Current Events > Study Finds Trans Women Athletes Have No Advantage Over Cis Women Athletes

(+) Yeah! (+)

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Lia Thomas, placed first in 1 out of 3 of her events (the 500m freestyle). She placed 5th in the 200m freestyle and 8th in the 100m freestyle: both times finishing over two seconds behind 1st-place (both races were won by cis women). This was at the national collegiate level, so it's pretty high, but it's not even close to the highest level in women's swimming.

Conveniently leaving out her results swimming against men. Didn't even kiss top 100 let alone win in any events. She went from ranking 500's to #1 in the 200 yard freestyle.You're also severely downplaying how much she won against women and and some of the records she smashed against them. Again ranked in the 500s against men.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

2) Being a trans woman myself, I am constantly amazed by how fantastically ignorant society at large is about us, about our experiences, and about the nuts and bolts of how hormones work (and thus how HRT works). Even most doctors are ignorant about it! This ignorance is rooted in the essentialization of gender, oppositional and traditional sexism, and, of course, the discounting of femininity in general.

Out of curiosity, since you seem to put a high value on your personal experiences, what is your opinion on the multitude of ciswomen athletes who speak about their experiences going up against transwomen athletes and saying that in all the years they've been competing, especially in combat sports, that they've never felt a disparity in strength/speed/etc as they do against transwomen athletes?

I mean, you want to point out that Fallon Fox and Alana McLaughlin never fought anyone but scrubs while ignoring that they're not exactly world class talents themselves. They got ahead almost exclusively on their physical advantages.

The problem isn't that any transwomen is going to beat any ciswoman in every event ever, I think what most people see as the potential advantage is that middling level athletes in Men's Division's become top level athletes when put into the female division. there's apparently studies on each side that say they do or don't have the advantage, but how do you explain the fact that their achievements never get worse, or even the same, only better?

Agree with point 3 though for the record.

s0nicfan posted...

So are you just gonna try to quiz me until you find some reason to convince yourself the world is wrong and you're right? I'm not going to play your pop quiz game in a topic where other posters have also posted holes in the study this topic is about, holes you'll completely ignore because your standard for academic rigor here is "tear apart what I don't like, automatically accept what I do."

You want to change my mind? Find actual research conducted by an actual university that proved trans women don't maintain a physical advantage over cis women and I'll read those too, but I'm past the point of CE trolls screaming into the void because for once they're on the wrong side of science and they don't know how to handle it.

I mean, you seem confident enough in the findings of your sources that you post them in every topic about trans women in sports, but most of us dont have access to the full texts. You claim to have read them, which would imply you have access to them and could defend them or at least post the full body when asked so the rest of us can discuss it.

TC posted a whole breakdown with findings, details, and a discussion. Why should your post get any acknowledgement when you can't even answer basic questions when asked?

ElatedVenusaur posted...

This is the point where I get out of work and editorialize a little. A few points...

1) The hysteria over trans women competing in women's sports is so very obviously baseless, insofar as possibly the most successful trans woman athlete, Lia Thomas, placed first in 1 out of 3 of her events (the 500m freestyle). She placed 5th in the 200m freestyle and 8th in the 100m freestyle: both times finishing over two seconds behind 1st-place (both races were won by cis women). This was at the national collegiate level, so it's pretty high, but it's not even close to the highest level in women's swimming. Laurel Hubbard technically competed at a higher-level of competition, but did absolutely terribly - attributable in part to her relatively advanced age for weightlifting. Lia, of course, has subsequently been banned by FINA due to a sudden change in regulations regarding trans swimmers that just so happened to exclude the only prominent trans woman swimmer in the world and any other future trans competitor who doesn't transition before the age of 12 - a near impossibility in most of the world so that's as high a level as Lia will ever swim at. Past that, you're looking at MMA fighters like Fallon Fox and Alana McLaughlin (neither of whom fought anyone who wasn't a scrub) and former high school athletes like Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood.

2) Being a trans woman myself, I am constantly amazed by how fantastically ignorant society at large is about us, about our experiences, and about the nuts and bolts of how hormones work (and thus how HRT works). Even most doctors are ignorant about it! This ignorance is rooted in the essentialization of gender, oppositional and traditional sexism, and, of course, the discounting of femininity in general.

3) Any appearance of issues could be easily dispelled by making transition care wildly available for minors and educating kids and society at large, as starting blockers up early enough would prevent trans women from developing these scary masculine traits that give them nebulous advantages that somehow has yet to produce a hyper-dominate athlete (as well as giving trans men a real shot at getting into the upper ends of the male height spectrum, rendering them far more likely to be competitive athletes themselves, not to mention affording the other undefinable advantages that cis men presumably have over them), but weirdly the same people who think trans people (yes, boxing effecitvely banned a trans man boxer by shunting him off into an "open" category...by himself lol.) should be blanket banned from sports also think that's child abuse or whatever. Weird how that works...

what about my question ?

s0nicfan posted...

I did, but I know you didn't. But hey, since you've decided to throw that out as an insult, how many studies have you personally read that stated that trans women don't have a physical advantage over cis women? Surely you wouldn't say something like that if you yourself are only going off of what other people have said or what you personally feel would be nice.

