Home      Subscribe (free)    All Articles

The Box Travels

Laurel-Hubbard
Transgender woman weightlifter Laurel Hubbard

How is This Fair?

When it comes to anything having to with the topic of transgenderism, there is no shortage of opinion and commentary. For this article, we want to stick to the sub-topic of women’s sports competition. We question the fairness of transgender women being able to compete alongside biological females. While much has been written on this particular topic, we’ve seen little in the way of possible solutions being offered to make the contests fair.

First, knowing the recent history of eligibility requirements for competing in international women’s athletic events is crucial to evaluating this topic in the proper context. There are two main governing bodies for international sports that enforce the eligibility rules – The International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF).

It has long been the case that elite athletes are subject to drug testing after a major competition. Among the tests that are performed is one that measures the level of testosterone. Testosterone is a hormone naturally existing in both males and females, but at much higher levels in males. It can also be synthesized and administered to athletes attempting to unnaturally enhance their performance. Testing can distinguish between native and synthesized testosterone in the body. If a male or female athlete tests as having synthesized testosterone in their body over a certain limit, they are disqualified from competition. That rule is easy to understand and is applied equally to all competitors. Within the last decade, a few women athletes began to appear on podiums with decidedly male-looking physical characteristics. These first cases were linked to the medical conditions of hyperandrogenism (~5% of women) and a related condition called intersex (~1.7% of women). Both are characterized by having very high levels of naturally occurring androgens (including testosterone). Intersex people are often born with an ambiguity in their sex organs making them atypical for a male or female body. They can also have combinations of chromosomes other than the usual XY-male and XX-female.

It is argued by some that both intersex and hyperandrogenous athletes, because of their close-to-male physical characteristics, have an unfair advantage when competing against other females at the highest level of sport. This assertion was brought into focus in 2009 when 18-year old South African sprinter Caster Semenya (now considered to be intersex) won the woman’s 800M race at the World Championships. Her masculine physical appearance and high level of natural testosterone prompted the IAAF in 2011 to place an upper limit on the amount of natural testosterone allowable in female competitors. This limit was in addition to the previously described limit on synthetically administered testosterone. The purpose, from a purely sporting perspective, was to prevent individuals with testosterone levels and physical characteristics more closely aligned with men from competing in women’s events. However, this rule was suspended in 2015 because of a successful court challenge by Indian sprinter Dutee Chand (who has hyperandrogenism). Now able to compete again internationally, Caster Semenya once again dominated the woman’s 800M event and remained unbeaten over the following three years. As a result, in 2018 the IAAF re-imposed its testosterone limit on female athletes, but this time only for track & field sprint races, including the 800M (the IAAF was heavily criticized for not being the least bit subtle in directly targeting Semenya). Semenya sued to challenge the ruling but lost her case in the IAAF’s court of arbitration this past May. She and others in her situation now must medically reduce their natural testosterone levels in order to compete in international women’s track & field sprinting events.

The case of transgender women overlays this backdrop. It is in one way very different from hyperandrogenism/intersex in that testosterone levels are not the key issue. When an adult male transitions to a female, the process normally includes drugs that suppress testosterone, lowering the level in the body to within the acceptable limits of the IAAF for competing in female events. The dilemma presented here is that the skeletal frame and musculature of a transgender woman are still those of an adult male. The muscular development and bone density/length that result from male puberty are not erased by suppressing testosterone later in life. To be consistent, all of the same arguments in the previous cases about the unfairness of a male body type competing in a female event should apply in this case as well. Currently they don’t.

