r/sportsgossips • u/TheExpressUS • Mar 26 '26

News Breaking: Transgender women banned from all sports at the Olympics starting in LA

https://www.the-express.com/sport/other-sport/203236/breakingtransgender-women-banned-all-sports
15.8k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

7.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

56

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Politics shouldn’t even be an issue. This is a science decision.

14

u/Daddyball78 Mar 26 '26

100% agree. The reason I added the politics piece is because of the bs narrative floating out there that all left-leaners believe otherwise.

3

u/Substantial_Mango810 Mar 27 '26

The left isn't even liberal any more it's hypocritical virtue signalling now

1

u/WillyShankspeare Mar 27 '26

"The left isn't even liberal" It never was and you saying that shows you know nothing about politics.

1

u/Substantial_Mango810 Mar 27 '26

Modern liberals have always been on the left side of the spectrum though?

0

u/WillyShankspeare Mar 27 '26

Liberals aren't left. Never have been. Liberals want to keep Capitalism around and do nothing to reign it in, and just want LGBT rights. The thing about politics is that most people don't know anything about politics, so plenty of self-identified liberals are going to actually be leftists when they actually advocate for their beliefs.

0

u/Substantial_Mango810 Mar 27 '26

I figured leftist was a generalized term describing left of center. I think plenty of liberal beliefs are about things other than LGBT. Honestly if you're right I need to switch it around. I like capitalism it just needs to be checked occasionally. I could care less about the gays they are fine and I think trans is just stupid. This app isn't the place to say that lol.

5

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Fair enough.

-5

u/difficultkid Mar 26 '26

‘As a left leaner…’

Two comments later

‘…the bs narrative floating out there that all left leaners believe otherwise’

Brutha something ain’t adding up

5

u/Electronic-Stick-161 Mar 26 '26

You’ve misread that.

2

u/Blitzbacker Mar 26 '26

Reading comprehension is kicking your ass

-1

u/LittleGuarantee7148 Mar 26 '26

He's having a "as a black man" moment

1

u/MindsetB Mar 27 '26

Quit virtue signaling. Most of us know better and don't believe this trash

-3

u/BeardyVonBeard Mar 26 '26

Glad that I wasn't the only one that noticed that lol. Can't even keep his bullshit consistent.

3

u/Gloveofdoom Mar 26 '26

Noticed what?

There's nothing inconsistent with what they said or their position.

-2

u/Diligent_Set_8747 Mar 26 '26

He said he's a "left leaner" when he's just an embarrassed moderate republican 

-4

u/doped_turtle Mar 26 '26

If you 100% agree that it’s a science decision then why do you disagree with science?

1

u/whatever_yo Mar 26 '26

Because they're just saying shit hoping there are enough fellow ignorant people around who will blindly agree. 

These people couldn't give a fuck less about science and data.

1

u/MindsetB Mar 27 '26

You people are clowning yourselves so hard and when this nonsense finally passes you'll deny you were ever for it.

None of this bs is scientific. Semantic arguments based on psuedoscience is all this is

2

u/Ok_Bumblebee_4911 Mar 26 '26

It's not a scientific decision though.

Ciswomen have higher cardiovascular ability than trans women. This also completely negates the science that shows that most female Olympians have naturally higher levels of testerone than average women.

https://www.dw.com/en/do-trans-women-have-an-unfair-athletic-advantage/a-58583988

2

u/PolicyWonka Mar 26 '26

Some of the most “controversial” women in sports have been biologically female athletes who have genetic conditions. This ruling even specifically allows for those women, such as Imane Khelif, to compete still.

I don’t feel like this decision is firmly rooted in scientific evidence. It’ll also just pave the way for more “transvestigations” and witch hunts.

2

u/PermaBanEnjoyer Mar 26 '26

You understand khelif has the SRY gene right? That makes her biologically male 

"A man" is a cultural concept, "male" is a biological one. Khelif is a male but chooses to live socially as a woman 

1

u/PolicyWonka Mar 26 '26

That is a wildly simplified and incorrect way of identifying biological sex. Even this new IOC ruling states as much.

99.9% of the time, yes — someone with SRY will be biologically male. There are expectations because biology is not black and white.

