90

26 comments

[–] Cailin 30 points Edited

One of the main contentions by the governing body centers around questionable data from World Rugby, which implemented a much-discussed ban on transgender women at elite levels two years ago. The data includes a stat that claims there is a ”160-percent advantage in punching force for a male versus a female boxer”

Questionable data? Questionable? Everyone in the world who hasn’t completely lost their mind to this bs would be able to tell you men have an advantage over women in sports. No sane person really needs data to know this. To call it “questionable data” is just nonsensical.

If our bodies are so similar and men have so little advantage, then why aren’t women able to defend themselves against rape, assault and murder? If women were able to fight off an attacker - do they think the statistics of women raped and/or killed by men would be so high?

If our bodies are so similar and men have so little advantage, then why aren’t women able to defend themselves against rape, assault and murder? If women were able to fight off an attacker - do they think the statistics of women raped and/or killed by men would be so high?

This is what needs to be said and said much much louder now to debunk all this bullshit not just in sports. Too many girls today really think women have the same physical strength as men.

Damn, I missed that one. They've all lost their damn minds... I bet the writer knows what sex would punch them harder

If our bodies are so similar and men have so little advantage, then why aren’t women able to defend themselves against rape, assault and murder? If women were able to fight off an attacker - do they think the statistics of women raped and/or killed by men would be so high?

Exactly.

[–] DonnaFemina 3 points Edited

"Everyone in the world who hasn’t completely lost their mind to this bs would be able to tell you men have an advantage over women in sports"

This is so easy to prove.

Just ask people to google the male and female world records over the past century in literally every sport. Or to be exact, every sport in which speed and/or strength are tested. So not equestrian sports, not target shooting... Anyway:

Men's and women's records in the 1000-meter race over the past century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1000_metres_world_record_progression

The most recent male vs. female records in a range of track and field events (scroll to section 2, Comparing the World Records): https://zigapskraba.com/2016/09/15/womens-world-records-compared-against-mens-world-records-in-track-field/

Men's and women's records in a range of swimming events: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_swimming

...etc.

The ONLY sports where women outperform men are rhythmic gymnastics and marathon swimming. The basic idea of rhythmic gymnastics is contortionism. Women are more flexible than men, and there's simply a biological ceiling for men trying to compete with women.

Marathon swimming? That's biological, too. Here's an article written by an amazingly brave soul in 2020 https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/why-women-have-beaten-men-in-marathon-swimming/

Swimmers have biological differences that affect their performance according to their sex. Women have lower hemoglobin levels, oxygen supply, and do not develop as much muscular power. Therefore, in sprint events, women are quite far from reaching men. However, ultra-distance swimming is a different story. With time, they have been getting closer and have even beaten the men.

One of the main factors that affect and benefit women on their performance in ultra-distance swimming is their body fat. According to Knechtle, women are better at fat burning over longer distances than men. He averaged that women marathon swimmers have between 30.7 and 31.3% of body fat, while men have between 18.8-20.2%. The higher the fat percentage, the better the buoyancy and insulation against cold water.

Maybe "Veronica Ivy" has some new possibilities on the horizon. He's got plenty of fat.

Body fat? But that would mean fat men have an advantage, so men could simply fatten up a bit to beat the women.

They would probably say the statistics are wrong. That women really want it.

You’re right - that is exactly the type of thing that would be said. And then they would start talking about how many trans people are murdered every day.

Their "gotcha" is that supposedly HRT makes them "weaker", completely ignoring the fact that in general TIMs will have more fast twitch muscle fibers (making them stronger), better VO2 max capabilities (allowing more oxygen into their bodies during sporting events), longer limbs, etc. These are ingrained in their very DNA and taking estrogen will never erase that.

supposedly HRT makes them "weaker"

Even if it does, becoming weaker than they used to be is not the same thing as becoming no stronger than women.

I love this trend. It's like everyone KNEW it was a problem but was waiting for someone to go first.

Good. I really don't want female boxers having to get killed on TV before people decide that maybe it's not such a great idea.

“The safety of, and fairness for, female boxers is not up for negotiation. Boxing New Zealand will not be implementing gender self-identification in the Male or Female categories.”

How long before the NZ government whines about this?

The NZ govt can set itself out to sea on a raft. They can drift to Canada and take our malicious govt too.

Good, because those are sex-class categories, not gender categories.

one by one the bricks fall out of the wall: indemnity and liability for future injuries likely behind this. No matter the stated "justification" of fairness.

Good thing too: better to save women's sports, and prevent injuries (read: lawsuits/liability) than have women beat up on live TV for the fun of it.

[–] DonnaFemina 4 points Edited

indemnity and liability for future injuries likely behind this

Yes. The insurance industry is a friend to the GC movement, because insurers can't ignore physical reality -- it would cost them too much money.

Young men (under 25) are much more dangerous drivers than young women, so their car insurance costs more. Boxing matches that pit men against women are much more likely to cause serious injuries, so the insurance costs more. Ditto rugby and every other contact sport.

And as lawsuits over "gender affirming care" (surgical butchery and life altering hormones) continue happening, guess who's going to pay? And then guess who's going to change the rules so doctors can't do that anymore? When medical associations and ethics boards fail, insurers still tell doctors what they can and can't do. Things that harm people cost money, so the insurers say hell no.

Does anyone here work in the insurance industry? This would be an interesting issue to push, because every single thing you might suggest would be for the entirely rational reason of trying to accurately measure risk and save money.

A few lawsuits in, this madness will be stopped. Once sports teams or franchises cannot get insurance, we'll see a shit tonne of "studies" confirming safety issues. Like any fool really needs a "study". Jeez o'pete.

This is why I send my donations to WoLF. They are going the legal route, since apparently appealing to people's intelligence is getting us nowhere.