I’m not going to assume malicious intent from you but what you’re doing in practice is JAQing off.
If you care about getting to the facts to form an opinion, as you say you do, then you could have carefully read through the study I linked, or even the ones you posted, before you posted them. That’s what the several people who responded to you did.
I’m going to disengage now. Good luck to you on your fact finding mission.
The first link does not support your position. It comes to broadly the same findings as the one I linked. The second link is to a DW article that haphazardly hyperlinks to a couple of small-scale studies (that were themselves included in the meta-analysis from your first link).
The idea of a preturnatural sporting advantage for trans women in womens sports is taken as an axiomatic truth by most people when this issue comes up. In fact the evidence suggests that over the first few years of GAHT, trans atheletes’ physical performance approaches that of their cis peers. They tend to remain in the same percentile of performance for their true gender post transition as they achieved in their assigned gender pre-transition.
The article I linked was a large-scale meta-analysis (52 studies, n=6485) that is looking at a broader evidence base. At the very least, it is reasonable to question the base assumption that there is an obvious performence difference in the first place. Especially when that assumption is being used to justify the exclusion of trans people from yet another aspect of public life, both in professional sports and in for-fun, low-stakes highschool and local sports.
There is no good evidence that transgender women who have been on GAHT for two years have any physical advantages over cisgender women. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/60/3/198
I did, and i did.
I didn’t say you were a consipiricist and I specifically didn’t ascribe to you malicious intent.
Perhaps in the spirit of learning, you could maybe read into that rhetorical technique a little. The wikipedia article maybe focuses a little too much on conspiracy theorists but it’s a well-developed concept and it is in fact what you are doing.
You are crowding the conversation with questions that you’ve not sincerely attempted to answer for yourself, instead you saw my comment, googled for 30 seconds and dumped two links in here, that you didn’t read, as if they were some kindof gotcha. You’ve forced several other people to take time to engage you in the substance of your questions, which they, and I, did.
Nobody is silencing you, I’m disengaging because this is the sum-total of the amount of energy I’m willing to put into this conversation with a stranger, whose motives I don’t fully trust. You are of course free to continue crashing out.