Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Nothing can change that.

It’s those kind of absolute statements that really bug me, out of your whole post, it can simply be summed up in that one line. It’s why the whole ‘biological females’, ‘biological males’ nonsense has no real-world application whatsoever, because broad generalisations like that, which are not scientific facts but are rather nothing more than broad generalisations suggested by scientific evidence gleaned from tiny population studies. I don’t mind that, it’s why I say I don’t disagree with the idea, but trying to apply that idea in a context where it doesn’t belong? And then to go further and declare that nothing can change that? I begin to wonder what kind of a scientist are you?

Because it sounds like you’re more vested in upholding your personal beliefs than evaluating what I know you know from scientific evidence and the effects of synthetic hormones on the human body. That’s still not moving the goalposts, it’s pointing out that you cannot apply broad generalisations at an individual level, and still you have no scientific research regarding transgender athletes performance. It’s as though you imagine relevance is irrelevant.

OMG this thread has turned into an argument similar (or akin to) what one might have with a flat earther. 😄

Prove to me the earth is not flat, of course it's flat, it even says so in the recent edition of Flat Earth Weekly, they even have a picture of it taken from space. Now you prove to me that the earth is round

I often wonder does someone just get off on writing reams and reams of waffle and psychobabble for the sake of it. Nobody seriously thinks that men should compete against women or girls in the sporting arena, so the only reason anyone would argue page after page after page is because they just love to wallow in it and to waffle for the sake of it.

There is no logic to the argument that men (no matter how they identify) should compete in women's sport.

I bet you that you cannot keep this silly thread going for 1000 posts, well just you wait, I bet you I can …

It’s those kind of absolute statements that really bug me, out of your whole post, it can simply be summed up in that one line. It’s why the whole ‘biological females’, ‘biological males’ nonsense has no real-world application whatsoever, because broad generalisations like that, which are not scientific facts but are rather nothing more than broad generalisations suggested by scientific evidence gleaned from tiny population studies.

Science does seem to bug you, yes. Calling it nonsense when it is literally the biggest factor in all of this, just shows a serious ignorance to absolute facts, based off evidence and science. There is no "generalisations" going on either. The facts remain that males have more powerful and suited bodies for performance and power, again, nothing can change that.

This all comes from the years of sporting events that support it, ignore them if you want, but they are not nonsense.

I don’t mind that, it’s why I say I don’t disagree with the idea, but trying to apply that idea in a context where it doesn’t belong? And then to go further and declare that nothing can change that? I begin to wonder what kind of a scientist are you?

How does biology not belong in this conversation? Nothing can change a male to a female, nothing, unless there is a way to change the living genetics of a human, nothing at all will change it. I also never claimed to be a scientist, there difference is that I listen to them.

Because it sounds like you’re more vested in upholding your personal beliefs than evaluating what I know you know from scientific evidence and the effects of synthetic hormones on the human body. That’s still not moving the goalposts, it’s pointing out that you cannot apply broad generalisations at an individual level,

I don't have beliefs here. Again, I listen to the science, I don't have to believe anything, I just understand it. I am aware of what synthetic hormones does to a body, I am also aware of the effect of natural ones as well, which males experience when they hit puberty and it dramatically changes their bodies, have you read about them also?

and still you have no scientific research regarding transgender athletes performance. It’s as though you imagine relevance is irrelevant.

Oh dear, Transwomen are male, that is not bigotry, that is another fact. They are male athletes trying to compete in females categories, there is your relevance. It is what you seem to ignore, when it is clear as day for you to see.

"It’s why the whole ‘biological females’, ‘biological males’ nonsense has no real-world application whatsoever, because broad generalisations like that, which are not scientific facts but are rather nothing more than broad generalisations suggested by scientific evidence gleaned from tiny population studies."

What does this even mean? Of course male and female have real world applications and aren't "broad generalisations", they are literally objective, measurable facts which apply to every person who has ever existed on this planet, and not just "tiny population studies" lol. I mean, a biologically male person showing up to hospital with stomach pain is hardly going to be screened for pregnancy is he? In your world view maybe they should, since apparently biology doesn't actually exist.

This is the broad generalisation I was referring to -

Transwomen, biological males, have the physical advantages over biological females. Do you accept that much?

It’s not a cop-out, it’s simply realising that I was wrong in thinking you were a scientist, and I’m not interested in continuing our conversation when it becomes clear that you’re not a scientist, you’re just parroting what you’ve been told.

The scary part is you're wrong on both counts. People do think the world is flat and people do think think men should compete against women in physical sports.

I know there are women stronger then men for example and if they want to enter male weight lifting competitions at a local level then fair play to them they might even win. But at the elite level especially where man on man collisions occur keep them separate. The world almost went mad there normalising a man battering a woman around the ring but thankfully we're coming back from the brink.

If I had to play football at an adult level against women where I had a kill or be killed mentality I'd have just quit and played golf or something. I'm not playing sport to Hurt women.

I asked for your help with this one though?

Where is the sheer volume of data on transgender athletes performance?