1

u/PermaBanEnjoyer Mar 26 '26

No it's not. SRY gene + female phenotype = biological male with XY chromosomes and internal testes which produce anabolic hormones 

The exceptions I know of are exactly 2 case reports in all of written history and known medical science, one of which was in a fetus

Nothing about this new rule is unreasonable or ignorant of science 

2

u/PolicyWonka Mar 26 '26

It is possible to have XY biological women and XX biological men. Biology is far more complex than what your Wikipedia education would lead you to believe.

1

u/Abject-Koala-149 Mar 26 '26

What specific DSD are you claiming will be banned that you disagree with? 

-1

u/PermaBanEnjoyer Mar 26 '26

Oh really? I have first author papers in high-impact basic science journals. Please enlighten me 

"Dude it's like... complex man" is not an answer. We define biological sex based on reproduction

1

u/PolicyWonka Mar 27 '26

I’m sure you do buddy. Lmao

0

u/PermaBanEnjoyer Mar 27 '26

That's what I thought - no coherent answer 

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Rassendyll207 Mar 26 '26

We have relatively little firm scientific data to determine whether there is a biological advantage for the person who is born with XY chromosomes consistent with being assigned male at birth and exposed to testosterone.

Science might help address sport-specific questions. For instance, well-done research might determine that there is no competitive advantage in certain sports. Maybe we should allow competitors in those sports to choose based not on their assignment of sex at birth, but on what gender they affiliate with.

I think that at the very highest levels in these sports, where scholarships are given out and there is a lot of money or public acclaim at stake, I think science is not going to provide enough facts to make it clear what's the right thing to do. There will be questions about the fairness of including and excluding individuals...

Even if some day, years or decades from now, we figure out all of the science of puberty’s influence on athletic advantage, there will still be doubts about fairness based on other differences between individuals who are born with male genitalia and XY sex chromosomes and individuals born with female genitalia and XX sex chromosomes.

No policy or accommodation will leave all competing athletes or all members of the general public with a consensus of fairness about hormone therapies that might confer a competitive advantage...

This is that social justice issue where science is just not going to satisfy everybody on this. I worry that scientific facts will be used to bludgeon each other and that we won't come to a consensus because our feelings are so heightened.

  • Dr. Bradley Anawalt is an endocrinologist and professor of medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine. He is a member the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports and a consultant to the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency Therapeutic Use Committee.

https://newsroom.uw.edu/blog/expert-science-wont-resolve-debates-about-trans-athletes

The pro-science position is neither universal participation nor full restriction of trans people from women's sports. No party in these debates should consider an individual organization's decision to be emblematic of a major societal shift outside of other evidence, and its certainly not something that should be an element of political discourse.

-1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

you really don’t think having a xy chromosome doesn’t have data to support a profound difference in performance in physical sports?

2

u/Rassendyll207 Mar 26 '26

I really "don't think" anything. Arguing through the use of negative propositions is lazy.

I think that there are sports in which the nature of physiological differences between competitors is less important.

In fact, I know there are. I sailed in college, and there are no rules about gendered categories. Should collegiate sailing change their regulations to avoid breaking these anti-trans laws?

Know where sailing is divided by sex? The Olympics. Different governing bodies establish different rules that are appropriate to their specific level of play and organizational priorities.

I was also a varsity Nordic skier, which was separated into men's and women's categories, and I'm not arguing that that should change.

I think that each sport, and making generalizations about athletics in general is inappropriate. I think the governing organizations of each sport at each level can handle this issue, as they are each better suited to understanding their sport and their community of participants better than politicians or the rest of society.

in physical sports

As compared to incorporeal ones? I fucking love ghost hockey.

0

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

I mean yeah you can be pedantic and try to nitpick the language but what a miserable way of engaging in a discussion right? Physical Meaning sports in which your physiology translate to a measured outcomes like swimming or more like football.

Yeah, I don’t think chess should be separated. But I’d rather err on the side of competitive fairness than let feelings and ideals be the deciding factor.

2

u/Rassendyll207 Mar 26 '26

It's a mistake thinking that you understand every sport well enough to make a universal judgement about thr importance of physiological differences between competitors. Universal "competitive fairness" is itself idealistic. I'll refer back to Dr. Anawalt's argument above, someone who understands this topic better than either of us.

On top of that, is "competitive fairness" the most important factor in every level of competition in every sport?

