Two boys take 1st and 2nd place in Connecticut girls' 100m sprint

"GeorgeFayne sex is a protected characteristic in UK law so you should be able to.

I expect there would be bad press. But more examples like this (in the OP) and Laurel Hubbard competing in events against women might convince people that women do need female only sports.

www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/04/transgender-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-might-have-unfair-advantage-expert.html

Here's a question: in the UK, if you wanted to create, say, a private running club for girls that had competitions, awards, etc., and limit it only to biologic females, would you be allowed to do so? Here in the US, I'm not entirely sure, and I suspect in Canada, the answer would be no.

There was one accurate statement on one of those slides.

'Words have meanings'. I wish these POMO-addled academics (and others) would remember that.

Science is not a belief based system. Its objective.

American Academia is riddled with, well on the Right we call it "Cultural Marxism", but whatever you choose to call it, it's everywhere in Academia now. Even the Sciences and Engineering are being corrupted by it now whilst in Sociology and similar, students are being directly taught that reality ranks lower than subjectivity.

No it doesn’t follow a null hypothesis model. It reads as an invite to produce a monologue that will support unisex sport

That's what I though Babel, just checking with the better informed!

Most PhD studentships are funded by a funding body - and most openly state that.

I won’t put her email on here because that seems intrusive but if you click on the link in the thread above there’s an email address for the person coordinating studies. Ask them outright!

The concise statement just says X million in endowmentsxetc. Not where the money comes from.

No it doesn’t follow a null hypothesis model. It reads as an invite to produce a monologue that will support unisex sport

I can't get through the Financial Statements to find out who is behind the endowments and funding grants.

So more sociology than science.

So would you say that LB's initial introduction (posted above) for the required areas of study follows the null hypothesis model? To me, it seems to be inviting a certain type of study and outcome - and it's not keep sport sex segregated!

Loughborough' Athena Swan project to advance women in STEM has been coopted by trans.

I wouldnt count them as science based PhDs - they seem to be more sociology based tbh.

It would be enlightening to see who is funding them.

Yes, it would.

That's really interesting Errol & Babel Thank you.

So would you say that LB's initial introduction (posted above) for the required areas of study follows the null hypothesis model?

There’s an email address on their webpage in that link for the postgraduate studies coordinator. No funding body seems to be listed on the web page (only had a quick poke.)
It would be enlightening to see who is funding them.

Just as an aside;

How would these PhD's be funded, from an outside source, ie company/group?

What errol said.

You should be using a null hypothesis. So ‘there is no difference in colon cancer rates between my wild type and my mutant mice.’

It’s (mainly, there are specific tones you need to) really bad science to do scattergun ‘data mining’ type stuff. If you throw enough stuff at the wall, something will stick, and that’s a recipe for false positives.

Seriously concerned about Loughborough - yes is leading sports uni in country .... if they are going this route - HELP!!!

Follow the money!
I have no doubt that Loughborough has received funding for these "posts". Now I wonder who would be interested in funding
such a biased approach to the men's rights ?
Who believes that widely-held beliefs about fairness and the biological advantages associated with being male.... are over-simplistic, legitimise discrimination, and hinder the sports participation of transgender (intersex, trans, non-binary) individuals

I didn't do a Science-based PhD, but I always imagined you would set yourself/be set a "question" , look for all the evidence, and form an answer.

Not quite. Question/initial evidence gathering may be the first stage, but you don't then 'form an answer' - you should propose a hypothesis and the next stage should be to design experiments to test that hypothesis. And by 'test', this does not mean design experiments which would be expected to confirm the hypothesis - on the contrary, you should be trying to design experiments which are capable of disproving it.

(The whole process may well be more than the scope of one PhD project of course.)

Loughborough seem to have decided on the answer before they’ve even researched the question

That's how it reads to me. I didn't do a Science-based PhD, but I always imagined you would set yourself/be set a "question" , look for all the evidence, and form an answer.

Loughborough seem to be saying;

"This is what we think. Back it up"

No it wouldn't solve any of it. The vast majority of trans women do not see themselves as men. Not any type of man.

What on earth does 'how trans women see themselves' have to do with their eligibility to participate in women's sports? (And trans girls in girls'). Presumably if you think it's relevant, either you think that the significant differences in athletic performance between the sexes is due to something in the brain rather than the body or logically you'd have to accept that 'trans disabled' athletes would be eligible for the Paralympics in whatever ability category they saw themselves as being. (Or you think the feelings and aspirations of males are more important than those of females).

Loughborough seem to have decided on the answer before they’ve even researched the question.

CongrTulations Bridget the woman who won the race 🥇