Thread by @KirstiMiller30

“IN FACT”

There is no clear biological list of features that allow us to even remotely cleanly separate men from women.

Chromosomes? NOPE

Testosterone? NOPE

Height? NOPE

Vo2 Max? NOPE

Haemoglobin? NOPE

Weight? NOPE

Bone Density? NOPE

FUN FACT: Male and female muscle is the same strength when comparing equivalent cross section/size (Costill et al., 1976; Schantz et al., 1983). Something never considered by Hilton et al.



q

MORE FUN FAQ: Research finds trans women have bone density lower than natal males, natal females, and FtMs, as a group, BEFORE hormone therapy even begins (sample=711, FAR larger than any of the studies Hilton uses)

asbmr.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.10…

There currently exists NO evidence to suggest that trans women who elect to suppress testosterone (through, for example, gender affirming hormone therapy and/or surgical gonad removal) maintain disproportionate advantages over cis women indefinitely.

Tucker, Hilton etc cite Q angle, lung size, bone density & height in XX women – confer a performance advantage for XY trans women, but there is NO support in the literature that these factors confer any such advantage

Going back to the 1960’s the XY/XX chromosomes classification made no historical, scientific, ethical, legal or social sense.

Recognizing this,the IOC last engaged in chromosomal testing in 1996 Olympics, and formally banned the practice in 1999.

Policies that impact the practice of trans women in competitive sport emanate from the parallel history of efforts to define the female category in ways that excluded those women whose bodies were deemed to not conform to normative standards of femininity.

Many people want a simple biological criterion to indicate an athlete’s sex. But it’s mind-bogglingly more complicated than that. The answer is that there is no simple definition of what a biological male or female is.

medium.com/@kirstiphillip…