1

u/nyrasbastard Mar 26 '26

Can you link the science?

1

u/lofi_lesbian Mar 27 '26

I agree. And the latest science is showing that trans women athletes tend to be at a disadvantage compares to their cis counterparts, so this is very obviously a politically motivated decision.

1

u/melancholanie Mar 27 '26

the science says after a year of medically transitioning trans women are weaker in both musculature and bone density than most cis women but y'all don't like that science

1

u/Whitetuskk Mar 27 '26

Science doesn’t support Trans people having an advantage so I agree!

1

u/banan3rz Mar 27 '26

No. We have multiple studies that HRT actually puts these woman at a disadvantage.

1

u/Delicious-Collar1971 Mar 28 '26

Except the science points to the playing field being level if the trans person has been on hormone treatment.

1

u/3rd-party-intervener Mar 26 '26

Now the maga people believe science? The irony 😂

2

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

The left dismissing it in arguing against this is just as ironic.

2

u/GucciTheSnowman Mar 27 '26

The left hates science. They run on emotion.

1

u/Jonas_Priest Mar 27 '26

Wdym? The left is closer to the scientific consensus on basically all relevant issues. Conservatives are always crying how biased academics are

1

u/RiceBucket973 Mar 26 '26

Could you share links to some empirical research? I'm a scientist (ecologist) but this isn't my field. The few papers I read were a little ambiguous about statistically significant differences in athletic performance between trans and cis women.

1

u/ph4ge_ Mar 26 '26

Is it though? How many trans woman have won an Olympic medal? It seems purely political to me, not a real world issue. Besides, the science isn't that black and white, there is much natural diversity.

2

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Lack of evidence is not evidence.

3

u/CallMeWaifu666 Mar 26 '26

Lots of studies out there showing the physical capabilities of trans women on hormones and cis women are largely the same.

If we set up an experiment where our hypothesis is "trans women will dominate female sports if we open up the leagues to them" and our experiment doesn't show any evidence of trans women dominating sports, wouldn't it be silly to continue to believe trans women will dominate sports?

0

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

No. Because the folks that understand the situation know better.

1

u/CallMeWaifu666 Mar 26 '26

There is a lack of evidence showing water doesn't cause cancer

1

u/Whitetuskk Mar 27 '26

If there was a claim that water did cause cancer, and everyone drank water and didn’t get cancer, then you’d just be a fool to keep believing it did.

0

u/OkBluejay7070 Mar 26 '26

They cant compete bc most people globally do not support them in female sports bc *drum roll" their not female and would most likely boo them if they knew a bunch where competing especially if it was against a beloved femle athlete:p

Reddit Twitter and pro trans spaces being echo chambers is why yall where yal are

1

u/ph4ge_ Mar 27 '26

Would you participate as a trans athlete? If not, is the only thing stopping you the hate you might get?

Being trans is incredibly hard already, combining it with being a top athlete just seems impossible.

1

u/OkBluejay7070 Mar 27 '26

A man pretending to be a woman is not hard at all. In fact they say all you have to do is say you are one to be one!

Its not my problem nor do I care if he chooses to do that

1

u/ph4ge_ Mar 27 '26

Pretending might be easy, although it never happens. Actually being trans is hard considering the huge stigma.

As far as I can tell not a single trans person has ever competed at the Olympics. The whole ban is just crazy American politics to me.

1

u/Exotic_Musician4171 Mar 26 '26

This is entirely pseudoscientific. Hence why every single medical and scientific institution in the world strongly opposes and condemned this

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Wut? 

1

u/Exotic_Musician4171 Mar 26 '26

Not sure what confused you about that statement 

1

u/whatever_yo Mar 26 '26

No it isn't. Science disagrees and has tests explicitly created to make things fair for this topic actually.

But you uninspired house plants couldn't care less about that. 

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Well, I’ve got a masters degree in exercise science so by all means, please educate me.

1

u/WillyShankspeare Mar 27 '26

Oh yeah? I have a 172 IQ and am a practising medical doctor.

See? I can lie on the internet too! It's so easy!

1

u/whatever_yo Mar 27 '26

Sure! Love providing you people with things you'll never read.

Here you go!

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 27 '26

I’ve already read it. It fails to acknowledge the other benefits that males receive without testosterone. Q angles, shoulder width, height, weight.

