Armstronglivs wrote:
Dijon Gebremustard wrote:
actually i have yet to get a single fact wrong, including this one, while you have gotten many wrong. thank you for pointing out the dimorphism of testosterone, though, because that's been a central point of my argument that goes against everything you've said previously about T not being a fair dividing line between sport categories. the fact that T tends to extremes, as i pointed out earlier, is strong evidence that it's a much better dividing line than chromosomal testing, which can't be altered by humans and isn't the causal factor for increased performance, only a correlatory factor.
Armstronglivs, i'll say again, have you ever seen Bekele run? or any pro distance runner for that matter? these people are not tall and any accredited coach will tell you that being large is a huge disadvantage in distance running. this is basic, elementary-school level physiology and it's astounding you can't accept this scientific reality. men are taller than women on average, and this generality extends to distance running -- but in this case the men are faster in spite of the tallness disadvantage due to, as you say, having increased testosterone -- a disadvantage that becomes evident when trans women transition and decrease their T to female levels, as we've already seen with June in her recent performances. perhaps the fact that you said "yet" in your comment above was a Freudian slip on your part. tell me, how does a 14:38 person go to 18:40 5K shape within a year despite consistent training? do you honestly think June is benefiting from her height when she runs 24 minute 4 miles?
again, name one "physical advantage" that you think men have over women that doesn't decrease to zero or negative on HRT -- remember the last time you did that, when i individually debunked each of the crack science points you parroted to no response from you? i'd gladly do it again. the relevant differences between men and women athletically in distance running are purely hormonal, not musculoskeletal, and this is shown both in science and in practice. indeed, the female body is the ideal form for distance running -- the only reason women are slower is because they don't have the testosterone, they don't have the big engine required for their small bodies.
by the way, again you mention the strongest evidence against your point of view and present it as if it somehow helps you. guess what -- Kratochvilova was good because she had more T than her female competitors, naturally or otherwise. an equitable women's playing field like the line I propose (and I should add, the line already accepted and legislated by today's IAAF) would mandate that Kratochvilova keep her T levels at female dimorhpic amounts. the physical changes you mention in Kratochvilova aren't "masculine" per se -- they are "testosterone-like", which we associate with masculinity but it's important to note that the root cause for these physical changes is the testosterone. the muscles she has are landmark indicators of increased testosterone, and these would grow on any born-female who was on increased testosterone and training for a year or longer (as they already have on Chris Mosier).
Semenya might lose less time because her testosterone levels may be "in between". it's not as much of a drop as someone like June who may have been born with higher levels of T. funny that T levels give us an actual measurable scale for this stuff while chromosomes only tell one part of the story, like looking at the correlation without the causal variable for increased performance, right? your total lie about 1:47 to 1:50s instead of 1:47 to 2:00 is also not based at all on science, and in fact totally contradicts the Harper study linked above. you continue to ignore basic scientific truths in pursuit of a biased vision.
now this is where your argument really starts to unravel. i understand using the word "biological male" to refer to people born male, but it's important for this conversation to note that by most biological markers, she is female on account of having female levels of T+E, and the resultant muscular changes (decreased pelvic size, decreased lung size) from maintaining such levels -- the only male biological markers left for her would be things like her height and her chromosomes, which have been proven to either be a hindrance or make no difference in distance running. and by the way, your idea about sports being exclusionary is a total falsehood -- black people, white people, gay people, have always been allowed to participate in sport (well not *always*, but please, i dare you use racial segregation to your advantage, i would love to see this coming from you). people born in East Africa are allowed to participate in sport despite having an abundance of slow-twitch muscle fibers compared to people born in the USA. but again, they can compete equitably because these differences are not substantial enough to necessitate separate categories.
again, totally wrong. June isn't "pretending" to be a female, her biological characteristics especially as they relate to long distance running are effectively female as i've outlined above. the reason for that, and as all evidence shows without a single point of evidence from you, is that reducing testosterone causes a domino effect in the body that actually shrinks pelvic size and decreases lung size and VO2max to levels at least equal to, if not far below female levels (more "feminine" if you will).
no, what you fail to understand is that this difference is based on skill ceiling, not baseline. so a mediocre male runner could not compete equitably with women because, theoretically, if he trained more and ran high mileage, due to his increased testosterone, he would then develop an unfair advantage on account of his increased ceiling. all the available literature points to T being the appropriate marker for this. the point of having a female category is, as Joanna Harper put it, "so women can win things", and this certainly holds true once June enters the mix as a woman -- one who deserves to win things just as much as, but not more or less than, other women. put differently, we separate into two based on an inherent biological dimorphism in testosterone level distribution, and June still conforms to that dimorphism as much as any other, just on the opposite end of it as she was born.
Of course, nothing you say is correctly either factually or logically but it does reflect perfectly your religious point of view on this subject. I am not interested in conversion, thank you.
there it is, friends - - the ultimate concession of defeat. note that there was never a single person in this thread who i refused to debate, no matter how abhorrent their views and their attacks- - even going to far as to systematically break down each of your points piecemeal style dozens of times. this isn't over, and i'll continue to take on your further flawed arguments in your response above. but let it be known that on this occasion, rather than take on my views, you said as plainly as possible that you couldn't. it speaks volumes to the indefensibility of your positions.
june finished her opener today, in 7th place 14:33 for 4K, second on her team to Frissell:
https://goeags.com/documents/2019/8/22/19wxClashINWResults.pdf?ismobile=truei predicted 14:20ish for 6th place above - - looks like i was pretty spot on, while all those who claimed that she would set records out the gate have been proven wrong again. i'll break it down a little more later, and i look forward to seeing if Eastwood improves throughout the season.