Comment by drankl | Hacker News Reader

Comment by drankl | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

There is a wealth of data that shows the male performance advantage in sports. The difference is so stark that even the most elite female athletes are at a disadvantage compared to teenage boys: https://boysvswomen.com

This male advantage remains even for those who choose to lower their testosterone levels; they retain strength and muscle mass above women, and their overall skeletal structure remains intact too: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7846503

One can also easily see the difference when comparing equivalent female and male competitions. For example, here's a graph of weights lifted in a decade of World Masters events, combining both W35 and M35 - it's very obvious which data point is the male competing in the women's event: https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/JrzQoA6fWKtYdm8auCMj6RKil0Y...

What all the data we have so far shows is that allowing males to compete in women's sports disadvantages women and shatters their athletic opportunities.

> I think they should be included because it's the human thing to do.

Women are human too you know. Their needs matter as much as those of men, and more so in female-centered spaces. Women's sports don't exist to be a therapeutic setting for men who desire to be women. They're for female athletes, who deserve the same opportunity as male athletes to enjoy fair competition and have their athletic excellence celebrated.

> I think a lot of conservative types not long ago didn't think women should even be playing sports, so it's ironic that the sanctity of female sports is so important now.

It's important for female athletes regardless of what opinions conservatives may or may not have about this issue.

There is no advantage that shows up in the data to show that trans athletes have an advantage in sports.

If there were we would see trans-athletes winning lots of medals. They don't. In fact there just aren't that many athletes. This is a giant nothing-burger.

There is another argument that says trans-athletes can be disadvantaged by having a skeletal structure which their hormone system can not properly power and this is actually hinders their athletic performance. Either way as I said, there aren't any trans athletes winning medals so I don't think we really have anything to be concerned about.

As for your concern about female sports I have my doubts about whether or not you are sincere but I'll pretend you are.

Perhaps it is easier for you to think of Female sports as "a protected category for people who do not have male levels of testosterone". This is what it effectively is anyway because of inter-sex humans. We monitor people's testosterone (whether that is right or wrong is another issue) and we decide if they are allowed compete in female sport. The exact same process can be applied to trans-athletes.

There is plenty of data which shows the sex-based performance gap is so large that, even when impaired by long-term testosterone suppression, male athletes still have a significant performance advantage over female athletes. Please read the review I linked in my previous comment.

I also linked you data which shows that males have won hundreds of medals in women's competitions, and provided you a case study in the form of a very illustrative graph showing the performance of trans-identifying male weightlifter Laurel Hubbard in the World Masters, compared to both female and male cohorts, which places him solidly in the latter despite competing against the former - for which he 'won' a gold medal.

> Perhaps it is easier for you to think of female sports as "a protected category for people who do not have male levels of testosterone".

No, it's a protected category for female athletes, despite some sporting bodies undermining this in recent years. Testosterone suppression does not unbuild a male, nor does it convert his male body to a female body. All you end up with is a somewhat weakened male, yet one who still retains significant advantage from his testosterone-driven male development.

A female athlete who doped with androgens for years wouldn't be allowed to compete in women's sports even if she's ceased doping, for obvious reasons. Yet somehow it's considered acceptable for male athletes who've had the effects of testosterone in utero, post-natally and throughout puberty to do so, as long as they start androgen suppression as adults - or, for some competitions, do nothing more than 'identify as female'. This double standard makes no sense whatsoever, is clearly unfair, and is an insult to women.

Then why aren’t the Olympics being won by trans women. They are not.

Why isn’t the NCAA dominated by trans women ? Because it turns out it’s a giant nothing burger.

Like I said, you would expect 1% of the winners to be trans women but actually only one trans women ever has won a medal.

One person ever. And they were part of a soccer team so they are probably just over 1% of the women who won soccer medals that year, let alone every person who won an Olympic medal that year let alone that has ever won an Olympic medal.

Your argument is just trans phobia and I understand you can be scared of things but don’t allow that to ostracize a (small) group of people who just want to fit in.

Here is an article about the trans-phobia panic

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/22/indiana-gove...

Literally no transgender athlete in Indiana.

No athletes from Cambodia have ever won an Olympic medal. So would it be fair for any Cambodian man to compete in women's sports? No, it wouldn't. It would obviously be unfair. Just as it is when any male competes in women's sport.

Does every athlete who dopes win a medal or a spot on the podium? No, but it's still cheating, still an unfair advantage. Again, just as it is when any male competes in women's sport.

Female athletes aren't the only group to have protected competitive categories. For example, dwarf basketball leagues exist, where all players have to be below a certain height. Would it be fair for a player who is actually 6'6" tall to 'identify as short' and enter their competitions? No, of course not. It's as nonsensical and unfair as males 'identifying as female' to compete against female athletes.

Please take the time to read the resources I linked so you can actually understand the argument.

> Your argument is just transphobia and I understand you can be scared of things but don't allow that to ostracize a (small) group of people who just want to fit in.

That small group of people is men who very selfishly desire to compete in women's sports, regardless of how unfair this is on female athletes.

You're only looking at this from the male perspective, and are apparently unwilling to respect or understand women's boundaries. I suspect this is why you're not seeing the problem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com