Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

What on earth are you on about? Are you trying to say that because the world record holding female can outlift the transwoman that it is somehow now air that a male sex athlete can compete in the female categoy?

A point which could and had been argued ad infinitum. It would be a more compelling data point for the discussion had they been on blockers for decades and still had that result is all.

There's no need for that level of complexity. The current sports science is pretty comprehensive in demonstrating that anyone who has been through male puberty has inherant advantages over females who have not been through male puberty (the links to a very relevant paper on that specific subject are only back a page or two on this thread). Hormone treatment is sideshow that does not affect that fundamental point. That basic fact doesn't need a more compelling data point to support it. It stands perfectly well on its own merits.

There is a need for that level of complexity, precisely because the current sports science is inconclusive given the lack of data with regard to men competing in women’s sports. Hormone treatment is only one aspect of that research, and it does have a fundamental impact on the results, which is why more compelling evidence is needed to support the idea of prohibiting men from competing in women’s sports. The problem is the lack of data doesn’t stand on its own in support of anything either way.

I don’t see anyone arguing that they aren’t? I certainly didn’t anyway, nor did I present a woman who is capable of beating other women by way of suggesting women could beat men. The point was, and I made this clear, that the achievement of one particular athlete is nothing noteworthy when it’s put in its proper perspective. The same issue arose with Laurel Hubbard - there were complaints that they would dominate the women’s competition, they didn’t even come close.

I don’t need to go to mixed sports events, it would be pointless for the very reasons you state - it indicates absolutely nothing unusual whatsoever. In the same way, the competition in Canada (and thank goodness I don’t have to go there! 😂) indicates absolutely nothing whatsoever.

There’s no lack of statistical understanding on my part in demonstrating that women can beat women, I didn’t say anything about whether or not women could beat men - statistically speaking, in competition they won’t even come close. ceadaoin has always made the point that she was sick of women being told they need just need to try harder. Nobody has ever actually made that argument because it’s generally accepted that the first thing a loser would think of themselves is that they need to try harder, it’s not something that should ever need to be said, because it just comes off as condescending, in the same way as it’s condescending to assume women are incapable of improving their performance in competition.

I’ll admit I was being facetious about it in suggesting that ceadaoin blame Canada (even if it is because of the rules of a Canadian competition that these circumstances came about). That was a reference to this:

I started doing strength and conditioning training in March. Not for any competitive reasons or anything like that, just to get some exercise and lose a bit of flab. There are a number of women in the same class as me that have been doing it for 12 months and longer. These would be very fit strong and fit women, excellent muscle definition, tone etc. Me, an out of shape, mid 40s man, only doing it for 5 months about 3 times a week can easily lift twice what these "seasoned" women can lift for things like deadlifts, benchpress and overhead press. The advantages I have in my skeletal frame and in built muscle system will always be there. Certain parties will immediately point to the 1 or 2 outliers but the cold hard reality is that in the main, the advantages most men have over most women exist and always will. Males and females are not on a level physical playing field once puberty comes into the equation. Hell, Im involved in coaching the under 6s group in my local GAA club and even with that age group, the boys are physically more advanced than the girls in every single one of them barring one young lady.

Could the saying of women being able to multitask and men not actually be an advantage to men when playing chess?

When I was young it was not really ever thought about at the club as it was only male members I ever saw playing and wasn't considered unusual.....considering all the great female mathematicians in the world you would think a brilliant biological female would be able to compete with a brilliant biological male, there may be other neurological abilities at play also though.

Certain parties will immediately point to the 1 or 2 outliers

Nobody actually needs to point to the one or two outliers (or using themselves by way of anecdotal evidence vs actual scientific evidence), because we have that already in Laurel Hubbard - was never even in medal contention in the first place, in the end didn’t even qualify, didn’t matter whether they could lift more anyone else at their local gym. I’d be thinking of the same thing I’d say to you as I’d say to Laurel Hubbard if you were beaten in competition - try harder. Except that I wouldn’t say it, because it will have occurred to you already. It would be obvious, which was the point of the answer I gave to the question I was asked.

Nobody is talking about most men or most women in anything. We’re speaking in a very specific and limited context which is still based on reality - the reality being that most men competing in women’s sports are achieving as much in the sport at international level as you are in your local gym. If you were competing in the sport in Canada, it’s just as likely nobody even within the sport will ever have heard of you. People scouring the internet looking for anecdotes to support their argument however, might come across you and make out that you’re an example of men dominating the sport, even though you’re nowhere in terms of world rankings.

There is a need for that level of complexity, precisely because the current sports science is inconclusive given the lack of data with regard to men competing in women’s sports. Hormone treatment is only one aspect of that research, and it does have a fundamental impact on the results, which is why more compelling evidence is needed to support the idea of prohibiting men from competing in women’s sports. The problem is the lack of data doesn’t stand on its own in support of anything either way.

