The case for trans athletes in women's sports

A genuine attempt at progress

Photo by leah hetteberg on Unsplash

Last month, President Trump signed an executive order banning trans athletes from women’s sports. It received little pushback. That’s because, as Matthew Yglesias likes to point out, it was a losing issue by a wide margin. As Democrats continued to tolerate the insistence on acceptance from progressive activists, many females began telling their stories about losing races or changing in locker rooms with trans people—providing ammunition for Republican campaign teams in targeting a much-needed group of voters. Even after the election, Republicans have continued to soak up favor given by opposing such an unpopular issue.

In the president’s address to Congress, he recognized Peyton McNabb, a former North Carolina high school volleyball player who was severely injured by an allegedly transgendered opponent in 2022. A tough scenario for Democrats. While I understand this issue is viewed unfavorably by most, and some activists have tainted the discourse with dogma and disdain, I don’t think giving up on an important issue is the right answer to the reality of disadvantaged electoral politics— nor is evading the solution, which could be just one thought away.

Sex and gender in sports

Sports competitions are categorized by sex because the physiological and hormonal differences between the sexes are indeed significant. These differences confer a notable performance advantage for males. But these classifications aren't an end in themselves: they are a means to achieving a more fair competition. If we devised a fairer method of determining competitiveness, then sex classifications would fail to ensure a level playing field. To discriminate against athletes based on sex is not only wrong, it misses the entire goal of sports.

However, there are limited options when it comes to solving the problem that arises when males attempt to compete with females, and most are not viable.

Create a separate league

There are fewer than 50 trans athletes — and possibly less than ten — in the NCAA. It would be impractical and pointless for these athletes to compete with one another. Many of the trans athletes in college play different sports; trans men and trans women would not be able to compete against one another in most sports, due to the same reasons people don’t want cisgender men and women competing. Also, a separate trans league would be meaningless. Any award an athlete might win could not come close to the acclaim of an NCAA or Olympic win—something they very well could have achieved under the right circumstances.

Allow trans athletes but no league changes

Constraining trans athletes from competing with the sex they were assigned at birth is majorly faulty. It would be barring individuals, who could be exhibiting fair competition with cisgender athletes, from competing at all — with no sound justification.

Something that I found strange in Trump’s EO banning trans athletes was that he only banned them from women’s sports. If a trans man were to compete with men, that is perfectly fine in the eyes of the new Admin. As I thought about it more, I figured out that this was simply a ban on trans women from competing altogether. A male who undergoes hormone therapy will likely never make the men’s team, much less play or become a star. And although they could be more competitive with women, they are now banned from even attempting to demonstrate it.

Allow all trans athletes in any league

Allowing all trans athletes to compete in either division with no requirements is clearly not a solution to the problem of maintaining fair competition in sports. If there were no requirements for trans athletes, those individuals would be able to switch divisions quite literally overnight, spoiling the competition in women's sports altogether. Imagine Lionel Messi or LeBron James switching to the women’s league with free rein— ridiculous. Though it’s an unlikely and undesirable scenario, even for most trans people, I think the loophole would be abused in some way. If people have a problem with Lia Thomas, who underwent therapy for over two years, then they’ll certainly not be satisfied with men at full capacity poisoning the competitiveness of women’s sports.

The dichotomy of an open mind

The way I see it, we have two options left: ban most trans athletes but allow individual cases in any league or ban all trans athletes in all leagues. I’m not entirely sold on either argument, but I do know both are an improvement from the others; the former is the ideal, while the latter is the default. The ideal should always be —at least—discussed.

The best solution is to allow trans athletes to compete on an individual basis: the athlete must qualify under the criterion set which compares the trans athlete's physiological condition, such as lean body mass, body fat and lean muscle mass, as well as testosterone levels and anatomical structure, to cisgender athletes.

Trans athletes deserve to have the ability to compete—if they can exhibit fair competition. We have established that sex classifications are not an end in itself but a mere means to achieving competition. If that were to be altered with trans athletes, the ends would be the same: fair, entertaining, and skillful competition.

A natural advantage?