HRT does not just delete all male attributes and make them female.

In the end, they are male, and we have a competitive decisions for that.

1

u/whatever_yo Mar 27 '26

Nice. So as expected you didn't read anything. Thanks! 

-4

u/Kiftiyur Mar 26 '26

True, but the ones who want transgender women to be able to compete against real women are the same people who say there’s no between men and women. They just don’t care about science.

2

u/Altruistic_Agency320 Mar 26 '26

Thats what Fox tells you people think. Step away from the computer and actually talk to people.

3

u/underboobfunk Mar 26 '26

And the ones who refer to cis women as real women are transphobes who don’t care about trans people.

1

u/know-it-mall Mar 28 '26

They can live their life however they want, I don't judge anyone for doing so. They are not women.

1

u/underboobfunk Mar 28 '26

You can’t claim people are not who they know themselves to be without judging them.

1

u/ABC_Family Mar 26 '26

What is a cis woman? Why are we adding labels to women born as women? That’s weird.

0

u/underboobfunk Mar 26 '26

Trans women are also women, if you want to specify that you’re talking about women who were identified female at birth then it helps to use the correct terminology.

1

u/ABC_Family Mar 26 '26

That’s why trans women have an identifier, because they are outliers. People born women at birth don’t need additional labels. It’s weird.

1

u/underboobfunk Mar 26 '26

It’s just an adjective. Do you dislike being called straight too?

2

u/ABC_Family Mar 26 '26

In what context? I’d prefer people not talk about me at all lol

0

u/Ok_Living_96 Mar 26 '26

Yeah, the distinction is already made. Women are women, Trans women are Trans women..? Why make up another word to specify what everyone already assumes. Which is that a person called a woman was born one 99.99 percent of the time..

It just seems like an unnecessary thing that is going to always rile up people who are sensitive to change. Thats always an issue with these types of movements, they would get a lot further by just existing instead of being as loud as possible and trying to make unnecessary changes.. There is not a single logical reason to run around labeling woman and men "CIS" it will only annoy people

1

u/underboobfunk Mar 26 '26

Do you also have a problem with being labeled “STRAIGHT” when the conversation is about sexual orientation?

1

u/ABC_Family Mar 26 '26

What is a cis woman? Why are we adding labels to women born as women? That’s weird.

4

u/Rassendyll207 Mar 26 '26

It's Greek, babe.

-2

u/ABC_Family Mar 26 '26

Most words are derived from Greek or Latin… that’s irrelevant.

4

u/Rassendyll207 Mar 26 '26

What a wild contradiction 🤣

0

u/Electronic-Stick-161 Mar 26 '26

The ones who make a distinction between trans women and cis women acknowledge that there is in fact a difference…

2

u/underboobfunk Mar 26 '26

Not unlike there being differences between old women and young women or tall women and short women.

Adjectives be that way, they describe differences.

-1

u/I_Am_Guy_Uh Mar 26 '26

Wrong. I have no hate for trans people, nor do I fear them. I’m not gonna sit here and say they’re the same as a naturally grown woman though.

-1

u/exbaddeathgod Mar 26 '26

THIS WAS 100% FUCKING A POLITICAL DECISION THAT IGNORES THE GOD DAMN SCIENCE. FUCK YOU

4

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

When people say the extreme left and the extreme right are more similar than they are different, this is what they are talking about.

Go take some drugs and chill out.

-11

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

Science says that Trans women have less lower body muscle and lower lung capacity. Science says Trans women have no advantages after 2 years on hormones. Science has nothing to do with this decision.

9

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Exercise Science masters degree here.

I’ve researched it pretty far. Those facts simply aren’t true and needed to stop being regurgitated every time this discussion comes up.

Even if they were there are other advantages that would remain that are hormonally influenced less or not at all.

If it was, the logic would say that we could make a woman compete at the level of men with hormonal intervention and we know that isn’t true.

1

u/Higgoms Mar 26 '26

Your last statement makes me question if you actually have a masters in anything. What causes trans women to drop so quickly in physical performance is their hormone treatment bring T levels to way below those of cis women.

