Trans Athletes

Is there any answer to the trans athlete dilemma? I don't think there is - so many issues are coming to light that the only solution is a debate to tease them out and analyse them, rather than a dogmatic adherence to a particular camp.

We split competitions into male and female as a means of levelling the playing field; however, there is a number of events where no distinction is made between male and female, as strength is not the determinant of supremacy - equestrian sports and a particular sailing event, for example.

Within boxing there are weight categories, again to level the playing field and facilitate the smaller chaps (and women) with a chance.

Trans women have to undergo testosterone reduction therapy and, unless their testosterone level is below a certain value, they are barred from competing. However, any competitive trans woman would naturally aim for the upper testosterone limit, rather than the middle of the reference range. A woman, using supplements to get to the upper limit would be accused of doping. Is that fair?

When you think of it, almost all world class athletes have an advantage which isn't necessarily conducive to a level playing field - extra-large lung capacity, huge hands or feet, an ability not to express the normal amount of lactic acid. These attributes are not spread among the population in any equitable manner and are the result of pure chance or genetic mutations.

Perhaps there should be no categorisation at all, with men, women and all categories in-between competing on the same field. Sure, men will dominate the brute strength sports, but I'm sure there are events where men would have no natural advantage at all - shooting or archery, for example. Whether there are any where women would naturally dominate is an question I'm struggling with - perhaps ones where a small and light frame is the prerequisite for success, although I do believe that women consistently outperform men in ultra sports. If the search is for the best performer, then let it be the best performer, not the best within a myriad categories that are prohibitively expensive to cater for.

Am I convinced by the arguments made by one camp or the other? No, albeit that my emotional brain says it's not in the interests of fair competition, so it's merely an opinion with no evidence backing it up. Perhaps we need to hear more from women athletes about the issue.