Sure a trans man can experience a male puberty, they just take action to incite it rather than it naturally occurring. Perhaps the more accurate term would be testosterone puberty as you said. In both cases they are afforded the physical advantages of increased testosterone levels. However, I am not sure how trans men could come to mind in this discussion as they are far out of scope. They take drugs that would likely be considered performance enhancing by a sporting org. There are further regulation and implementation concerns regarding them.
Regarding your question. All that matters is if the athlete is afforded an advantage via their male physiology. If one renders these advantages negligible if the athlete takes hormone blockers as a pre-pubescent via scientific methods, then so be it let them compete. It does not seem all that unlikely. Pre-pubescent children are generally allowed to compete in the same sporting competitions.
That athletes performance over late 2023 to now appears to be 73% percent of events in the top 3. That’s dominating the competition. Also, you appear to be limiting this performance discussion to the athlete performing within the minimum and maximum performance of a female athlete, which is flawed.
If we visualize athlete performance for males and females as two separate normal distributions. The mean performance of females relative to males would likely shift the female distribution lower. However, some overlap would exist (best female athletes could outperform the worst male athletes). I am not sure how much they would overlap, perhaps the best female athletes can perform beyond the average male athlete.
A proper investigation would be to see if any given individual has a net shift along the performance distribution as a result of male physiology. If they do it compromises the competitive integrity of woman’s sports. That article I posted also provides an Instagram post by the athlete. In which the difference in size between her and her competition is apparent to the naked eye. Her size affords her much longer strides than the ones she is competing against. If these differences were the result of a testosterone puberty or previously male physiology, then one could hypothesize there is a problem.
My question about trans men was to clarify what you previously called “biologically male”, which you seem to mean “experienced testosterone puberty” (strange definition, but sure)
As for your second point, I’m confused, why are you talking about male athletes now? You’re aware that having experienced testosterone puberty at some point is not the same as having a testosterone dominated body? Muscle density and mass, fat distribution, some cardiovascular effects, and many more things that are associated with testosterone are impermanent, and disappear/shift towards a estrogen-typical distribution when testosterone is suppressed (over the span of 1-2 years, with some variance)
Height and bone structure are some of the few things that don’t change on HRT. Which brings me back to one of my old points: Why should a cis woman that is 1.80m tall be allowed to compete, but a trans woman should not?
We appear to be having a miscommunication. Someone who is born a male will on average see greater increases in physical capability if they do not suppress or alter their development.
As you say, a trans woman can negate these advantages by some amount with HRT. They still however retain advantages through things that are not affected by HRT (bone structure, height, etc.)
To your third point. Because height is an optimal genetic outcome, and is largely uncontrollable. There are some weird people who procreate with the goal of achieving optimal genetic outcomes, but those people are few and far between. Someone can be born a man, reap the benefits of a male puberty(bone structure, height, ect.), then become a trans woman athlete. That is a completely controllable path that circumvents some amount of training and preparation other participants in the sport have to do. This sort of thing fits the description of a ‘loophole’.
I never said definitively that trans women shouldn’t be able to participate. However, there are some questions that need to be answered in order to do this kind of thing without compromising competition. These questions are:
- Is HRT required for trans woman to be eligible to compete? (it appears yes it should be)
- Can performance advantages gained through physiology unaffected by HRT be considered negligible? (my intuition
tells me no. However, I could be wrong given enough performance data)
- Does HRT actually negate their capabilities to the level you are claiming?
- Are any potential advantages completely avoided by starting HRT as a prepubescent? (This does not seem far-
fetched. Males and females often compete against one another as prepubescents in publicly sanctioned leagues)
HRT is already mandatory to compete at basically every level. The whole “you can just identify as a woman and compete” is scaremongering by transphobes.
Someone can be born a man, reap the benefits of a male puberty(bone structure, height, ect.), then become a trans woman athlete. That is a completely controllable path that circumvents some amount of training and preparation other participants in the sport have to do.
You make it sound like being trans is a choice one can make to give themselves an advantage, and let me just say, yikes. Being trans is not a completely controllable path, just as your height or if you’re left handed is not.
The median trans woman is likely taller than the median cis woman. This does not justify why she should be excluded. We don’t treat other categories like this, either. The median Dutch woman is taller than the median Korean woman. But you don’t see politicians making a fuss about the Dutch in sports, now do you?
What are you trying to say? You’re either saying being trans is a choice (yikes!)
Or you’re saying cis men would go through years of transition, crippling dysphoria from transitioning into the wrong gender, the social ostracization that comes from being transgender in general and a trans athlete in specific, all to… get a potential, marginal advantage? That’s a fantasy.
The amount of emotions you superimpose over the discussion doesn’t change the fact that it is a highly repeatable avenue to gain an advantage. Unlike the genetic markers you have mentioned.
There are athletes that forgo companionship, marriage, having children, etc. to improve in their sport. It is not uncommon for people to withstand tremendous sacrifice to reach their goals.