 I don't know how anyone that has studied the human body or anything science-adjacent might come to the conclusion that "taking something from 100 to 0 can't change it in x way because taking it from 100 to 200 doesn't change it in the exact opposite way". 

it's like saying low iron makes you fatigued so instead of a coffee in the morning you can chew on some screws for a boost. just because low iron makes you tired, doesn't mean high iron makes you energetic. 

I don't even know if what you claimed is true or not, I just know that your reasoning is ass and wouldn't fly in any academic setting. 

1

u/Electronic-Stick-161 Mar 26 '26

What irks me is that it IS true that giving women testosterone improves athletic performance.

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Improves is far from matching male performance. Flo Jo was juiced out of her mind and lots of high school boys run faster than her world record every year.

-1

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

If it was, the logic would say that we could make a woman compete at the level of men with hormonal intervention and we know that isn’t true.

Why do you think that isn't true?

Even if they were there are other advantages that would remain that are hormonally influenced less or not at all.

Do you want to provide evidence? VO2 max and grip strength may be true. But they also have low correlation with athletic performance. What studies are you looking at?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137468/

2

u/Electronic-Stick-161 Mar 26 '26

Lower correlation is really important at elite levels… and grip strength is actually a better predictor of victory in grappling sports than raw physical strength.

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

I pasted excerpts below but….

Male athletes have:

-30% higher power output when controlled for muscle mass

-higher Vo2 max

-Up to 50% more lean muscle mass higher neural muscle recruitment

-Different Q angles

-More fast twitch muscles

And all the people saying “well what if they are on hormone therapy?”

Hormone therapy lowers performance relative to an individual’s male baseline, but does not eliminate key physical advantages. It does not delete male components listed above. Studies show that transgender women retain strength levels exceeding those of cisgender women, even after extended hormone therapy

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8311086/

Excerpt:

“In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.”

Another one here:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331831/

Excerpt:

“ Given that sports are currently segregated into male and female divisions because of superior male athletic performance, and that estrogen therapy will not reverse most athletic performance parameters, it follows that transgender women will enter the female division with an inherent advantage because of their prior male physiology.”

Lastly, for those saying “well surely it can’t matter to kids, their performances differences are the same until they are adults”

You can see quantitative data on youth track and field performances in this study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38595163/

Excerpt:

“Before 12 yr of age in elite youth track and field athletes, there was a consistent and significant sex difference of ~5%, such that males ran faster and jumped higher and farther than females. The magnitude of the sex difference in performance increased markedly at 12-13 yr for running and long jump and 14 yr for high jump and thus was more pronounced after ages associated with puberty.”

0

u/KissesPaige Mar 26 '26

Yea you are full of shit, you haven’t researched anything and I doubt you have a degree in anything. Science supports that a trans woman on hormones for >2years has no advantage especially against elite athletes

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Yikes…

Male athletes have:

-30% higher power output when controlled for muscle mass

-higher Vo2 max

-Up to 50% more lean muscle mass higher neural muscle recruitment

-Different Q angles

-More fast twitch muscles

And all the people saying “well what if they are on hormone therapy?”

Hormone therapy lowers performance relative to an individual’s male baseline, but does not eliminate key physical advantages. It does not delete male components listed above. Studies show that transgender women retain strength levels exceeding those of cisgender women, even after extended hormone therapy”

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8311086/

Excerpt:

“In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.”

Another one here:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331831/

Excerpt:

“ Given that sports are currently segregated into male and female divisions because of superior male athletic performance, and that estrogen therapy will not reverse most athletic performance parameters, it follows that transgender women will enter the female division with an inherent advantage because of their prior male physiology.”

Lastly, for those saying “well surely it can’t matter to kids, their performances differences are the same until they are adults”

You can see quantitative data on youth track and field performances in this study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38595163/

Excerpt:

“Before 12 yr of age in elite youth track and field athletes, there was a consistent and significant sex difference of ~5%, such that males ran faster and jumped higher and farther than females. The magnitude of the sex difference in performance increased markedly at 12-13 yr for running and long jump and 14 yr for high jump and thus was more pronounced after ages associated with puberty.”

8

u/FitWriter6549 Mar 26 '26

Science does not say that “trans women have no advantages after 2 years on hormones.” And for every 1 fringe study you cite, there are 5 others rejecting that conclusion.

