s not about slagging off on someone or putting someone down, what you’ve done is very positively and in a very caring way, supported people that are being disadvantaged unfairly because of a monstrous lie in our society.

Katherine Deves:

Look, that’s right. And I mean, bodies play sport, not identities. And so for that reason, that’s why I just used fact based language. Some people might find that confronting or offensive, but I think it’s really important to just acknowledge the biological sex here. And I mean, I have people in my life who identify as trans, people who have gone through the whole surgical process, they understand that they are still the sex that they are born, but they find it easier to move in the world, identifying as the opposite sex, wearing the clothes that are associated with the opposite sex, and I fully respect their experience, but I think there are certain times when we need to just acknowledge biological sex, for very important reasons.

Malcolm Roberts:

My wife and I know of someone overseas, who was seen as a tomboy when she was a little girl and she’s dressed like a boy, she’s played sports like a boy, she’s married to another lady. She then contemplated getting a sex change operation. And as she stepped up to that, I think she might have even started the hormonal treatment, as she stepped up, she thought, no, this is not right. So that was her choice to go that way and then to pull back, and we love her for doing that, for both, that’s her choice. We love her as she is and she doesn’t claim to be a boy or a man, but we just love her as the human she is. And I think that’s what really matters here, and your love for young girls, your love for your own daughters, your love for women, it’s the same as your love for men because you’re doing this to protect men as well.

Katherine Deves:

Well, I just see this, with the gender ideology, it really just reinforces these regressive sex stereotypes. Why can’t we just have gender nonconformity? Why can’t you just have a girl who is going to grow up to be a lesbian, she likes wearing shorts, she likes playing rugby? And you say there is a million different ways to be a girl, there’s a million different ways to be a boy, but just because you’re maybe a boy who likes dresses and plays with trucks, or a girl who plays footy and wants to cut her hair off, it doesn’t mean that you’re the opposite sex. And I think that selling children that lie, we’re doing a great disservice to them. I think we should just be able to accept people for who they are, however they want to dress, whoever they want to love, instead of enforcing these sex stereotypes.

Malcolm Roberts:

Beautiful. What’s the future for this movement, and is there more to do, Katherine?

Katherine Deves:

There definitely is more to do. Unfortunately, the trans activists are very much focusing on erasing sex in law and policy, not just in sport, but in many other areas of our national interest, in education and so on. And I think we need to be very vigilant, I think we need to defend the concept of biological sex. And so yes, there is a lot of work to be done, not just with sports.

Malcolm Roberts:

How can people be more involved? I mean, you could mention your website again and people can maybe become educated by reading the book that you mentioned, Unsporting, the title was Unsporting. How can they be more involved? What are the first steps they should take if they want to protect our society? Because that’s what I see it as doing, you have been protecting our society and you continue to protect our society, and I am very grateful for you doing so. How can more people help you?

Katherine Deves:

Well, what I would suggest is following on social media, some of the groups that are doing the lobbying with respect to this. So that would be Coalition for Biological Reality, Binary also do good work. So if you start following them on social media, you’ll start to see the other groups around the world as well, that are also fighting this issue. I think supporting those who publicly stand up, whether it’s politicians, whether it’s ordinary people like me, supporting them on social media, writing to your local paper, write to the national papers, call into your radio stations, make sure that your voice is heard, get your opinion out there. Make the politicians, decision makers, see that the vast majority of Australians really don’t agree with the erasure of sex in law and policy.

Malcolm Roberts:

There are very few people like Katherine Deves, with her courage and her sense, and a common sense in politics, so take her advice and jump right into the fray. Katherine Deves, thank you so much for protecting our country and our values. Listeners, stay right here, we’ll be back after the news with another great guest, another down to earth view. Thank you so much, Katherine. Thank you to our listeners.