this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
416 points (98.8% liked)

Damn, that's interesting!

4644 readers
1 users here now

  1. No clickbait
  2. No Racism and Hate speech
  3. No Imgur Gallery Links
  4. No Infographics
  5. Moderator Discretion
  6. Repost Guidelines
  7. No videos over 15 minutes long
  8. No "Photoshopped" posts
  9. Image w/ text posts must be sourced in comments

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
416
Birthplaces of the 100 fastest 10km runners of all time (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
84 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

several orders of magnitude more of an advantage than trans women have.

Have there even been studies which can back up this claim¿? Hell have there even been studies which even measure how much of an advantage having smaller calves and ankles gives¿?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

9 Conclusion There is no firm basis available in evidence to indicate that trans women have a consistent and measurable overall performance benefit after 12 months of testosterone suppression. While an advantage in terms of Lean Body Mass (LBM), Cross Section Area (CSA) and strength may persist statistically after 12 months, there is no evidence that this translates to any performance advantage as compared to elite cis-women athletes of similar size and height

They're resorting to saying "trans women are stronger than their competitors, but how do we even know that being stronger is advantageous in sport???"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You need to work on your reading comprehension. XD

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Do you think that an advantage in terms of strength translates to any performance advantage?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I think that "maybe" having an advantage in terms of strength is an admission that the research is incomplete.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The document is full of admissions that the research is incomplete.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

Hence, my comment to Sentau's question about the research.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Did you mean 'yes'. Because the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages

Noit doesn't. You are misrepresenting it, or misuing the word 'concludes'. It never says anything like "we conclude' that there is no advantage". The actual conclusion is on p40-41 and can more honestly be phrased as "we cannot conclude that there's a definite advantage. Strength is a possible exception, but how do we even know strength is relevant to sport?" ("Additional biomarkers (such as handgrip strength, hip angle, bone density) have been used uncritically in positivist biological studies to demonstrate cis men’s purported biological advantages over cis women, but there is not sufficient evidence these measures are salient to the question of trans women’s participation.")