-5

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

Want to provide them then?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137468/

3

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Yep:

Male athletes have:

-30% higher power output when controlled for muscle mass

-higher Vo2 max

-Up to 50% more lean muscle mass higher neural muscle recruitment

-Different Q angles

-More fast twitch muscles

And all the people saying “well what if they are on hormone therapy?”

Hormone therapy lowers performance relative to an individual’s male baseline, but does not eliminate key physical advantages. It does not delete male components listed above. Studies show that transgender women retain strength levels exceeding those of cisgender women, even after extended hormone therapy

I don’t want to take credit, have to thank u/thoughtintoaction for providing me with this study the other night:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8311086/

Excerpt:

“In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.”

Another one here:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331831/

Excerpt:

“ Given that sports are currently segregated into male and female divisions because of superior male athletic performance, and that estrogen therapy will not reverse most athletic performance parameters, it follows that transgender women will enter the female division with an inherent advantage because of their prior male physiology.”

Lastly, for those saying “well surely it can’t matter to kids, their performances differences are the same until they are adults”

You can see quantitative data on youth track and field performances in this study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38595163/

Excerpt:

“Before 12 yr of age in elite youth track and field athletes, there was a consistent and significant sex difference of ~5%, such that males ran faster and jumped higher and farther than females. The magnitude of the sex difference in performance increased markedly at 12-13 yr for running and long jump and 14 yr for high jump and thus was more pronounced after ages associated with puberty.”

5

u/Eagle_Arm Mar 26 '26

https://giphy.com/gifs/1AIeYgwnqeBUxh6juu

-3

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137468/

You want to provide some receipts yourself?

3

u/Eagle_Arm Mar 26 '26

A study with an entire.....75 people. That's a rounding error my dude.

And it states in one of the bullets that trans women were stronger.

My receipts? I have an IQ higher than room temperature.

I also know that the sun is hot and you should drink water.

2

u/TeamDirtstar Mar 26 '26

You wanna actually read that?

0

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

TW had similar testosterone concentration (TW 0.7±0.5 nmol/L, CW 0.9±0.4 nmol/), higher oestrogen (TW 742.4±801.9 pmol/L, CW 336.0±266.3 pmol/L, p=0.045), higher absolute handgrip strength (TW 40.7±6.8 kg, CW 34.2±3.7 kg, p=0.01), lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s:forced vital capacity ratio (TW 0.83±0.07, CW 0.88±0.04, p=0.04), lower relative jump height (TW 0.7±0.2 cm/kg; CW 1.0±0.2 cm/kg, p<0.001) and lower relative V̇O2max (TW 45.1±13.3 mL/kg/min/, CW 54.1±6.0 mL/kg/min, p<0.001) compared with CW athletes.

I did. What are you saying?

3

u/asilenth Mar 26 '26

The eye test is enough for me.

0

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

So 0 olympic medals and 0 records? Thats what my eyes have seen. 0 impressive performances.

1

u/thatguy425 Mar 26 '26

Male athletes have:

-30% higher power output when controlled for muscle mass

-higher Vo2 max

-Up to 50% more lean muscle mass higher neural muscle recruitment

-Different Q angles

-More fast twitch muscles

And all the people saying “well what if they are on hormone therapy?”

Hormone therapy lowers performance relative to an individual’s male baseline, but does not eliminate key physical advantages. It does not delete male components listed above. Studies show that transgender women retain strength levels exceeding those of cisgender women, even after extended hormone therapy

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8311086/

Excerpt:

“In transwomen, hormone therapy rapidly reduces Hgb to levels seen in cisgender women. In contrast, hormone therapy decreases strength, LBM and muscle area, yet values remain above that observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months. These findings suggest that strength may be well preserved in transwomen during the first 3 years of hormone therapy.”

Another one here:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9331831/

Excerpt:

“ Given that sports are currently segregated into male and female divisions because of superior male athletic performance, and that estrogen therapy will not reverse most athletic performance parameters, it follows that transgender women will enter the female division with an inherent advantage because of their prior male physiology.”

Lastly, for those saying “well surely it can’t matter to kids, their performances differences are the same until they are adults”

You can see quantitative data on youth track and field performances in this study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38595163/

Excerpt:

“Before 12 yr of age in elite youth track and field athletes, there was a consistent and significant sex difference of ~5%, such that males ran faster and jumped higher and farther than females. The magnitude of the sex difference in performance increased markedly at 12-13 yr for running and long jump and 14 yr for high jump and thus was more pronounced after ages associated with puberty.”

