Thread by @HairyLeggdHarpy

I'm appreciative of Ross's analytical work here. It's really important.

BUT. I have always to add my own caveat. And it's huge.

Performance shouldn't matter. It isnt actually the crux of the argument.

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

Because, for example.
If we took any group, say, "able-bodied diabetic men aged 75+" and after analysis, discovered their performance was comparable to an entirely different group, say, "under 14 female amputees". Should we merge the groups? Does that make sense?

We separate sports categories by notable, material physical characteristics. Male/female bodies are the criteria. Not feelings.

If women's categories are not to be defined by physical s ex, then gender advocates are suggesting that all category participants must instead share the same 'identity'. Their argument is: sports by shared 'identity' groups.

Not once have I ever seen a justification for why.

But, much more importantly, have I EVER seen anyone advocate for any TEST, CRITERIA or VALIDATION to verify that all of the female participants DO share the same 'identity' as the male ones.

If I was an elite female athlete, faced with a mediocre male athlete who performed comparably, and my sporting authority was arguing that we belonged in the same category because: reasons, I'd want to hear those reasons. I'd want to hear the criteria.

I'd want to hear the explanation and demonstration for why he and I are 'same category' but his twin brother and I are 'opposite category'. I think female athletes deserve to know which of THEIR OWN purported characteristics is considered to MATCH the male athlete.

And it can't be down to "you both perform similarly, that's all" because that would include many people, including all mediocre men regardless of age, disability, identity.

And it can't be as ludicrously flimsy as "you both call yourselves women" because we are demonstrably using opposite definitions for the words. I use woman to mean female sex body. He uses it to mean male sex body plus feelings.

So what IS the shared, defined, measurable, relevant sporting characteristic that elite female athletes DEMONSTRABLY SHARE with mediocre male athletes that sporting bodies are arguing should be the criteria for separating categories?

Let's hear it.

Because the juxtaposition so far to the careful considered work that Ross does here, is the counter argument produced by sporting bodies which so far, goes thus:

"These mediocre male athletes and these elite female athletes belong in the same category despite being the opposite s ex, because they all share the same, more powerfully important and relevant sporting characteristic:

The shared use of three consonants and two vowels.

/End.