One of the main reasons behind my unpopular stance on trans athletes is the understanding of how much the sport, league, and athletes involved influence the debate over natural advantage factors.

Athletes come in all shapes and sizes, and different sports require distinct skills, abilities, and talents. Leagues then organize athletes into competitive categories based on these factors. For example, there are many types of athletes across the country, some playing football, others tennis, and some ping pong. Each sport demands a different level and type of competitiveness. There are men’s and women’s leagues, but there are also co-ed, senior, and 17-and-under leagues. These often-overlooked divisions exist to achieve the desired outcomes of competitiveness and enjoyment—for both participants and viewers.

Each sport, athlete, and league also comes with its own set of expectations. A Division 1 men’s baseball star wouldn’t want to play in a women’s little league tournament, just as fans wouldn’t want to watch it. Similarly, people don’t go to WNBA games expecting a dunk from the free-throw line, nor do they attend UFC fights to see Jon Jones figure skate. As mentioned, not all trans athletes have an advantage. And even if they did possess a natural advantage, is that a reason for barring trans athletes in and of itself? I don’t think so.

Take a 7-foot-3, 21-year-old NBA player who can shoot, dribble, dunk, pass, and rebound with ease. Now take a 6-foot-3, 36-year-old player who shares a few of these abilities, but not all. Who has the natural advantage? Since we're talking about basketball—not gymnastics or horseback riding—we can assume the former. But this is the NBA! Both players are male and identify as such. Neither is on hormones, and both are competing against others who share the same biological sex. Nevertheless, it's clear that some players indeed possess natural advantages over others, even when they’re the same sex.

The two players in question were Spurs center Victor Wembanyama and Warriors guard Stephen Curry. Anyone familiar with basketball knows that Wembanyama’s natural advantages aren’t irrelevant when comparing the two, but it doesn’t tell the full story. Curry is a great example for many reasons: he’s shorter, weaker, slower, and older than most players in the league. Yet, those factors matter less for him than they would for someone like you or me, because his talent, skills, and the hard work he’s put into reaching this level of expertise compensate for those natural disadvantages. Ultimately, no one is scrutinizing Curry’s genetics or questioning whether he deserved to make it to the league. We simply gave him the opportunity to demonstrate his competitiveness, and he succeeded—some failed. The same should apply to trans athletes.

The fact that a trans woman was born male and likely has higher levels of testosterone, is taller, stronger, faster, etc., doesn’t change the fact that if they can demonstrate their competitiveness with other athletes in their preferred sport and league, what reason would we have to prevent her from participating? Because someone else lost their spot? Welcome to competitive sports!

Men are from Earth and women are too

Whenever I discuss my arguments in favor of trans athletes competing on an individual basis with someone who disagrees, I realize toward the end that the person isn’t focused on fair competition or the nuances of different sports and leagues. Instead, they simply want sports segregated by sex. But if someone's primary concern is separating the sexes, that becomes their goal for sports. For example, if one group of females consistently dominated another group of females in softball, winning 100-0, they ostensibly wouldn’t care at all—it would be as exciting as the Super Bowl (they’re all female, after all!). But I believe that’s not the true point of sports. It’s about competition. If adding a few trans athletes to the teams made things more competitive and entertaining, that would probably be a good thing—even if your daughter gets less playing time.

We often talk about males transitioning to play in women’s sports as though it’s a quick and costless process, where people abuse the system to deceitfully gain advantages in a weaker division. But that’s almost never the case. More often, it’s a teenager figuring out life, while also trying to play a sport with different expectations. For them to transition and still compete in sports is difficult, but not impossible, nor should society be spiteful toward them for trying.

Some of this hatred towards trans athletes is simply due to a bad understanding of sports and women’s place in them. There’s this idea that males can outperform women on everything athletic. That’s false. There are plenty of sports where women can and do outperform men, and also where they’re equally competitive. The fastest record of Catalina Channel swim (20+ miles) is held by a woman, potentially due to women’s higher proportion of body fat which helps regulate body temperature in cold water and floating. In stationary shooting events like rifles and pistols with fixed targets, women and men perform equally. In ultra-running events of 100-mile races, statisticians found men were faster than women less than 1 percent of the time; in distances greater than 195 miles, women were 0.6 percent faster than men. There are many other sports too where men simply don’t compete as much, like equestrian, artistic swimming, and pole dancing— all Olympic sports by the way. This goes back to my point on the importance of which sport, league, and participants.