Why would I have already read the studies you cherry-picked?

And I've read several that argue my side.

Hint: the topic is about said literature

ElatedVenusaur posted...

2) Being a trans woman myself, I am constantly amazed by how fantastically ignorant society at large is about us, about our experiences, and about the nuts and bolts of how hormones work (and thus how HRT works). Even most doctors are ignorant about it! This ignorance is rooted in the essentialization of gender, oppositional and traditional sexism, and, of course, the discounting of femininity in general.

I imagine it must be beyond frustrating to literally exist and have random people with no personal experience tell you how your body works.

People think they're just disagreeing over your poltical beliefs or something when it's more like... telling someone how their legs work or how much pain they are in. "Yeah I know you think you have neurological pain, but I am an avid Internet user and my research says that maybe you and your doctor are too biased to accurately diagnose what's going on in your extremities."

It's so stupidly patronizing. Anyone actually interested in learning wouldn't ignore literal firsthand experience from affected people.

Man that's crazy, so if a trans person receives athletic support before transitioning, that carries over from men's to women's sports. So I'm over here thinking biological factors must be at play beyond just testosterone, but if lung capacity, bone density and joint angles were accounted for, then it seems as if the main advantage trans women have over women is that of the privilege men enjoy in sports that women can't even access.

I knew there was a financial disparity between men and women sports, but is there really an access difference? I imagine they eat the same types of food and engage in the same types of activity, so is it an equipment problem? Coaching? Is that really where the ultimate difference is? Biology's role isn't as big as we thought?

DrewAllar posted...

Conservacucks BTFOd

I'm starting to think they must get off on it

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

That seems true, if it really was a matter of men sports enjoying certain benefits that buff performance, why do trans men not experience a performance boost in mens sports?

The way gender dysphoria works, trans people are trans even before the transitioning. And transitioning isnt a requirement of being trans.

Is this study just concerning trans athletes that have transitioned?

s0nicfan posted...

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/11/577.full?ijkey=yjlCzZVZFRDZzHz&keytype=ref

https://jme.bmj.com/content/45/6/395.full

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/105/3/e805/5651219?login=false

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289906/

Thats inconvenient.

Ill ignore it.

Dyinglegacy posted...

Thats inconvenient.

Ill ignore it.

Already been covered. Those studies dont hold up to the lightest scrutiny, and the guy that posted them won't even bother to defend them when pressed. But you ignored that for some reason. Wonder why that is?

people. just block s0nicfan and move on. he has nothing of value to this topic

speaking of which, this topic is significantly less of a dumpster fire than most topics about trans women, so bravo to tc for at least starting from a good spot

EndOfDiscOne posted...

Misogyny and lack of funding for womens programs

But the NBA literally funds the WNBAs entire existence.

Readers, the link has a space in it, because GameFAQs. This isnt hard to figure out! The article I posted *also* links the study. You do not, under any circumstances, need to send me a fucking private message to complain about it.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

You do not, under any circumstances, need to send me a fucking private message to complain about it.

lol people who demand to be heard and will enter your PMs to ensure that.

I would think it would depend on when they transitioned and how manly? They were before hand. Like if they were 64 and athletic it only makes sense that some of that would carry over transition. And it depends on the sport. Non physical it prolly doesnt matter. MMA? Id think it would. A lot.

why not just do away with sex based entry requirements and just go with weight divisions or something?

Dyinglegacy posted...

I would think it would depend on when they transitioned and how manly? They were before hand. Like if they were 64 and athletic it only makes sense that some of that would carry over transition. And it depends on the sport. Non physical it prolly doesnt matter. MMA? Id think it would. A lot.

why not just do away with sex based entry requirements and just go with weight divisions or something?

Because people assigned male at birth would still tend to have a large physical advantage over people assigned female at birth, even if theyre the same weight.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Readers, the link has a space in it, because GameFAQs. This isnt hard to figure out! The article I posted *also* links the study. You do not, under any circumstances, need to send me a fucking private message to complain about it.

People really won't let us have any moments of peace if they can help it.

radical_rhino posted...

Because people assigned male at birth would still tend to have a large physical advantage over people assigned female at birth, even if theyre the same weight.

*points at OP* Uhhhh

there is no evidence that this translates to any performance advantage as compared to elite cis-women athletes of similar size and height.

*facepalm*

DrewAllar posted...

It is so silly to worry about trans female athletes.

Less than 1 in 250 athletes go on to play professionally.

That is 0.4% (less than half of 1%) of athletes that become professionals.

The number is much, much lower when you consider that most people arent athletes to begin with.

It literally does not make any significant difference in anyones lives.

It angers TERFs and transphobes though, and aren't their feelings more important than facts or the quality of life of a vulnerable minority group facing some of the worst political discrimination seen in generations?

COVxy posted...

A single well designed study is far more informative than aggregating 100 shitty studies. Evaluating evidence isn't just a counting game.

You are definitely in your feelings. You read 100 shitty studies regarding this topic? naw you didn't

Sure under the right circumstances.

DrewAllar posted...

