[DC 86]

I disagree. The number will surely be small but the impact could be significant.

Renee Richards was ranked 20th in the world at age 44. In her mid-forties she reached the third round of US Open singles and the final of US Open doubles. John McEnroe was slammed for saying that the #700 men's player would beat Serena Williams but the reality is that an NCAA champion or mid-level pro could be grand slam champion if they competed in the women's draw. A seven foot male college basketball player would surely be dominant in the WNBA. Surely a male professional boxer or MMA athlete would be dominant against women. I understand that athletes who transition have to artificially lower their testosterone levels but the residual benefits of puberty, not to mention height and length, are still very relevant.

Lia Thomas was a good, Ivy League swimmer when competing with males. But just one or two higher level athletes who transition in each sport would significantly impact women's sports as a whole.

These are not all equivalent examples.

7-foot male college basketball player in the WNBA? Yes, probably would do quite well, given that 7 feet is quite tall even for men. Would have to assume that the player was skilled though.

Any given male professional boxer/MMA athlete dominating vs. women? Not necessarily—not all men are inherently faster and stronger and more talented than all women and fighting is an area in which skill and speed count for a lot.

A mid-level male tennis pro or NCAA champ automatically winning a grand slam against women? I don’t think so. That vastly undersells the talent of the best female tennis players.

You're vastly underestimating the physical differences between male and female athletes. Of course I'm not comparing accomplished female athletes to random males off the street. But a college (or low ranked professional) male athlete will beat even a female champion in their sport.

Matthew Bolling ran 100 meters in 9.98 when he was still in high school, the women's world record is 10.49, and only five times has a woman ever run under 10.72.

There's something called the Universal Tennis Rating which is an objective system used to match players; it's widely used for tournaments at both the national and local level. Novan Djokovic has the highest current rating (16.30), while the #1,000 ranked pro player is rated at 13.26. The current top college player (Ben Shelton, Florida) is rated at 14.40 while the #100 college player is at 13.25. The #1 ranked women's pro in the world (Ashleigh Barty) has a rating of 13.40, which is the same as the #874 male professional and the #66 college player (who coincidentally is Axel Geller.)

When Tara coached the 1996 Olympic dream team they scrimmaged against ad hoc local men (with no male players over 6'2"). You can research how that went. A 7' college basketball player in the WNBA would be like Wilt Chamberlain in the NBA in the 1960s, but even a shorter college player would excel in a woman's league. Any man on the UFC roster would smash the women champions in that sport, I speak from experience as someone who trains and competes in the sport, who has actually sparred against highly accomplished women fighters in the gym. I suppose this is anecdotal but I doubt you will find basketball players, soccer players and fighters who believe otherwise. As a final point, the FC Dallas Under-15 academy team beat the US women's national soccer team 5-2 in a scrimmage at at time that the USWNT was ranked #1 in the world.

I feel awkward writing all this because a man being able to beat a woman doesn't make him a better athlete or better competitor or make women's sports inherently inferior to men's sports, and I don't want the above to be interpreted as being disrespectful to great women athletes. A woman champion is much more impressive and someone I respect more than a middling male athlete; the male athlete being able to defeat the female champion is simply as a matter of biology, not superiority as an athlete. The Stanford men's basketball team would easily beat the Stanford women's basketball team but I feel comfortable saying that our women are "better" and that the women are far more worthy of praise and adulation. That's not the point. The point is that a reasonably accomplished male athlete who transitions to a female identity - even after some amount of testosterone suppression or hormonal adjustment - is likely to compete at the highest levels against cis female athletes.

---

For me, I just struggle when people bring up the biological advantage as their only response because all of the athletes that are competing at a high level were born with a biological advantage.

People are born with natural biological advantages. Transitioning to a different gender is actively creating an artificial advantage, that's the difference.

[DC 86]

I disagree. The number will surely be small but the impact could be significant.

Renee Richards was ranked 20th in the world at age 44. In her mid-forties she reached the third round of US Open singles and the final of US Open doubles. John McEnroe was slammed for saying that the #700 men's player would beat Serena Williams but the reality is that an NCAA champion or mid-level pro could be grand slam champion if they competed in the women's draw. A seven foot male college basketball player would surely be dominant in the WNBA. Surely a male professional boxer or MMA athlete would be dominant against women. I understand that athletes who transition have to artificially lower their testosterone levels but the residual benefits of puberty, not to mention height and length, are still very relevant.

Lia Thomas was a good, Ivy League swimmer when competing with males. But just one or two higher level athletes who transition in each sport would significantly impact women's sports as a whole.

These are not all equivalent examples.

7-foot male college basketball player in the WNBA? Yes, probably would do quite well, given that 7 feet is quite tall even for men. Would have to assume that the player was skilled though.

Any given male professional boxer/MMA athlete dominating vs. women? Not necessarily—not all men are inherently faster and stronger and more talented than all women and fighting is an area in which skill and speed count for a lot.

A mid-level male tennis pro or NCAA champ automatically winning a grand slam against women? I don’t think so. That vastly undersells the talent of the best female tennis players.

You're vastly underestimating the physical differences between male and female athletes. Of course I'm not comparing accomplished female athletes to random males off the street. But a college (or low ranked professional) male athlete will beat even a female champion in their sport.

Matthew Bolling ran 100 meters in 9.98 when he was still in high school, the women's world record is 10.49, and only five times has a woman ever run under 10.72.

There's something called the Universal Tennis Rating which is an objective system used to match players; it's widely used for tournaments at both the national and local level. Novan Djokovic has the highest current rating (16.30), while the #1,000 ranked pro player is rated at 13.26. The current top college player (Ben Shelton, Florida) is rated at 14.40 while the #100 college player is at 13.25. The #1 ranked women's pro in the world (Ashleigh Barty) has a rating of 13.40, which is the same as the #874 male professional and the #66 college player (who coincidentally is Axel Geller.)

When Tara coached the 1996 Olympic dream team they scrimmaged against ad hoc local men (with no male players over 6'2"). You can research how that went. A 7' college basketball player in the WNBA would be like Wilt Chamberlain in the NBA in the 1960s, but even a shorter college player would excel in a woman's league. Any man on the UFC roster would smash the women champions in that sport, I speak from experience as someone who trains and competes in the sport, who has actually sparred against highly accomplished women fighters in the gym. I suppose this is anecdotal but I doubt you will find basketball players, soccer players and fighters who believe otherwise. As a final point, the FC Dallas Under-15 academy team beat the US women's national soccer team 5-2 in a scrimmage at at time that the USWNT was ranked #1 in the world.

I feel awkward writing all this because a man being able to beat a woman doesn't make him a better athlete or better competitor or make women's sports inherently inferior to men's sports, and I don't want the above to be interpreted as being disrespectful to great women athletes. A woman champion is much more impressive and someone I respect more than a middling male athlete; the male athlete being able to defeat the female champion is simply as a matter of biology, not superiority as an athlete. The Stanford men's basketball team would easily beat the Stanford women's basketball team but I feel comfortable saying that our women are "better" and that the women are far more worthy of praise and adulation. That's not the point. The point is that a reasonably accomplished male athlete who transitions to a female identity - even after some amount of testosterone suppression or hormonal adjustment - is likely to compete at the highest levels against cis female athletes.

---

For me, I just struggle when people bring up the biological advantage as their only response because all of the athletes that are competing at a high level were born with a biological advantage.

People are born with natural biological advantages. Transitioning to a different gender is actively creating an artificial advantage, that's the difference.