World Athletics have introduced regulations preventing female athletes with certain differences in sex development from competing in the female category. We argue these regulations are not justified and should be removed. Firstly, we examine the reasoning and evidence underlying the position that these athletes have a substantial mean difference in performance from other female athletes such that it constitutes an advantage, and argue it is not sufficient. Secondly, if an advantage does exist, it needs to be demonstrated it is unfair. (...) We argue the advantage would not be unfair because to say otherwise relies on a presupposition about whether these athletes are female, which involves contradictory and inconsistent definitions of sex. Thirdly, we contend that even if it is established that there is an advantage and it is unfair, the response of requiring athletes to take testosterone-suppressing medication is not appropriate and is unfair. (shrink)

In a previous paper entitled ‘Beyond Physiology: Embodied Experience, Embodied Advantage, and the Inclusion of Transgender Athletes in Competitive Sport,’ we claim that analyses of the inclusion or exclusion of transgender athletes in competitive sport must go beyond physiological criteria and incorporate the notions of embodied experience and embodied advantage. Our stance has recently been challenged as impractical and excessively exclusionary. In this paper, we address these challenges and build upon them to expand on the policy implications of our original (...) framework, highlighting that embodied experience and embodied advantage heavily influence athletic performance. We differentiate competitive fairness from justice to, with an emphasis on the inclusion of transgender women in competitive sport, formulate a justice-based argument for maximizing inclusion. Afterward, we identify ideal and nonideal policy recommendations connected to our analysis of embodied experience and embodied advantage. We ultimately advocate for a qualified inclusion that assesses potential residual (physiological and embodied) advantages while striving for justice and competitive fairness. (shrink)

In her excellent essay, Blumenthal-Barby (2024) argues that it is “time for bioethics to end talk of personhood.” She is concerned, more specifically, with “the philosophical concept of personhood,...

The recent Olympic controversy surrounding Algerian boxer, Imane Khelif, who was falsely accused of being a man, exposes the issue of gender as perpetuating prejudices in elite sports (Treisman 202...

Jennings and Braun (2024) argue convincingly for the conclusion that the World Athletics (WA) definition of fairness in sport is applied inconsistently in its efforts to regulate the participation...

Two distinct forms of fairness in sport are regularly conflated, which produces confusion in important debates concerning the participation of transgender women in female sporting contests. The distinct forms of fairness arise in two distinct forms of sporting contest: the handicap contest and the championship contest. Handicap contests seek to ‘level the playing field’ by ensuring that all participants have an equal or ‘sporting’, chance of winning. Championship contests seek to find the person or team that is best at a (...) particular event – to find a champion. Each form of contest makes use of female categories, although for different reason. Arguments for and against the use of handicapping to ensure fairness in championship contests such as the Olympics conflate these forms of contest and their distinct accounts of fairness. (shrink)

This paper continues the discussion of three values of sport (safety, fairness, inclusion) that has developed around the theme of inclusion of transwomen in the female category in World Rugby, as discussed by Pike, Burke and Imbrišević. In contrast to their discussion, in which these three values have been seen from the limited perspective of the inclusion of one group of athletes into a specific category of one sport, they are here discussed in the context of the categorization in sport (...) in general, with a focus on constitutive and eligibility rules. Constitutive rules give a strong foundation for eligibility rules. From the perspective of eligibility rules, the value of inclusion is identified as the underlying main value, while fairness and safety are its functions. This view rehabilitates the value of inclusion and has implications for how we think about the inclusion of athletes in sport, and for the creation of categories. (shrink)

The 2024 Paris Olympic Games generated spirited, often misguided and ill-informed, discussion regarding regulations governing the eligibility of athletes with differences of sex development (DSD)....

Katerina Jennings and Esther Braun identify an important problem with the current approach to defining categories of competitors in sport (Jennings and Braun 2024). They make a significant contribu...

Working within the parameters of (their reconstruction of) World Athletics’ (WA) definition of fairness, Katerina Jennings and Esther Braun (2024) propose a categorical system better suited to meet...

The pursuit of fairness in athletic competitions endures as a persistent challenge, particularly among athletes with differences in sexual development (DSD). World Athletics (WA) has implemented re...

In their article Beyond Suppressing Testosterone: A Categorical System to Achieve a “Level Playing Field” in Sport, Jennings and Braun (2024) accurately display how the World Athletics’ (WA) restri...

In 2023, World Athletics (WA) updated their regulations of athletes with differences of sexual development (DSD) hyperandrogenism or sufficient androgen sensitivity (henceforth, referred to as DSD)...

The aim of this article is to examine how different types of sports rules place unique demands upon athletes with regard to their weight and how these demands condition different strategies of weight management. We categorized sports rules into three main categories according to their relationship to weight: 1) sports with weight-prescribing rules; 2) sports rules that advantage lean light bodied athletes; and 3) sports rules that advantage lean robust muscular athletes. This enabled us to provide a more complex view (...) than has been presented by authors in sports sciences, whose emphasis is usually on researching athletes’ body composition, sometimes establishing the ‘desired body’, or addressing the problematic aspects of athletes’ weight-controlling practices within ‘weight-sensitive sports’. We advocate a change of focus from ‘weight-sensitive sports’ to risk groups, since not all athletes in a sport are equally affected by weight issues raised by the sporting test. Thus, this approach offers an athlete-centred approach to weight management in sport, rather than an emphasis on certain types of sports. (shrink)

Jennings and Braun (2024) suggest that if World Athletics (WA) is fully committed to a vision of fairness based on “talent, dedication, and hard work” the federation would need to endorse and adopt...

Elite sport’s struggle with what counts as “fair” predates recent controversies over female athletes with differences of sexual development (DSD) competing in the women’s categories; fairness quest...

Drawing on World Athletics’ conception of fairness as ensuring a “level playing field” for individual athletes, Jennings and Braun (2024) claim that it is inconsistent to only regulate testosterone...

Jennings and Braun’s (2024) article “Beyond Suppressing Testosterone: A Categorical System to Achieve a ‘Level Playing Field’ in Sport” is a valuable contribution to the academic debate over the DS...