One thing that stood out to me as particularly surprsing was the idea that athletes would be stripped down and “examined” to verify their femininity. This in my opinion and based o todays social norms seems completely absurd and unreasonable. It would seem to me that they would be other more obvious methods to verify someones gender

No, the gendering of sport has not been a constraint on my involvement. This may be because I have not felt limited by traditional gender expectations in sports or have been in environments that encourage participation regardless of gender. However, I understand that for many, societal pressures and gendered expectations can create barriers, so it’s important to recognize those challenges for others.

Softball, gymnastics and volleyball skew more female the rest more male. The polling results largely match my assumptions about gender-coding in sports with the exception of soccer which surprisingly more people believe to be neutral wheras i coded it as male.

I agree with Leah Thomas’ comment to some extent. Trans women are a small percentage of athletes, and the regulations governing their participation have been in place for more than a decade, with no indication that they have had a substantial influence on women’s sports. It’s worth noting that the NCAA and other organisations have policies in place to maintain fairness, such as hormone level limitations, which serve to address concerns about competitive advantage.

These debates sometimes turn into bigger cultural and ideological fights rather than developing or defending women’s sports. The emphasis should be on guaranteeing inclusion and justice for all athletes, and it is critical to distinguish real concern from political intent.

In favor: I agree that sports, by design, are not fair. In my experience, sports are inherently competitive, and there will always be factors that give some players an advantage over others, such as having access to better training facilities, more resources, and more experienced coaches. For example, some athletes may have greater natural ability or genetics that give them an edge over their opponents, and some teams may have more experienced and highly paid players that have more financial resources. Therefore, I believe that fairness is not a defining characteristic of sports, and that athletes must work hard and use their skills to overcome any perceived unfair advantages.In more detail, fairness is not a defining characteristic of sports because the very nature of competition implies that there will be some degree of inequality between athletes or teams. This inequality can take many forms, such as physical differences, socioeconomic differences, or access to resources and opportunities. For example, an elite athlete may have access to better coaches, training facilities, and nutrition than an amateur athlete, giving them an advantage in terms of skill and performance. Similarly, a team with more resources may be able to attract higher-paid and experienced players, giving them an edge over less wealthy teams.

Robins argues that the outrage over Imane Khelif’s boxing victory is not really about fairness in sports or protecting women’s rights. Instead, it’s about using Khelif as an excuse to attack trans women in general.

1. People who are upset over Khelif’s victory are the same ones that promote transphobic conspiracy theories online. The author points out that celebrities who have spoken out against Khelif, such as Elon Musk and Joanne Rowling, are known to have transphobic beliefs.
2. The question is whether Khelif is “really” a woman. The dispute “centred around” whether Khelif was born female, rather than her athletic abilities. This shows that the issue is more about her gender identification than sporting fairness.
3. Many sports currently exclude transgender women. The article adds that the IOC has prohibited trans women who have gone through masculine puberty from competing. This shows that Khelif’s cisgender status is what enabled her to compete in the first place. 
4. Cis women athletes who have been caught doping haven’t gotten this much attention. The author argues that if this was really about protecting women’s sports, there would be similar outrage over cisgender women who cheat.
5. The language used to defend Khelif reinforces a narrow definition of womanhood. The author criticizes people who defend Khelif by calling her a “biological woman.” This implies that there’s only one way to be a real woman.