Here you go:

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00615.2024?utm_source=chatgpt.com

There are profound sex differences in human performance in athletic events determined by strength, speed, power, endurance, and body size such that males outperform females. These sex differences in athletic performance exist before puberty and increase dramatically as puberty progresses.

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/10qf3xe/sex_segregation_in_strength_sports_overall_7688/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Sex segregation in strength sports ["Overall, 76%–88% of the strength assessments were greater in males than females with pair-matched muscle thickness, regardless of contraction types"

Along with the evidence based in the result of the Olympics, Commonwealth Games etc, but you already know that.

Fun thing is, you’re not required to believe anything, in the same way as nobody is required to believe anything that they don’t believe, like when they’re told that because men are bigger, stronger and faster, and fcuk it why not - smarter than them, they are required to believe it, and to act as though they believe it.

There is a difference in believing something, simply because you are told to, over believing something when there is evidence to support this. No one can help you if you don't read the evidence of course.

You don’t have to be a scientist to understand basic science, which is why I was perplexed by your continued accusation that I was denying science and all the rest of it. It’s from that, that I figured you must be some sort of scientist (a poor one, but there’s no shortage of them either), and the reason I was engaging with you at all is because I figured you were one of those scientists who puts their personal beliefs before science.

Rubbish.

This was you attempt at a cop-out. You're veiled insult there at being a "poor scientist" when it is just a basic, fundamental understanding of the science seems to be what is tripping you up. It reflects more on you if you thought I was one more than anything, heaven forbid someone might actually have an interest in this type of stuff…

Who’s ’we’ Frank? There’s no ‘we’, just you, because it’s your opinions I was addressing, unless ‘we’ is your preferred pronoun now? I’ll keep it in mind if I’m addressing you in future.

This is another weird trait of yours, fair enough.

The one sport that settles it for me is rugby.

Pretty comprehensive display of speed, power, strength. Now, imagine a male running full tilt into a female and get back to me.

Fair play Frank, genuinely, because at least it’s clear you put some effort and thought into it. I’m not going to piss on your parade, but unfortunately out of all the sources you provided, and there were plenty in the article alone, only ONE study, out of all the evidence presented, is relevant to the question I asked -

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15476439/

One study according to who, you?

From your own link: The conclusion is that androgen deprivation in M-F increases the overlap in muscle mass with women but does not reverse it, statistically. The question of whether reassigned M-F can fairly compete with women depends on what degree of arbitrariness one wishes to accept

Having to use arbitrariness seems a tad unscientific, wouldn't you agree?

As you have already figured out by now, I would have hoped for something more recent than 20 years ago, and a study participant size greater than 38, conducted over a period of years, a longitudinal study. To be fair to you, I know it’s a tall order, but considering what’s actually at stake, I would suggest the onus is on sports organisations to fund the research which can be carried out in a controlled, consistent and systematic manner.

What difference does it make if it was from 20 years ago? You will do literally anything to undermine a study if it is not what you want to hear, really anything. All of a sudden you have preferences for how a study should take place, and be conducted. Moving them goalposts yet again. And shifting the onus AGAIN…the song and dance continues.

I don’t know that there’s a difference in being told something and reading something, I mean, you still hold fast to your beliefs in spite of the lack of evidence to support your beliefs. I don’t imagine that evidence will be forthcoming any time soon given how between global sports organisations inventing new rules and regulations, and various Governments in the Anglophone region are mounting a coordinated effort to ensure transgender athletes don’t get any funny ideas about competing in sports under their jurisdiction and governance. It’s almost as though if you weren’t told they existed, you wouldn’t believe they could, but that seems to be the general idea behind their efforts. Now if only they could do that for athletes like Tom Daley, Christ he’s annoying with the whole knitting thing 😒

Stop calling them beliefs, it is childish. It is science, get over it. And more and more moving the goalposts, rules change blah blah, but still just can't accept that biological men have advantages over women…you will do anything to avoid that. This is what a faith based position looks like.

And that Billie Jean King one?

https://gcn.ie/billie-jean-king-empathy-inclusion-trans-athletes/

Like what does she know anyway, amirite?

Everybody knows she’s just wrong, and they have the scientific facts to prove it.

Ah yes empathy…because that is what matters here, allowing men who "feel" like women to compete against them so that individuals feelings are catered to. That makes so much sense, pretty sure science isn't needed for that one.

This is another weird trait of yours, fair enough.

You have no idea, and I think it’s best for both of us that we keep it that way 😂

Another bizarre comment.

One study according to who, you?

Well that’s disappointing, as it appears you didn’t even bother to read the article you provided, which references the study I posted as being the only one that was actually relevant to the question I asked you. The issues of course, are number one that the sample size wasn’t even worth talking about, and the fact that it is 20 years out of date when science has advanced considerably in that time. It wasn’t MY link at all, it was a study referenced by the author of the article YOU posted. Even in attempting to prove whatever point you were making, you took that piece out of context and neglected to finish what you’d started-

The question of whether reassigned M-F can fairly compete with women depends on what degree of arbitrariness one wishes to accept, keeping in mind, for instance, that similar blood testosterone levels in men have profoundly different biologic effects on muscle properties, rendering competition in sports intrinsically a matter of how nature endows individuals for this competition.

