BC TRANS HUMAN
Saved by @Alex1Powell

The @dailymaverick asked me to do a piece on the trans woman in sport issue. It’s necessarily short and high level, but here it is. Writing it made me realize there are some key questions everyone who wades into the debate upfront should answer. Wanted to share them here (1/_)

 The first question, before any other “shots are fired”, should be:

“If there is ZERO evidence for what happens to performance and/or biology in trans women undergoing treatment, what should happen for sport? Would you allow inclusion, or would you exclude until it exists?” (2/)
This is so important because it reveals a “value system” and understanding of women’s sport. If you believe in inclusion in the absence of evidence, you’re saying that women’s sport should be OPEN to self-ID, and then evidence must be provided to prove unfairness or risk. (3/)
On the other hand, if you say exclusion until evidence exists, you’re stating that women’s sport should remain CLOSED unless evidence can be provided to assure its participants that it is fair and safe to open it to athletes who have benefited from T during development (4/)
Once you’ve answered this first question, then you move to number 2, which is:

“The current policies for inclusion require suppression of T for 12 months, in order to allow participation without unfairness or harm. How strong is the evidence that this is actually achieved?” (5/)
Here’s where it gets as tricky as you want it to be, and you can act in bad faith to say “Ah, we are so helpless, there is no good research in athletes to answer this, we simply can’t say”. Which is why your answer to Q1 is important. However, such self-despairing pity is also...
...not even true, because there are some studies. In runners, there are 2 studies, neither particularly good. One finds that in 8 runners, with self reported times, spanning two decades, with no controls, no report of training, or even T levels, performance advantages are removed
The other showed that in DSD athletes who can use T, the suppression of T slowed performance by 5.7%, which is half the typical male advantage. So you could call it 1-1, but really neither study is very good. So then you find some good studies. (7/)
Those good studies are unfortunately not directly in athletes, but they are the ones that should really make sports organizations sit up and take notice. They show, without exception, that trans women who have suppressed T lose only small amounts of mass, muscle mass & strength
The result is a retained advantage over the correct reference group of females. The problem, of course, is that these comparisons are in non athletes, so both baseline and subsequent training induced changes are not directly assessed. But go back to Q1 now. Remember we said ZERO
...evidence, right? Well there’s NOT zero evidence. There’s actually a lot to suggest retained advantages, and when you look at published literature you find that training may make these even larger. How sport & scientists can ignore these is astonishing. It’s 12-0 on evidence
However, you may still hold that line, that there’s zero (or maybe you think insufficient) evidence, and so this inclusion should be the default. Which is fine, but that’s what should be stated upfront. Basically, you have to declare whether women’s sport is Closed or Open (11/)
Then you have to evaluate the “fix” - testosterone suppression. If you think it works to create fairness, safety AND inclusion, you’re ignoring a dozen studies that point in exactly the opposite direction. Now you have to treat women’s sport as open AND ignore evidence (12/)
All of which would make me wonder what the agenda is? Inclusion at the expense of all else? Ok cool, but then own it, and say “I think women’s sport should be open, despite available contradictory evidence with limitations, and I don’t care about fairness and safety of females”.
At least if you did that, it would frame subsequent disagreements, would be honest, and your position could earn some respect. But to pretend you’re holding up “scientific evidence” as a basis for inaction & then ignoring that which strongly suggests the fix doesn’t work? Come on
So if you believe in “open women’s sport to biological males until evidence shows we shouldn’t”, say so at the start, save us debate time. If you believe it should be closed, but also in inclusion, let me know which evidence you think supports this, I’d like to see it (13/13)

You May Also Like

Coffee Sloth \u2615
Coffee Sloth ☕
@CaseyExplosion
*Heads-up that this thread will feature some extreme examples of homophobia and transphobia.*

Hey folks, have you ever wondered why trans people face constant accusations of fetishism, sexual predation and child abuse/grooming? Well, today let's talk about stochastic terrorism.

So, first we have to talk about what stochastic terrorism actually is. Remember when there was a conspiracy that there was a pedophile ring operating out of a pizza parlour basement, and a crazed gunman showed up? It's that sort of incitement that stochastic terrorism describes.

It's the demonisation or incitement against a group of people or individuals with the intent that other, unaffiliated parties will act upon it; it's the releasing doctored footage and a shooter show up at Planned Parenthood as a direct result of what he's been led to believe.

So with that in mind, let's talk about Russia's extreme anti-LGBT laws that banned the "promotion" of LGBT lifestyles to children. A move that specifically marked LGBT people as a threat to children, and resulted in neo-nazis meting out vigilante "justice" against gay men.


