"Look, it's only one candle, and the house hasn't burnt down. Let's light another."

In fact what did happen was that males with DSDs who would have tested SRY+ and don't have CAIS or Swyer were able to take medals from females, in a grossly unfair period from 2008 to 2016.

there's no such thing, it's an archaic term. Today people with ambiguous sexual characteristics are referred to as having DSDs or "Differences in Sexual Development". My understanding is that most people in this category find the term "hermaphrodite" inappropriate.

OK, yes, not "definitive" - you are correct. But in a situation where all existing evidence points to retained male advantage, by the precautionary principle, the burden of proof is on those arguing there is no advantage.

you are conflating gender stereotypes with sex differences. Of course there are and always have been strong women and delicate men. The regressive position is the one that says that some people who don't conform to stereotypes are somehow excluded from their sex class.

well at minimum it suggests that anyone taking estrogen for less than 36 months should be excluded from the women's category.
Absent proof that estrogen *ever* levels the field, the current categories should be preserved.

I don't know anything about you or your body or your hormones but I acknowledge that exogenous estrogen can cause breast growth and have other effects on the body, including a reduction in muscular strength. I don't think it changes anyone's sex, or erases all differences between a man and a woman.

that's not true. A recent review of the evidence concluded that "values for strength, LBM and muscle area in transwomen remain above those of cisgender women, even after 36 months of hormone therapy."
bjsm.bmj.com/content/55/1...

It's nothing to do with morals, it's to do with the competitive nature of sport. Either abolish sex categories altogether and accept that women will no longer compete (because they'll almost never win), or preserve a category for biological women only.

hormones can make changes. So can surgery. So can padded bras. None of those changes are sex changes and none of them erase all of the differences between men and women that necessitate sex categories in sports in order to preserve fair competition.

weird and scary. I try not to think about how many of them are really out there, because I'm sure many of them are actually dangerous. Many believe they're effectively or literally fighting Nazis and therefore any tactics, including violence, are justified.

Yes, and I wish the Democrats and everyone else had resisted going along with it.

one can hope, but I wouldn't get too optimistic about that. I think that you're doing great work though - many non-crazy, non-fanatic people haven't been exposed to the facts.

doesn't matter one way or another. They're secondary sex characteristics and whether you, I or anyone of either sex get them through hormones, surgery or bra-stuffing, they're not what determines anyone's sex. If I paint my dog black and white, he's still a dog, not a zebra.

you can't persuade someone with reason out of a position they've come to by faith.

Unbelievable - the man who lied about Hillsbrough and to this day the Sun not stocked in Liverpool

The pain and hurt that man has caused with the lies he printed about Hillsborough should have been the end of him.
Robbie Gibb should resign for this error of judgment. I’m not joking

Absolute filth.

You're confused. Sports aren't separated into gender categories, they're separated by sex. Gendered sports *would* be a joke, but biological sex categories allow for fair competition because sex does affect sports performance.

You keep saying it if you like, repetition won't make it true.