Gender again. Sorry!

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

If I say your every thought is correct, will you stop trolling the thread? It would make life more bearable for more people than just me (probably).

I think lots of people feel that way abouot you when you once again claim biological male trans athletes have no advantage over biological women all the while on the same page, you have to compare a 40 year old women to a 65 year old men to claim the women will win.

There seems to be a contradiction for some reason.

 

[monkers]

Lol. So now humans and chimps are the same comparators for athletic purposes? A male chimp has x5 the strength of a man.
The age difference between males is a far less significant factor than the sex difference between men and women.

Here's the author of the study saying the 2 groups in the study - trans identifying men and women - shouldn't be compared because they weren't like for like:

"Professor Yannis Pitsiladis, who led the research and who sits on the IOC’s medical and scientific commission, said that such discrepancies should prevent anyone viewing the two groups as synonymous when addressing the issue of gender inclusion".

https://sports.yahoo.com/ioc-accuse...e1VOVKlPLlCT3ZkfZeYZSFdO5r_zc5gNxaUB2_ueuth2a

No. Once again you are either incapable of understanding science and the point, or you are being willfully stubborn.

You spoke about commonalities. It's no use banging on about DNA as if the DNA between us is completely difference; we are nearly the same from that point of view we are all made from nearly the same DNA and materials. Therefore teenage boys and trans women are nearly the same, but nearly the same as everybody else. Either you do want to follow the science or you don't.

Constructing an entirely false narrative as if it represents the opinion of the scientific community is entirely bogus. You keep saying we can't change our DNA, but it is a bogus argument. We are all of us nearly all the same in that respect. The gametes argument is more powerful, but you can't accuse people with no gametes as having the wrong gametes, that just defies reason.

Then you bang on about hormones, saying that it's about testosterone and that the advantage for trans women doesn't diminish. Just about every factual website or book on the subject disagrees with you. Every trans woman who no longer has testosterone and has more oestrogen in her body is at a disadvantage. The laws of simple mechanics proves it, reduce the power available to a lever and you have to make it lighter to make it move at the same speed, leave it at the same weight it moves more slowly and can't move the same load.

What we know about muscles is that training load is related to lactate. The role of testosterone is related to lactate which is why athletes are almost obsessed by lactate measurement.

If you were honest and said you just don't like trans people, I'll think you a twat but at least respect your honesty.

 

[monkers]

I think lots of people feel that way abouot you when you once again claim biological male trans athletes have no advantage over biological women all the while on the same page, you have to compare a 40 year old women to a 65 year old men to claim the women will win.

There seems to be a contradiction for some reason.

People born male with typical amounts of testosterone will out-perform females of the same age with similar training.

But trans women are not in either category, and they are certainly not teenage boys.

 

[icowden]

People born male with typical amounts of testosterone will out-perform females of the same age with similar training.
But trans women are not in either category, and they are certainly not teenage boys.

I'm pretty sure transwomen are born male and yes, hopefully they are not teenaged boys. However, it remains to be proven whether or not transwomen retain an inherent advantage from being born male. Certainly the perception with which transwomen win women's events at all levels suggests that they do, and at sub-elite level this is a real issue which will put off biological girls and therefore threaten women's sport.

A more interesting part of it (to me) outside of the obvious physical issues is arenas like Chess and Pool where it's also being suggested that transwomen have an advantage. Here, I would guess (sorry no research) that the pool of women players is much smaller than the pool of male players, thus it may be easier to win against the majority of players in a smaller pool. Certainly with Chess there are no actual men's categories, only a women only category to encourage more women into the game. The same is true of Pool in terms of recruitment, although I understand that there are also benefits in terms of reach.

The sensible thing to be done, is what most governing bodies are doing which is to prevent transwomen from competing in the women's category until such a time that the science confirms that any unfair advantages are eliminated. For some sports where height / reach / build are important this may never be achievable.

 

[CXRAndy]

People born male with typical amounts of testosterone will out-perform females of the same age with similar training.

But trans women are not in either category, and they are certainly not teenage boys.

Trans are the same category, they're male.

You just deny this fact.

Most don't go through with drug therapy and surgery, well not until after sporting activity ends.

 

[classic33]

Trans are the same category, they're male.

You just deny this fact.

Most don't go through with drug therapy and surgery, well not until after sporting activity ends.

So you're saying all trans gender are male?

 

[icowden]

So you're saying all trans gender are male?

I thought he was pretty clear on that point. For the sake of clarity, I think he is speaking of biology rather than legal status. He is also clearly only referring to transwomen, as there are no issues with transmen taking any wins in men's sport. If anyone has an explanation for the lack of competitiveness of transmen in elite sport, it would be interesting to hear...

