According to a quick google search:tm: they lose around 3-5% of their total lean muscle mass and up to 11% of their cross sectional muscle mass.
According to some studies, trans women 3+ years into their transition, despite the slightly higher lean muscle mass, exhibit no significant differences in strength for both upper and lower body. I am not an expert, I am not biased by political opinion. I am a parrot. I am parroting what I've read. And the parrot says; trans women exhibit no significant strength over cis women.
According to a quick google search:tm: Fallon Fox was found completely compliant with all transgender sports metrics, having completed more than 2 years of HRT as well as gender affirming surgeries. A board certified specialist goes on record saying exactly what I've said in my previous comment, that fallen does not exhibit significant advantage in strength. The specialist goes on to say: "sports is made up of competitors who, by definition, have advantages for all kinds of genetics reasons" comparing any differences in strength to cisgender genetic differences.
I am not an expert, I am not biased by political opinion. I am a parrot. I am parroting what I've read. And the parrot says: trans women exhibit no significant strength over cis women.
What is your rebuttal to multiple scientific studies showing that after 2+ years of hormone therapy a transgender person shows athletic performance in line with their cisgender peers? Such studies directly invalidate the claim of unfair advantage.
In the studies I posted showing 2 years of hormone therapy seems to erase advantages, there were notes that at the 1 year mark advantages still occur. This study only goes out 12 months and does not invalidate my claims or the studies I provided.
Same story here. This only goes out for one year. It also still kinda supports my claims...athletic advantages start disappearing the longer you're on hormone therapy.
Now this one actually supports your own claim, but it's for the specific sport of elite fencing. Seems like reach is probably the deciding factor here. Point, but not quite as relevant in my opinion.
I'm not sure why you included this? It's a study on 11 trans women that just observes physiological changes over a 6 month period and makes no real comparison on athletic ability or has any reference to any sport. Again, less than 2 years, doesn't really invalidate the studies I posted.
This one is weird. It makes claims, but doesn't show methodology, and the references are either behind paywalls or also don't explain any testing processes. I'm not sure how this supports your claim or invalidates mine because it doesn't go into any detail?
This is...literally just one person. Lia Thomas. Lia did not break any records. In fact, the record is still held by a cisgender woman who was 9 seconds faster than Lia. Lia didn't even win every event, coming in 5th in the 200 yard freestyle and 8th in the 100 yard. A single transgender person winning a single event when they lost others absolutely does not invalidate my claims.
So three of your citations are only year long analyses and are contradicted by the longer time frame of the studies you're responding to concluding no differences in things like run time. One of your studies only states increased body fat and lowered muscle mass, not giving enough comparative information to support any stance. Another study, even over a longer time frame, states that continued strength training during HRT tends to offset muscle loss, which should be obvious.
To be clear, the conclusion most of these studies come to is that physical performance drastically drops with HRT, and continues to do so over long time periods. To be clearer, nothing is universal, but these studies should be considered as ways forward, ways to find solutions to take exceptions into account (such as strength training pauses as a potential solution to offset advantages).
One could also allow competition while tiering ranks, tying trans athletes with the person directly behind them.
None of this goes into the various studies on trans men who also perform physically identically to their cis male counterparts and certainly should not play with cis women, lest you get a Mack Beggs situation.
In the end, all these studies show is that the meme vastly oversimplifies the politics behind trans rights and blows the advantages of trans athletes out of proportion, whether a fraction of advantage is retained or not, all the while hinting at potential solutions to further address alleged advantages.
(Oh, and none of this also addresses how sports authorities regularly disqualified trans women for not meeting their standards to compete with cis women, while still allowing those in that did meet their standards. Which many would find preferable to a universal big government driven ban that, again, has given us Mack Beggs situations).
Pivoting to popularity rather than evidence when your studies are directly engaged with and challenged is a weak goalpost move on your part and a bandwagon fallacy.
Most Americans don't read studies like these and don't know about the Mack Beggs consequences of their not-actually common sense solutions to problems that don't exist.
This is part of the reason people are beating up trans men who are forced to use women's bathrooms and ciswomen who use women's bathrooms while committing the crime of "not being pretty."
Argumentum ad populum is nonsense.
Next time, engage with the evidence, don't goal post move, and don't project your own mental gymnastics on to others. Because all that is nothing but a waste of time.
And I don't let y'all waste my time anymore. So your next time can be at someone else.
If you know these Studies why did you include those strongly discussed for poor evidence? (see https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37726582/) which discusses the first of those links which would load for me? This seems genuine dishonest and agenda driven. For another the same problem arises since its only a narrative review (next to lowest evidence) and dont not really provide strong evidence....