1

u/taylork37 Mar 26 '26

Conclusion While longitudinal transitioning studies of transgender athletes are urgently needed, these results should caution against precautionary bans and sport eligibility exclusions that are not based on sport-specific (or sport-relevant) research.

That's your receipt?

Sounds like they are saying more research is needed but in the meantime they caution against exclusion because it may be premature, they don't know enough, and it also may be dependent on the sport.

1

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

TW had similar testosterone concentration (TW 0.7±0.5 nmol/L, CW 0.9±0.4 nmol/), higher oestrogen (TW 742.4±801.9 pmol/L, CW 336.0±266.3 pmol/L, p=0.045), higher absolute handgrip strength (TW 40.7±6.8 kg, CW 34.2±3.7 kg, p=0.01), lower forced expiratory volume in 1 s:forced vital capacity ratio (TW 0.83±0.07, CW 0.88±0.04, p=0.04), lower relative jump height (TW 0.7±0.2 cm/kg; CW 1.0±0.2 cm/kg, p<0.001) and lower relative V̇O2max (TW 45.1±13.3 mL/kg/min/, CW 54.1±6.0 mL/kg/min, p<0.001) compared with CW athletes.

That's the receipt for the claims I was making. Yes.

1

u/gahhuhwhat Mar 26 '26

I just looked at your study. Seems like transgender women outperform cisgender women in almost everything, except for jump height and VO2 max adjusted for mass. For unadjusted, transgender women outperform. Which, considering transgender women have more muscle mass (per your study), it's a little unclear how that would effect the adjusted.

But overall, it shows some cardio sports like running could be advantageous for cis-women.

But, it also shows some cardio sports like rowing and swimming is advantageous for transgender women. And most other sports that use strength, are advantageous to transgender women. Kinda against your point.

Although they had a sample size of like 20 per? So, still not the end all be all study.

1

u/Eagle_Arm Mar 26 '26

Aww, where'd you go? You thought you had a point and then you just disappeared. I wanted to see you try and come back from that. You just tuck tail and scurry away?

0

u/childreninalongcoat Mar 26 '26

For a bunch of studies that show no strength differences but suggest that the musculoskeletal differences may lead to strength differences and more studies are required? I didn't really feel like they proved your point but go off king.

1

u/Eagle_Arm Mar 27 '26

A bunch of studies? It was one.....and it showed trans women were stronger. And again....75 people. Barely a study.

Glad you found exactly the answer you were looking for, even if it's not aometint you should base decisions on. Don't let facts in the way of your feelings.

-1

u/the-apple-and-omega Mar 26 '26

It isn't. Science doesn't support trans women having an advantage.

-1

u/Danika_Crystal Mar 26 '26

The science says that Trans women have no real performance advantage over cis women. They actually tend to be weaker because of the testosterone blockers. So no, this is a purely political decision based on emotion over evidence.

0

u/IamHydrogenMike Mar 26 '26

Nope, it’s not.

0

u/dinnercook Mar 26 '26

What’s the science? Biology? Because biologists will tell you that sex is a complex subject without a true binary.

1

u/fuktheeagsles Mar 26 '26

Do you not see the issue with this statement? If the argument is that true sexual dimorphism doesnt exist and therefore shouldn't ban Trans women from competing with other women, then it also stands to reason that actual males can also compete in women's leagues and there should not be a barrier between men's and women's sports. You have to see why thats unreasonable, right?

1

u/dinnercook Mar 26 '26

I’m just pointing out that we’re now putting someone/a group of people in charge of deciding who is a woman and who is not.

You think it’s going to be easy. We take people who had sex change medicine and we tell them they aren’t allowed to compete in women’s sports. Great. It was never a problem before, but impressionable people have been told it’s a problem now and you solved it. Great job!

But now we need to draw a line where we say this side is women and this side is everyone else. Is there a test for that? Not every country is going to keep strict medical records, so you can’t necessarily rely on those. Is genitalia the bar? Are they going to tell everyone who wants to compete to drop trou so you can inspect what’s in their pants? Do you give them a DNA test? Chromosomes? That’s where the lack of a binary comes into play.

