Photo from Darren Abate on AP
“As of today, it will henceforth be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders: male and female.” President Trump delivered in his 2024 inaugural address.
With that line, one of the most divisive social issues in America was assumed to have been put to rest, but the real impact shows that assumption couldn’t be farther from the truth.
The single, casually delivered sentence sparked sharply different reactions across the political spectrum. From the right, it was seen as a much needed clarification for the increasingly complicated and evolving definition of gender identity. From the left, it was viewed as a complete dismissal of the transgender community and a rollback of hard-earned progress. The existence of transgender people has never held a stable place in the American social climate. Nowhere can this be seen clearer than the debate over trans kids in sports.
But let’s clear up the basics first. What does being “trans” actually mean?
“Transgender,” The American Psychological Association explains, “is an umbrella term for persons whose gender identity, gender expression, or behavior does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.” Simply put, if someone is transgender or “trans,” it means that they believe the gender they were born as doesn’t fit who they actually are. This feeling is referred to as “gender dysphoria.”
“Gender dysphoria,” publishes the NHS, “is a term that describes a sense of unease that a person may have because of a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity.” About 2.8 million trans people live in America, raising one of the greatest social debates of our time: Should trans people be allowed to participate in sports?
What was once viewed as a niche issue, affecting a small minority of the population, has risen to one of the top social issues in this political climate just within the last decade. It became a core issue to the left and, more importantly, to the right. It became the social sensation that occasionally served as a primary driver to vote for one candidate over the other. And, it remains one of the most controversial social developments in modern America. So what does the opposition say?
The side against trans people participating in sports is often associated with right wing politics. The main argument poised against trans participation is that there are certain, immutable advantages, that competitors who were assigned male at birth will have over biologically female athletes. For that reason, this piece will primarily focus on transgender women in sports, although it is important to note that transgender men have also faced bans from athletic participation as of last year.
At first glance, the argument appears intuitive. If biological males are, on average, stronger than biological females, allowing a group with a physical advantage to compete, especially at the elite level, can seem unfair. But what are these biological advantages exactly?
To start, we have to consider the inherent strength disparity between biologically male and female competitors. “After going through puberty,” UW Medicine writes, “males as a group will be stronger and faster than females as a group (…) A male athlete at the highest level will typically be stronger and faster than a female at the highest level.” It is a biological reality that men and women, on average, perform differently in most sports after puberty. This does not mean all men are stronger than all women, but that male puberty generally gives advantages that translate into higher average strength and speed.
However, that comparison involves exclusively non-transgender women and men which provides little relevance when talking about transgender women who hope to compete in sports. For organizations like the NCAA and many others, trans women are required to undergo Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy like taking estrogen and testosterone blockers. While the long-term athletic effects remain debated, hormone therapy does significantly reduce muscle mass and strength. According to JCEM, after a certain number of years of hormone therapy, patients’ scores began to mirror those of their fellow competitors and draw some distance between the scores they had held previously.
But even with hormone therapy, it is continually cited that trans women have cheated biologically female athletes out of hundreds of placements, medals, and scholarships.
“Over 600 female athletes have lost close to 900 medals to transgender opponents.” Reported an anchor on Fox News. This line is one of the most popular statistics read in the argument against allowing trans athletes to compete in sports. Unfortunately, these numbers may be slightly inaccurate.
The statistic originates from the website She Won, where users can submit instances of transgender women winning competitions. As comedian John Oliver noted in his Transgender Sports segment for his show Last Week Tonight, the list includes events ranging from elite championships to local fun runs and even activities like poker where gender confers no advantage. Additionally, one first-place finish is counted as three “lost” medals, inflating the total with the logic being the second place finisher should’ve come first, the third should’ve come second, and so on.
Besides unfair advantages, safety concerns are also raised. Critics argue that greater average male strength could increase injury risk. One of the most famous examples of this happening is with Payton McNabb, a high school volleyball player who suffered a concussion after taking a spike to the head by a transgender opponent.
Concussions are serious, and safety should always be the highest priority. However, having the standard be that no trans women can injure female athletes is simply an impossible standard because there will always be an inherent risk of injury when competing in sports. “There is no evidence that trans-inclusive policies are harmful to cis girls,” Yamey from Time Magazine points out. “[There’s] no documented evidence of any harm to cis kids.” If trans kids were injuring cis kids at much higher rates, then we could have safety concerns to address. However, that evidence doesn’t seem to exist.
While the opposition tends to focus primarily on athletes at the elite level, the side in favor of trans inclusion, often associated with left wing politics, centers on youth sports. Because of this, the issue of boys having an advantage over girls is less pronounced, since puberty hasn’t been hit yet, and most sports are co-ed to begin with. Even considering this though, blanket bans are continuously being passed to keep trans athletes out of all competitions. Advocates argue that bans strip transgender youth of discipline, community, and health benefits. The left argues that allowing transgender children to participate affirms their identity while granting them access to the same benefits their peers receive.
For many trans youth, sports can be a critical source of community and stability, and exclusion from these spaces has been linked to higher rates of isolation and mental health struggles. “Overall, we found that [trans and gender-diverse] adolescents who participated on a sports team had a lower prevalence of elevated depressive and anxiety symptoms than similar adolescents who did not participate.” Researchers from the University of Minnesota defend. From this perspective, policies that restrict participation do not simply regulate competition, they shape who is allowed to belong.
In the end, it’s hard to say which side is objectively right or wrong. The debate often treats elite and youth athletics as the same issue, despite their significant differences. While concerns about fairness and safety deserve serious consideration, the social, emotional, and health benefits that sports provide, especially at the youth level, can’t be ignored. Any lasting policy will require balancing fairness and safety with inclusion rather than choosing one at the expense of the other.
Be First to Comment