I don't know anyone who's a runner- hell, I don't know any athletes, period- but I wish these folks all the best with their boycott. The way the most prestigious institutes of higher learning have turned to putty in the spray-tanned shitgibbon's tiny, splotchy hands is just infuriating. Their administrators should all be ashamed of themselves.
If they had let her run, she might have shown average ability, proving conclusively that trans woman athletes have no biological advantage over cis women. I bet.
Exclusion from any activity is really no different from employment discrimination, and a general slap in the face that, unfortunately, happens too often to trans individuals.
Indeed. 🙂 I quoted this just for the context. I have done a complete analysis of the races that Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller participated in, comparing to the women who were challenging them in court (esp. Chelsea Mitchell), plus men in the same race categories. The point is not to say they aren't superb (women) athletes - of course they are - but to make it numerically clear that they aren't more than that. I have the same data for Lia Thomas and detractors; I just need to compile it in the same graphical way.
If you look at the comments on this post, you'll see that a transphobe (I prefer to call them "transmisiacs") responded with what was essentially a canned canard that showed she hadn't even tried to read it. (And then someone else, a frequent commenter on Erin's page, got really upset at my assertion that muscle mass isn't the only factor that matters. Sigh. I *really* need to get that book out!
They require trans women to be better than cis women, because their worldview is that the male sex is biologically superior. If they accept that it's mostly just down to some hormones -- that an AMAB with female hormones would be physically inferior to an AFAB with male hormones -- then there's nothing intrinsic that makes AMAB people better.
I agree with that. If HRT works, let it work. At worst, a person AMAB would have longer legs, on average, but that's not as huge a factor in running as people would casually think. It's basically proven that one on estrogen has no inherent advantage, and if they had previously been on puberty blockers as well, it's hard to conceive how they'd have the slightest advantage. This is anti-trans propaganda taking the form of discrimination, as was suggested. It's against human equality.
"At worst, a person AMAB would have longer legs, on average, but that's not as huge a factor in running as people would casually think."
And not even that, since AFAB people (at any rate those who've gone through estrogen puberty) tend to have longer legs in proportion to overall height than AMAB people, thus cancelling out most of the 'taller person, longer legs' difference.
I happen to believe that trans women ARE better, but not in this way. I just think that they go through so much suffering just to be themselves as women, and therefore to be more admired and respected than cis women.
This is an interesting question for both trans vs. cis, and cis women vs. men. I have found quite a lot of evidence (this is all in academic papers, coming from both male and female researchers) supporting the idea that attitude is a large part of the "gender gap" in athletics. It's not just a matter of "I can do it" for one race; this affects and accumulates over years. I think one of my posts mentions the fact that (in an Australian study) 9 year olds showed the same ~10% gender gap as adult athletes; of course there is *no* testosterone involved; but there are social attitudes. A man (also in Australia) assembled data nearly 50 years ago showing a correlation between the size of the gender gap and the degree of misogyny in the culture. Lots to still work on, but the mind does matter in athletics!
I was actually thinking the same thing as Mike. I'm thinking I must have missed your previous comments. It just felt kind of scorching to me. But that is the case of reading comments and having no body language or eye contact.
Princeton University’s decision to remove track star Sadie Schreiner from the Larry Ellis Invitational simply because she is transgender is not about fairness — it is about fear, political pressure, and capitulation.
This move sends a chilling message: that dedication, talent, and hard work can be erased when institutions decide controversy matters more than inclusion.
Athletics are supposed to reward performance and perseverance, not serve as a battleground for political agendas targeting an already marginalized community.
By excluding Sadie Schreiner, Princeton and the organizers of the Larry Ellis Invitational have chosen to bow to manufactured outrage rather than stand up for fairness, dignity, and equal opportunity.
It reflects a broader pattern of institutions bending to political pressure and media narratives instead of defending student-athletes who have earned their place through competition.
Universities should lead with courage and integrity — not abandon their own stated values the moment they become inconvenient.
Silence and compliance are not neutrality; they are participation.
Athletes deserve to compete.
Students deserve respect.
And discrimination, no matter how it is repackaged, should never be mistaken for fairness.
The Track meet should be boycotted by all athletes and the public
As usual, the young ones are leading the way with compassion and intelligence. I would love to see more people come out and respectfully protest this track meet on May 5. Indeed, Princeton's entire LGBTQAI+ community should come out in force that day.
Who do I have to thanks for this post - Erin or Max? Regardless, they both are awesome and do important work.
"As made clear by the lack of scientific evidence about transgender runners’ supposed athletic advantages, transgender participation in not just running but all sports harms absolutely nobody."
Actually, Joanna Harper has been doing research and data collection about transgender participation in sports—particularly endurance-based—for years. Her book Sporting Gender covers the topic from a range of angles. She does find that cardiovascular benefits from testosterone drop off after (I think) 3 months on T blockers; athletes perform in the same age-graded bracket as before but adjusted for gender. For strength sports the enduring advantages are mixed.