 

[monkers]

I'm pretty sure transwomen are born male and yes, hopefully they are not teenaged boys.

Try telling CXRAndy that. The extension of his 'logic' was that all boys are trans!!!

 

[monkers]

However, it remains to be proven whether or not transwomen retain an inherent advantage from being born male.

Yes it does, but some folk are happy to reach their own conclusion on either the scantiest of evidence, or denial of the evdince.

The Brighton Report does not draw conclusions. It says that the differences that they tested for were smaller than expected. To which GCs say they clearly cheated in the tests. I don't see how it is possible to cheat at testosterone, bone density, and haemoglobin tests, but the accusation persists, despite the tests showing there was some retained advantage in hand grip strength, which figure since larger hands are enablers of stronger grip - so they didn't cheat that test, which leaves just about the square root of fark all.

The report does not draw any conclusion other than saying their finding show more research is needed, and yet the accusations are flying.

The GCs need to make up their minds, they call for research, and then when they get it they cry foul. Do they want evidence that provides truth, or just evidence to support a carefully crafted narrative that disguises bigotry. Me? I'll go with the science, reason, and the law.

 

[CXRAndy]

Government minister now urges sporting bodies to ban all trans from women's sport

https://www.theguardian.com/society...nder-athletes-competing-in-female-only-events

 

[icowden]

Government minister now urges sporting bodies to ban all trans from women's sport

They are also urging a law change to declare Rwanda safe, so I'm not sure that their opinion counts for much...

 

[AuroraSaab]

People born male with typical amounts of testosterone will out-perform females of the same age with similar training.

But trans women are not in either category, and they are certainly not teenage boys.

They are the correct comparators because the key factor is not current levels of testosterone but the overall 'male body advantage' that an androgenised male body has. ie once a male has been through puberty the effects of testosterone are irreversible. Testosterone has already done its job and lowering the levels only slightly mitigates the advantage it has given.

Your attempts to pretend that an older man with low testosterone is somehow more akin to a woman than a younger male are laughable.

USA Women's Football World Cup and Olympic winner Carli Lloyd with one of the 15 year old Dallas boys that beat her team 5 -2. The (not even fully realised) effects of testosterone are already apparent. If he had zero testosterone he would still have male body advantage.

 

[matticus]

People born male with typical amounts of testosterone will out-perform females of the same age with similar training.

But trans women are not in either category, and they are certainly not teenage boys.

Are there any studies that show the marked reduction in performance that trans-athletes suffer?
(this can only consider strength/speed/etc ... you can't make a 6'+ basketball/volleyball player shorter!)

 

[AuroraSaab]

There are poor quality ones like those of trans woman Joanne Harper. Even their studies show retained advantage:
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865

"Notwithstanding, values for strength, LBM and muscle area in transwomen remain above those of cisgender women, even after 36 months of hormone therapy".

The trouble with these lab studies is that there is no reason for the transwomen participants to try their best. It's to their advantage to sandbag their efforts and record lower times.

Emily Bridges is currently taking part in one. Of course, the worse times Bridges records the better the evidence that transwomen have no advantage. It's very poor science.

We could also ask, if testosterone is such a poor predictor of performance why is it banned? Why can't women take it to get their levels up to that of transwomen?

 

[classic33]

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the interrelationship between the resting serum testosterone (T) levels of female athletes from different types of sporting events and their athletic success.
Methods: The study involved 599 Russian international-level female athletes (95 highly elite, 190 elite, and 314 sub-elite; age: 16-35 years) and 298 age-matched female controls. The athlete cohort was stratified into four groups according to event duration, distance, and type of activity: 1) endurance athletes; 2) athletes with mixed activity; 3) speed/strength athletes; 4) sprinters. Athletic success was measured by determining the level of achievement of each athlete.
Results: The mean T levels of athletes and controls were 1.65±0.87 and 1.76±0.6 nmol/L (P=0.057 for difference between groups) with ranges of 0.08-5.82 and 0.38-2.83 nmol/L in athletes and controls, respectively. T levels were positively associated with athletic success in sprinters (P=0.0002 adjusted for age) only. Moreover, none of the sub-elite sprinters had T>1.9 nmol/L, while 50% of elite and highly elite sprinters had T>1.9 nmol/L (OR=47.0; P<0.0001).
Conclusions: Our data suggest that the measurement of the serum T levels significantly correlates with athletic success in sprinters but not other types of athletes and in the future may be useful in the prediction of sprinting ability.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32608215/

Why do you only want women to be allowed the use of what is currently a banned substance?