this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
418 points (98.8% liked)

Damn, that's interesting!

4688 readers
1 users here now

  1. No clickbait
  2. No Racism and Hate speech
  3. No Imgur Gallery Links
  4. No Infographics
  5. Moderator Discretion
  6. Repost Guidelines
  7. No videos over 15 minutes long
  8. No "Photoshopped" posts
  9. Image w/ text posts must be sourced in comments

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
9Q6u7hroWkwW9@lemmy.ml
418
Birthplaces of the 100 fastest 10km runners of all time (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by sjmarf@sh.itjust.works to c/damnthatsinteresting@lemmy.ml
84 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Did you mean 'yes'. Because the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages

[–] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

the article you share concludes that trans women have no advantage which is greater than other biological advantages

Noit doesn't. You are misrepresenting it, or misuing the word 'concludes'. It never says anything like "we conclude' that there is no advantage". The actual conclusion is on p40-41 and can more honestly be phrased as "we cannot conclude that there's a definite advantage. Strength is a possible exception, but how do we even know strength is relevant to sport?" ("Additional biomarkers (such as handgrip strength, hip angle, bone density) have been used uncritically in positivist biological studies to demonstrate cis men’s purported biological advantages over cis women, but there is not sufficient evidence these measures are salient to the question of trans women’s participation.")