#100 TRENDING IN Politics 🔥

Transgender Participation in the Olympics: the Inclusion Debates and Guidelines

Politics

July 15, 2024

As anticipation rises within both athletes and spectators for the Paris 2024 Olympics, debates awaken. The Olympic Games, a global symbol of unity, peace, and athletic excellence, are now at the heart of a contentious conversation regarding transgender inclusion.

Though the first modern Olympics dates back hundreds of years to 1896, transgender and intersex participation was only permitted starting 20 years ago, and openly transsexual olympiads just began competing during the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. Given that their involvement is incredibly recent, conflicting opinions are still up in the air.

On one hand, proponents argue that transgender and intersex athletes are entitled to participation in competitions that align with their gender identity, as inclusion is paramount; however, from the opposing viewpoint, critics posit that this compromises the fairness of the Games. In other words, they believe that transgender athletes strictly belong in the competitions of their biological [censored].

Not only has this intense controversy sparked an uproar within the public, but it has also prompted the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to issue new guidelines addressing these concerns.

Image Credit: Collum from Unsplash

The Case Supporting Inclusion

Proponents of transgender inclusion in sports emphasize the importance of equality, human rights, and the evolving understanding of gender identity. They proclaim that sports should be a space where everyone, including transsexuals, can compete fairly and be respected for their abilities.

Shunning transgender women from the women category is seen as a form of discrimination, violating fundamental human rights principles. In a national context, American activists are citing Title IX, or the Education Amendments of 1972, in support of transgender athletes in sporting events at educational institutions.

From a defender's point of view, this act forbids categorically banning transgender students from participating in sports teams because of their [censored]. This is especially true for transgender women who begin hormone treatment before puberty; there is no scientific reason for their prohibition since there are no measurable contrasts in athleticism between prepubescent girls and boys.

To extend this dilemma to a global context, those who hold the U.S.’s NCAA to this standard, believe that the IOC should act accordingly as well. Ultimately, it’d be beyond cruel to force someone to decide between staying true to themselves and following their passion for sports.

Advocates also highlight the psychological and social benefits of inclusion. Transgender athletes often face high levels of discrimination and stigma, so much so that they are highly underrepresented in sports. Their exclusion at such an elite level would only lead to a further decline in their participation; however, if their inclusion is visible to the trans community, it will serve as inspiring tales of empowerment.

Image Credit: Cipriano from Pixabay

The Case Against Inclusion

Opponents of transgender participation primarily focus on the IOC’s responsibility to uphold competitive integrity. They maintain that biological differences between males and females create an uneven playing field, which inclusion policies will exacerbate.

Biological males generally have greater skeletal muscle mass and strength than their female counterparts. There are critical differences between their bone density, maximal force expression, testosterone levels, and other underlying factors that deeply contribute to one’s athletic performance.

For instance, testosterone, which helps build muscle by generating proteins, is notably higher in males, as females generate only 1/10th to 1/20th of the amount produced by men. According to SIXSTAR, larger quantities of the primary male [censored] hormone contribute to "stronger bones, greater muscle mass and strength, and higher circulating hemoglobin," providing men with an upper hand in sports.

Because of these integral variations in the anatomy and physiology of the sexes, men are naturally faster and 30% to 75% stronger than women. Thus, critics believe that these fundamental differences give transgender women (assigned male at birth but identify as female) an unfair advantage over cisgender women. They claim that these physiological traits, which are developed during male puberty, can persist even after hormone therapy and gender-affirming treatments.

Consequently, when New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard participated in the Tokyo Olympics, she received immense backlash. Millions argued that Hubbard, who transitioned in her 30s, retained physical advantages from male puberty, raising questions concerning the Games’s equity.

Much of the opposition believes that for transgender women to compete, they must lower their male hormone levels below specific bounds, hence losing their [censored]-linked edge. If not, the integrity of the competition is diminished exponentially.

In essence, detractors fear that allowing transgender athletes to compete in categories that do not align with their [censored] assigned at birth will undermine the credibility of women's sports. Many, including University of Nebraska professor Dr. Gregory A. Brown, insist that this decision might allow “‘many who would not be considered top tier male performers’ to replace the world’s most skilled female athletes on the podium,” creating an arbitrary competition.

Image Credit: Rice from Unsplash

The IOC's Response

After two years of deliberation and consulting with over 250 athletes and stakeholders, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has created a new framework: "Fairness, Inclusion, and Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and [censored] Variations." They aim to strike a balance between inclusion and fairness, ensuring that all athletes have the opportunity to compete while maintaining the integrity of the competition.

Rather than focusing on testosterone levels as the primary criterion like the 2015 guidelines that required medically unnecessary procedures, these rules fabricate a more individualized approach. The modernized Framework dictates that it is now the responsibility of individual sports federations to determine the eligibility criteria for men’s and women’s categories. These decisions must be unprejudiced and based on scientific reasoning to reduce reliance on one-size-fits-all solutions.

To ensure fairness, the IOC demands that sports organizations 1) ensure that no athlete has “an unfair and disproportionate competitive advantage;” 2) “prevent a risk to the physical safety of other athletes;” and 3) “prevent athletes from claiming a gender identity different from one consistently and persistently used.”

These measures acknowledge both sides of this disputed coin, as the IOC has done its utmost to make future Olympic Games both nondiscriminatory, harassment-free environments and fair competitions wherein no athlete has an overwhelming upper hand. Striking a balance between fairness and inclusion is a nuanced and ongoing process, but this updated approach has made significant headway so far.

Image Credit: Anthony from Pexels

In light of this information, it is evident that the debate over transgender inclusion in sports is complex and multifaceted. As the world watches these upcoming games, the evolving conversation around transgender involvement will undoubtedly continue to shape the future of sports.

Julia Andrade Xavier
5,000+ pageviews

Writer since Dec, 2023 · 9 published articles

Julia Andrade Xavier is currently a senior in high school. She loves writing, watching TV shows, and skiing during the winter season. Her aspiration is to major in international relations when she heads off to college and subsequently attend law school, aiming to become an attorney.

Want to submit your own writing? Apply to be a writer for The Teen Magazine here!
Comment