World swimming bans transgender women from competing

[msethhunter]

I post links at work, I usually don't post scientific studies, which I want to read first. For this topic, I've talked about it before, I have notes.


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pits.22500
a study looking at LGBTQ youths taking part in sports in general. The finding is that trans teens are less likely than cis teens to take part in sports at all, something the article believes we should make efforts to change due because school sports improve self esteem/less likelihood for depression and suicide.

https://www.sapiens.org/biology/female-male-athletes-differences/
https://runrepeat.com/state-of-ultra-running
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2014.00195/full

An article, some data, and a study, all looking at differing performance between men and women in sports, the findings are that it's more complicated than 'men are better than women', the reality is that there are some sports where women have definite advantages over men, others where men have a big advantage. Women tend to do better in high endurance sports.

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865
Harper on physiological changes trans people undergo during transition. Her findings are in major areas like hemoglobin and testosterone levels, trans women end up basically at the same level as cis women, their muscle mass decreases as well. A note on this is that Harper has admitted that in the studies looking at muscle mass there is a weakness in that the studies look at non athletic trans women, according to her the trans women started out with a lot less muscle mass than cis men, so they had less to lose, and which might effect the slower rate of muscle mass loss. Also, muscle mass does not necessarily equal muscle strength.

Which brings us to:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8090355/
Which looks at muscle strength, Harper does not like this study because it's scope was limited to 8 people, but it's one of the only studies looking directly at muscle strength available. The data shows that trans women's muscle strength is in line with cis women's muscle strength.

This is also partially backed up by
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577
which shows that trans women's ability to perform push ups and sit ups are equivalent to cis women after 2 years of hormone therapy. It does show that running speed is about 12% better than an average cis woman, however, separately the author of this study does note that high level and elite athletes are substantially higher still, so the performance advantage is completely within the performance advantage that one cis woman could have over another cis woman.
Also, the findings on running isn't consistent, Harper looked at running as well
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307766116_Race_Times_for_Transgender_Athletes

Her conclusion was that trans women in running do not have an advantage.

Which comes to what still is essentially the overall state of the science on trans women in sports:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357259/

Which basically concludes that the data available does not show a consistent, unfair advantage for trans women, and policies that sports organizations have implemented are not justified by the science.

Anyway, since it was brought up, I searched for opinions of people who actually compete with trans women, and found this:
https://bridges.monash.edu/articles...n_Sport_and_the_Pride_Cup_Initiative/12731810
Only 24% of women who actively compete against trans women believe that the trans women have an unfair advantage. For some reason, 46% of men, who don't compete against trans women, feel the same. Odd how the people who aren't competing against trans women are the ones that think it's unfair, but the ones actually competing think it's fine.

Going into policies being passed in the US and around the world would probably get very political, but suffice to say, a lot of states in the US are banning trans children from getting gender affirming care, and internationally the US is still one of the more progressive states, so, a lot of trans women will be excluded by a rule that prohibits those who go through a male puberty.

Read up, if you want.

Took me a minute to get through all those links. The thing is, the majority of the support the differences between men and women. Harper also says what I quoted in an earlier post, and agrees that the changes don’t fully go away.

So, I’ll say it again. Biology isn’t identity. And when the Sapiens article says “sex isn’t binary”, it makes me dismiss it. You are either born male, or born female. You can either have a baby or you can’t.

The majority of people don’t care what anyone wants to identity as. The majority of people however do care if the way you want to identify disadvantages a group. This swimming sanctioning body has decided it does. Case closed.

 

[ScarySpikes]

Took me a minute to get through all those links. The thing is, the majority of the support the differences between men and women. Harper also says what I quoted in an earlier post, and agrees that the changes don’t fully go away.

So, I’ll say it again. Biology isn’t identity. And when the Sapiens article says “sex isn’t binary”, it makes me dismiss it. You are either born male, or born female. You can either have a baby or you can’t.