It is estimated that 0.3% of the US population is transgender (Williams Institute survey). It is also estimated that less than 0.01% of the US population are Olympic class athletes. Mathematically therefore, the odds of an Olympic class medal contender emerging from the transgender population are vanishingly small. Yet, it is now happening in a veritable avalanche of disproportionate numbers. This past winter at the high school state track championships in Connecticut, the 1st and 2nd place finishers in the woman’s 55M sprint were both transgender women. The winner set a new state record and both runners finished far ahead of the biologically female 3rd place runner. In May of this year, an American transgender woman set multiple world records in the Raw Weightlifting Federation competition in Virginia. At the same time, an Australian transgender woman won two weightlifting gold medals at the 2019 Pacific Games. And just this month, a transgender woman won the Woman’s World Cycling championship. Fair?

What can/should be done? Any suggested course of action other than the status quo (which is no action at all) will be met with fierce claims of discrimination from those supporting transgender rights. In fact, the social stigma associated with proposing to limit the participation of a transgender person in any activity may be the biggest barrier to any solution. Political correctness and social attitudes notwithstanding, something must be done, else the whole notion of having a separate sporting category for biological females will become totally undermined.

The two of us have different thoughts on possible solutions, so we decided to present our ideas separately and let readers decide.

Tom:

First, I want to point out that so far, this is only an issue for woman’s athletics – not men’s. The reverse situation, a transgender man dominating a men’s sporting event, has not occurred. It’s possible it could, but it’s very unlikely it ever will. Men’s bodies are bigger, stronger and faster than women’s – including those at the highest levels of athletic competition. That is the essence of the problem. I know it will be very unpopular, but I question the purity of motivation involved in the transition decision of biologically male athletes intending on competing against biologically female athletes after their transition. This is particularly true for any biological male whose pre-transition performance level would keep him off the podium in a men’s event but would see him standing atop it in the corresponding women’s event. On the other hand, it’s also not fair to burden the already complicated decision of going through a gender transition by adding the specter of never again being able to formally compete in a high-level athletic event. I’d be in favor of a new competition category in addition to the traditional men’s and women’s. What the new category is called doesn’t matter as much as the idea that it would include all of the outlier cases described in this article plus any future cases of a similar nature.  I anticipate that one argument against a separate category would be that there aren’t enough participants. Another might be that this new category stigmatizes the participants, e.g. the “Not Normal” category. These could be rectified by allowing any biological woman to compete in this new division if they so choose. The voluntary decision of a biological female to enter this category could be social, ideological, or based on the higher level of competition. In any case, it would level the increasingly uneven playing field in the women’s sporting category.

Paula:

Another approach is to just gird our loins, and say to transgender females, “Look, your body has gone through male puberty, which affords it a bone structure and density and muscular development that is superior to and unmatched by those elements in a body which has gone through a female puberty. It’s regrettable, but there it is. Bodies that have gone through male puberty have an innate advantage in competitive athletics over those which have not. You are welcome to compete with the men, whose bodies have also gone through male puberty, but you are prohibited from competing with those athletes whose bodies have gone through a biologic female puberty”. I suspect that given our current strident and rigid societal notions of social justice, many athletes and bystanders will reject this approach. Nonetheless, I see this as a biological reality that has medical evidence in support.1 This cannot be ignored in the service of a currently championed segment of society (transgender persons) to the detriment of another group (biologically female athletes).

Fundamental to any “fair” solution to this problem is a uniform recognition by those being harmed (biologically female elite athletes) that this is a real problem they care about. If so, it must then be followed by action. A unified declaration by elite female athletes that women’s sports in general, and top tier individual athletes in particular, are being wronged is essential. If female elite athletes remain silent, this hijacking of women’s sports accolades will continue at every level.  Sadly, social pressure to support transgenderism in all endeavors diminishes honest and open discourse on this topic.

Ideally, elite female athletes and transgender athletes should caucus with the rule-makers (the IAAF and the IOC) to address this thorny issue head on. Dabbling with allowed testosterone levels just doesn’t cut it. Bodies altered by male puberty are not equivalent to native female bodies as regards sport. The next Olympics are in Tokyo next summer and could well feature a number of transgender participants.

1Supporting Medical Evidence:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *