That there is even a discussion about this issue is damaging and archaic. It also serves as a reminder that women are expected to be good, but not too good, and we are expected to meet white, patriarchal, binary ideas of what being a woman means. Nowhere is it clearer than in these sporting debates that gender identity is defined by women's comparative weakness to men, and the restrictive expectations of an unrealistic gender binary. The majority of reporting on Semenya has been intrusive at best, and violent at worst. The reality is that physiological details of Semenya's body and person are not crucial to this discussion. Caster Semenya is a woman. Full-stop. No need to touch on this again. The details of Semenya's body, identity and experience should never have been public property. While sports bodies appear to have accepted this, it's now overwhelmingly female competitors who seem to have a problem with what they see as other women's unfair physical advantage.

This is a widespread issue. As Simona Castricum, a Melbourne-based, trans-feminine musician and VWFL footballer posted on Facebook this morning: "[This issue] speaks to my own lived experience of invasive questions about my body and mental state to enter a foreign country, but also to crowd vilification and formal complaints of my own eligibility compete in amateur women's AFL." This controversy is rife with complex intersections of sexism, racism, transphobia, and discrimination against trans, intersex and non-binary identities. Let's take a look at the male athletes for a second. US swimmer Michael Phelps picked up his 23rd gold medal in Rio, making him the most decorated Olympian in history. He holds world records across multiple races and he has taken the media by storm during this Olympic Games. His extraordinary 6 ft 7 in arm span is well-reported – but that's because it is disproportionate to his height, not because it is seen as giving him an "unfair advantage". Phelps was queried about performance-enhancing drugs in 2009 but aside from that, the overwhelming tone of his media coverage has been awe, respect, worship and reverence. The same can be said for Usain Bolt, who is expected to win every race touched by his "unbeatable" style, contributing to his "legacy".

Semenya, on the other hand, was temporarily banned from her sport, has had her performance and identity hijacked by the media, and been forced into years of social and medical scrutiny. A statement from Semenya in 2010 confirmed this: "I have been subjected to unwarranted and invasive scrutiny of the most intimate and private details of my being." This comparison is a stark reminder of two key truths: that a certain brand of 'femininity' or 'womanhood' is lauded and praised above all – that is, that being assigned female at birth, in a way that suits a white, western, patriarchal gender binary, is the only acceptable way to be female. Anyone that lies outside of that is immediately suspect. And secondly, that the definition of womanhood continues to be tied to weakness as the male standard's "other", and anything that threatens this fact must be quashed. If women are seen to be too successful, too hard-working, too big, too fast or too strong – they run the risk of being blocked from achievements, banned from fields, excluded, harassed and humiliated as "not real women". Individuals like Semenya help pave the way for those who are gender non-conforming, those with diverse gender identities, diverse bodies and diverse experiences of self. This interrogation of what is 'normal' is so often squared at women – in sport, in particular, men do not suffer this level of scrutiny over their 'competitive advantage'. Deemed male, you should strive to be as big, strong and fast as you can possibly be, short of doping. It's clear that a new methodology needs to be adopted by international sport to truly assess the world's best athletic achievement among women, especially if the sporting world is going to catch up with the rest of us.