I know that wasn't the point of the article, but I wanted to correct the idea that there is no scientific research into the advantages and disadvantages that trans athletes have.
I hear you, there could be specific scenarios where specific trans women would have a material advantage - but it's amazing how infrequent that seems to be. Between trans women being a small percentage of population, and being on HRT/etc., it's hard to accept the outrage as having any substantial basis in results of contests.
If their definition of “woman” is grounded in strict biological essentialism, then it needs to hold in all cases—not just the typical ones. But biology doesn’t cooperate that cleanly.
There are women with XY karyotypes (like androgen insensitivity syndrome) who are born, raised, and recognized as women—sometimes only discovering this later in life. There are post-menopausal women, women with reproductive agenesis, and others who don’t meet the “ordinary” criteria—yet their definition doesn’t exclude them.
So their definition already relies on a cluster of traits and social recognition, even if it isn’t framed that way. “Ordinarily” just patches exceptions—it doesn’t give a necessary condition.
In practice, we all use a sufficient-traits model: appearance, role, interaction, and internal sense of self. That’s how people are actually recognized in the world—long before chromosomes or hormone panels enter the picture.
A quick comparison between the 2026 and 2025 Larry Ellis Meet Info pdf documents available online definitely show some "interesting" modifications, clarifications, and deletions. It does make an average person wonder.
Quick recap: from the top down $-wise, the IOC, USOPC, World Athletics, USATF, NCAA, educational institutions and their leadership, registration services, timing & results services, as well as meet/event organizers work in a complex, entangled environment.
Personally, I continue to 100% support trans, non-binary, all runners and athletes in sports at all ages and competitive levels.
On a side note, I think Kim Keenan is currently in Poland (March 20-22nd) as a USATF staff Event Manager at the 2026 World Athletics Indoor Track & Field Championships.
Hope this adds something worthwhile to the discussion.
I don't know anyone who's a runner- hell, I don't know any athletes, period- but I wish these folks all the best with their boycott. The way the most prestigious institutes of higher learning have turned to putty in the spray-tanned shitgibbon's tiny, splotchy hands is just infuriating. Their administrators should all be ashamed of themselves.
If they had let her run, she might have shown average ability, proving conclusively that trans woman athletes have no biological advantage over cis women. I bet.
Exclusion from any activity is really no different from employment discrimination, and a general slap in the face that, unfortunately, happens too often to trans individuals.
Here is how she placed in January. In the 200 m Lions Invitational she actually placed 4th. Definitely destroying women's sports...
https://www.athletic.net/TrackAndField/meet/621749/results/f/1/60m
Definitely setting the athletic world on fire. But hopefully showing her cis compatriots how to win.
Indeed. 🙂 I quoted this just for the context. I have done a complete analysis of the races that Andraya Yearwood and Terry Miller participated in, comparing to the women who were challenging them in court (esp. Chelsea Mitchell), plus men in the same race categories. The point is not to say they aren't superb (women) athletes - of course they are - but to make it numerically clear that they aren't more than that. I have the same data for Lia Thomas and detractors; I just need to compile it in the same graphical way.
If you look at the comments on this post, you'll see that a transphobe (I prefer to call them "transmisiacs") responded with what was essentially a canned canard that showed she hadn't even tried to read it. (And then someone else, a frequent commenter on Erin's page, got really upset at my assertion that muscle mass isn't the only factor that matters. Sigh. I *really* need to get that book out!
https://jaynasheats.substack.com/p/transathlete-phobia-is-it-really
I see that the transmisiac rapidly descended to a position that's just straight-up gender segregationist.
They require trans women to be better than cis women, because their worldview is that the male sex is biologically superior. If they accept that it's mostly just down to some hormones -- that an AMAB with female hormones would be physically inferior to an AFAB with male hormones -- then there's nothing intrinsic that makes AMAB people better.
I agree with that. If HRT works, let it work. At worst, a person AMAB would have longer legs, on average, but that's not as huge a factor in running as people would casually think. It's basically proven that one on estrogen has no inherent advantage, and if they had previously been on puberty blockers as well, it's hard to conceive how they'd have the slightest advantage. This is anti-trans propaganda taking the form of discrimination, as was suggested. It's against human equality.
"At worst, a person AMAB would have longer legs, on average, but that's not as huge a factor in running as people would casually think."
And not even that, since AFAB people (at any rate those who've gone through estrogen puberty) tend to have longer legs in proportion to overall height than AMAB people, thus cancelling out most of the 'taller person, longer legs' difference.
I happen to believe that trans women ARE better, but not in this way. I just think that they go through so much suffering just to be themselves as women, and therefore to be more admired and respected than cis women.
