Emily does the trans cause no favours by being so dogmatic & making such patently untrue blanket statements. If I were Emily, I’d argue it along the following lines. It’d be painfully self-serving, but there’d be nothing new there, and would throw a few of her trans sisters under a bus in the process but, hey, all’s fair in competition, right?:
(a) Local/low level individual sports – ban TW from competition [prizes, accolades, etc] since monitoring of T levels etc isn’t really possible, but pull out all of the stops [maybe in terms of specific funding] to encourage participation; also in team sports very actively encourage the playing of friendly matches etc by part/full trans teams against any all-natal women’s teams whose members unanimously agree to it by anonymous ballot.
(b) ‘Extreme contact’ sports whose very existence, at least in its current form, is under at least mild threat because of concerns about safety, particularly head injuries [e.g. boxing, rugby] – accept that such safety concerns mean that pitting natal women against competitors with potentially vastly greater body mass is a no-no, ban all TW.
[c] Any remaining sports where height or weight is likely to confer an intolerable advantage [e.g. rowing, weightlifting, possibly basketball, etc] – ban all TW.
[d] Other top level sport – permit TW subject to robust testing of T levels etc.
I personally wouldn’t agree with any of the above, I personally, for the reasons that are well rehearsed on here & elsewhere, prefer zero tolerance at any level in any sport [with a few minor exceptions such as ultra-long distance running etc].
But coming out and arguing, as Emily does. that any TW who so much as slips a packet of contraceptive pills into her handbag is reduced to a quivering wreck of excessive femininity who can barely muster the strength to tie the laces on a pair of trainers, just doesn’t cut it.