Recent content by seanie

Have an Open category and a non-androgenised category. The non-androgenised category being 99.95% confirmed female at birth.

Putting Testosterone in capitals is not, in itself, an argument. Who knew?

Well, and I don’t want to be unkind, you’re talking shite. We necessarily segregate most sports by sex due to the physiological advantages that male bodies have over females. And trans women, whilst they should be respected and protected from harm and discrimination, are biologically male...

"Male" and "female" are very relevant and obvious classifications when it comes to sport. Male physiology confers such an advantage that we need to separate most sports by sex. That allows us to celebrate and reward excellences on both sexes. Segregating sport by self-identified gender is...

You appear to be confused and upset by the use of the term "males". This does not suggest you have a coherent understanding of the issues in hand, your confident claims about what you have outlined or established notwithstanding.

Males have physiological advantages over females in most sports, largely due to development in puberty due to testosterone. That is not an argument "from tradition". It is an argument from obvious, demonstrable reality.

Puberty suppression to treat dysphoria is still an experimental treatment. The use has increased dramatically over the last 10 years but there is little follow up data. A number of countries who enthusiastically pushed the treatment are now reviewing, pausing or reigning back the route to...

It's not an argument based on tradition. It's an argument based on objective reality that, hard won, has existed for long enough to be considered a "tradition" by those a little hard of thinking.

There are very, very good reasons for segregating most sports by biological sex. There are few good reasons for segregating sport by self-identified gender, and obvious reasons why that's a very bad idea.

There is very little evidence of the long term effects of puberty suppression in adolescence, as those that pioneered the treatment acknowledge. As to the medium term benefits the evidence is also weak. But again, that’s a separate consideration to the participation of males who identify as...

I only offered it as a hypothetical. Post-pubertal treatment does not currently negate male physiological advantage. And puberty blockers to treat dysphoria is currently an experimental and potentially harmful treatment. Also, focusing on the hypotheticals around hormone treatment for...

However, if there was a transitioning process that removed male physiological advantage, pre or post puberty, then the unfairness objection would not apply. But the evidence is that post puberty hormone treatment doesn’t negate male physiological advantages, and there’s very little evidence on...

So my problem is bringing up a material objective fact? My bad. How very dare I. However, there is the live issue of biological males, with the advantages of androgenised development, performing in female sports. Which is manifestly and obviously unfair.

Your coherence isn’t improving. Anyhoo, most sports are segregated by sex due to the unfair advantages conferred by male physiology, largely but not exclusively due to the effects of testosterone during puberty. There are some very rare DSD/VSD conditions where there can be some ambiguity as...

That’s not all that coherent. Maybe try again?