The Trans Bans
Trans Girls/Womens in sports
This continues my post from last week (Let's Talk about Gender Identity). Now let’s talk about trans girls/women and sports. It’s a complicated issue, and apparently 79% of US residents are opposed to letting trans females participate on female sports teams.1
In my opinion, total bans are wrong; they apply black-and-white thinking to a complex problem and are biased against women – not just trans women. (If you don’t agree by the end, at least I’ll give you some interesting things to think about). You should care because you’re a voter. And the issue is not going to go away until we come up with some societal agreement on what is fair.
I’ll give a brief introduction of current policies and laws on this, then discuss why we have separate competitions for men and women, based on the physical and physiological differences between the sexes. Next, I’ll explore whether trans women have an advantage over cis women. Finally, I’ll examine the sexist assumptions behind much of this, debunk some myths, and present a few alternatives to total bans.
I. Where we are Now
In February 2025, Trump issued an executive order stating that schools won’t receive federal funds if they permit trans girls/women to be on girls/women’s sports teams. Lawsuits have been filed against the order, and not all states are complying.2 The NCAA issued its own ban on trans women participating in women’s sports only one day later.3
Twenty-seven states now have such laws pertaining to female sports teams, usually at both the secondary and post-secondary levels, although in four of them, courts have halted enforcement pending further review. A few states (e.g. California) have the opposite laws, protecting the rights of trans girls/women, including in sports participation.4 The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether two state laws banning sports participation by trans girls violate the Equal Protection Clause or Title IX.5
On March 26, 2026, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) passed a ban on trans women participating in any women’s Olympic sports. Starting with the LA Games in 2028, all women athletes must undergo a genetic test to see if they were born with the Y chromosome.6
II. Why are Sports Separated by Sex?
For most sports, dividing up competitions by sex is considered the most fair way to create ability groupings, since men have biological/physiological advantages in terms of strength and cardiovascular ability. But that difference does not impact outcomes in all sports. Where men don’t have an advantage, there is certainly no reason to exclude trans women. And if we didn’t have separate competitions for men and women, there would be no problem with trans women competing.
A. The Biological Advantages of Men
For those sports in which strength, speed, or explosive power make a difference, boys outperform girls once puberty starts.7 Puberty in boys brings on much higher testosterone levels than in girls, which leads to more muscle mass, larger skeletal mass, and bigger bones. Boys’ puberty also leads to higher blood hemoglobin content, which means more oxygen uptake (VO2 max).
Before puberty (around age 10-11 in the U.S.), boys don’t have an advantage over girls in sports.8 Recognizing this, many schools and communities have coed sports for elementary-age kids (soccer, T-ball, ice hockey, etc.).
As researchers discovered the link between testosterone and strength, many sports organizations at the elite level, and at the Olympics, tested for testosterone levels in women’s sports to ascertain if any female athlete had natural (as opposed to synthetic) testosterone levels higher than a certain limit. This test, designed for trans women, required many cis and DSD women to lower their testosterone levels through hormone treatments in order to be able to compete, and the test was opposed by many people (cis, trans, and DSD) as unfair.9
B. But not an advantage in all Sports!
Post-pubertal boys and men don’t have an advantage in every sport, however. In swimming competitions, for example, women are faster in certain circumstances, due to their higher body fat percentage, which aids in flotation and keeps them warmer in cold water. Women are faster than men at all ages at open-water ultra-long-distance swim events (e.g., English Channel, Manhattan Island). But from puberty on, men are faster at the indoor pool competitions. Interestingly, however, girls/women are often faster in the pool in the years prior to puberty and again in the last decades of life.10
Adult women perform better than or equal to men in equestrian events11 and certain shooting competitions, including skeet shooting and rifle.12 In the NCAA sport of rifle shooting, men and women compete against each other, and the women consistently outperform men, taking 70% of the titles in recent years. Some scientists believe that’s because women may be better at the fine motor control and mental focus (staying calm under pressure) needed in shooting. Others believe it’s because women have a lower center of gravity and thus better balance.13
When men and women were combined in the Olympic sport of skeet shooting (from 1968-1992), a woman won the gold medal in 1992. Since that time, the sexes have been separated (I wonder why; could it be that the men didn’t like losing?).14 But under the new IOC policy, no trans woman can compete in women’s skeet, despite the fact that she may be disadvantaged, having been born male. And trans women wouldn’t want to compete with the men, since they’re no longer male. They are effectively shut out.