The majority of people don’t care what anyone wants to identity as. The majority of people however do care if the way you want to identify disadvantages a group. This swimming sanctioning body has decided it does. Case closed.

The scientific evidence that sex is bimodal and much more complicated than 'male or female' is overwhelming. We've literally talked about intersex people in this thread, which on their own prove that sex is bimodal, not binary. The fact that you dismiss an article entirely for saying so basically tells me that you don't actually give a shit about what the science says, and only care about trying to justify your worldview.

Every single one of those sources, the top people for scientific research on this subject, say that trans women and cis women can compete against each other meaningfully. Every single one of them says that the differences between a trans woman on HRT for a sufficient length of time, and a cis woman, are minor. The differences between an athletic woman, especially an elite athlete and the average cis woman, are orders of magnitude larger than the differences between trans and cis women.

 

[afm199]

Every single one of those sources, the top people for scientific research on this subject, say that trans women and cis women can compete against each other meaningfully. Every single one of them says that the differences between a trans woman on HRT for a sufficient length of time, and a cis woman, are minor. The differences between an athletic woman, especially an elite athlete and the average cis woman, are orders of magnitude larger than the differences between trans and cis women.

Lia

 

[TylerW]

How many threads about women's sports have you started or participated in that weren't about trans women? I think we might have to adopt your logic and conclude that your participation in this one must be about something else.

You're fucking right! I don't give a shit about sports, but I definitely give a shit about trans rights.

Now, reduce your fraction.

 

[msethhunter]

The scientific evidence that sex is bimodal and much more complicated than 'male or female' is overwhelming. We've literally talked about intersex people in this thread, which on their own prove that sex is bimodal, not binary. The fact that you dismiss an article entirely for saying so basically tells me that you don't actually give a shit about what the science says, and only care about trying to justify your worldview.

Every single one of those sources, the top people for scientific research on this subject, say that trans women and cis women can compete against each other meaningfully. Every single one of them says that the differences between a trans woman on HRT for a sufficient length of time, and a cis woman, are minor. The differences between an athletic woman, especially an elite athlete and the average cis woman, are orders of magnitude larger than the differences between trans and cis women.

Every one of those articles has contradictions in itself. It’s not my worldview that has anything to do with this. If anything, you’re projecting there. The science I’ve seen, even from one of the people you’re quoting, says that the genetic advantages persist even after years of treatment. That’s a closer for me right there.

Competing meaningfully isn’t competing equally. That’s what this is all about. Life comes with choices. Competing in sports is a choice. Sometimes some choices one makes exclude them from making other choices. So, what’s more important, competing in sports as a woman, or transitioning to a man?

 

[ScarySpikes]

Every one of those articles has contradictions in itself. It’s not my worldview that has anything to do with this. If anything, you’re projecting there. The science I’ve seen, even from one of the people you’re quoting, says that the genetic advantages persist even after years of treatment. That’s a closer for me right there.

Competing meaningfully isn’t competing equally. That’s what this is all about. Life comes with choices. Competing in sports is a choice. Sometimes some choices one makes exclude them from making other choices. So, what’s more important, competing in sports as a woman, or transitioning to a man?

You clearly don't actually care about the science and only care about quote mining for out of context statements, so let's move past that.
should anyone who has any competitive advantage over their competition be banned from competing in sports, in your opinion?

 

[James]

You clearly don't actually care about the science and only care about quote mining for out of context statements, so let's move past that.
should anyone who has any competitive advantage over their competition be banned from competing in sports, in your opinion?

Not to derail your guy's conversation, but that is a silly question. And, quick reminder: No body is banned from competing in sports due to this decision.

 

[ScarySpikes]

Not to derail your guy's conversation, but that is a silly question. And, quick reminder: No body is banned from competing in sports due to this decision.

