Science IOC transgender rules do not provide fair competition - Lifting weights with a beer belly at the Olympics is top Female physique or how to Transpeak working class people 101

Article: https://netherlandsnewslive.com/ioc-transgender-rules-do-not-provide-fair-competition/150006/
Archive: (X)
Original Dutch Article: https://nos.nl/artikel/2379979-transgenderregels-ioc-leveren-geen-eerlijke-competitie-op

IOC transgender rules do not provide fair competition
​

Lundberg: “There is no research showing that the therapy makes a difference in terms of performance advantage. In almost all studies the limit of five nanomoles was reached, but the effect on muscle mass and strength remained small.”


“Hormone therapy also has hardly any effect on removing the advantage that men have in strength and speed. Only one-fifth of the original benefit is lost due to testosterone suppression.”

An advantage that has to do not only with hormones and testosterone, but with other physical male characteristics. Lundberg: “After puberty, boys are taller and taller, and the difference is so big that in sport you have to have a separate women’s category to create a fair competition. Otherwise women will no longer become champions and they will not win medals.”

‘It does not work’​

Lundberg continues: “Maybe the IOC thought, ‘Let’s see if this works.’ We now have enough data to say, it doesn’t work. From that perspective, their current regulations are not supported by scientific evidence.”

The proposition that the current regulations lead to fair competition between born women and transgender women (born men who now go through life as women) thus seems built on quicksand. “That would be a lie,” said Lundberg. “That’s the issue: inclusion and fairness don’t go together. In the sports world it is either one or the other.”

‘IOC transgender rules do not provide fair competition’
Source link ‘IOC transgender rules do not provide fair competition’

Spoiler: Dutch Article

Transgenderregels IOC leveren geen eerlijke competitie op​

Er is geen enkel wetenschappelijk bewijs dat de huidige transgenderregelgeving van het Internationaal Olympisch Comité (IOC) deelname van transgenders aan de Olympische Spelen op een eerlijke manier mogelijk maakt. Dat zegt de Zweedse wetenschapper Tommy Lundberg in gesprek met de NOS.
Lundberg werkt voor de medische universiteit van Zweden, die jaarlijks de Nobelprijs voor de fysiologie of geneeskunde uitreikt. "Er zijn botsende belangen. We willen transgender sporters mee laten doen. Maar sport moet een keuze maken tussen inclusiviteit en eerlijkheid. Allebei gaat niet."
De discussie over transgenderdeelname aan de Olympische Spelen is actueel nadat de Nieuw-Zeelandse gewichthefster Laurel Hubbard zich plaatste voor de Olympische Spelen.
Om het mogelijk te maken dat transgenders deel kunnen nemen aan de Olympische Spelen, paste het IOC in 2016 de regels aan. Transmannen die als meisje zijn geboren, mogen zonder beperking meedoen. Transvrouwen, die als jongen zijn geboren, moeten twaalf maanden lang hormoontherapie hebben gevolgd en hun testosteronniveau mag niet boven de tien nanomol per liter uitkomen. Het doel van de regelgeving: een eerlijke competitie creëren.

Nauwelijks effect​

Lundberg deed in 2020 onderzoek naar de invloed van testosteron op de sportprestaties van transgenders. Volgens hem hebben de extra IOC-voorwaarden nauwelijks effect op het prestatieverschil. Hij ziet in studies dat transgenders bijvoorbeeld langer voordeel houden van een hardere strafcorner of een snellere service.

Lundberg: "Er is geen enkel onderzoek waaruit blijkt dat de therapie qua prestatievoordeel verschil maakt. In bijna alle onderzoeken werd de grens van vijf nanomol bereikt, maar bleef het effect op spiermassa en kracht gering."
"Ook de hormoontherapie heeft nauwelijks effect op het wegnemen van het voordeel dat mannen hebben aan kracht en snelheid. Slechts een vijfde van het oorspronkelijke voordeel valt weg door testosterononderdrukking."
Een voordeel dat niet alleen te maken heeft met hormonen en testosteron, maar met andere fysieke mannelijke kenmerken. Lundberg: "Na de pubertijd zijn jongens groter en langer, en dat verschil is zo groot, dat je in de sport een aparte vrouwencategorie moet hebben om een eerlijke competitie te creëren. Anders worden vrouwen geen kampioen meer en winnen ze geen medailles."

