LogFAQs > #967398636

Proto_Spark posted...

I don't really like this argument. Suggesting that sports are just inherently unfair gives the impression that trans women in sports are just genetically better off, when there's very limited evidence to suggest that, especially with the amount of HRT that's required often for trans athletes to actually compete (things like NCAA and the Olympics have had HRT requirements for decades)

Using the argument "Sports are inherently unfair" just gives a lot of weight to transphobic arguments that haven't done nearly enough work to earn that. Not to mention it leads to things like "well then why do we bother with women's sports at all?"

The section of HRT is... weird. 2 of the 3 studies are based on trans men vs. trans women, When the actual debate is about trans women vs. cis women or trans men vs cis men. And the only study shared that even comes close comes with the caveat of "this isn't actually how we measure athletic performance". It certainly doesn't do a particularly good job of saying trans women are just empirically better equipped for sports against cis women, which is how they just start the next section assuming.

Theres also a lot of ignorance about how HRT actually works: mostly cis people way underestimate how powerful it really is. This isnt just limited to laypeople either: a lot of doctors are ignorant too. Its rooted in the erroneous belief that a male person and a female person are fundamentally different from each other, when the biggest difference by far is just from their hormone levels.