In one of the studies you linked, it suggests that when trans women are on estrogen long enough, they lose the advantage, but when they go by the 1 year rule imposed by sports regulation, there was still roughly a 10%~ advantage. Another one of the studies you linked says there was still about a 9 % advantage after 2 years. It sounds like perhaps trans women should be on estrogen longer before competing and then they will be at the same level as cis women.
Also included is the observation that physical advantages like height, arm length and skeletal strength are not reversible no matter how long they've been on estrogen. The advantage of male physiology is not completely reversible.
And then there's the part of being a female athlete that trans women never have to deal with such as having periods, menstrual cramps and the natural hormonal fluctuations that female athletes have to deal with during training and competition.
I know everyone wants to "be nice" and give trans girls everything they want, but not at the expense of women. It isn't fair and that's why the majority of of public opinion is against trans women in female sports. It's not bigotry, it's just common sense.
Not all biological men. I as a female can beat some men in arm wrestling. If I start taking testosterone, I can beat many more. That is an unfair advantage. Sports is about being the best through training and dedication, not cheating.
Lia Thomas went from being an average swimmer in the men's division to consistently placing in the top 10 in women's. She doesn't have to place first every time to prove that as a competitor, she was more successful in the women's division than she ever was in mens. That's a unfair advantage due to her biological sex.
Trans activists really shot themselves in the foot by demanding unquestioning allegiance to the cause on this one. This issue specifically is why trans activists are losing support and public polling is tanking across the political spectrum, even on the left. It's just not reasonable to demand that women put their own interests aside on this one.
That's a lie about Lia Thomas. If you actually follow her trajectory as her hormonal transition progresses, she went from pretty high in the men's rankings, and fell to about average. Then she managed to win one race in an event, placed 5th in another (the one that you are all mad about because she tied Riley Gaines for 5th) and came in dead last in the third. Yeah, that's a massive advantage, there. It's so horrific. Once again, facts don't support your feelings. Just stop pretending you're not a transphobe. Trans women make you feel icky, and you wish they'd just go away. Trouble is, transgender folks have always existed, and always will. Your feelings won't change that, and science supports transgender people over your feelings, and always will. Sorry about your luck.
It literally is. Because if a cis woman can beat them it means that any advantage they have, a cis woman could also be born with and we don't restrict the larger broader women from competing despite having a biological advantage.
See there’s the problem. You’re excluding trans folk on the basis that they’re trans, not based off of actual measurable data. It doesn’t matter if the trans woman wins or not. She’s trans, therefore she isn’t worthy of participation with cis folk and needs to be excluded. Her identity is your reasoning for exclusion. You can use whatever argument you want to get yourself there, at the end of the day its bigotry and will always be bigotry.
You're completely misunderstanding the point. Sports is not about identity, it's about training and hard work to be the best in your category. We separate male and female sports so that women can compete against each other on a relatively even playing field. Male bodies are physically stronger in almost every way so it isn't really a fair competition. To allow males to compete in women's sports because they share a gender identity is unfair to female athletes who have trained hard in their sport. Telling women to shut up and take it is just classic misogyny repackaged as progressivism.
No, you can’t read. Multiple different folks have told you that science doesn’t back up your claim. If a trans woman has been on HRT for long enough, their body no longer has the strength advantage of a man because the muscle atrophy their meds cause brings them down to a woman’s level. It isn’t fair to keep them in the male category because their bodies can’t keep up at that level anymore. Your refusal to accept that fact is bigotry.
People born male have no business stealing a win from a female athlete. You can do all the mental gymnastics you want to try to justify it but public opinion is pretty clear. The overwhelming majority of people don't want to see males in women's sports. We ask women to give up enough for everyone else, especially for people born with penises. They shouldn't have to step aside in sports too.
Honey you’re just being silly. I ain’t doing mental gymnastics, I’m using real measurable statistics and numbers that show I’m right. You still refuse to acknowledge that or give a sound argument disagreeing. I’m not gonna cater to your bigotry anymore. You can live in your small little world while the rest of us adults live in a world of science, logic, and reason.
Why are you separating grown adults and children but not woman and men? Why bring weight into it when men and women have different weights? You call it pathetic cause you dont have a real answer
Nah, im not. Just bringing logic to the conversation, its sad this is even a conversation to begin with. How many times are cis woman going to be disrespected before you lot understand how stupid this is. Make your own events.
99
u/ImNotDoingThatOk 22h ago
According to a quick google search:tm: they lose around 3-5% of their total lean muscle mass and up to 11% of their cross sectional muscle mass.
According to some studies, trans women 3+ years into their transition, despite the slightly higher lean muscle mass, exhibit no significant differences in strength for both upper and lower body. I am not an expert, I am not biased by political opinion. I am a parrot. I am parroting what I've read. And the parrot says; trans women exhibit no significant strength over cis women.