{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025120772946859903, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011111111111111112, 'mean_word_length': 5.163690476190476, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 9, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sport, Sex Segregation, and Sex Testing: Critical Reflections on This Unjust Marriage

We extend appreciation to Karkazis, Jordan-Young, Davis, and Camporesi for their outstanding article. They argue that the legitimacy of the new policies on hyperandrogenism in elite female athletes can be questioned on several fronts, and we wholeheartedly agree. Here, we address several unexamined points in Karkazis and colleagues’ important and rigorous article. One major point is in reference to the authors’ statement that they disagree with the practice of sex testing, yet agree with the “continued division of athletics into male and female categories” (3). In this commentary, we reveal how sex testing cannot be disentangled from sex segregation. After all, arguments for sex segregation have historically justified the need to verify the sex of participants in female athletic competitions. In addition, sex segregation in sport is upheld and maintained through sex testing policies, which reinforce sex and gender injustice. (Cooky, Dycus, and Dworkin 2012). The authors therefore inadvertently reinforce gender injustice in sport. Sex testing is only one example of sex/gender discrimination in sport, and it is critical to contextualize the unjust nature of sex testing within the broader sociohistorical context of gender inequality in sport. One of the most central and coveted beliefs in sport is that of male physical superiority and female physical inferiority. Shoring up this categorical belief system in fact informed the institutional formation of sport at the turn of the 19th century (Burstyn 1999). Under rapidly shifting gender relations at the end of the 1800s, there were numerous changes in work and family relations for both women and men. That is, as more women entered the professional world, and as increasing numbers of women entered into college, medicine, and law schools, and given that women began to teach male children in the educational sphere, gender roles were in a state of rapid flux (Burstyn 1999; Messner 1997). Scholars point to how