On BBC Newshour this afternoon, hear me and @chasestrangio discuss transgirls in females sports.

@bbcworldservice

From 45:00 mins in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172x2z59b74d7v

I have some follow up questions for Chase.

1. Thanks for promoting me to professor, but I am not a professor.

2. You claim I said there wasn't "any dominance" of transgirls/transwomen, when I actually said there wasn't yet any "systematic dominance" but that individual athletes were displacing girls and women.

3. You claim we haven't seen any "significant performance" from transgirls/transwomen. This is not true. There are plenty of examples of individuals who have dominated their races/sports to the detriment of female competitors.

4. You claim no transwomen qualified for the 2020 Olympics. This is not true (or would not have been true, were qualifiers completed). Not only were there transwomen due to appear, there were possibilities of medals (see Laurel Hubbard, NZ weightlifting).

5. You say, "They are not males, they are girls". "Male" describes a body type regarding reproduction. It's a simple, neutral scientific description that applies to all species that reproduce in a particular way. Including humans.

6. You claim transgirls/transwomen have no other place in sport. This is not true. There is no barrier to competing in the male category, in open categories or in mixed sports.

7. You say it is "categorically untrue that transgirls/transwomen are bio equivalent to non-trans boys/men".

In what sense is that the case for Andraya Yearwood and Terri Miller, when they started competing in the absence of any medical intervention?

8. You evoke what I call the Phelps Gambit.

Do you believe that a female with the same background genetics as Phelps delivering the same favourable wingspan or lactic acid metabolism would swim at the same speed as him?

9. You claim that "transgirls who transition at a young age are physically equivalent to cisgirls". Can you provide citations for this please?

10. You say that there are "100s of years worth of data showing that no simple fact determines sex", yet humans have reliably identified sex for evolutionary timescales. Weird, huh.

That's it. I apologise if I had inadvertently misquoted you. I may have made statements shorter for Twitter, or jotted notes incorrectly, but have no intent to misrepresent.