That’s from a study, from an article, that YOU provided, to answer the question as to where is the sheer volume of data on transgender athletes performance.

Stop calling them beliefs, it is childish. It is science, get over it. And more and more moving the goalposts, rules change blah blah, but still just can't accept that biological men have advantages over women…you will do anything to avoid that. This is what a faith based position looks like.

I’ll call them beliefs, because that’s exactly what they are, your personal beliefs, which aren’t based on any data whatsoever related to transgender athletes performance in sports. That’s not changing the goalposts, they’re still very much where they were when I asked you for the sheer volume of data on transgender athletes performance, and you came back with data alright, the only issue being that it was almost entirely irrelevant, apart from that one study which you don’t even appear to be aware was referenced by the article YOU provided. You’re in no position to lecture me on faith based positions when you’re in an even worse position. That just looks like you’re attempting a game of “I know you are but what am I?” We’re not in the playground now.

Ah yes empathy…because that is what matters here, allowing men who "feel" like women to compete against them so that individuals feelings are catered to. That makes so much sense, pretty sure science isn't needed for that one.

It isn’t, which is why appeals to the feels, fearmongering and scapegoating are far more powerful tools than science will ever be when it comes down to a question of how other people should be treated according to others. There are many scientific studies which have investigated that phenomenon too, like this one for example -

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812483/full

I figure if you didn’t read your own evidence, you’re not going to read that either, and shall continue to believe whatever you choose to believe, which is fine by me. Freedom of thought, conscience and belief and all that jazz, y’know, human rights stuff that you also don’t appear to appreciate or imagine are at all relevant.

You don’t have to imagine anything though? French Rugby Federation gave World Rugby the two finger salute:

https://sportfriendlyproject.com/en/alexia-cerenys-en/

Oh great, one player who plays in the French third division…that puts that debate to rest, doesn't it? If you have to reply on outliers for your claim, it isn't very strong.

And you certainly don’t have to imagine a much bigger opponent who has no regard for their own or other player’s safety and the consequences of what can happen when they lose the rag and don’t care for the rules of the sport -

“Sport has always given me great pleasure in life, and I don’t blame the game of rugby for what happened that day. Ultimately, I feel I was let down by improper and poor behaviour from the opposing player, coaching staff and the referee.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/23/rugby-player-paralysed-after-reckless-tackle-wins-high-court-case-opposing-player

You are making my point for me, imagine this was a male…this would be a far common occurance.

Always wild that it is transwomen in the news…not the other way around, for physically demanding sports…weird.

Agreed, yes football (all codes, rugby or otherwise), athletics, basketball, boxing, tennis, cycling, gymnastics, swimming, volleyball and on it goes … Men and women are different, like we've always been.

Different strengths, different physiology, different musculature that has evolved over millena, and we always knew that up until about five or six years ago, then something strange happened, almost like some people in western society were hit with the neuralyzer from Men in Black 😎

the neuralyzer

, the little device that makes a super bright flash and erases people's memories.

Flash,

What? who said men & women are different? can't remember, ok so in the meantime, anybody who claims trans status can, and must be allowed to compete in the gender catagory of their choice, cool agreed. So sex is irrelevant, yes, what, I think so? can't quite remember. Trans women are women.

Flash, Will Thomas is now Lia Thomas who will be changing from the men's swimming event to the women's catagory, he now identifies as she/her, yes that is good, we comply.

What about his biology? What's that got to do with anything, we're now running sport on her gender self identity (self id) and "inclusion".

That would turn the idea of competition in sports on it's head. It's because of the fact that athletes are exploiting the advantages they have over other athletes that they are able to perform in competition, in the hope of winning the competition. To suggest that anyone should have to prove that a group in society does not have advantages within certain contexts would be to turn the idea of prohibiting discrimination on it's head, whereas the way it normally functions is that organisations which wish to enforce rules which promote discrimination, must be able to justify the policy.

The fact that transgender athletes are already at a considerable social disadvantage would be an obvious consideration. It's why laws exist which prohibit discrimination and promote fair and equal treatment on the basis of the grounds which exist in law -

The Australian Sports Commission (ASC) has released its guidelines for the inclusion of transgender and gender diverse athletes in high performance sport, reminding sports governing bodies of their commitment to promoting a 'spirit of inclusion' and abiding by Australian law.

High-performance guidelines released for transgender and gender diverse inclusion in Australian sport - ABC News

International sports organisations aren't exempt from international law either, which is why the mickey mouse court that is CAS are moving more towards being in line with the ECHR than they were previously -

The Grand Chamber of the ECHR ruled on Thursday that the Swiss legal system had “fallen short” in providing what they felt should have been a “rigorous judicial review that was commensurate with the seriousness of the personal rights at issue” and that Semenya’s right to a fair hearing had therefore been violated.

…

The ECHR ruled Semenya’s complaints that other human rights were violated inadmissible, including the prohibition of discrimination. It found Semenya did not fall within Switzerland’s jurisdiction in respect of those complaints.

Caster Semenya declares victory after ECHR rules she was denied fair hearing | The Independent