III. Do Trans Women athletes have advantages over Cis Women?
The Trump administration and the IOC both use the argument that, in order to be “fair and safe” for a cis female athlete (let’s call her “Jane”), we can not permit a trans woman to compete against Jane. They are ignoring physical variations within each group; they assume that a trans woman is more different from Jane, is better and faster than Jane to a degree higher than all other women who compete against Jane. But the evidence does not bear this out.
Importantly, many studies disagree with the IOC finding that a trans woman retains an advantage after testosterone reduction. A study published in Feb 2026 concluded that:
. . .despite persistent differences in absolute lean mass, transgender women do not exhibit significant differences in upper-body strength, lower-body strength or maximal oxygen consumption relative to cisgender women after 1–3 years of [gender-affirming hormone therapy].15
The study also compared trans women athletes with cisgender male athletes, and found that the upper- and lower-body strength of the trans women was substantially lower than in the cis men. In other words, trans women are not “really still men,” as certain people claim.
Some studies have shown that one year of hormone therapy still yields some strength advantages for trans women over cis women, which disappear after longer treatment.16 Lowering one’s testosterone levels could happen more quickly than the shrinking of the muscles that needed that testosterone to stay strong. Thus, a fair threshold for trans women might be a set amount of time of hormone therapy before competing.
The common argument that “letting a trans girl be on the team takes a spot away” from a cis girl assumes that the trans girl has an unfair advantage. If, as the data suggests, several years of hormone therapy leaves no residual strength advantage, then this removes the “unfair advantage” argument. In sports that are a “zero-sum game,” where one person who makes the team prevents another from making it (and not all sports are like that), the fact that a trans girl makes the team (assuming she underwent hormone therapy) shouldn’t be seen differently from a more highly-skilled cis girl making that team.17
The people behind the trans bans cite their own research, of course, to support their arguments that trans women still have an unfair advantage. For example, the IOC document states that, in sports that rely on “strength, power, or endurance,” a trans woman has a “performance advantage” that is not eliminated by testosterone reduction (without offering supporting details other than mentioning “training effects and fixed traits.”)18 Take the example of a big, tall trans woman who began gender-affirming hormone replacement therapy after the age of 25. Her testosterone levels are now in the normal range for females, but this reduction doesn’t take away her height and bone structure. It seems unfair to let a 6’10” trans woman compete in women’s basketball, where the average height is 6 feet.
But there have always been athletes who have physical characteristics (“fixed traits”) that give them an advantage over other athletes of the same sex; we don’t exclude them from competition. It seems unfair to other male swimmers that Michael Phelps was born with super long arms, huge hands, and low lactic acid levels; should we ban him from the sport? What about Manute Bol, a 7’7 basketball player who towered over everyone else? A sprinter who was born with more fast-twitch muscle fibers?
We all applaud an athlete’s hard work and training, but part of what makes an athlete great is genetics.19 Before the issue of trans women in sports was contentious, the differences in physical traits among women, as well as among men, was just part of sports.20
I’m not advocating that we exclude from sports anyone with lucky genetic inheritance. These physical differences don’t necessarily determine the winner. The tallest basketball players aren’t necessarily the best; skill plays a more important role. There are also other environmental advantages that have nothing to do with physiology: a girl born to wealthy parents who pay for lessons, equipment, and travel will often end up ahead. Being cis or trans doesn’t change that. So focusing on the height or bone structure of a trans woman is inconsistent with our longstanding approach to sports, in which these advantages don’t mean you can’t play.
Negative attitudes towards trans people can lead to unjustifiable assumptions about trans woman and performance. Supporters of bans often cite Lia Thomas, the trans swimmer whose U-Penn medals were stripped after the Trump administration went after the university. Yes, she won races, but her times were not out of line with other top women swimmers. She came nowhere near the college records set by Katie Ledecky and many other cis women.21
The hateful comments directed at successful trans women athletes often reveal a view that if a trans woman wins anything, it proves that no trans women should be allowed to compete. That is certainly not “fair.”
