The post below originally appeared as commentary in Road Race Management Newsletter, of which I am an associate editor. The question of whether to include transgender women in women’s sport—specifically those who have undergone male puberty—has become caught up in political and culture wars to the neglect of science. Also the kind of language used around it feeds into the political or moralistic narrative.
The Transgender Women Athletes Dilemma
Talking about equality, not fairness, is the way forward, and science indicates cisgender and transgender equality may exist in track and field and road racing in distances of 5000m and over, but not in shorter distances, and not in most team sports.
Since this commentary originally went to press, the International Olympic Committee has taken steps to resolve the transgender women in sport dilemma by turning policy over to the governing body of each sport. Given the current state of science, this may be the best compromise. But just think how a member of the public will get turned off by the complexities of differences between sports. “Oh, is that really a woman? How come it’s a woman in sprinting, but a man in swimming?” Down the road, we need more science, and we need more clarity in the rules.
We need public support to keep our sports thriving! Partly that comes with advances in knowledge, partly that comes from education of athletes, coaches, officials, and the public, and partly that requires dropping the use of “fairness” in favor of “equality.” The term “fairness” creates an unnecessary moral barrier.
Whether transgender women should participate in non-recreational women’s sport is a question now embroiled in social, cultural, religious, and political clashes that evoke strong emotions, and the emotions make a hash of rational discussion.
It’s a bit crazy that the science has been overshadowed by issues irrelevant to sport. Sport itself is not religious or political. People can unify over sport in a way that crosses those boundaries—cheering on the same teams and athletes. Or cheering on excellence even when it’s not on your own team. That’s all good. We should keep it that way. Focusing on the science helps with that.
The language being used—pitting “fairness” against “inclusion”—makes objectivity all the more difficult. In general, fairness is a good. And in general, inclusion is a good. The debate rages about whether the inclusion of transgender women in women’s sport violates fairness in women’s competition. Advocates for abolishing transgender athletes in women’s sport maintain that biological males who have undergone male puberty who self-identify as female have an unfair advantage over biological women where strength and speed are decisive.
Sadly, there’s no middle ground for the athlete in this dilemma. As a transgender woman you are either included in women’s sport—leading to allegations of unfairness to women—or you are excluded.
The Concept of “Fairness” Muddies Rational Debate
The word fairness is loaded with moralistic overtones. The concept of fairness transcends sport: it’s about the fair treatment of all people in society at large. It’s a grim reality that transgender people, both men and women, are under assault in general—discriminated against, smeared, stigmatized, vilified, harassed, bullied emotionally and physically, and even murdered for their choice of identity. They have been called abnormal, unnatural, freakish, and even immoral. They have been accused of cheating in women’s sport. Trans people do not deserve this kind of cruel treatment. It’s manifestly unfair, and it all too often leads to depression and suicide.