several orders of magnitude more of an advantage than trans women have.
Have there even been studies which can back up this claim¿? Hell have there even been studies which even measure how much of an advantage having smaller calves and ankles gives¿?
the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages
Noit doesn’t. You are misrepresenting it, or misuing the word ‘concludes’. It never says anything like “we conclude’ that there is no advantage”. The actual conclusion is on p40-41 and can more honestly be phrased as “we cannot conclude that there’s a definite advantage. Strength is a possible exception, but how do we even know strength is relevant to sport?” (“Additional biomarkers (such as handgrip strength, hip angle, bone density) have been
used uncritically in positivist biological studies to demonstrate cis men’s purported
biological advantages over cis women, but there is not sufficient evidence these
measures are salient to the question of trans women’s participation.”)
9 Conclusion
There is no firm basis available in evidence to indicate that trans women have a consistent and measurable overall performance benefit after 12 months of testosterone suppression. While an advantage in terms of Lean Body Mass (LBM), Cross Section Area (CSA) and strength may persist statistically after 12 months, there is no evidence that this translates to any performance advantage as compared to elite cis-women athletes of similar size and height
They’re resorting to saying “trans women are stronger than their competitors, but how do we even know that being stronger is advantageous in sport???”
Have there even been studies which can back up this claim¿? Hell have there even been studies which even measure how much of an advantage having smaller calves and ankles gives¿?
Nope: https://www.cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/pdf/transgenderwomenathletesandelitesport-ascientificreview-e-final.pdf
Did you mean ‘yes’. Because the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages
Noit doesn’t. You are misrepresenting it, or misuing the word ‘concludes’. It never says anything like “we conclude’ that there is no advantage”. The actual conclusion is on p40-41 and can more honestly be phrased as “we cannot conclude that there’s a definite advantage. Strength is a possible exception, but how do we even know strength is relevant to sport?” (“Additional biomarkers (such as handgrip strength, hip angle, bone density) have been used uncritically in positivist biological studies to demonstrate cis men’s purported biological advantages over cis women, but there is not sufficient evidence these measures are salient to the question of trans women’s participation.”)
They’re resorting to saying “trans women are stronger than their competitors, but how do we even know that being stronger is advantageous in sport???”
You need to work on your reading comprehension. XD
Do you think that an advantage in terms of strength translates to any performance advantage?
I think that “maybe” having an advantage in terms of strength is an admission that the research is incomplete.
The document is full of admissions that the research is incomplete.
Hence, my comment to Sentau’s question about the research.