"You start trying to define "fully female" based physiology and you get on a slippery slope and pretty soon the female basketball players, volleyball players, and high jumpers have to be under 6' tall (because being tall is a male characteristic). "
You make a very good point. I could take all the hormone therapy in the world, and that won't make me not 6' 3". But what if I was born "the wrong gender" (however you define that). Like you said, height is a male characteristic. But then again, my cousin is a 6' 3" woman (her brothers are 6'8"). Maybe I'm just a tall woman who was born with a penis. (of course I'm not)
But as a tall woman, I could dunk a women's basketball when I was younger, something that only 4 pros have ever done in a game. Jumping ability is also a male characteristic, but I'm not better than the best. Maybe I'm just a tall, very gifted jumping woman who was born with a penis. (of course I'm not)
I think the biggest issue we have is that with women's sports we are trying to define a category that is, effectively, a less competitive division of sports. You must be a "woman" covers 99+% of all cases, and the remaining fraction of a percent are not generally athletic enough to be worth arguing over. Its those that are left that are difficult to categorize fairly.
The trans MMA fighter who's mauling women is an issue.
The trans rugby player mauling women is an issue.
The trans high school wrestler under hormone therapy who wants to wrestle with the boys but is being forced to wrestle with the girls (and getting booed as a result) is an issue.
FWIW, I don't think male to female transitions should be able to qualify for awards. That still leaves a small % of issues with other competitors.
-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485