Quote (duffman316 @ Oct 20 2020 10:47pm)

that's a reportable offense :huh: ?

Quote (ReturnFormer @ Oct 20 2020 08:33pm)

the solution is really quite simple. since women are at a bilogical disadvantage when it comes to sports, have a biological womens only division. kinda like how they have the special olympics for those who have further disadvantages. then you have the general division, where anyone who wants to can compete, male, female, trans, etc. theres really no need for a mens only division since men almost always have the advantage. if a biological woman or trans person wants to compete there, why not let them?

Quote (balrog66 @ Oct 20 2020 03:32pm)

Women are winning some ultra-endurance events due to their recovery being better than men. (see https://www.bbc.com/news/world-49284389 )

If women were pushed as hard to be competitive (which ofc also is partially due to test) as men I think esp in that category they'd be more dominant.

Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 21 2020 07:02am)

ive been convinced based on some studies that women are better at the 100+ mile marathon event. 100% they are better at long distance ocean swims, such as the english channel swim.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Oct 21 2020 03:48pm)

Ive read theyre better at rock climbing as well since their muscles are smaller and they fatigue slower

Quote (Thor123422 @ Oct 21 2020 08:48am)

Ive read theyre better at rock climbing as well since their muscles are smaller and they fatigue slower

Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 21 2020 08:34am)

ANY sport pushed into the range of mega endurance IMO either has women ahead biologically OR in some cases the sample size is so small we can't see which sex has an advantage because like 5 people have done it.

rock climbing i tend to not think they'd have an advantage, generally, it would take some serious endurance requirements for them to edge ahead imo. and in that case on a multi-day climb men would likely win out. but im no rock climber.

Quote (sir_lance_bb @ Oct 20 2020 09:08pm)

The main issue is males receive more testosterone while in the fetus. Not only does this cause the main sex characteristics , it also has affects on the central nervous system that means males on average has significantly more strength than females. And then it happens again at puberty.

So even if someone transitions later on and their test levels that would be within the average normal female range, that person is still going to have an advantage as your central nervous system doesn't magically just lose all your strength because your test is now low and pretty much will retain athletic capability that outclasses females. This is also a factor with PEDs/Steroid use outside of this transgender issue. It's been proven that steroid use more than likely results in life time strength benefits and increased ability to build and maintain muscle mass later on. And the adaptation to the increased ability to train with more loads results in central nervous system adaptations that most likely will remain for life which opens up potential discussions that maybe steroid use is a permanent enhancement to performance even after 1-3 years.

There's no way to make this fair unless somehow science completely removes the biological reality that XY individuals are going to have more strength than XX.

Anyone who thinks test levels testing can somehow make all this fair just doesn't have a basic understanding of how strength development works.