It is so silly to worry about trans female athletes.

Less than 1 in 250 athletes go on to play professionally.

That is 0.4% (less than half of 1%) of athletes that become professionals.

The number is much, much lower when you consider that most people arent athletes to begin with.

It literally does not make any significant difference in anyones lives.

The opposition can use this same line of reasoning to suggest trans athletes dont need to compete.

cuttin_in_farm posted...

The opposition can use this same line of reasoning to suggest trans athletes dont need to compete.

"It's okay if we discriminate against this group because they're small."

CyricZ posted...

"It's okay if we discriminate against this group because they're small."

I feel like you missed what I was responding to.

Someone made the claim that Theres not that many! It wont affect anything!

Im giving warning that that logic can be used for the inverse conclusion. Same thing with They never cared about womens sports like I mentioned earlier.

If yall want to effectively argue points or persuade, yall need to debate points better without blatantly trapping yourself.

What I do notice is folks immediately start implying or outright attacking someones character or intentions. I dunno if yall have ever talked to people about this in real life who disagree with you, but I notice it a lot online.

No I got it. I'm just simplifying your response.

If your argument is that the opposition can use bad faith to make their argument, I don't know who you expected to disagree with you.

But ultimately that's what it distills to.

untrustful posted...

That seems true, if it really was a matter of men sports enjoying certain benefits that buff performance, why do trans men not experience a performance boost in mens sports?

There are no "mens sports", outside of maybe college for Title IX accounting.

If evidence was enough to convince bigots, they wouldn't be bigots in the first place.

squall567 posted...

If evidence was enough to convince bigots, they wouldn't be bigots in the first place.

...i'm stealing this.

gunplagirl posted...

If transphobes cared about the facts, they'd not be transphobes.

I said it first and better. I've said this on CE more than a few times, ffs.

gunplagirl posted...

I said it first and better. I've said this on CE more than a few times, ffs.

I mean, it's pretty applicable across the board. Bigotry in all forms whether it's homophobia, transphobia, racism, misogyny, etc. is born purely out of ignorance, willful or otherwise. Bigots don't care about facts.

This study was a bunch of nothingburger. It's just a study of why they believe current data doesn't accurately "prove" there is an advantage.

It pretty much boils down to "the only advantage is a height difference, but there are no studies showing if there is an advantage after 12 months!" Effectively moving the goal post.

Was expecting more of an actual study with actual athletes over long periods of times. This "study" is none of that. It really just a research paper.

Interesting. I might read OP in full later.

Transitioning should never make you become a better athlete. Lia Thomas went from being relatively unimportant swimming against men to being a serious contender swimming against women. That by itself kinda shows there is some significant advantage whatever it may be even if times don't vary that much or even get worse

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Right, most published studies can be found somewhere on the internet, but when the standard has been set by the OP to post what you want to argue and why it's relevant, why should consideration be given to someone that just posts a bunch of bolded abstracts with no further commentary? In short, why should I do his homework for him?

Slaya4 posted...

This study was a bunch of nothingburger. It's just a study of why they believe current data doesn't accurately "prove" there is an advantage.

Should a proven physical advantage not be a prerequisite when drafting up guidelines for sports organizations? I would think that long term studies should be the standard for creating the most accurate and fair standards for everyone. Showing that current data is insufficient proof is important work, since that data is being used for implementation of those guidelines.

Give it time.. A lot of the older people who are uncomfortable with it have been exposed to two images of women who transitioned late and thus present with masculine qualities that I'm sure neither woman wishes they had.

It's hard for people to look at a broad shouldered woman with a chiseled jaw and not think they are essentially succeeding based off of those features despite that not being the case.

Gwynevere posted...

Should a proven physical advantage not be a prerequisite when drafting up guidelines for sports organizations? I would think that long term studies should be the standard for creating the most accurate and fair standards for everyone. Showing that current data is insufficient proof is important work, since that data is being used for implementation of those guidelines.

Yes, but it's silly to use the study that was referred to in OP and go "see I told you so transphobe" and plant your face in the sand. Especially when there are actual studies that have done the data gathering and number crunching.

The study that is being referred to in OP is pretty much what I wrote in college of why gay marriage should be legal in like 2013. It's an opinion piece.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Just says a few top 8 and "personal records" definitely a better athlete now

Every study proves the same thing. We should be more supportive of trans people when they are still children. Allow them to socially transition, then go on puberty blockers, then fully transition, and all these worries about advantages and broad shoulders and chiseled jaws go away.

And before any transphobic jokers get cute, no I am not advocating 6 year olds to get their penis cut off so they can play girl's sports. I'm advocating that acceptance at young age allows us to identify trans kids and nurture them so they can cross each threshold as their age and health allows, with the guidance of doctors.

If anyone has a problem with that, then they are showing that their concern is not fairness in women's sports, but something more sinister.

WizardPowers posted...

Just says a few top 8 and "personal records" definitely a better athlete now

If a cis girl played with boys her whole life and then started playing with other girls, would you say it's unfair that she's more successful now than she was playing with boys?

Also it's not exactly surprising a senior would be relatively more successful athletically than a freshman.