'Het werkt niet'​

Lundberg vervolgt: "Misschien heeft het IOC gedacht: 'laten we kijken of dit werkt'. We hebben nu genoeg data in handen om te zeggen: het werkt niet. Vanuit dat perspectief wordt hun huidige regelgeving niet ondersteund door wetenschappelijk bewijs."
De stelling dat de huidige regelgeving leidt tot een eerlijke competitie tussen geboren vrouwen en transgendervrouwen (geboren mannen die nu door het leven gaan als vrouw) lijkt dus gebouwd op drijfzand. "Dat zou een leugen zijn", aldus Lundberg. "Dat is het issue: inclusie en eerlijkheid gaan niet samen. In de sportwereld is het of het een of het ander."

 

[axfaxf]

Gotta love the "lol, just build a fleet with women size stuff, don´t be a bigot, guys!", coming from people that seems to never have been on a ship. I hope it´s a troll.

1) Space is tight. Way too tight for however many women needed to do menial tasks men can do in a heartbeat.
2) Time is of the essence. This is an emergency, not a tea party and we certainly don´t need more people getting in each others way. See 1).

 

[Oh Long Johnson]

No one is saying that? But it's never occured to you why a water pump is that shape and weight? A water pump is not some naturally occuring resource than can only be that size, weight, and design.

Do you want $600 toilet seats? Because this is how you wind up with $600 toilet seats.

 

[KateHikes14]

No one is saying that? But it's never occured to you why a water pump is that shape and weight? A water pump is not some naturally occuring resource than can only be that size, weight, and design.

This conversation highlights the fact that our military budget is way too high if we have retards considering sacrificing readiness for equality. It also makes me wistful for the days that we had one warmongering party rather than two.

 

[Calculus]

Why are you so damn determined to argue that true and honest women are as strong as men, and if they're not, various modifications should be made to universal equipment used by tens of thousands of men so that a handful of women could probably technically haul someone's ass out of a fire?

Not everything is sexism.

I never said women are as strong as men but that equipment is not designed for female needs which makes it harder for them to use the strength that they do have.

Equipment is not "universal" if more than 50% of the population can't use it and saying that it is, is sexism, especially as there is no reason to continue having it that way.

Redesign me a jerrycan, or a tanker bar.Or make it so a woman can drag a casualty trough the driver's hatch.Redesign me a drive sprocket that doesn't weigh 50 kilos, but also doesn't disintegrate from having to pull a 20 ton vehicle.Design me smaller roadwheels, but still keep the ground pressure bellow 0.8kilos per square centimetre.

It's just a complete coincidence that the requirements, equipment, and training around all of these items just happens to also coincide with being within the size and strength of the average man. Nothing at all to do with procedures and items being designed for those using them.

Gotta love the "lol, just build a fleet with women size stuff, don´t be a bigot, guys!", coming from people that seems to never have been on a ship. I hope it´s a troll.

1) Space is tight. Way too tight for however many women needed to do menial tasks men can do in a heartbeat.
2) Time is of the essence. This is an emergency, not a tea party and we certainly don´t need more people getting in each others way. See 1).

If space is tight then it makes more sense to have a crew of women as they are smaller.

And no, I'm not a troll. The forces themselves are finally starting to notice this and redesign equipment:

https://taskandpurpose.com/analysis/women-combat-gear-problem

https://www.economist.com/international/2021/04/24/female-soldiers-are-changing-how-armed-forces-work

Edit: I found a paper that goes into much more detail about this if anyone is interested, see attachment.

This conversation highlights the fact that our military budget is way too high if we have retards considering sacrificing readiness for equality. It also makes me wistful for the days that we had one warmongering party rather than two.

Wasting money on equipment that more than half the population can't use is much worse.

 

[Grapefruit Soda]

Why waste time and money designing shit for women when men can both use it just fine, and don't need specialized equipment to do it. Your arguments support removing women from pretty much all combat roles, you do realize this right. Beyond that, I don't want women running into burning buildings or firefights, because they aren't men, they can't do the things men do, and the world's better if it stays that way retard.

 

[axfaxf]

If space is tight then it makes more sense to have a crew of women as they are smaller.

And because they´re smaller, you will need more crew to do the same job(s). That will require more space, which makes your ship a bigger target for enemy fire. It´s almost like someone figured this out 1000 years ago. If you could win seabattles with crewships full of women, it would already been done by now.

I´m not suggesting that women can´t or shouldn´t join the navy. All I´m asking for is, that a crew can do their duty, because otherwise we might as well just sink the ship without the crew.

