Bretom wrote:
The issue is not broad shoulders and narrow hips. In the case you refer to it is believed to be internal testes and, very relatedly, testosterone levels in excess of 10 nmol/L which is 3x higher than a level that would cover 99% women (I'm cribbing this from the Science of Sport Article btw). In my view she is a woman because she identifies as one and that applies in every aspect of life. With the possible exception of sport (and fwiw I appreciate her predicament and admire her courage in the sporting sphere). If you don't want to make the sporting exception that's fine - and a logically coherent position - but it amounts to telling every aspiring female 800m runner that doesn't have internal testes and astronomical testosterone levels to pick another career. I'm surprised anyone would take that position without some hesitation but, as I say, each to their own.Yeah it seems like to me in sport the essential question isn't one's gender but one's physiology. If you have the physiology of a male, then you probably have an unfair advantage over those with the physiology of a female regardless of gender. Women's records will eventually be largely held by physiological males.