,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
A few thoughts on the decision to limit Caster Semenya's ability to compete due to ideas about gender and chemistry. There's this odd idea that testosterone is what makes people good at sport. The most and you're the best man, too much and you're not a woman.
This is a pretty rigid way of defining gender. Not only that, it leaves out the truth that although men are more suited to some labor than women, there will always be women who are are as strong etc., as the average man. Women and men can vary far from the average.
I've competed in full-contact sports against men and transgender athletes, and although sometimes there were men so good I wasn't as effective, there were women like that as well. It was never a reason not to compete.
I heard @ProfBlackistone speak recently about sports, and the idea that it has elevated the discussion of race, or more rigidly confined black athletes. And now I've started thinking about whether the same is true about gender.
Certainly Billie Jean King's win over Bobby Riggs was a defining moment, but by rigidly putting men and women in different categories, do we continue to emphasize our differences in a way that is unhelpful to society at large.
And Semenya is such a case in point. She has been measured and defined and observed to decide which she is. Is she *this* or is she *that.* Our rigid categories will not be denied. Blue or pink, those are the only options. Sometimes sports feel very limiting.