 

[Iron Jaguar]

For permanent fixtures. We are talking portable units. Plastic and aluminum are pretty common for them. Ever used a Banjo self-priming centrifugal pump?

Are you really so stupid that you do not understand that MILITARY equipment is specifically designed/selected to withstand explosions, fire, concussive shock, etc? - A ship, for example, that has been hit and is on fire, is not an environment where a plastic/aluminium pump could be expected to work for long, if at all.

 

[Les Morfalous]

It's just a complete coincidence that the requirements, equipment, and training around all of these items just happens to also coincide with being within the size and strength of the average man. Nothing at all to do with procedures and items being designed for those using them.

You are repeating yourself like a barrel organ
>requirements
the requirements are basic physics and the technological level of the human race.
>equipment
designed for the sole purpose of fullfilling a task in the most effective and expedient way possible for the least amount of cost to available resources.
>training
doesn't change, no matter the sex of the operator, the manual is the same for everyone - "crank bolt back with provided tiller , then rotate barrel counter-clock wise to disengage it from the trunnion, replace barrel, make sure barrel is fully seated, cycle the bolt in order to confirm lug engagement"
>items being designed for those using them
Making X lighter for women would not disadvantage men, but would only increase their productivity , thus asuring the inherent physical superiority of the male sex.

If space is tight then it makes more sense to have a crew of women as they are smaller.

It doesn't - men have superior upper body strenght which is somewhat of a necessity when conducting manual labour in limited space, but i'm guessing you've never had to replace the drain pipe under the kitchen sink.

 

[KateHikes14]

Wasting money on equipment that more than half the population can't use is much worse.

It's not though, it's ~20 percent of the military.
But if we were intent on finding a use for those who aren't capable we could have some sort of division utilizing women's abilities, some kind of division to provide joy could support the actual military while not compromising its mission and providing them with cute uniforms and not condescending them by pretending 60-70% of their peers abilities is good enough.

 

[Mnutu]

If an average sized man was disabled on a battlefield and needed to be carried out, who do you think is going to have the better chance of pulling that off, an average sized man or an average sized woman? Basic fucking physics. Everyone needs to be able to pull their weight, and straight fucking fact men lift more than women. Equipment has fuck all to do with that, it’s bone density and muscle mass.

 

[OG Swolemaster]

West Germany was less sophisticated, they used meth in football and had the brilliant idea to blow air in the ass of swimmers.

Yeah, that sounds like something Germans would do.

 

[Calculus]

If an average sized man was disabled on a battlefield and needed to be carried out, who do you think is going to have the better chance of pulling that off, an average sized man or an average sized woman? Basic fucking physics. Everyone needs to be able to pull their weight.

I can't tell if you did this intentionally or not but to carry a man she wouldn't be pulling her weight, she would be pulling her weight and a half, if not double.

You are repeating yourself like a barrel organ

Because none of you seem to be able to comprehend that equipment just doesn't fall from the sky. It's repeatedly redesigned and retested and the training and procedures improved and simplified to make it as easy to use as possible.

You all keep trying to throw gotchas at that me but if you just comprehended that there is no reason for things to be how they are right now, you would answer your own questions. And don't "but physics" either, things can work around physics which is how we've come this far already.

 

[Mnutu]

I can't tell if you did this intentionally or not but to carry a man she wouldn't be pulling her weight, she would be pulling her weight and a half, if not double.


Because none of you seem to be able to comprehend that equipment just doesn't fall from the sky. It's repeatedly redesigned and retested and the training and procedures improved and simplified to make it as easy to use as possible.

You all keep trying to throw gotchas at that me but if you just comprehended that there is no reason for things to be how they are right now, you would answer your own questions. And don't "but physics" either, things can work around physics which is how we've come this far already.

My point exactly. If she is in an emergency situation where she is the only able-bodied person, she will not be able to lift the average man. That’s a vulnerability. Not to mention the social consequences of letting women into a squad of men. If you can’t do the bare minimum a situation demands, you shouldn’t be there.

 

[Clem Fandango]

things can work around physics

What on earth does that mean?

 

[Grapefruit Soda]

Because none of you seem to be able to comprehend that equipment just doesn't fall from the sky. It's repeatedly redesigned and retested and the training and procedures improved and simplified to make it as easy to use as possible.

You all keep trying to throw gotchas at that me but if you just comprehended that there is no reason for things to be how they are right now, you would answer your own questions. And don't "but physics" either, things can work around physics which is how we've come this far already.

