3 ms·
None of those articles argue that men and women are biologically equivalent in all things. If I might summarize, they mostly argue that hormonal arguments towa
by nickelpro 3y ago
None of those articles argue that men and women are biologically equivalent in all things.
If I might summarize, they mostly argue that hormonal arguments towards unfair advantages in certain sports understate the already existing disparities in hormonal distribution in a given sex. That a given trans athlete might be less hormonally advantaged than a cis woman who competes uncontroversially.
The latter articles are even less supportive of your point, and mostly discuss the uncontroversial point that binary biological sex is an incomplete model of humanity as a whole.
These are reasonable and evidence-based discussions to have.
- bko 3y ago> the uncontroversial point that binary biological sex is an incomplete model of humanity as a whole. Why does sex have to be a complete model of humanity? It's real and useful. For instance as a male I don't bother getting mamograms. Sex tells you more about predisposition of health conditions than any other factor apart from maybe age and weight. Let's not pretend it doesn't exist
- AlexandrB 3y ago> Let's not pretend it doesn't exist This is a common straw man. No trans advocate I've heard pretends that sex doesn't exist. Indeed, what would be the point of medically transitioning if one thought sex wasn't real? Instead it seems like trans opponents like to pretend that sex is the only thing that exists or that gender identity and expression do not exist. Additionally, sex is more complicated than a binary m/f - the obvious examples of intersex individuals or androgen insensitivity[1] come to mind. So yes, sex exists, it's not a binary state, and it's connected to but not fully descriptive of gender identity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrom...