The ongoing hot topic of participation of transgender female athletes in girls’ and women’s sports, from junior to high school to college to elite levels, is cloaked in a cry for fairness and safety.
But fairness too often is immersed in politics and steep versions of religion.
Science?
What’s been explored so far, what is conclusive and yet inconclusive, provides just enough information for people on both ends of the matter to claim they have right on their side.
Too often, though, right is self-embraced righteousness, especially for those who flat want to ban trans women from competing against cis females in all sports.
It’s reached the point where the science, the research within it, is being interrupted by strong emotional conclusions already drawn.
The fact that the topic has become as big of a deal as it is when it affects such a small percentage of the population is evidence that there’s more stirring here than just whether a trans woman should be allowed to compete against a cis woman.
When Utah State’s women’s volleyball team forfeited a match against San Jose State because that school’s team included a trans female athlete, there were political figures in Utah who not only saluted the decision, they recently urged USU to intervene in a lawsuit that included an Aggie player as well as players from other schools, and one from San Jose State, brought against the Mountain West Conference for allowing that participation. The move to intervene would enable USU to join the lawsuit.
Gov. Spencer Cox, Utah Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz issued this statement: “Female athletes deserve the right to a safe playing field, fair competition and equal opportunities. By intervening, Utah will send a clear message that those rights are non-negotiable. The NCAA, the Mountain West Conference and other institutions across the nation have failed to take action, thereby undermining vital protections and putting female athletes at risk. We will continue to defend our female athletes and the integrity of our athletic programs.”
The NCAA policy for trans female athletes states that such an athlete must complete one full year of testosterone suppression treatment before competing on a women’s team.
That’s good enough for some, nowhere near good enough for others.
Anyone who reads the studies that have been done and opinions expressed by doctors and researchers can see that there are more conclusions to be found. The International Olympic Committee paid for a university in Great Britain to make a study — without the IOC’s input or influence — of elite cis female athletes and compared them to trans female athletes to discover whether there are physical advantages gained for trans individuals, and the findings were mixed, what with cis athletes actually having some advantages and trans athletes having others.
For example, the study showed that trans athletes had greater handgrip strength and that cis athletes could jump higher and had greater lung capacity and cardiovascular fitness.
The study, while acknowledging its own limitations, issued this warning: “While longitudinal transitional studies of transgender athletes are urgently needed, these results should caution against precautionary bans and sport eligibility exclusions that are not based on sport-specific (or sport-relevant) research.”
Even without that research, bans are being implemented. Many states in the U.S., including Utah, have restrictions on trans girls competing in female categories of school sports. The IOC allows decisions about eligibility for trans athletes to be made by global sports federations.
Interesting it is that Dr. Yannis Pitsiladis, who participated in the aforementioned study, which was published earlier this year, noted two significant observations, as quoted by The New York Times.
The first is that, “Trans women are not biological men.”
And the second, on account of the backlash received by researchers involved in the study, and the heat they’ve taken since the study was published, is likely to slow the flow of researchers in the future making necessary efforts to do further study: “Why would any scientist do this if you’re going to get totally slammed and character-assassinated? This is no longer a science matter. Unfortunately, it’s become a political matter.”
The NCAA’s policy is relatively inclusive, and is said to be subject to ongoing review, as the association has been sued by those who want a total ban of trans women in female college sports, citing interpretations of violations of Title IX. The NCAA could follow the IOC’s policy of dividing up those allowances on a sport-by-sport basis.
The NAIA, an association of small schools, about 65% of them with religious affiliations, already has implemented a ban barring all trans women from participation in their female sports, regardless of the fact that there had been little or no history of trans women competing in postseason NAIA events.
Trans advocates, of which there are many, consider that ban not only ridiculous, but based solely on pressure of the political/religious sort.
As opponents claim they want to protect female athletes on the court, on the field, on all playing surfaces, they want to make it fair and safe, they often ignore the needed and often-sparse protection of trans female athletes and all trans athletes and, for that matter, all trans individuals, young and old. In that regard, the concern for the overall welfare of trans people is forgotten or ignored, and the issue at hand is seen by some as a problem to be dismissed or disposed of, championing the “normal,” all while the innocent are harmed.
It’s complicated, we get that.
But science should be embraced, not shoved aside if it doesn’t line up with political or religious or traditional affiliation. Even so-called experts on both sides of the issue are at present only ankle-deep in a study that requires neck-deep information.
Further study is important. As is understanding and inclusion, as is open-mindedness, coming and going, as is the need, even if you or somebody you care about finishes fifth instead of fourth or first, to stop simply jumping aboard a cause that somebody down at the party headquarters shouted or that an ecclesiastical leader taught over the pulpit at church.
Editor’s note • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.
