Miroslav Imbrisevic

The recently published ‘Scientific Review’ by the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport about transwomen’s participation in female sport doesn’t deserve its name; it is wholly unscientific. This publication follows a familiar pattern. The body is not important anymore when it comes to categorisation and eligibility in sport; instead, it’s all about a psychological phenomenon: gender identity. This side-lining of the body (which makes the side-lining of female athletes and the inclusion of male-born athletes possible) is now reinforced by an attack on the bio-medical sciences.

‘Trans philosophy’ is mostly silent about its critics; that is why I put it in quotation marks in the title of this essay. At present it can only be called ‘trans theory’, rather than ‘philosophy’. The term ‘philosophy’ should be reserved for those who engage with their critics. The sad lesson is: trans allies in academia/philosophy see it as part of their job to silence gender-critical (or sex-realist) voices. They are exercising ‘epistemic violence’. The long philosophical tradition of engaging with your (strongest) critics does not apply, when it comes to trans theory. Here, philosophy makes an exception - and fails to uphold its own norms.