The battle over trans athletes in American schools heats upWatch
No, that isn't the only reason. Tall guys have a huge physical advantage over short guys in basketball, yet we don't have separate competitions. Short slight guys who grew up in high-altitude areas have a huge advantage at distance running, but we don't have separate events for big bulky guys who grew up at sea level. Why not? Because we don't consider it socially important that those disadvantaged groups be represented and able to participate at a comparable level of prestige.
There surely could be basketball for short, but where big money is involved, everyone want to have the best players, so it goes on as it goes since the times people believed everyone should do what the person is the best suited to. In the first line of top sports, there is only one distinction; for men and women because this difference is very big, and is very easily checked.
Imho the fairest thing to do, would to make four separate classes, for biological men, biological women, trans men and trans women.
Although if some people are so concerned about social exclusion, I don't see why they don't demand Olipic and Paraolimpic games to be one event, and additional classes within the games, eg. ageing sportshumans class, and elderly class.
There are all sorts of separations, for example, there are piano competitions for professionals and separate for amateurs. There are olimpics for disabled, chess competitions for people with intellectual disability ICD-10 F70. In motorsports aside from separate classes depending on the engine capacity, weight, level of modifications, there are also different classes for professionals and amateurs, for new cars and old cars, for 'normal' drivers, and elderly drivers, and so on.
There surely could be basketball for short, but where big money is involved, everyone want to have the best players
Trans women have hypothetically been allowed to compete in the Olympics since 2004, as long as they meet the same testosterone conditions as their cis competitors. Yet far from trans athletes dominating women's events, we're still to see any compete at the Olympic level, at least openly. There was a brief suggestion about Team GB possibly including a couple of trans women in 2016, but to my knowledge their identities were never revealed, so either they weren't picked at all or went largely unnoticed in the games. The far bigger gender-related controversy in professional athletics has been over intersex athletes.
And the original topic of this thread is of course not about something even close to Olympic level.
It’s a bit of a strange system, if prohibiting participation due to gender isn’t fair how is it fair to prohibit participation based on testosterone levels? Some women will of course have unusually high levels.
But that's a very different criteria - then you're adding the consideration of what is entertaining to spectators, rather than simply what is fair to the participants.
The classes are made for fairness and to give competitors equal chances. A 90 year old retired rally driver is probably still better normal drivers who never entered motosport, but stands no chance against young professionals. Poor reflex, different cars, weaker body. Same with everything else. A moron (an obsolete medical term), has not a chance against against a pro player without deficiencies. An amateur piano player can't play as well as a professional. A short good basketball player can't play as well as a tall good player. The classes are made to allow people to compete on equal terms, but the more deficient the class, the less spectacular it is.
Professional sport has always struggled to establish a reliable and uncontroversial method of sex verification. Prior to WW2, the Olympics had virtually no checks at all - it just relied on good faith.
And it's still very controversial. But throughout all of this, the real issue has been neither men posing as women, nor trans women, but rather intersex women.
The problem is plain and easy. Make some basic classes easy to distinquish, and let the not considered advantages to be counted as a talent.
That may be a possible solution if it can be shown there's a need for it, but at present there isn't one. There are relatively few trans women competing at high levels in women's sport, even when the rules permit them to do so. Trans women have been entitled to compete in women's events at the Olympics since 2004, but so far none have done so (at least as far as we know). Trans women have been eligible to compete in WTA tennis events ever since Renee Richards won her case in the late 1970s, but can you even name a trans woman tennis player other than Richards?
2. Just leave it as it is, and wait two or three decades. You're do damage to trans people, instead of a favor.