Men’s and women’s sports are segregated in part because men have large amounts of testosterone which is like a naturally occurring performance enhancing drug. So, of course men will outperform women in most sports, even if all other factors like access and funding were equal.
But the chart leaves out sports where women can beat men or are very comparable like some gymnastics, ultra-long distance swimming & running, sailing, bowling, equine sports, shooting, rock climbing, racing etc.
Basically, sports that minimize the importance of muscle mass and maximize the importance of muscle efficiency and endurance tend to be much more competitive, but that’s missing from this chart which shows men being superior across the board.
"The metrics were compiled from publicly available sports federation databases and/or tournament/competition records."
"Although not an exhaustive list, examples of performance gaps in a range of sports with various durations, physiological performance determinants, skill components and force requirements are shown..." [0]
To clarify why I'm quoting these - I don't think they're trying to spin it one way or the other. Reading the report one can see that they say things like "which creates advantages in sports where levers influence force application, where longer limb/digit length is favorable", i.e. not all sports.
So, they're coming to the same conclusion. Either way - some small percentage of people are always going to be upset if they can't just do whatever they want.
> When comparing athletes who compete directly against one another, such as elite or comparable levels of school-aged athletes, the physiological advantages conferred by biological sex appear, on assessment of performance data, insurmountable.
The paper is missing that these differences are not insurmountable in all sports, and not even in all Olympic sports (they reference the IOC multiple times). It's an important distinction not addressed adequately in the chart or the paper IMO.
> In this review, we aim to assess whether evidence exists to support the assumption that testosterone suppression in transgender women removes these advantages.
If your study is designed to analyze the fairness of different testosterone levels in all Olympic sports (or a cross-section of all sports) in an un-biased way, then you should include data on all Olympic sports (curling, artistic gymnastics, artistic swimming, equestrian, fencing, figure skating, marathon swimming, rhythmic gymnastics, sailing, rock climbing, surfing, table tennis, etc.), or at least include varying types of sports like endurance sports, dexterity sports, artistic sports, equine sports, etc.
Maybe they just don't have data for those other sports, but then at least include a prominent caveat that this data is incomplete and is not a good representation of all sports or even all Olympic sports, or limit the scope of your paper to what your more narrow analysis actually is.
> Of course, different sports select for different physiological characteristics—an advantage in one discipline may be neutral or even a disadvantage in another—but examination of a variety of record and performance metrics in any discipline reveals there are few sporting disciplines where males do not possess performance advantage over females as a result of the physiological characteristics affected by testosterone.
Correct, but why not name those sports and include them in the chart? Apparently the authors know that these sports exist enough to acknowledge that they are "few" in number.
Just a little too much of an agenda wrapped in science for my taste. I don't think it's the best chart to be promoting, because it's incomplete and paints a picture that male sporting dominance over females is "insurmountable", when in fact "dominant in many areas, but comparable in a few areas" is a much more accurate conclusion.
That said, I don't think it's hate speech by any means, just a poor chart from a poor paper with incomplete data.
> "Solemn declaration" isn't exactly what you want to read in a paper that's free of bias.
You got that exactly wrong. No bias is being displayed by that quote because they're simply describing IOC criteria.
The full quote is:
"Accordingly, the IOC determined criteria by which transgender women may be eligible to compete in the female category. These include a solemn declaration that her gender identity is female and the maintenance of total serum testosterone levels below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to competing and during competition."
Sorry, I didn't continue reading the rest of your comment.
Why does everyone only focus on the hormones as the major difference between men and women? Men and women's skeletal structure differ in a significant way. Men are larger generally and hence have larger lungs. All of these differences add up.
But the chart leaves out sports where women can beat men or are very comparable like some gymnastics, ultra-long distance swimming & running, sailing, bowling, equine sports, shooting, rock climbing, racing etc.
Basically, sports that minimize the importance of muscle mass and maximize the importance of muscle efficiency and endurance tend to be much more competitive, but that’s missing from this chart which shows men being superior across the board.