We *have* been using toilets and so forth with transwomen for decades. Maybe some we clock, and no idea how many we don't (because we don't).
It was a social contract - a compromise - for a *specific demographic* who were either completely undetectable as male, or for whom we rarely encountered but for whom we, presumably understanding male violence, shared refuge.
This is a 200 yard freestyle analysis of Lia Thomas, a transgender woman and US college swimmer. Lia began transition last (Covid-cancelled) season, having competed in male competition for the three previous years.
Pre-transition, Lia's PB was 0.21s off the NCAA female record for the 200 yard free, set in 2015 by 5 time Olympic gold medalist Missy Franklin.
Lia's most recent time is -4.2% slower than the pre-transition PB.
Lia's winning margin in the race was +5.6%. The times for the remainder of the field clustered within 5.5% of eachother.
That is, Lia was (very) slightly further ahead of Bridget O'Leary in P2 than O'Leary was to the slowest finisher.
In February 2020, Dr Colin Wright @swipewright (evolutionary biologist) and I (developmental biologist) wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, called The Dangerous Denial Of Sex.
@RichardDawkins@SwipeWright In it, we discuss the biological basis of sex, and how attempts to deconstruct the material reality of sex (social construct! spectrum!) present potential harms for women's rights, for gay rights and for dysphoric children.
For this op-ed, we were vilified.
@RichardDawkins@SwipeWright Since then, following the treatment of writer Suzanne Moore @suzanne_moore after she raised questions about sex and gender, we, with Dr Pam Thompson @egipam and Prof Dave Curtis @davecurtis314 argued for a rethink of discourse on sex, particularly in scientific publications.
Let’s imagine a battlefield RPG. Each player is randomly allocated a character. Each character is described by a set of metrics - SIZE, SPEED, STRENGTH, STAMINA, SKILL – from 0-10 points.
At BASELINE, all characters have broadly similar metrics, around 5 points for each.
One character may score a point higher on SIZE and a point lower on SKILL. Another scores a point higher on STAMINA but sacrifices a STRENGTH point. And so forth.
How does this look on the battlefield?
There’s not much overall difference between players right now. It’s pretty much luck who wins any given fight, and we'd expect a broad share of victories across players over multiple battles.
1. Males are, as a class, better athletes than females. 2. Males have, as a class, higher testosterone (T) levels than females. 3. T has well-researched effects on sports relevant physiology. 4. The effects of T on sports relevant physiology happens during male puberty.
So what on earth can he possibly mean when he says that performance is not proportional to natural T level? More, that is it *obviously* not and anyway who thinks otherwise must be stupid or something.
I’ve read it about ten times and it’s just a hot mess of platitudes (not always bad), overlapping concepts, absent definitions and inconsistent ‘rules’.
Devil’s advocate: I could have written a better framework document for them.