I agree that the right to marry or sleep with who you want is a fundamental right.
Choosing to run in female races just because you identify as a woman is not a fundamnetal right. Transgenders can identify with whatever sex they choose but only be allowed to compete in the sex of the anatomy they were born with. That should be the end of the story.
If a guy starts taking estrogen at 16 or 17. He still has the benefits of the years of testerone. Plus being physically stronger, lower fat, higher bone density, etc. This argument is asinine.
As a male athlete if I were allowed to compete with female athletes in high school the records would be unbreakable. I ran 1:54 in the 800 and 48.7 in the 400. No hs female should be objected to that.
There might be some benefit. So far the evidence is that it is pretty tiny in most sports. You ran 1:54. How fast do you think you will be after 12 months of estrogen when you gained 10lbs of fat and don't have the benefits of test to recover from training? Probably be lucky to break 2:10. I.E. about inline with your male performance plus or minus a couple seconds. At the olympic level, that matters. HS track? Who cares.
Of course we have no clue what level of transitioning these girls has done. There is a vast gap between saying you can just pick a gender on the entry form and if you have undergone say 9 months of hormone therapy. My impression is that at least initialy when these CT sprinters showed up, there was no hormone therapy involved.
Wrong. Hormone therapy doesn't put on pounds of fat, or we would see most elite female athletes are overweight. They aren't. Jessica Ennis-Hill? Miller-Uibo? Sifan Hassan?
The advantages of a male physiology don't simply disappear at transitioning. The tennis player Renee Richards, who trained Martina Navratilova, has said that if she transitioned in her twenties and not her thirties no female players would have stood a chance against her. She is now opposed to trans competing in women's sport.