As I understand it, there is a significant group of people who would agree with the following:

- A person is a woman if they identify as such; and people who identify as women are women, without exception or qualification, and should be entirely treated as women.

That is very different from the discussion around trans-women (biological men) competing as women. At least at the Olympic level, it looks something like this:

- A person can compete as a woman if they identify as a woman and have suppressed their testosterone levels to an acceptable level for a long enough period of time.

And if I really spend some time thinking about the Olympics' position. . . it starts to not make sense.

The pretty-obvious reason for it is that un-altered men competing as women would be a disaster for un-altered female competitors. In Utah, the Boy's Highschool 100M State Champion would have won the Women's Gold Medal at the most recent Olympics. Think about that.

So the Olympic approach tries to affirm gender-identity while simultaneously acknowledging that it can't really do so, at least without putting in place qualifiers that are very inconsistent with other aspects of Gender Politics/Identity. It's saying that men can compete as women, as long as the men aren't "too good," because then they wouldn't be women (or, at least, allowed to compete as women).

🤷‍♂️