One interesting example of this is the UTR system for tennis. It is agnostic in gender as wells as age, and tournaments can be held purely based on the UTR range

bad comparison - here is one better, not a perfect one...

You can't enter a car into a boating competition. The question here is: if you take basic precautions to make it the same class of boat - a modified car turned into a boat should be a valid entry - provided the engine speed roughly matches.

People worry about cars on water here, not knowing that doesn't exist by definition: any car in water has been modified from a car to be a boat. you may recognize that it was once a car - but that's vestigial shell stuff. the inter-workings are a propeller - not a wheel.

I see your argument and has some merit but isn't persuasive enough. I would posit that its a bit too loose and that it breaks down on biological people have many more complicated systems that aren't simply re-categorized similar to your car and boat comparison.

For better or worse nor is our medical science sophisticated enough to swap out the systems to be true comparables (and I don't mean to offend anyone).

> For better or worse nor is our medical science sophisticated enough to swap out the systems to be true comparables

The problem is that it isn't a hard binary. All the relevant metrics are going to fall on a spectrum, and there is a significant overlap between the male and female spectra.

The real question is: do you consider it fair if a top 1% male spectrum transitions to a top 1% female spectrum, or it only fair if that top 1% male spectrum ends up at the 50% percentile on the female spectrum?

> No idea on the hard data

Great thanks!