So, I've had moments in the past where I might have spent 30 seconds thinking about this subject but ultimately I don't give a fuck about competitive sports so my analysis usually ends up being, all competitive sports should be banned because competitive sports are dumb. Which is admittedly a neanderthal take.
But yeah, now the global athletic showdown is going down and seemingly everyone in my immediate vicinity keeps clutching their pearls and I guess I'm sick of not being able to advocate for trans comrades appropriately and articulate a proper response.
So what's a better response besides, "who cares?" Am I missing something? Like, if all things were equitable, what would or should competitions look like?
Help me out. I honestly have no idea.
Removed by mod
Transgender female athletes are at a physical disadvantage compared to cisgender women in several key metrics, research funded by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has found.
Removed by mod
Cope harder
Professional sports is about people who are physical outliers competing with other physical outliers. Even if your proposition were true for the general population (it's not; I used to fence and fencing has mixed gender competitions, there was no discernible difference between fencers based on gender) it's untrue for the statistical outliers.
Beyond that, serious citation needed on the "people who have gone through male puberty" claim. Everything I've read suggests trans athletes performance are indiscernible from cis athletes of the same gender once they've been on HRT for around 12-18 months
huh i didn't realize women's fencing was that advanced, i figured there'd be legacy cultural biases in athleticism or a toxic social situation like chess.
I agree that HRT makes 'skeletal differences' irrelevant, and that trans in sports is a non issue after the accepted window of HRT.
However, women's and men's sport is simply different. Fencing, well, perhaps there's less advantage for men, but it's still notable. I don't know much about fencing. I mean, I'm speaking anecdotally as you are but I knew a team GB fencer (I don't think she made international in the end, but still de facto one of the top womens fencers in the country/world), and the Chinese guys who also went to fencing all used to brag about beating her in straight sets (or whatever the scoring system is) Then there was a guy who was 6'6 by age 14 who would beat her too, but accounted for size difference there's not much anyone the size of the women's fencer could do in that scenario against the huge reach discrepancy.
Outside of fencing, in every other sport I've played, strength makes a huge difference. Any sport with a level of direct contact becomes unfeasible. Again, I have known multiple international rugby players of both genders. On the school fields at break time sometimes the girls would come and play touch rugby. At age 18, I, as a 3rd string player for my school team, could essentially score a limitless amount of tries against women who have since played at international level, in one of the best women's sides in the world. I was just faster, and able to switch directions a split second quicker due to strength. Of course, Portia Woodman would put me in the dirt, but then put Woodman against Alesana Tuilagi and see what happens.
Same goes for swimming. Up til age 12 this tall girl in my year would demolish everyone at breaststroke. I was level pegging in front crawl. By age 14, we both go to regional swimming competitions, having both trained for it equal amounts, and her times that she made podium with were not comparable even to anyone in my heats.
Testosterone is just a different animal. It's kind of insane.
The only sports, aside from events with a mental rather than physical focus, that women consistently compete and beat men in are ultra long distance marathons.