Letter of the Day

The real confusion

CERTAINLY, believing being biologically male means greater physical strength and prowess in competitive sport may be valid in some situations, but historically, spectators and participants in male-only sports would have surely realised not all males are built like a “brick s…house” (“Trans confusion hits new depths”, HS, 22/4).

Indeed, the strength of male physicality is varied, and having watched Aussie Rules for more than 60 years, I have seen many “skeletally-skinny” males come off second-best contesting physically against opponents twice their size.

Sometimes, the critical differences can be about particular skill, talent, speed, teamwork, and even how one trains and is coached, among other things. It has never been a “level playing field” for biological males. Similarly for females, I suggest.

With both genders of all shapes, sizes and skills, asserting it’s “just not fair” for biological men to compete against female swimmers, and in other sports, misses the pertinence of the particular. Perhaps the real “confusion” is confusing inclusiveness with equality and supposed sameness as fairness. A new understanding of competing “in the human race” seems imperative for opportunities in sport across society.