This is an interesting question for both trans vs. cis, and cis women vs. men. I have found quite a lot of evidence (this is all in academic papers, coming from both male and female researchers) supporting the idea that attitude is a large part of the "gender gap" in athletics. It's not just a matter of "I can do it" for one race; this affects and accumulates over years. I think one of my posts mentions the fact that (in an Australian study) 9 year olds showed the same ~10% gender gap as adult athletes; of course there is *no* testosterone involved; but there are social attitudes. A man (also in Australia) assembled data nearly 50 years ago showing a correlation between the size of the gender gap and the degree of misogyny in the culture. Lots to still work on, but the mind does matter in athletics!
Quite interesting.
It's a good point, people who have been through a lot over identity tend to have more understanding and empathy about it.
Go Princeton!!! [the student body objecting to the bigotry]
Thank you, Erin and Max.
I was actually thinking the same thing as Mike. I'm thinking I must have missed your previous comments. It just felt kind of scorching to me. But that is the case of reading comments and having no body language or eye contact.
Are you saying that Princeton is correct for excluding Sadie Schreiner /
Referring to the student body, who evidently are not so much in agreement with that policy. You don't read other comments much, do you?
I DO I was not sure if you were agreeing with Princeton"s decision they way your statement left me confused
I have to mention, my prior comments here would have been a clear indicator . . .
sorry i miss understood your post - What i do not understand is why people get so upset when a question is posed
Mike I am far more bemused than upset. Pls sweat it not.
Princeton University’s decision to remove track star Sadie Schreiner from the Larry Ellis Invitational simply because she is transgender is not about fairness — it is about fear, political pressure, and capitulation.
This move sends a chilling message: that dedication, talent, and hard work can be erased when institutions decide controversy matters more than inclusion.
Athletics are supposed to reward performance and perseverance, not serve as a battleground for political agendas targeting an already marginalized community.
By excluding Sadie Schreiner, Princeton and the organizers of the Larry Ellis Invitational have chosen to bow to manufactured outrage rather than stand up for fairness, dignity, and equal opportunity.
It reflects a broader pattern of institutions bending to political pressure and media narratives instead of defending student-athletes who have earned their place through competition.
Universities should lead with courage and integrity — not abandon their own stated values the moment they become inconvenient.
Silence and compliance are not neutrality; they are participation.
Athletes deserve to compete.
Students deserve respect.
And discrimination, no matter how it is repackaged, should never be mistaken for fairness.
The Track meet should be boycotted by all athletes and the public
As usual, the young ones are leading the way with compassion and intelligence. I would love to see more people come out and respectfully protest this track meet on May 5. Indeed, Princeton's entire LGBTQAI+ community should come out in force that day.
Who do I have to thanks for this post - Erin or Max? Regardless, they both are awesome and do important work.
"As made clear by the lack of scientific evidence about transgender runners’ supposed athletic advantages, transgender participation in not just running but all sports harms absolutely nobody."
Actually, Joanna Harper has been doing research and data collection about transgender participation in sports—particularly endurance-based—for years. Her book Sporting Gender covers the topic from a range of angles. She does find that cardiovascular benefits from testosterone drop off after (I think) 3 months on T blockers; athletes perform in the same age-graded bracket as before but adjusted for gender. For strength sports the enduring advantages are mixed.
I know that wasn't the point of the article, but I wanted to correct the idea that there is no scientific research into the advantages and disadvantages that trans athletes have.
I hear you, there could be specific scenarios where specific trans women would have a material advantage - but it's amazing how infrequent that seems to be. Between trans women being a small percentage of population, and being on HRT/etc., it's hard to accept the outrage as having any substantial basis in results of contests.
If their definition of “woman” is grounded in strict biological essentialism, then it needs to hold in all cases—not just the typical ones. But biology doesn’t cooperate that cleanly.
There are women with XY karyotypes (like androgen insensitivity syndrome) who are born, raised, and recognized as women—sometimes only discovering this later in life. There are post-menopausal women, women with reproductive agenesis, and others who don’t meet the “ordinary” criteria—yet their definition doesn’t exclude them.
So their definition already relies on a cluster of traits and social recognition, even if it isn’t framed that way. “Ordinarily” just patches exceptions—it doesn’t give a necessary condition.
In practice, we all use a sufficient-traits model: appearance, role, interaction, and internal sense of self. That’s how people are actually recognized in the world—long before chromosomes or hormone panels enter the picture.
A quick comparison between the 2026 and 2025 Larry Ellis Meet Info pdf documents available online definitely show some "interesting" modifications, clarifications, and deletions. It does make an average person wonder.
Quick recap: from the top down $-wise, the IOC, USOPC, World Athletics, USATF, NCAA, educational institutions and their leadership, registration services, timing & results services, as well as meet/event organizers work in a complex, entangled environment.
Personally, I continue to 100% support trans, non-binary, all runners and athletes in sports at all ages and competitive levels.
On a side note, I think Kim Keenan is currently in Poland (March 20-22nd) as a USATF staff Event Manager at the 2026 World Athletics Indoor Track & Field Championships.
Hope this adds something worthwhile to the discussion.