Transgender athletes: ‘Protect women’s sport,’ say two British elite athletes

Transgender women should compete in an “open category” in order to “protect women’s sport”, say two current elite female runners.

The debate centres around the balance of inclusion, sporting fairness and safety in women’s sport – essentially, whether trans women can compete in female categories without their biological sex giving them an unfair advantage or presenting a threat of injury to other competitors. The governing bodies of cycling and swimming are currently reviewing their transgender policies.

Many argue that transgender women should not compete in elite women’s sport because of the perceived advantages they retain, but others argue that sport should be more inclusive.

In recent months, the debate has transcended sport, even drawing comment from UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson who does not believe transgender women should compete in female sporting events.

The athletes who spoke to BBC podcast The Sports Desk have asked to remain anonymous for fear of social media backlash and losing sponsorship deals.

They were advised against speaking out by those closest to them – but felt they needed to “stand up”.

“I believe sport needs to be kept in sex categories,” said athlete A. “That’s the only way it remains fair.

“The categories aren’t there for gender identity. The categories are there for sex and the difference between the two sexes.”

Athlete B added: “Competition needs to be fair; it’s meaningful if it’s fair.

“The whole point of competition is to make a fair and level playing field and the only way to do that is to have a female category and a male open category, where trans women can compete and it’s a level playing field.

“We need to protect women’s sport.”

The debate around transgender athletes has recently focused on the case of transgender cyclist Emily Bridges.

In March, the 21-year-old was ruled ineligible to compete in her first elite women’s race by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), cycling’s world governing body. The process to rule on Bridges’ eligibility to race in international competitions is continuing, while British Cycling has suspended its transgender policy.

Bridges began hormone therapy last year as part of her gender dysphoria treatment and has now become eligible to compete in women’s events because of lowered levels of testosterone.

She said she had been “harassed and demonised” after being told she could not compete.

Last year, New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard became the first openly transgender athlete to compete at an Olympic Games in a different sex category to that in which they were born, while in March, American Lia Thomas became the first known transgender swimmer to win the highest US national college title.

“I think by trying to have inclusion it actually excludes who the category is for,” said athlete A.

“The female category was made because women wouldn’t get a look in if they played male sport.

“We have seen at the Olympics last year trans women being included in the female category, and that then takes away an opportunity for one woman to be called an Olympian, and that is something we all dream of.”

Athlete B said: “We’ve made great strides in encouraging women into sport.

“This is actually excluding more women from sport and it will slowly turn around so then we won’t have a female category any more, but it will be just taken over by trans women who are biologically male.”

However, this is disputed by sports scientist Joanna Harper, who is transgender herself. She told BBC Sport that “trans women will never take over women’s sport”.

“If you look at NCAA [US college] sports, there are more than 200,000 women competing every year. Trans women make up 0.5-1% of the population so we should be seeing 1,000-2,000 trans women [competing in the NCAAs] every year,” she said.

“The NCAA 11 years ago allowed trans women to compete, based on hormone therapy. We should be seeing 1,000-2,000, but we see a handful every year.

“So 11 years after these hormone therapy-based rules went into effect, trans women are not taking over NCAA sports. They are still hugely under-represented.”

Both athletes say transgender athletes are welcome in elite sport and do not want to see anyone deterred from participating at any level, but add that it is a common belief among other female athletes that transgender women should not compete in women’s sport.

“I haven’t actually spoken to another athlete that doesn’t feel the way I feel,” said athlete A. “Every single female athlete I’ve spoken to is scared to speak out.”

In April, a letter signed by a group of elite female cyclists – including retired Olympians, scientists and researchers – called on the UCI to “rescind” its rules around transgender participation and testosterone levels and implement eligibility criteria for women “based on female biological characteristics”.

The letter – referring to the Bridges situation – said there was “deep regret” at the “crisis situation”, claiming female athletes in the UK “have shown they were willing to boycott” in order for the UCI and British Cycling “to hear their concerns about fairness in their sport”.

The letter included the signature of Sara Symington, head of Olympic and Paralympic programmes at British Cycling.

Later that month, Olympic cycling gold medallist Katie Archibald – who did not sign the letter – said she felt “let down” by the International Olympic Committee’s stance that there should be no assumption that a transgender athlete automatically has an unfair advantage in female events.

“I read this and hear my world titles, Olympic medals and the champions jerseys I have at home were all won in a category of people who simply don’t try as hard as the men,” she said.

World Athletics president Lord Coe has warned that the integrity and future of women’s sport is “very fragile”.

What is the IOC’s view?

The International Olympic Committee’s framework on transgender athletes – released in November – states that there should be no assumption that a transgender athlete automatically has an unfair advantage in female sporting events.

It places responsibility on individual federations to determine eligibility criteria in their sport, but does not require transgender women to suppress testosterone levels in order to compete in female events.

However, this latest guidance has been criticised from many corners, with the athletes speaking to BBC Sport saying it is “not clear”, “very vague” and “problematic”.

The IOC’s head of human rights Magali Martowicz told BBC Sport: “It has always been the responsibility of federations to set their own eligibility criteria. This has not changed.

“The previous approach that we were recommending to have a set threshold of testosterone was no longer sustainable and we had to really rethink how to ensure inclusion and pathway for inclusion for transgender athletes, and those with sex variation, as well as of course maintaining the fairness of competition.

“One of the key things that came out strongly is that it has to be looked at on a sport-by-sport basis, that’s one of the key outcomes of the consultation.

“There is nothing in the framework that suggests that you cannot exclude someone. What the framework says is that federation has to truly understand what constitutes a disproportionate advantage, and to do that it has to be based on a thorough review of the science, but also other considerations, as laid out in the framework.

“If indeed on a case-by-case basis a person has demonstrated a disproportionate advantage, there is nothing in the framework that says she has to compete at all costs.

“So it’s not that we are favouring inclusion over fairness, it’s really trying to balance the two but having a process that allows for a fair process for all athletes in that category.”

‘No-one is trying to ruin women’s sport’ – the argument for inclusion