Groups such as this would lure unsuspecting gay men via dating sites, and brutalise and humiliate them on camera. They did so under the guise of combating child abusers, one group calling themselves "Occupy
SOCIETY
\u2745\u1710\u170b\u1713\u170e
❅ᜐᜋᜓᜎ...
@uglyluhan
First thread of the year because I have time during MCO. As requested, a thread on the gods and spirits of Malay folk religion. Some are indigenous, some are of Indian origin, some have Islamic


Before I begin, it might be worth explaining the Malay conception of the spirit world. At its deepest level, Malay religious belief is animist. All living beings and even certain objects are said to have a soul. Natural phenomena are either controlled by or personified as spirits

Although these beings had to be respected, not all of them were powerful enough to be considered gods. Offerings would be made to the spirits that had greater influence on human life. Spells and incantations would invoke their


Two known examples of such elemental spirits that had god-like status are Raja Angin (king of the wind) and Mambang Tali Arus (spirit of river currents). There were undoubtedly many more which have been lost to time

Contact with ancient India brought the influence of Hinduism and Buddhism to SEA. What we now call Hinduism similarly developed in India out of native animism and the more formal Vedic tradition. This can be seen in the multitude of sacred animals and location-specific Hindu gods
RELIGION
Advertisement
V\u0936\u0941\u0926\u094d\u0927\u093f
Vशुद्धि...
@V_Shuddhi
The first ever world map was sketched thousands of years ago by Indian saint
“Ramanujacharya” who simply translated the following verse from Mahabharat and gave the world its real face

In Mahabharat,it is described how 'Maharishi Ved Vyasa' gave away his divine vision to Sanjay


Dhritarashtra's charioteer so that he could describe him the events of the upcoming war.

But, even before questions of war could begin, Dhritarashtra asked him to describe how the world looks like from space.

This is how he described the face of the world:

सुदर्शनं प्रवक्ष्यामि द्वीपं तु कुरुनन्दन। परिमण्डलो महाराज द्वीपोऽसौ चक्रसंस्थितः॥
यथा हि पुरुषः पश्येदादर्शे मुखमात्मनः। एवं सुदर्शनद्वीपो दृश्यते चन्द्रमण्डले॥ द्विरंशे पिप्पलस्तत्र द्विरंशे च शशो महान्।

—वेद व्यास, भीष्म पर्व, महाभारत


Meaning:-

हे कुरुनन्दन ! सुदर्शन नामक यह द्वीप चक्र की भाँति गोलाकार स्थित है, जैसे पुरुष दर्पण में अपना मुख देखता है, उसी प्रकार यह द्वीप चन्द्रमण्डल में दिखायी देता है। इसके दो अंशो मे पीपल और दो अंशो मे विशाल शश (खरगोश) दिखायी देता है।


Meaning: "Just like a man sees his face in the mirror, so does the Earth appears in the Universe. In the first part you see leaves of the Peepal Tree, and in the next part you see a Rabbit."

Based on this shloka, Saint Ramanujacharya sketched out the map, but the world laughed
ALL
Justin Jackson
Justin Jackson
@mijustin
A lot of bootstrappers think they have a marketing problem:

"I need to get better at marketing."

But, it's more likely that you have a product problem:

"Do customers really want this? Do they care enough about this to switch to a new solution?"

☝️ this is why most of my book, @marketingdevs, is about:

1. Choosing the right market
2. Building something they want

"If your product is remarkable, getting noticed is a lot easier." – @peldi


I was reminded of this concept again this morning while reading @pjrvs' book (Company of One):

"Sales increase when you honestly evaluate what someone needs and then teach them the value of what you're selling."


To succeed, your product has to offer an outcome that is highly desirable to a large group of customers.

The number of sales your product receives is a multiple of these two variables:

1. How big is the target market?
2. How desirable is the outcome you're offering them?
STARTUPS
Michael King \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8
Michael King 🇺🇸...
@8MichaelKing
Ever notice how the top niches are centered around health, wealth, and relationships?

There's a deep-rooted psychological (and biological) reason why.

And today, I'm gonna to explain all of it so you can start profiting off of this knowledge 💰💰

*Now, this thread is going to be long and in depth. Make sure to favorite the top tweet now so you can come back to it later.

So. Down to the very core of every living being (humans, dolphins, bacteria, aliens), there are only two drivers:
1. To survive
2. To reproduce

Right off the bat, we know that sex is a primary driver to human behavior.

This would also mean that each gender has its own insecurities regarding sex.

Men have a subconscious fear that their woman will leave them for someone more successful

Women have a fear that their man will leave them for someone younger & better-looking

We can conclude that men are attracted to looks, and women are attracted to status.

This is human nature down to its very core.

Crazy, blue-haired feminists will try to argue and say otherwise.

But, 50 years of feminism DOES NOT OVERRIDE millions of years of evolutionary biology.

Here's a quick visualization exercise so you can see how true all this is...
STARTUPS