Biological assumptions. Instead of assuming that in every pairing of a woman and a man the woman will always have smaller lung capacity than the man, actually test for lung capacity and create two separate classes based on that instead.
Rather than simply reciting an empty meaningless platitude, why don’t you explain exactly how something like that would work in the real world of competitive sports.
In general yes, there should be no universal rule or law that says a woman and man can’t play 1 on 1 bball against each other. In organized sports I’m saying a person who’s _____________ is in the same range as another person’s, that they should be able to complete against each other.
How about we stick with the OP and talk about a high school track team?
Today you have men’s track and you have woman’s track. Nature dictates that men and women will naturally compete at two different levels. We already know that no matter how much reassignment surgery is done to a man, that man will never be able have a baby.
By that same dictate, a man will still be a man when competing in a woman’s sport, putting all natural born woman at a decided disadvantage.
Where does it end?
Following this absurdity to its logical conclusion we will have men’s sports and amazon woman sports - basically surgically altered men. Natural born women will simply become spectators in a world dominated by natural born men and transgender women.
In boxing there are weight divisions, but it is a sure bet that a welterweight man (transgender or otherwise) will have a decided advantage over a welterweight female.
What are you talking about? It’s not based on assumptions, it’s based on facts. If you took the best WNBA team they would still lose to most (maybe all) men’s college basketball teams. You could make that case for just about (if not all) any sport.
If the NBA wanted there to be over 100 teams in their league then yes at some point there will be a woman good enough to make one of those teams. But the economics would not support that.