Men and women are different and possess distinct skills and abilities. While women may be less prone to fatigue at ultramarathon distances, men generally have greater muscle mass. As we've seen, the natural advantage factor alone isn't enough to determine a policy that works for everyone.

An example of the misguided focus on intra-sex competition is the hypothetical scenario of NBA star Caitlin Clark competing in the NBA. If she were good enough, I believe there should be no law preventing her from doing so. If Clark can prove herself competitive with players like Curry and Wemby, then trans athletes should be evaluated in the same way—not based on their genitalia or DNA but on their ability to compete with other athletes. If they are too dominant due to male genetics, they should continue therapy, find a different sport, or attempt to compete with men. My idea simply offers an opportunity, not a guarantee of participation. If the trans athlete is too good or bad, they will know that’s the reason they’re not competing, instead of a discriminatory decision based entirely on their gender identity.

Trust the process

When I first wrote about this idea three years ago, I based my prescribed procedure of determining trans athletes’ extent of competitiveness on the guidelines of USA Swimming. It has drastically changed since then, but here is what it was in 2022: “the policy includes a requirement that transgender women swimmers demonstrate they have maintained a testosterone level below 5 nanomoles per liter continuously for at least 36 months before competition. It also requires transgender women to provide evidence that they do not have a competitive advantage from being assigned male at birth. That evidence will be reviewed by a panel of three independent medical experts.”

I think this is a fine process that could be tweaked and improved over time. Lia Thomas, for instance, was on hormones for nearly two and a half years: still about six months to a year short of the Olympic guidelines (not the NCAA’s). And while the hype surrounded her one win of the event, she also came in fifth and eighth in others. Thomas was not dominating the competition, but her one win was the nail in the coffin for many female athletes who lost or thought it unfair for trans athletes to compete at all.

As I’ve mentioned on Substack a few times while reflecting on this piece, I explained that the possibility of a female being injured by a trans athlete in the league is not, on its own, a valid reason to ban all trans athletes. Females can be injured by other females, males can injure males, and females can even hurt males. The real issue is consent. If many female athletes were unaware of or disagreed with Thomas’ participation, that would be the problem—not the fact that Thomas is playing. Females already understand and voluntarily consent to competing against other females, knowing the risk of serious injury. Some females may back out of boxing matches because their opponent's strength and skill seem unfair. If they were competing against a male and consented to it, the potential for serious injury doesn’t mean the event should be canceled. It simply means we need to ensure both athletes are fully aware of the risks and circumstances.

Ban all of them

Banning all trans athletes from all sports is probably the second-best option, in my view. If a trans athlete cannot demonstrate their ability to compete with others, they shouldn’t be allowed to compete in that particular league or division.

As I’ve explained, a ban on trans women in women’s sports essentially excludes them from all sports. Also, I don’t think the mostly conservative argument that trans men can play with men because they’re not good enough to make the team based on competition (not sex) holds up: it contradicts their original argument against trans women competing in women’s sports due to sex! It’s one or the other: you either prioritize intra-sex competition, or you prioritize fair and entertaining competition. Yes, in many cases, fair competition will require intra-sex divisions, especially in sports like MMA and rugby. However, in other sports, like free diving or rock climbing, the necessity for intra-sex participants is less clear. I think it is fine for someone to desire intra-sex competition for whatever reason, but don’t act as though competition itself is the goal.

I think competition is the goal of sports. I could be wrong, but we won’t figure that out by being closed-minded or discriminating against people in sports based on misinterpretations of advantages related to sex. Activists on the left need to stop acting like this problem has an obvious solution, and those on the right need to stop thinking about sports in a reductionist fashion. We’re talking about a very small number of people, but they are people nonetheless. And people deserve a minimal effort of critical thinking and creativity when discussing their problems— including trans athletes.