[Itse]

Originally Posted by Matata

It's so much more than size: it's testosterone levels, muscle structure, bone density, reaction times, grip strength, etc. The athletic gap between men and women is staggering once you start looking at the data.

There's three main problems with your logic here.

First, again, those are all just averages.

Second, human physiology is not binary. The whole basis of your argument rests on the idea that all people are either biological men or women, but that's just not humans work. There's plenty of people on the spectrum in between, and that applies to the whole physiology. Just because someone has one set of genitals or another doesn't mean that the rest of their body is what you would assume based on those genitals.

The third problem with your logic is, if those are the things you care about, then why not limit those things instead of genitals? After all, those are all measurable things. (Not sure about muscle structure.) In other words, make up your mind already. Is this about genitals or not? If it's about testosterone levels, reaction times and grip strength, then set limits on those things.

No issues here, this all looks good to you? No women are being harmed? #### those bitches for not standing with that heroic trans-women?

So, was someone actually harmed there? Again, just because you're uncomfortable with something is not an argument.

And yeah, that podium pic seems pretty bad. I don't see how posting a picture of what looks like crap behavior helps your case that this is not about just people behaving like crap towards each other?

e: homeboy is 5'8 and probably no more than 140-150 lb. lol.

So, obvious female genitals and he's small enough to not be a problem, so I assume that you're trying to argue that Buck Angel is an obvious female that should be competing in women's sports?

Because that's what you're trying to argue, isn't it? That people can be divided into obvious males and obvious females by looking into their pants.