I was surprised to learn the persistence of sex testing despite its scientific flaws and ethical concerns, and how it often reinforced outdated and binary ideas about gender.

Learning how deeply rooted biases have shaped women’s experiences in sports, from being excluded to facing invasive testing, really shows how much work still needs to be done to achieve fairness and respect in athletics.

Indian sprinter Dutee Chand was banned from competing in women’s events because of her naturally high testosterone levels under hyperandrogenism policies. In 2015, she fought back, taking her case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The court ruled there wasn’t enough proof that high testosterone gave athletes an unfair advantage, forcing the suspension of the rules.

This case was a big moment in the fight for fairness in women’s sports. It challenged the idea of testing and policing women’s bodies and pushed for more inclusive and science-based rules.

After recording my responses, I noticed that the polling results showed a mix of traditional gender stereotypes and shifting attitudes toward sports. Some sports, like gymnastics and figure skating, were still seen as more “feminine,” while others, like baseball and football, remained “masculine” in the popular imagination. However, there were also signs that perspectives are changing, with more people recognizing sports like rugby or surfing as gender-inclusive.

One thing that surprised me was how some sports, like volleyball, hockey, and basketball, had more of a gender split than I expected. This shows how culture and societal norms in the environment you grew up in can influence your opinions. To me these sports are equal to both genders, but the polls suggest that people think otherwise.

On one hand, Leah Thomas’ statement suggests that trans women make up a very small percentage of athletes and that, despite policies allowing their participation for years, there hasn’t been a widespread takeover of women’s sports. This supports the argument that the controversy is exaggerated and that the focus should be on inclusivity rather than restriction.

On the other hand, critics argue that biological differences like muscle mass, bone density, and oxygen capacity can provide trans women with an advantage, even after hormone therapy. They worry that allowing trans women to compete in women’s sports could create unfair competition, particularly in strength  and endurance based events.

I do not agree with Leah’s statement and I personally do not think it is fair. Trans athletes are becoming more prominent and should have their own league/division.

I agree that sports, by design, are not always fair. In elite competition, natural advantages like genetics, access to better training, and even financial resources, can play a huge role in success. As an example, some Olympic swimmers, like Michael Phelps, have unique physiological traits that give them an advantage, but we don’t consider that unfair. Similarly, athletes from wealthier countries often have better coaching, facilities, and nutrition, creating an uneven playing field. That being said, while sports may never be completely fair, the goal should still be to create rules that promote as much fairness as possible. There’s a difference between natural talent and advantages that fundamentally alter competition. I think the key is deciding where we draw the line.

My response to someones post:

You make a great point about how sports naturally reward exceptionalism, and I totally agree that true fairness is impossible to achieve. Some people are just born with certain advantages whether it’s genetics, geography, or access to top-tier training, and that’s a huge part of what makes elite competition what it is. Your example of East African runners is a perfect example of how natural factors can create an edge that not everyone has.