That is, quite frankly, a load of rubish. We have 100 years of data on sports performance. There is absolutely no shortage whatsoever of data on the performance difference between male sex athletes and female sex athletes. They very very clearly demonstrate a significant performance advantage which post-pubescant male sex athletes have over females sex athletes. The sports science is 100% clear and unambiguous on this. Again it sounds like you either have no understanding of the sports science or your trying another bad faith argument. There is no lack of data. Quite the opposite in fact. We have billions and billions of data points.

Do you agree that post pubescant males sex athletes have a significant performance advantage over females sex athletes? Yes or no?

Again, only one or two pages back there is reference to a comprehensive sports science article outlining clearly the reason why hormone tratment does not elminate the natural performance advantages that male sex athletes have over female sex athletes. If you want to dispute that science then please provide some references as to what leads to you to conclude that this is not the case.

In saying that hormone tratment eliminates the performance gap between male sex athletes and female sex athletes, does this mean that you accept that posesion of a gender recognistion certificate is insufficient grounds in itself to allow a transwoman to fairly compete in the female sex category, as no hormone treatment is required to obtain a gender recognistion certificate?

The point was, and I made this clear, that the achievement of one particular athlete is nothing noteworthy when it’s put in its proper perspective. The same issue arose with Laurel Hubbard - there were complaints that they would dominate the women’s competition, they didn’t even come close.

And the point here is it doesn't matter if a transwoman doesn't win when competing in the female category. The mere fact of someone of male sex (And by definition all transwomen are male sex) competing in the female category is inheherantly unfair to ALL female sex athletes they are competing against, irrespective of the results. Laurel Hubbard is a perfect example of that. A female sex athlete from New Zealand was robbed of her opportunuity to compete in the olympics by the rules that allowed Laurel Hubbard to take her place. That's gross unfariness.

And again, the broad statisical reality beyond individual performances is that Male sex athletes have a significant performance advantage over female sex athletes. The only way to achieve sporting fairness to allow female athletes to compete on a fair basis in the vasdt majority of sports is to seperate competitive results into male and female sex categories.

Nobody has ever actually made that argument because it’s generally accepted that the first thing a loser would think of themselves is that they need to try harder, it’s not something that should ever need to be said, because it just comes off as condescending, in the same way as it’s condescending to assume women are incapable of improving their performance in competition.

It's an off-topic point, but I disagree here. Plenty of times a competitor will lose and think that they gave it their best, but quite simply the better person won.There's nothing wrong with that. It's much more likely to be grounded in reality than some Amerian style BS that you can achieve anything you want if you just work hard enough. Sorry, but no, that's just not the case. Hard work and talent gets beaten by hard work and more talent almost every time. I could have spent my life working on being the best sprinter I could be, but I wouldn't have come remotely close to beating someone with natural sprint talent who puts in even a basic amount of work. That's just reality. It's healthier for one's mental health to accept this reality.

In exactly the same way the most talented female sex athletes can spend their entire lives working as hard as possible to improve their performance levels, but they will still not be able to match the perfomance levels of equivalent level male sex athletes.

I’ll admit I was being facetious about it in suggesting that ceadaoin blame Canada (even if it is because of the rules of a Canadian competition that these circumstances came about).

Funnily enough I was happy to accept that that was a shorthand reference that the rules of the canadian weighlifting NGB were to blame. And I'd actually agree with that!

Funnily enough I was happy to accept that that was a shorthand reference that the rules of the canadian weighlifting NGB were to blame. And I'd actually agree with that!

Well it’s good to know we agree on something at least 😂

The rest of your post though, been done to death, revived, and beaten to death again, and brought back for infinite rounds and beaten to death again, going over exactly the same ground as before, and yet still you’re aware that the lack of data being referred to is the lack of data regarding transgender athletes.

Relying on anecdotal evidence like the latest example from Canada is not nearly coming close to being classed as scientific evidence that could support any conclusion either way in terms of their participation in sports in order to determine what is or isn’t fair. Science can’t determine fairness, that comes down to whatever people think is or isn’t fair, and that’s based on their own beliefs. Science isn’t necessary to make that determination.

It's called record keeping and the evidence is as emphatic as it is simple to see.

Again, completely missing the point.

EVERY SINGLE female sex athlete should be entitled to fair competition, not just Olympic level or elite level. Every last single athlete down to leggedy-last should be entitled to fair competition. Just because someone competing unfairly doesn't dominate or win is completely irrelevant. The unfairness arises in the fact that they are competing at all.

And again Laurel Hubbard is an excellent example of unfair rules resulting in a female sex New Zealand athlete losing out on a chance to compete in the Olympics due to the unfair rules allowing a male sex athlete to take that place.

I’m not missing the point at all. It’s simply that there is considerable disagreement over the idea of what is or isn’t fair, and we could both argue till we’re blue in the face over it, yet it still wouldn’t change what an organisation in Canada thinks is fair or doesn’t think is fair when they’re obligated to operate in accordance with Canadian law in any case.

Grand. I'll call it out as being wrong in that case. Feel free to prove otherwise.