Transgender and sports

[Al-O-Meter]

You have proof of any sort of conspiracy, or even of friendship?

Yes. I have the statements from Thomas' Penn teammate.

"I know they’re friends and I know they were talking before the meet. I think she let her win to prove the point that, ‘Oh see, a female-to-male beat me.'"

Now do you have any proof the Penn swimmer is not telling the truth?

I mean, if your interest were legitimate, it's really touching how worried you are about Ivy League women's swimming.

It is not just Ivy League swimming but all of women's sports. Having XY athletes compete in a division that is originally intended to be exclusive to XX athletes destroys the whole purpose of having women's sports. Biological males have a physiological advantage. Below are the time standards for the short course 100 for kids 15 and 16 years old.

That 5.6 second difference in 100 yard standards between what makes a AAAA girl swimmer versus what makes a AAAA boy swimmer is not a social construct. BTW, the 52.84 Thomas posted in the 100 when "losing" to Henig wouldn't have been good enough for a 15 year old boy to make AAAA, but the 49.42 Thomas posted just 45 days earlier shows Thomas to be a very fast swimmer when not sandbagging. Henig only won because Thomas wanted Henig to win. There is a good reason Thomas is the NCAA record holder and Henig is not.

Regarding dropping 2 seconds in the 200, the 200 is not the 100 and you are arguing against your own position. I think record holder Katie Ledecky could swim 2 seconds slower anytime she wanted to just like I think Thomas could swim 3 seconds slower to let Henig win. Katie Ledecky is the greatest female swimmer in the history of the sport. If meh Thomas can beat the best female swimmer there has ever been simply by changing a form and going on testosterone suppression for 12 months I think that will be enough to end this whole delusion being foisted on us by the religion of woke.

 

[One Brow]

Yes. I have the statements from Thomas' Penn teammate.

Now do you have any proof the Penn swimmer is not telling the truth?

At best, that's proof that they were friends, and not of any conspiracy.

It is not just Ivy League swimming but all of women's sports. Having XY athletes compete in a division that is originally intended to be exclusive to XX athletes destroys the whole purpose of having women's sports.

How about XY women with androgen insensitivity? Is their inclusion unfair? How about XY women who don't have an SRY region on either chromosome? Is their inclusion unfair?

What is the purpose of women's sports, or Ivy League collegiate sports generally, that Lia Thomas disrupts?

Bonus points if you can figure out how to answer that without implying Thomas is not a woman (so far, you have no bonus points).

Biological males have a physiological advantage. Below are the time standards for the short course 100 for kids 15 and 16 years old.

What does this have to do with Penn women's swimming or Lia Thomas? Did you really think that jumping around like this would confuse someone, or are you just that confused and desperate?

There is a good reason Thomas is the NCAA record holder and Henig is not.

As I demonstrated very clearly, Thomas is not the NCAA record holder. Her times are not even top 10. In addition to the 200Y and 500Y times, her ~50s times in the 100Y are about 5s too slow.

Why are you lying about Thomas's records?

Regarding dropping 2 seconds in the 200, the 200 is not the 100 and you are arguing against your own position.

You say that, but so far it's you that has failed to show any part of your argument.

Katie Ledecky is the greatest female swimmer in the history of the sport. If meh Thomas can beat the best female swimmer there has ever been simply by changing a form and going on testosterone suppression for 12 months I think that will be enough to end this whole delusion being foisted on us by the religion of woke.

Thomas is not in Ledecky's league.

I get that you have a lot of hate and fear here. It would actually look better for you to just admit that, as opposed to coming up with all these unbelievable rationalizations.

 

[LogGrad98]

How about XY women with androgen insensitivity? Is their inclusion unfair? How about XY women who don't have an SRY region on either chromosome? Is their inclusion unfair?

I wonder how often these have been encountered in women's sports in general. Just curious. Not expecting and answer as I am sure this isn't anything anyone can monitor or track or even reliably check.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

How about XY ...?

There is a place for them in the open division alongside all other XY athletes and any XX athletes who chose to compete in the open division. Everyone should be allowed to compete but women's sport should be XX exclusive.

 

[Gameface]

So all participation in women's sports should require a karyotype test first?

 

[LogGrad98]

So all participation in women's sports should require a karyotype test first?

Yep, starting in 1st grade. Kindergarten gets a pass.

 

[One Brow]

There is a place for them in the open division alongside all other XY athletes and any XX athletes who chose to compete in the open division. Everyone should be allowed to compete but women's sport should be XX exclusive.

Thank you for confirming that your objections have nothing to do with the physical differences between men and women that you referenced earlier.

 

[One Brow]

So all participation in women's sports should require a karyotype test first?

Hate is hate. No need to be rational.

 

[gandalfe]

There is a place for them in the open division alongside all other XY athletes and any XX athletes who chose to compete in the open division. Everyone should be allowed to compete but women's sport should be XX exclusive.

What about those who don't fit into your Jr High understanding of genetics? And are you seriously suggesting we perform genetic testing on every student who wants to play sports?

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Sporting events were split between males and females in the first place for a reason. Genetic males, on average, are stronger and faster than their female counterpart, with more muscle mass and testosterone.

If we are going to blur the lines, and let genetic males participate in female sports and vice versa, the best idea is to get rid of gender in sports and have everyone compete in one division.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

What about those who don't fit into your Jr High understanding of genetics? And are you seriously suggesting we perform genetic testing on every student who wants to play sports?

That would be silly. The open division accepts everyone regardless of genetics. Verification of some sort would only be needed for those competing in restricted divisions. If you had a kid in club sports you'd know they do that now. For my kid to eligible to compete in the 10U division I had to provide proof of age. Genetic tests for gender only aren't any more expensive than tests for banned substances and athletes have to take many of those throughout the season. Testing for compliance in sport is not the least bit unusual.

 

[One Brow]

Sporting events were split between males and females in the first place for a reason. Genetic males, on average, are stronger and faster than their female counterpart, with more muscle mass and testosterone.

People with higher levels of testosterone tend to have more muscle mass, but we don't create separate events based on te3stoserone levels, level of strength, height, etc., except when we do (boxing weight classes, etc.).

We have separate male/female sporting events for the same reason we have separate male/female bathrooms: to avoid close contact between men and women. It's not because of the size of the poo pieces.

If we are going to blur the lines, and let genetic males participate in female sports and vice versa, the best idea is to get rid of gender in sports and have everyone compete in one division.

That does nothing to alter the social distinction between men and women that led to the creation of separate events.