His argument is that some women should be banned from women's sports because they might have a competitive advantage of some sort. It's a completely fair question. Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing? He said that competition should be 'equal', it seems like, with that in mind, he would believe that any advantage should lead to a ban.

 

[afm199]

You're fucking right! I don't give a shit about sports, but I definitely give a shit about trans rights.

Now, reduce your fraction.

Most of us don't give a shit one way or the other about trans people. I'm firmly in the pro LBGQT ranks, but not in the politics. I'm totally fine with trans folks doing what they do with exception of post puberty males competing as females with the fiction that hormones make the bone structure and muscle structure difference somehow equal. That's just laughable magical thinking. I've worked with, played with, competed with and hired from that group for decades. But when you want me to pretend to believe something, fuxor off. It's like your spitting in the face of allies because they don't agree with every single political idea that you have.

 

[msethhunter]

His argument is that some women should be banned from women's sports because they might have a competitive advantage of some sort. It's a completely fair question. Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing? He said that competition should be 'equal', it seems like, with that in mind, he would believe that any advantage should lead to a ban.

Once you get past their not genetically women, and hold an advantage because of that, we can have an honest conversation. We’re not talking about identity here, we’re talking about biology.

Identity isn’t biology. This isn’t the minutia of “this female has a built different than that one.” This is “a transitioned woman wants to play with women.” There’s a very distinct and important difference there.

 

[Eldritch]

Most of us don't give a shit one way or the other about trans people. I'm firmly in the pro LBGQT ranks, but not in the politics. I'm totally fine with trans folks doing what they do with exception of post puberty males competing as females with the fiction that hormones make the bone structure and muscle structure difference somehow equal. That's just laughable magical thinking. I've worked with, played with, competed with and hired from that group for decades. But when you want me to pretend to believe something, fuxor off. It's like your spitting in the face of allies because they don't agree with every single political idea that you have.

Well, to be fair, studies do seem to show that muscle mass tends to regulate itself down after sufficient time under HRT.

However, skeletal infrastructure seems to remain as an unchanged advantage after HRT and the studies I have seen do not seem super clear on if cardiovascular advantages remain (men have bigger hearts and thus competitive advantages there as well).

 

[Climber]

Men also have larger lungs as well.

 

[Eldritch]

Men also have larger lungs as well.

Is that right? Huh, guess that is another advantage that probably remains unchanged after HRT, but I haven't seen the data so can't really speak to it.

 

[ScarySpikes]

Once you get past their not genetically women, and hold an advantage because of that, we can have an honest conversation. We’re not talking about identity here, we’re talking about biology.

Identity isn’t biology. This isn’t the minutia of “this female has a built different than that one.” This is “a transitioned woman wants to play with women.” There’s a very distinct and important difference there.

We could have an honest conversation if you would answer my question.
You said that you want sports to be about 'competing equally'.
Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing in sports?

 

[chickenfried]

Why have separate women's and men's categories at all?

'.
Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing in sports?

 

[msethhunter]

We could have an honest conversation if you would answer my question.
You said that you want sports to be about 'competing equally'.
Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing in sports?

I did. Identity is not biology. Some sports do separate by “competitive advantage”. And your lack of remembering that shows your ignorance of sports in general. You’re a huge advocate for these kinds of issues, and that’s an honorable and commendable thing. I applaud you for that. But in this area, you’ve got it wrong. Shit, just as an example, with swimming, biological men have larger hands and larger feet. Imagine the difference in power from a hand that’s 4” across to one that’s 7” and a size 6 or 7 foot vs a size 11 or 12. Nah, no competitive advantage there at all.

 

[ScarySpikes]

I did. Identity is not biology. Some sports do separate by “competitive advantage”. And your lack of remembering that shows your ignorance of sports in general. You’re a huge advocate for these kinds of issues, and that’s an honorable and commendable thing. I applaud you for that. But in this area, you’ve got it wrong. Shit, just as an example, with swimming, biological men have larger hands and larger feet. Imagine the difference in power from a hand that’s 4” across to one that’s 7” and a size 6 or 7 foot vs a size 11 or 12. Nah, no competitive advantage there at all.

