Thread by @RogerPielkeJr

Thoughtful thread argument by @Scienceofsport (as usual) on gender categorization issues in sport

But for me, issues related to female athletes w/ unique biology have no place in debates over trans athletes Who change categories — this always needs to be stated up front

https://twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/1333017543745953792

While acknowledging these are different issues, @Scienceofsport then lumps them right back together via a “premise or physiological principle”

I reject such a principle

Here’s another one: “anyone born female, raised female, in sport as a female is female”

No physiology needed

Appeals to physiology reflect an essentialist argument that sport categories exist to segregate men & women based on immutable biological realities

Such arguments fall apart quickly

Eg, Female DSD athletes w/ high T are “biological males” at 400m & “biological females” at 200m

Further, context matters

Rules governing category changes in rugby logically might be different than those applied in, say, equestrian or archery

Once we recognize contextuality matters for categorization we lose the comforting idea of physiological essentialism across sport

If we view gender categories as physiologically essential, then we will wind up in a very different place than if we view gender categories as a complex mix of the biological & social, more akin to nationality categorization in sport than to weight classification in boxing