Deykun

People without legs participate in runs in the Paralympics, and some of their prosthetics are quite bouncy. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point they beat runners with legs using those prosthetics.

I would prefer for them not to compete with "regular" runners because the balance between having legs and bounciness of the prosthetics shouldn't be the deciding factor when determining the winner.

Letting people with prosthetics compete with each other and not with people with legs is fair for both groups.

I advocate for the creation of separate categories for those people.

I’d argue they’re on the same level as the cis female population.

I would oppose that statement. You can balance hormones, but there are differences in how men grow taller, gain muscles while using different hormones, and fat distribution is different for different genders, with fat located in different places. These things don't disappear after transitioning completely. The trans community would love that because it would improve their lives and they wouldn't be misgendered as often, but it's not how it works for people after puberty.

Trans people make up 1% of the United States and within that 1% barely any trans people play sports.

As I mentioned, you don't need to have 10% of people with an unfair advantage in sports; you just need a few on the podium. You completely ignored that because it's easier for you to fight with an imagined bot than an actual argument.

If those athletes' performance would align with others, that wouldn't be an issue. What I'm raising as an issue is that they could build muscle differently, and even bone density can be different for men and women. It's impossible to eradicate all those characteristics. That's what trans people are trying to do and they have made progress, but some things stay, especially for those who began transitioning late after puberty.

The reasons a person transitions don't really matter if they do it later in life and can benefit from it.

I'm not a native English speaker.

What you're saying doesn't constitute a strong argument. My position is that we should notinclude trans people in those categories because, later on, we cannot remove them (which would be much worse). You, on the other hand, seem to opt for ignoring that and, through ignorance, place people with views similar to mine in the position of oppressors trying to remove those people from that category. That's malevolent.