They're not gotchas when you have yet to answer why, to be quite honest, the burden of information is on you, since you wish to drastically change the status quo to suit your feelings.

Men are stronger than women, if women can't do the bare minimum, why have them in the unit is doing the job. It's both easier and more beneficial to use their advantages elsewhere.

But I guess having to adjust your argument and use common knowledge is to much to ask from an obligate mouth breather.

 

[Squid Diddler]

I can't tell if you did this intentionally or not but to carry a man she wouldn't be pulling her weight, she would be pulling her weight and a half, if not double.


Because none of you seem to be able to comprehend that equipment just doesn't fall from the sky. It's repeatedly redesigned and retested and the training and procedures improved and simplified to make it as easy to use as possible.

You all keep trying to throw gotchas at that me but if you just comprehended that there is no reason for things to be how they are right now, you would answer your own questions. And don't "but physics" either, things can work around physics which is how we've come this far already.

You are one of the most willfully ignorant people I’ve ever encountered on this site. And that’s saying a lot.

things can work around physics

I rest my case. You’re terminally retarded.

 

[Sanshain]

Why are you so damn determined to argue that true and honest women are as strong as men, and if they're not, various modifications should be made to universal equipment used by tens of thousands of men so that a handful of women could probably technically haul someone's ass out of a fire?

That is quite literally not what he is saying, and he has explained what he means multiple times now.

My point exactly. If she is in an emergency situation where she is the only able-bodied person, she will not be able to lift the average man. That’s a vulnerability. Not to mention the social consequences of letting women into a squad of men. If you can’t do the bare minimum a situation demands, you shouldn’t be there.

Uhm, don't you see the inherent contradiction in terms here?

I'm not even pro-women in the military. I think women should enjoy the privilege of having an entire 50% of the world's population willing to do a job for them for a change, and not try to compete purely for the sake of personal vanity. However, the anti-woman arguments in this thread are so painfully stupid it fucking hurts to read, and just makes you all come across like the kind of shrieking misogynist stereotypes that pinknews and huffpost like to cherry-pick for their audience of vapid housewives. If you can't actually comprehend the argument somebody who isn't even trying to argue the things you think he's trying to argue then maybe you aren't equipped to make a judgement on this kind of stuff.

 

[Mnutu]

That is quite literally not what he is saying, and he has explained what he means multiple times now.



Uhm, don't you see the inherent contradiction in terms here?

I'm not even pro-women in the military. I think women should enjoy the privilege of having an entire 50% of the world's population willing to do a job for them for a change, and not try to compete purely for the sake of personal vanity. However, the anti-woman arguments in this thread are so painfully stupid it fucking hurts to read, and just makes you all come across like the kind of shrieking misogynist stereotypes that pinknews and huffpost like to cherry-pick for their audience of vapid housewives. If you can't actually comprehend the argument somebody who isn't even trying to argue the things you think he's trying to argue then maybe you aren't equipped to make a judgement on this kind of stuff.

Why would he be arguing for the redesign of equipment if not to encourage women join the military? His arguments are “women can’t pass the military requirements because the equipment was designed for men”.

 

[Squid Diddler]

If you can't actually comprehend the argument somebody who isn't even trying to argue the things you think he's trying to argue then maybe you aren't equipped to make a judgement on this kind of stuff.

What exactly is the argument being made here, in your words? If it’s “the only reason women fail military tests is because the equipment isn’t suited to them” then you’re a fucking moron. It has fuck all to do with sexism.

 

[Sanshain]

Why would he be arguing for the redesign of equipment if not to encourage women join the military? His arguments are “women can’t pass the military requirements because the equipment was designed for men”.

No, his argument is very obviously 'equipment is not being designed in an efficient and useful manner because manufacturers have learned that they can rely on the military to simply adjust their training standards to compensate for the inadequacy of their materials.'

This is not new or should even be surprising. The military-industrial complex is absolutely fucking notorious for being insanely, hilariously, ridiculously wasteful and inefficient, because it knows that what it supplies to the troops on the ground will be used pretty-much no matter what. If women being in the military is indirectly casting a spotlight on how lax the whole process of gear acquisition and creation has become and how much extra work personnel are expected to do in order to compensate for these inefficiencies, this is a good thing.

Seriously, just go look up anything on Youtube that involves former soldiers discussing their gear issues, and note how many times they spent their own money on better stuff than what they were given because it was so fucking useless, heavy, worn-out or badly designed that it was a choice between surrendering their wages or putting their lives at risk.