Science of sports issue to be discussed on radio 4 now

[EweSurname]

www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_fourfm

I was a gender non-comforming girl, sporty, good at science and maths, as a young woman did some work involving heavy labour and good mechanical skills, so I too was surprised by how different my boy and girl children were, despite them both being tall, strong and also gender non conforming. They always had very similar physiques but DD's was obviously generally female, DS's obviously male. Now as adults DD is approx 5 ft 11, DS 6 ft 4. I can also see how they have been socialised differently, though DS is more conventional and DD more unconventional.

So can I ask which form this "obviousness" took - other than what was bw their legs?

Dd does a sport which is mixed until 10. The girls often beat the boys at 7 8 or 9. The difference still isn't huge until they get to around 14, then the speeds and times start to differ widely

"The difference still isn't huge until they get to around 14, then the speeds and times start to differ widely"

UK all time best U15 times for boys and girls.

www.gbrathletics.com/uk/wu15.htm

www.gbrathletics.com/uk/mu15.htm

I'm not sure - I work with children under 5 and can't say I've noticed physical differences in stature/shape between the sexes at that age.

Pragmatically - it's generally fine to have mixed sports below puberty, but not during or after. Roughly, primary v secondary age? I guess there may be specific cases with the youngsters where single sex teams may still be of benefit for the same paradoxical reasons as apply to single sex education ?

Ewe Surname

There are significantly proven differences between girls and boys from birth. Look at the growth charts all new borns have, the male one is different to the female one.

What's the name of the programme this was on please? Want to look for it

So you are saying you can tell girls from boys by their height?

Today programme radio 4

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0002zzl

I know there are differences - I’m just not sure I’d be able to determine whether a preschool was a boy or girl based on a silhouette

greathat
It was on Radio 4 - the Today programme - this morning. I've just listened to it on catch up (in the last 30 mins of the programme) and it was excellent - clear, unambiguous from scientists who work with elite athletes and are in no doubt about the advantages that born males will have at elite level over women athletes.

I couldn't ewe. My two boys have very different body shapes as well.

My boy was larger and stronger than my girl at any comparable age, more muscular, had narrower hips and a wider upper back, larger hands and feet. As I said, they were both tall, strong children (and are tall, strong adults with very similar body shapes but clearly now far more differentiated by sex). However my daughter up until about 11 was way bigger, stronger and faster than many boys in her class - and a better football player. After that, period pain, heavy bleeding and PMS pretty much stopped her doing any competitive sport, sadly.

They both followed the lines in those charts exactly from 4 week old. Both packed on a load of weight early on and crossed several lines but settled on completely different ones for weight.

Thanks @NeurotrashWarrior

I think the prepuberty differences are socialisation and confirmation bias by adults. I have a DD with short hair and a preference for baggy black clothes, she's also very sporty so doesn't carry herself 'like a girl'. So, despite being tiny and delicate looking she gets called a boy, but only by adults (kids have better manners and ask if they are unsure).

DH caught this and was really pleased to hear the science speaking.

That’s true, I often hear that boys and girls are basically the same shape/size, up u TIL puberty.
But they do have different growth charts in the red book, so which one is it

The FA allows mixed football up to the age of 16.

The RFU allows mixed rugby up to the age of 12.

by taking hormones to reduce testosterone you potentially have the effect of a bigger car with a smaller engine, so whether trans women should be allowed to compete may depend on the sport

This analogy is nonsense. If we are using the analogy of an "engine" powering a person's body, then that will be equivalent to the heart and lungs, which will have developed differently in a male AT PUBERTY due to the testosterone surge then. A larger chest cavity, with larger heart and lungs = a more powerful engine.

The fact that the body is larger also is not a disadvantage as the car analogy tries to imply. Longer limbs, bigger hands and feet, different pelvic shape, etc. All confer athletic advantages. These physiological advantages are set at puberty and do NOT alter if testosterone is suppressed.

So these transwomen athletes still have a bigger car with a more powerful, more efficient engine.

So if even the advising self-interested trans athlete supported lower limits how the fuck did the IOC settle on 10?

Sounds like Joanna foresaw the backlash which would inevitably happen.

Why is it different for average sports people?

They didn't really explain this, but I assume that there are far more variables to take into account when you aren't comparing elite athletes at peak condition - e.g. how long they have been training, whether they smoke, whether they have injuries.

I have to admit it was very odd to hear to guests who completely agreed with each other on every point - I wonder how the BBC managed to make that mistake, where was their "balance"?

That was balance in the world of science.

There's no scientist who could speak for an opposing side there.

Would have loved to have heard RMK (not) debating with a scientist mind you!