Wow, look at that top tweet about sports. The post he's replying to is A++++ lolcow argumentation and rhetoric. "If we already know the 6'6 person plays basketball better than the 5'6 person, we may as well shut down athletics!"
And then Jake ups the ante with one of the most clearly bogus statements he's made all year, and that's an incredibly tough bracket to compete in. First he says stuff about bone density and muscle mass that even the most asspatting of pro-trans studies haven't said (at
absolute most they've said that T suppression/estrogen hormone therapy reduces the muscles to lower than their previous ranges, but not to female ranges -- the only thing they can show is below female ranges on
any MTFs is testosterone, and only on the eunuchs among them).
Then, the doozy: "We'd be worse off than anyone we competed against." OK, Jake, what an interesting idea. So MTF competitors should clearly be, if they can even make it into women's sports, middle-of-the-road players if they try their absolute hardest to overcome the clear hurdle of testosterone suppression. Except that's not what happens: when MTFs join sports, they do win, and they don't
just win, they set records. When FTMs juice with all the T they can handle, they end up at the back of the pack of the male team, even if they were champions before.
It's one of the most sexist assumptions of the entire trans movement that sports performance (and the differentiation between male and female performance) is almost entirely contingent on sex hormones, which they believe are also responsible for masculine and feminine personalities. The entire idea that women's bodies are different from men's in any other way, or that being the sex that gestates the young of our species might have impacts beyond what can be altered with hormone therapy, is beyond them.
For all that people like Avery Edison and Jake Alley like to talk about intersex people, none of them will talk about XY people who have complete androgen insensitivity (meaning that they develop, except for a lack of reproductive parts, very much like a genetic female and are raised as girls, often not finding out anything's different until they don't get a period).
Women (yup, XY
women, because they're brought up as girls and no one who isn't their doctor or someone they've told would ever know there's anything male about them - a good test is 'would this person get their clit cut off if they were born in Egypt?') with CAIS do look like women, but on average, some things are fairly different about them. In spite of never having had sensitivity to testosterone and not producing it, to the point where they never develop male genitalia, they grow 4-6" taller than the average normal, 46XX woman. They're also more likely to be attracted to women than normal 46XX women. They have higher grip strength and bone density as well as a fair number of other differences that aren't outside the range of possibility for natal women but which would be much less likely.
Sex testing for Olympic athletes identified that a fair number of very strong athletic performers in the women's division were 46XY women with CAIS. If testosterone and the body's response to it was so critical to athletic performance that testosterone levels should be the defining criterion of our sports divisions, you'd expect to see exactly
zero of these athletes in elite competition, because their bodies are physically incapable of generating a testosterone response. Yet instead, the opposite was true, and there's a far greater proportion of CAIS people in elite athletics than in the normal population.
Troon science requires flat-earther levels of science denialism.
