The London Marathon has chosen not to reflect the Supreme Court’s recent unanimous ruling affirming that sex is binary. Instead, it continues to operate under a framework that critics argue marginalizes biological women.
Race director Hugh Brasher claims the event awaits detailed guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). However, this hesitancy directly contradicts last week’s clear legal ruling. Baroness Kishwer Falkner, EHRC Chair, stated unequivocally that under current law, “transgender women” are not permitted to compete in women’s sport categories.
Despite this clarity, organisations like the Football Association, England and Wales Cricket Board, and now the London Marathon continue to delay action. These delays, framed as efforts toward inclusion, are increasingly viewed as exclusionary toward women.
The 2023 marathon drew significant controversy when transgender runner Glenique Frank, previously competing as male, ran in the women’s category without surgical transition. Critics saw this as undermining the integrity of women’s sports. Frank’s participation, highlighted by a “Girl power!” declaration on national television, drew backlash as performative rather than empowering.
While the non-binary class serves only to bestow spurious athletic distinction upon mediocre males who would be nowhere in the men’s field, the women’s event has witnessed such absurdities as Glen Frank, having lined up in both the New York and Tokyo marathons as a man, running in London in 2023 as a woman simply by rebranding as “Glenique”. “Girl power!” Frank shouted, in an interview at Tower Bridge with the BBC.
Except this was not girl power. It was difficult to imagine any spectacle less empowering for women than Frank, wearing a rainbow crop top.Also, admitting not to have undergone any reassignment surgery. Glorying on the national broadcaster in this pastiche of womanhood. But two years on, the London Marathon is content to let this preposterous situation persist. Instead of showing some semblance of leadership, Brasher said that he would have to wait for “detail” from the EHRC before complying with the Supreme Court’s decree.
The marathon currently offers three entry categories: male, female, and non-binary. However, critics argue this structure still allows biological men to participate in female categories. Failing to uphold the Supreme Court’s directive.
Leadership from major sporting bodies remains lacking. Rather than act, Brasher insists on waiting for further details. Meanwhile, the EHRC has already spoken clearly.
The Supreme Court’s decision is binding. The continued allowance of biological men in female events is increasingly seen not only as unjust but potentially unlawful.
The London Marathon is expected to host over 56,000 participants this weekend. Still, the debate over fairness in sport remains unresolved — and increasingly polarising.
Read More: Diaspora Lens