You still didn't answer the question. It's a yes or no. I asked "Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing in sports?"

I didn't ask whether some separation into different classes makes sense. On a sport by sport basis, those are fine if they are based on real world data and performance. I asked if any competitive advantage at all should be allowed in your version of sports. The fact that you said you think that competitors in sports should be "competing equally" seems to indicate that is you don't think there should be.

 

[byke]

The general rule seems to be "unfair advantage", because obviously 'roids will get you banned.

 

[msethhunter]

You still didn't answer the question. It's a yes or no. I asked "Should anyone who has any competitive advantage against other competitors be banned from competing in sports?"

I didn't ask whether some separation into different classes makes sense. On a sport by sport basis, those are fine if they are based on real world data and performance. I asked if any competitive advantage at all should be allowed in your version of sports. The fact that you said you think that competitors in sports should be "competing equally" seems to indicate that is you don't think there should be.

Yes. I did. If you don’t like that answer, it’s on you. You keep saying that “it’s not binary. What, are we going to start separating swimming classes based on hand size, foot size, arm length, leg length, height and sex. That question is unsound, a fallacy, and you’re having to reach really really deep to try and justify your position. The deeper one has to reach, the less sound their position is.

Biology is not identity. That’s it. Sure, there’s some sports where women are better. There’s some sports where men are better. All the more reason to separate by sex. You’ve made arguments in this thread that prove that.

 

[ScarySpikes]

Yes. I did. If you don’t like that answer, it’s on you. You keep saying that “it’s not binary. What, are we going to start separating swimming classes based on hand size, foot size, arm length, leg length, height and[/] sex. That question is unsound, a fallacy, and you’re having to reach really really deep to try and justify your position. The deeper one has to reach, the less sound their position is.

Biology is not identity. That’s it. Sure, there’s some sports where women are better. There’s some sports where men are better. All the more reason to separate by sex. You’ve made arguments in this thread that prove that.

I'm not having to reach at all. You are running back to some meaningless phrase of a talking point because you know that you can't answer the question without undermining your argument.

If you say yes, that you believe no one should be able to have a competitive advantage, it basically destroys the concept of competitive sports completely You think of separating by hand size, foot size, arm length, leg length, height, and sex all at the same time would still not get you there. Every person would basically be competing only with themselves, because there are small competitive advantages and disadvantages.

If you say that you say no, that you believe that only beyond a certain degree of advantage or disadvantage, then, as the data shows, you are going to have to start banning those elite athletes way before you start banning trans people. A trans woman, if you only pay attention to the studies that show differences, ignoring data collection issues the authors acknowledge and ignoring other studies that contradict their findings and show no difference, You are looking at relatively minor differences, like 5-15% above an average cis woman, and only on some things, and it also comes with some disadvantages which you seem to skip over. If you look at top 10% performers among cis woman, they are like 25-30% above the average cis woman on those same comparisons. If you look at elite cis women in sports, the best of the best, we are talking about 50-60% higher performance over the average cis woman.

Also, there is no evidence that trans women maintain that 12% performance bump even if they train as hard or harder than cis women at the elite levels. We are really only looking at anecdotes here, there are only a handful of trans women that have gotten into high level sports, and probably only Lia Thomas could be seen as being at an elite level. Prior to transition, she was also at the elite level for in mens swimming, and after transition, she is not dominating the competition, she won one NCAA championship in the 500 Freestyle, but otherwise, 5th in the 200m freestyle, 8th out of 8 in the 100m freestyle finals, At the same event, Kate Douglass, a cis woman, dominated, with breaking 18 different NCAA records. Again, there aren't enough trans women in sports at that top level to have a scientific study on it, but certainly not the performance you would expect if trans women have an unfair advantage over cis women.