@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov That’s great, she’s probably on the far right of the athleticism spectrum within the female sex. But the comparison with you is absolutely irrelevant, because, and I say this factually, you’re not an elite athlete. How does she compare to the top 10% of men? Nothing sexist here.
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov So the thing for your sister is that if you got your wish, the only sport she could ever do is play it socially against (and again, I’m being blunt here) mediocre males like you. The moment she stepped on a court or track, or jumped in a pool against top 10% males, she’s nowhere
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov And if that still seems sexist to you, spend some time on wiki and compare world records in track and field, swimming, weight lifting, cycling. Or even high school records. NCAA winning times. Take your pic. Check how many males are far ahead of the best females in history.
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov That dataset (and spoiler - you’ll find the best men are 10% faster in running & swimming, 30% stronger in weight lifting) leaves you a real dilemma. You now have to either accept that males outperform females in sport (not sexist, biology). Or, you have to tell all those women
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov …who are 10% to 30% (and punch power is 160% lower, by the way, so the range is huge), that they’re massively underperforming, why can’t they just run or swim faster? What’s wrong with women? You think it’s the former, or the latter?

Point is - a category for females in sport
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov …exists precisely because of the sex difference. It’s not sexist to recognise this, and then to say ‘Females need a category so that we can celebrate their excellence in sport!” The great irony is that the category actually achieves equality, that’s why it must be protected
@oldeisyoung @helenopinion @Rolnikov And conversely, to deny biology and its impact on sport is actually undermining and achieves inequality for women. So the attempt to play the “that’s sexist” card actually reveals sexism. We celebrate women Olympic champs as equal BECAUSE we have a separate female category.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Ross Tucker

Ross Tucker Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Scienceofsport

8 Dec 20
New study on transgender & performance. The paper’s title could've been “Significant endurance & strength-endurance advantages are retained for up to 2 years despite T reduction in TW: Implications for the assumptions of fairness in current policies”. Some thoughts to follow
First, remind ourselves of the principle and why the results matter. Sports policies have allowed inclusion of TW who lower T for 12 months on the assumption that this removes the male physiological advantages sufficiently to create fairness when women’s sport is “opened” up (2/)
The obvious (though amazingly unasked) question is “Is there evidence showing that this actually works? In other words, does T suppression remove the biological advantages that necessitate a separate women’s category in sport?" This is the question the study is trying to address:
Read 20 tweets
29 Nov 20
The @dailymaverick asked me to do a piece on the trans woman in sport issue. It’s necessarily short and high level, but here it is. Writing it made me realize there are some key questions everyone who wades into the debate upfront should answer. Wanted to share them here (1/_)
The first question, before any other “shots are fired”, should be:

“If there is ZERO evidence for what happens to performance and/or biology in trans women undergoing treatment, what should happen for sport? Would you allow inclusion, or would you exclude until it exists?” (2/)
This is so important because it reveals a “value system” and understanding of women’s sport. If you believe in inclusion in the absence of evidence, you’re saying that women’s sport should be OPEN to self-ID, and then evidence must be provided to prove unfairness or risk. (3/)
Read 16 tweets
24 Oct 20
This is a sound and accurate logical explanation of why this notion of “matching for performance” to sidestep male and female sports categories is flawed. There are so many problems with it, one being that it fundamentally undermined the meaning of sporting competitions. (1/)
Another way to frame or conceptualise this is to recognize that if a female and male athlete are “matched” by this “unicorn-algorithm matching strategy”, the female athlete will be relatively better in their original category than the male athlete in theirs. Fundamentally unequal
A woman would be in say the 95th percentile for metrics like strength, speed, power etc, vs a men with equal numbers who is at around the 50th to 60th percentile for men. This “competition” enables relatively mediocre males to compete “equally” against excellent, top 5% females
Read 7 tweets
9 Oct 20
The World Rugby Transgender guideline is now out, and fully available here: playerwelfare.worldrugby.org/gender You’ll also find a document called FAQs which tries to answer some common questions. We firmly believe it is the right thing in an emotive issue, for many reasons.
The Guideline is also accompanied by a visualisation that summarises the available physiological evidence that informed the Guideline. Here are those images, but I’d encourage consideration of all the issues - biological, legal, medical, social, ethical. All are in the doc & FAQs
As brief a summary as I can provide:
It is not possible to balance inclusion, safety and fairness. All the quality evidence, even if incomplete, strongly suggests that advantages are retained with welfare & performance implications. Therefore, players must compete in sex category
Read 10 tweets
9 Sep 20
Let me share a few thoughts on the latest #Semenya development - her appeal rejected by the Swiss Supreme court, World Athletics policy supported (pretty strongly too). We are planning a short pod on this tomorrow too, but here are a few thoughts… (1/…)
First, we’ve spoken a lot about transgender athletes recently. That has many elements to it. This has even more, and it’s really an unsolvable situation. It’s been present for nearly 100 years in sport, some horrendous attempts to manage it, and no clean solution in sight (2/…)
This decision establishes, for now, the policy that requires athletes with hyperandrogenism to lower T in order to compete. But not any hyperandrogenism, and not just any events. It covers only that caused by a selection of DSDs, where a person is 46XY, with testes, and thus (3/
Read 28 tweets
31 Aug 20
Last week, I posted a thread addressing a common criticism of transgender athlete policies, namely that they’re based on evidence in non-athletes. Here’s that thread, for a reminder. Today, I want to mull on another common issue raised in objection: (1/)
The objection is this: People argue that because trans women are often smaller, lighter, slower, weaker etc than biological females, it should be fine for them to compete as women. It’s an “overlap argument". Here’s one example of that thinking (this particular poll backfired): Image
The premise of the argument is this:
- Testosterone confers upon males advantages including size, strength, speed, power. This is why women have a separate category;
- If someone identifies as female (trans women), provided they’re not too big, strong, fast, they can compete as W
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!