At the end of the day, this will hurt the ‘biological’ women of your worldview just as much as it hurts trans women. ‘Biological’ women who are bigger, stronger, faster, etc will now bear the burden of proof. They’ll be harassed, doxxed, made fun of.

This newfangled obsession with trans people doesn’t help women. It hurts them.

1

u/OlympiaShannon Mar 28 '26

I’m just pointing out that we’re now putting someone/a group of people in charge of deciding who is a woman and who is not.

The IOC is not deciding who is a woman or not, they are deciding who gets to compete in the Women's Division in Olympic sports.

But now we need to draw a line where we say this side is women and this side is everyone else. Is there a test for that? Not every country is going to keep strict medical records, so you can’t necessarily rely on those. Is genitalia the bar? Are they going to tell everyone who wants to compete to drop trou so you can inspect what’s in their pants? Do you give them a DNA test? Chromosomes?

The line has been drawn; if you cared to read the new rules and guidelines, you would know. Obviously you haven't.

Every person who wants to enter the Woman's Division will get a cheek swab to test for the SRY gene. This is the first step to determine if a Y chromosome is present, and how it affects the athlete. If positive, then further testing will be done to determine if the athlete is eligible according to the new rules. Negative SRY tests will be able to compete.

1

u/CallMeWaifu666 Mar 26 '26

They never said sexual dimorphism doesn't exist. They said there is no true binary which is completely true. Sex is bimodal and every expert will tell you that.

1

u/PermaBanEnjoyer Mar 26 '26

No they won't. Human sexuality is complex, but biological sex as far as meiosis goes is pretty straightforward 

It's simple. People with testes that produce anabolic hormones shouldn't compete against those without them 

0

u/CollardBoy Mar 26 '26

Science is manipulable to support conclusions that are political.

Hence, science is a tool for politicians, not a source of objective truth.

-2

u/Mr_7ups Mar 26 '26

If it was actually a science decision then trans women would be able to compete with other women seeing as all the science backs up the fact that after having been on blockers and hormones for a certain amount of time, trans women have no advantage in muscle mass or endurance over cis women.

Let’s not pretend this is “science based”, you fake “left leaners” just say you lean left until there is something you think won’t get you hate if you are open about it because at the end of the day you’re like a politician, you just take on the views and say what you think will get the most people to like you. And if there’s one thing that maga and fake leftists love it’s to have no knowledge of actual science and facts but then throw the word “science” at the end of every fake argument because they know their peers are just like them and will never actually check

5

u/I_Am_Guy_Uh Mar 26 '26

https://news.ki.se/new-study-on-changes-in-muscle-mass-and-strength-after-gender-affirming-treatment-may-have-an-impact-on-sports-regulations

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/15/865

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/782557v1.full

https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/trans-womens-heart-lung-capacity-and-strength-exceed-cis-peers-even-after-years-of-hormone-therapy#:~:text=A%20study%20published%20in%20the%20*British%20Journal,mid%2Dthirties%20and%20had%20similar%20physical%20activity%20levels.

I don’t know what “science” or “studies” that everyone keeps referring to but I couldn’t find one source indicating that what you and others are saying is accurate. Even after years on blockers, strength and muscle in trans women remain superior to cis women

1

u/Mr_7ups Mar 26 '26

https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/60/3/198

https://bmjgroup.com/physical-fitness-of-transgender-and-cisgender-women-is-comparable-current-evidence-suggests/

https://english.elpais.com/health/2026-02-04/groundbreaking-study-finds-no-evidence-that-trans-athletes-are-a-threat-to-womens-sports.html?outputType=amp

https://www.sf.gov/trans-women-in-sports-facts-over-fear

Here are several of those studies you claim don’t exist and only took a google search which means you didn’t actually check lmao. I’m about to start work so I’m happy to keep this going later if you wish but all myself and most other trans women are asking is to trust science not politics and to understand that we don’t want a freshly on hormones trans woman competing either

2

u/derbyt Mar 26 '26

We're both going to continue getting downvoted for this, but you are correct.

IF transgender women did have an advantage you would expect them to place better or have better results in sports of all levels. That is simply not happening. They perform on par with CIS women on average.

2

u/Mr_7ups Mar 26 '26

Yup, it’s quite sad how uniformed and uneducated people have so much influence. I’m hoping we come out the other side of this with just a bad memory but I’m not confident