But debate over sex categories in sports is open
The world's top sports court's ruling favouring Dutee Chand is, of course, a major victory for the Indian athlete who will now be able to resume her running career but the judgement also keeps the larger issue of sex-based distinction open for debate. last year, Ms Chand, a rising star in the track and field world, was disqualified by the Athletics Federation of India as she was in violation of the hyperandrogenism policy.
Established by the International Association of Athletics Federations, track and field's global governing body, this policy lays down a certain acceptable range of naturally-produced testosterone, the primary male hormone, for athletes seeking to compete in the womens category. Ms Chand was found to be above the permissible limit. But instead of quietly accepting her disqualification or taking hormone-suppressing drugs that would lower her testosterone level, she challenged the IAAF's hyperandrogenism policy in the apex Court of Arbitration for Sport. On Monday, the court ruled in her favour and suspended the policy — but only temporarily. It has given IAAF two years to prove that testosterone over a certain level in a female's body does indeed give the athlete a significantly unfair advantage on the track.
Until a final decision is made, Chand and other athletes like her can continue running, though there is no guarantee for how long. The IAAF's hyperandrogenism policy was crafted after extensive discussion, in the aftermath of the Caster Semenya case. In 2009, the South African runner was forced to undergo humiliating sex tests, much like Ms Chand, after her competitors raised doubts about her being a female. The case was shoddily handled and the resultant outrage compelled sports officials to adopt the new hyperandrogenism policy, which was supposed to be even-handed.
At the crux of this issue lies a deceptively simple question: How do we differentiate between male and femaleIJ On the surface of it, the answer is obvious. But if one reconsiders the issue carefully, they will realise that there is, in fact, no definite bio-chemical or physiological line differentiating males from females. Sex, like gender, is not a binary feature. It is better understood as an arch or a range with most individuals featuring on either ends (as males or females) but quite a few of them also standing in the middle.
A few of these individuals may belong to the third gender (and their categorisation in sports is also controversial) but many of them are members of the first two genders with elevated characteristics of the other. The problem is that the sporting world, divided into black-and-white categories for male and female, is not in tune with this view of human physicality. But that's not all — while a binary view is problematic, a no-barriers-at-all policy is also not without its challenges. Eventually, a middle-path will have to be found, and this will guide not only track and field but the larger sporting world, be it swimming or hockey, basketball or weight lifting.