Um, okay?Cool story bro. So I have a giant pile of evidence that shows that testosterone exposure CAUSES A PUBERTY!Ah, bad faith bringing up dimensions of consideration to declare someone "technically" wrong without actually addressing content.This is posed on the boundaries of "this person was born with (the organ that produces testosterone)", and "has only been off it for a year"I've pointed out NUMEROUS times now that this better way is to just remove "sex" and "gender" completely from the discussion. While these things are in the same idea system, different abstract relations to the thing that sports fairness divides on, the real and complete alignment of the pivot happens on hormonal advantages.It isn't fair, this is a stupid way to run a women's sport. All the sports bodies need to figure out a better way for trans athletes to compete in more suitable divisions.
When someone has some mutation or condition or decision that exposes their body to testosterone for a long term period of time, and particularly while the skeleton is finalizing development THIS and ONLY THIS determines who someone ought be competing with.
How have you come to this conclusion?
You reference testosterone exposure in your own OP.
No, I didn't. The OP quotes a story which quotes a policy. The policy is not my policy and it is a policy I disagree with.
Of course, it's a policy you disagree with, too.
But more to the point, I still have no idea why you came to the conclusion that testosterone exposure is the ONLY thing that should determine who someone competes with. This is not true, since age and disability are also dimensions any fair-minded person would use, but even in the narrow space of sex-based differences, why would it be a good principle?
You are wrong that testosterone exposure during puberty is the only relevant factor in considering fair competition, even in the narrow space of fairness along sex-based parameters.
YOU are the one who makes tacit admissions that this orbits around "testosterone" not "gender" or "sex".
I have not made any such admissions and if you think I have, I will explicitly disabuse you of them.
Even if that were true--which you have not produced any evidence of--so what? There is no evidence that males who do not undergo a typical male puberty are indistinguishable from females in relevant ways for sporting fairness.Before that puberty, people who have organs that will produce testosterone are very similar in performance with people who do not.
Yes, it does.After puberty, people tend to look and perform a little different.
It's almost like testosterone/estrogen cause large impacts.
No. You are trying to make it about testosterone only. Testosterone exposure is not the only physiological difference relevant to sex differences between men and women.We can get into the with in-group between-group statistics, but either testosterone is what this is about, or you are trying to make it about the gross shape of the outside of people's bodies.
Not the only relevant circumstance. The bodies of pre-pubescent boys are different to the bodies of pre-pubescent girls."Gender" or "gender identity" is completely irrelevant to fairness in sports. Nobody's gender should make any difference whatever with respect to whom it is fair they compete with.[/QUOTE
Indeed, it should be decided on the basis of how their body has been modified by identifiable core circumstances.
Those circumstances are which hormones they have been exposed to and when.
"Testosterone" is also irrelevant, except that it's a performance enhancing drug and anybody taking testosterone is doping and it is not fair they compete.The major effect, orders of magnitude more generally impactful than any minor effect.
Lia Thomas could be suppressing testosterone for a lifetime, and he would still be an adult human male. Testosterone is part of the relevant difference in athletic performance between men and women, but it is not all of it.So, if you think testosterone exposure is not relevant, why do you bring up a whinge explicitly in your OP that "OnLy OfF T FoR a YeAr!!!111"?
That you cannot do anything but strawman my posts is your problem, not mine.I am guessing it's because every post I have ever seen you make on trans people drips with disingenuousness
But that doesn't matter to bad faith.
I don't understand your sentence.We see you.
AM already burned through three, let's see how long it takes you.
I didn't expect you to.
This is number two btw.
I didn't.Looks like you figured it out.
Now either you can discuss YOUR model about what physical factors, what chemicals which have changed their bodies, and thus which effects of which changes "ruin" people for competitive purposes within these leagues, or you can admit that you have not thought it through that far and your attacks come from somewhere else.
I propose that sports were separated by sex because men and women are physiologically different in ways that are relevant for performance. I also propose that mammals cannot change sex.
I don't know what your model is, but I do not agree with your premises. Testosterone exposure at puberty is not the sole reason for the physical differences relevant to sports performance between men and women, and testosterone suppression is not sufficient to remove those differences.I've proposed a model that would work. Your posts reveal fear over discussing this.
Last edited by a moderator: