> The unequal distribution of height and muscle mass is part of sexual dimorphism.
No, it’s potential evidence for sexual dimorphism. It’s also potential evidence for systemic dietary sexism. You’d need to establish that the latter doesn’t exist to establish that the former does.
> Imagine you convinced someone this was true. They could say trans women should be banned from women's sports because boys receive superior training.
At that point we’d have shown that sexual dimorphism was not at play and that gendered sports were inherently discriminatory, so that hypothetical person would now be an idiot arguing against reality. The obvious solution would be to redirect better training at the now know equally capable athletes.
> The effects of hormones are not assumptions.
Actually they largely are… we really don’t have more than minimal and crude knowledge of precisely how hormones work or what their actual effects are.
No, it’s potential evidence for sexual dimorphism. It’s also potential evidence for systemic dietary sexism. You’d need to establish that the latter doesn’t exist to establish that the former does.
> Imagine you convinced someone this was true. They could say trans women should be banned from women's sports because boys receive superior training.
At that point we’d have shown that sexual dimorphism was not at play and that gendered sports were inherently discriminatory, so that hypothetical person would now be an idiot arguing against reality. The obvious solution would be to redirect better training at the now know equally capable athletes.
> The effects of hormones are not assumptions.
Actually they largely are… we really don’t have more than minimal and crude knowledge of precisely how hormones work or what their actual effects are.