I noticed this has been released by Jon. It tries to cut through the emotion to focus on the priorities. It isn’t a new proposal, more a justification and considered perspective.
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00948705.2020.1863814
The regulation and division of sport ought to reflect, and be written around bodies. Hence, it ought to recognise male advantage, and protect female sport from those with male advantage. But this regulation should be substantially uninterested in gender identity.
First, then, I propose a ‘Protected’ or ‘Closed’ or ‘Non-Androgenised (NA)’ category of sport, which excludes everyone with male advantage, including residual male advantage.
Second, I propose that there should be an ‘Open’ category, in which everyone, and anyone is able to compete (with appropriate age restrictions). This category would be open to male and female bodied athletes, to transmen and transwomen: it would be neither a gender-defined category, nor a sex-defined category.
Personally, it sounds logical and reasonable and merits further consideration. However, I would expect this will not be accepted by anyone who already believes in sex segregation. Because it doesn’t serve the purpose of ‘competing with my gender or my perceived sex’. We have already seen here over the past week, males who believe they are females. So, this will not appeal to them. It mean they must admit biological reality- they have been through male puberty.
And it doesn’t take leave a proviso for further research into any advantages that may still be prevalent in puberty blocked males.
Either way. It will interesting to watch the comments on twatter about this very reasoned suggestion.