"This however is only an anectodal point which disregards not only the exceedingly greater amount of points of evidence I provided of trans women dominating biological women, but it additionally does not take into account that transgender women still have biological advantages in terms of testosterone."
So to get clarity let me ask when you say dominating, do you mean all cis women are playing in a rigged competition against them?
If so, are they aware of it?
If they are, the subject of disadvantage gets questionable because just like any opponent that is stronger, has more reach , more speed, that falls back on your training to prepare correctly to try to pull off a triumph.
If they're not aware, what do you think cis women are thinking, a rigged game , they suck, haven't met their match, what?
I'm taking it's not a mixed bag on one team. One team has all trans , the other not. I mean are we sure there isn't more to assess such as skill, the number of individuals on one side versus the other?
If we have two teams, 4 trans that are small with one cis female medium versus medium to large cis women, who has the advantage?
It's really a case by case instead of broad brushing.
"but it additionally does not take into account that transgender women still have biological advantages in terms of testosterone."
I would take it case by case. If we're talking about brawny stocking trans women versus little cis women, that be obvious.
"Notwithstanding the physical weaknesses of the transgender woman in question, the opposition has not addressed all the other individuals I have listed, thus making his assertion singular, anectodal and not empirical on a more larger scale like mine."
You just said there's physical weakness to question. So if or when the weaknesses are declared, so much for an advantage on their side.
"This assertion made by the opponent misinterprets the purpose of sports, that is to create a fair playing field for everyone to showcase their hard work, talent and skills that they have developed to perform to the best of their abilities and win. "
The assertion that a team, team player or athlete's objective to win or lose, is either true or false. If you agree it's true then the LOSING individual or party's best, skills, talent weren't good enough. Thus poor skills, talent and their best was not the best that would of had them triumph. You have to face it. In some shape or form there's an advantage that one side that has been made the victor.
For instance the advantage of a boxer's stamina, power, speed. Even weight difference see. You have some fighters that are wayyyyy faster than others. You have some that hit wayyy harder . There are some advantages and it's not going to be fair down the middle. If everything was even they're always be a draw.
The thing we have to be careful of is distinguishing a poorly/ highly skilled player you can say is mismatched or a physically impossible opponent to go up against I guess according to the rules of a sport. No one is truly invincible.
"The idea that the purpose of sports is to "sabotage" success is an unhealthy standpoint that would ruin the opportunity of women to perform fairly in their own division, on the basis that they should be sabotaged, which is simply a cynical, unreasonable and unfair approach to have."
Maybe you dislike the term "sabotage". Maybe "beat" or "triumph" is preferable. Either way you made a point about achieving success. In the event of a competition, somebody has to be unsuccessful accomplished by the opposing force.
"I say that if this is the case, then we should similarly separate transgender women from biological women, so that the former cannot leverage their unfair advantages against the latter. "
Ok but what you're not catching is , is it all trans females?
I never made a point about ALL cis females.
I said cis women themselves that can have unique physical advantages over each other. Meaning there are those on a different level can be put in a different class . Likewise with trans women that can be classed as such.
For instance, lightweight trans females classed with cis female middle weight or even perhaps within cis female light heavyweight class. See all this can be case by case sorted so in the end they're all competing trans persons with cis persons.
"This is an invalid argument on the basis that within competitions amongst cis-gender women, if one is much more skilled than the other, that is still fair because both parties had equal physical opportunities to improve themselves, and the more skilled one took greater responsibility for their training and craft."
Ok well I'm going to use the same rule about improving the training. Just like you say a person can improve their skill, she can improve strength. We don't even have to limit at physicality. She can just be smarter, the cis person that is, at beating the opponent at their own game. You say it's invalid but you just made my point that an advantage can just be turned into a weakness whether it's skill or physicality. Unless you're calling your point invalid, it works both ways .
"However, when we add biological males into the equation, they may have physical capacities that some women may be simply unable to surpass, no matter how hard they train, due to the considerable margin of biological differences between them. "
Maybe , maybe not. I'm going to use the loophole in your very point. You said "MAY have physical capacities that some women MAY be simply unable to surpass,".
It's like you just want to generalize but to be honest, we have to face the exceptions . Many people underestimate an iconic martial artist out of the 1970s that was no more than 140 lbs. There are those of the opinion that just because someone is bigger or smaller in body mass, the advantage that supercedes is with size. There are other factors such as skill, stamina, speed and cognitive ability.
A big guy versus a little guy, who'd win?
The big guy. He's got more strength. But can he be fast enough to be able to land a hit on the smaller person?
All those large muscles take a lot more oxygen. Is it even between the two? Which one has the advantage?
Much has to be taken into consideration instead of just a blanket assessment according to just size alone.
" It is important to note that this margin of skill between transgender women and biological women are OUT of the control of the biological woman to overcome, thus truly creating an unfair advantage."
If a cis woman is 3 times stronger than a trans woman, does the cis woman have an upper advantage that you'd say is unfair?
I'm going to cut it off here. I didn't realize the debate rounds are pretty much over. This could of been more rounds, a little more time to make the arguments.
But bottom line, we can make cases by case scenarios so the competitions can be mixed with cis and trans in the name of "fairplay" ok. Have a good day.