We have entered the subjectivity debate, which I am not interested in having. This was an interesting conversation nonetheless.
Sure a trans man can experience a male puberty, they just take action to incite it rather than it naturally occurring. Perhaps the more accurate term would be testosterone puberty as you said. In both cases they are afforded the physical advantages of increased testosterone levels. However, I am not sure how trans men could come to mind in this discussion as they are far out of scope. They take drugs that would likely be considered performance enhancing by a sporting org. There are further regulation and implementation concerns regarding them.
Regarding your question. All that matters is if the athlete is afforded an advantage via their male physiology. If one renders these advantages negligible if the athlete takes hormone blockers as a pre-pubescent via scientific methods, then so be it let them compete. It does not seem all that unlikely. Pre-pubescent children are generally allowed to compete in the same sporting competitions.
That athletes performance over late 2023 to now appears to be 73% percent of events in the top 3. That’s dominating the competition. Also, you appear to be limiting this performance discussion to the athlete performing within the minimum and maximum performance of a female athlete, which is flawed.
If we visualize athlete performance for males and females as two separate normal distributions. The mean performance of females relative to males would likely shift the female distribution lower. However, some overlap would exist (best female athletes could outperform the worst male athletes). I am not sure how much they would overlap, perhaps the best female athletes can perform beyond the average male athlete.
A proper investigation would be to see if any given individual has a net shift along the performance distribution as a result of male physiology. If they do it compromises the competitive integrity of woman’s sports. That article I posted also provides an Instagram post by the athlete. In which the difference in size between her and her competition is apparent to the naked eye. Her size affords her much longer strides than the ones she is competing against. If these differences were the result of a testosterone puberty or previously male physiology, then one could hypothesize there is a problem.
My question about trans men was to clarify what you previously called “biologically male”, which you seem to mean “experienced testosterone puberty” (strange definition, but sure)
As for your second point, I’m confused, why are you talking about male athletes now? You’re aware that having experienced testosterone puberty at some point is not the same as having a testosterone dominated body? Muscle density and mass, fat distribution, some cardiovascular effects, and many more things that are associated with testosterone are impermanent, and disappear/shift towards a estrogen-typical distribution when testosterone is suppressed (over the span of 1-2 years, with some variance)
Height and bone structure are some of the few things that don’t change on HRT. Which brings me back to one of my old points: Why should a cis woman that is 1.80m tall be allowed to compete, but a trans woman should not?
We appear to be having a miscommunication. Someone who is born a male will on average see greater increases in physical capability if they do not suppress or alter their development.
As you say, a trans woman can negate these advantages by some amount with HRT. They still however retain advantages through things that are not affected by HRT (bone structure, height, etc.)
To your third point. Because height is an optimal genetic outcome, and is largely uncontrollable. There are some weird people who procreate with the goal of achieving optimal genetic outcomes, but those people are few and far between. Someone can be born a man, reap the benefits of a male puberty(bone structure, height, ect.), then become a trans woman athlete. That is a completely controllable path that circumvents some amount of training and preparation other participants in the sport have to do. This sort of thing fits the description of a ‘loophole’.
I never said definitively that trans women shouldn’t be able to participate. However, there are some questions that need to be answered in order to do this kind of thing without compromising competition. These questions are: - Is HRT required for trans woman to be eligible to compete? (it appears yes it should be) - Can performance advantages gained through physiology unaffected by HRT be considered negligible? (my intuition tells me no. However, I could be wrong given enough performance data) - Does HRT actually negate their capabilities to the level you are claiming? - Are any potential advantages completely avoided by starting HRT as a prepubescent? (This does not seem far- fetched. Males and females often compete against one another as prepubescents in publicly sanctioned leagues)
HRT is already mandatory to compete at basically every level. The whole “you can just identify as a woman and compete” is scaremongering by transphobes.
You make it sound like being trans is a choice one can make to give themselves an advantage, and let me just say, yikes. Being trans is not a completely controllable path, just as your height or if you’re left handed is not.
The median trans woman is likely taller than the median cis woman. This does not justify why she should be excluded. We don’t treat other categories like this, either. The median Dutch woman is taller than the median Korean woman. But you don’t see politicians making a fuss about the Dutch in sports, now do you?
It can be completely controllable if one so chooses
What are you trying to say? You’re either saying being trans is a choice (yikes!)
Or you’re saying cis men would go through years of transition, crippling dysphoria from transitioning into the wrong gender, the social ostracization that comes from being transgender in general and a trans athlete in specific, all to… get a potential, marginal advantage? That’s a fantasy.
Either way, I don’t get your point
The amount of emotions you superimpose over the discussion doesn’t change the fact that it is a highly repeatable avenue to gain an advantage. Unlike the genetic markers you have mentioned.
???
who would do this? seriously
There are athletes that forgo companionship, marriage, having children, etc. to improve in their sport. It is not uncommon for people to withstand tremendous sacrifice to reach their goals.
We have entered the subjectivity debate, which I am not interested in having. This was an interesting conversation nonetheless.