To the extent people think that the research outcomes are unclear, here’s what a UN panel, convened to study this issue, stated this year:
In this context, scientific uncertainty cannot justify categorical exclusion or coercive testing. On the contrary, uncertainty heightens the obligation to proceed with caution and to prioritise inclusion.22
In addition, the research seems clear that if a child assigned male at birth had puberty blockers and then hormone therapy that enabled them to transition to female without going through “male” puberty, then she would not have any physiological advantage in sports.23 This is the exact situation for the plaintiff in the BPJ case now pending before the Supreme Court.24 Yet at age 11 she was not allowed to play, and she still wouldn’t be allowed in 27 states, or in the NCAA, or in the Olympics. That’s not fair; let her play.
IV. Sexism in Sports
People’s attitudes and biases, conscious or unconscious, can influence policies and laws. It seems that behind the trans bans are some sexist attitudes that go way back. At the start of the 20th century, many people in the western world were opposed to women participating in sports because of the fear that it could turn a woman into a man. Women’s sports in the Olympics were originally limited to those deemed feminine, like tennis and swimming. Starting in the 30’s, women at the Olympics who didn’t look feminine enough were pulled out for physical examinations to ensure they were in fact women.25
There is still a tendency in our society to value a feminine “look” in female athletes. Many people loved Chrissy Everett, but criticized Serena Williams for her physique and big muscles.26 They love Elena Delle Donne, not Brittney Griner or Audi Crooks.27 There are female pro basketball stars making money today doing beauty ads, because feminine beauty sells products. The ad companies wouldn’t feature a woman who looks too “masculine.” Many women Olympians have suffered from “body-shaming” for looking too heavy or too muscular. Two cis women boxers were heavily criticized at the 2024 Games for looking and fighting “like men.”28
This makes it all the more harder for a trans woman to enter the arena, especially if she doesn’t look feminine. The anti-trans movement, then, is partly a symptom of the larger societal bias against women who don’t look female enough, effectively policing what it means to be a “woman.” The trans bans further entrench these harmful attitudes.
As an example, since this issue became a political hot potato, many cis girls and women in sports have been accused of being trans when they’re not, because they don’t look “female” enough. They have suffered abuse, bullying, and privacy violations to prove their “womanhood.”29 Sadly, we have not in fact “come a long way, baby.”
There is another sexist assumption behind the U.S. and IOC policies. The new IOC policy prevents trans women from competing in any women’s events, and prevents them from taking a “female” slot on a mixed-gender team.30 But it doesn’t prevent trans men from participating in men’s events, or from taking a “male” slot on a mixed team. There is no required testing of trans men for chromosomes like there is for women. Talk about sex discrimination; why do trans males get a pass but not trans females? Because of assumptions; no one thinks a trans man (who was female at birth) could do as well as a cis male competitor.
In fact, trans men compete successfully in men’s sports; they don’t make the news because of these assumptions that they can’t possibly win against cis men.31 And there seems to be no concern for the “safety” of small men in the men’s competitions, only for small women in the female competitions. Could this be because women are supposedly more delicate than men?
V. Debunking some myths
The myth that trans women have changed genders because they didn’t perform well as a man in their sport, and want to improve their chances of winning.
There is no way that a cis male athlete who’s tired of losing would transition to female just to try and place higher. Undergoing hormone treatments, serious surgery, and social shunning, for a chance at a ribbon? Does not happen. Trans women athletes used to be boys or men who struggled and suffered their whole lives and finally are living as their true selves.
The myth that there are trans women athletes in such large numbers that your daughter will likely lose her spot on the team, or her scholarship to college.
This idea of trans women taking over sports is not supported by evidence. There are very few trans girls in interscholastic high school sports (5-10 have been identified).32 The NCAA President testified at a Congressional hearing in 2024 that there were 10 trans college athletes, out of 510,000.33 Even at the elite levels of sport, trans women are underrepresented compared to what their numbers in the general population would predict. There has been only one trans woman athlete in the Olympics (in weightlifting in 2020, and she didn’t medal).
The myth that we need to exclude trans girls to protect the safety of cis girls.
There are many large strong cis women who might pose a “safety” concern to smaller women in certain sports (rugby or ice hockey, for example) yet we don’t think of banning them. If you want to ban a trans woman because of her physique, you need to ban cis women with the same large physique.
If we ban trans girls’ participation, it does not actually protect cis girls; rather it harms them, subjecting cis female athletes who don’t conform to stereotypical notions of white beauty to bullying and attacks, as discussed above. If people who claim to want to “protect girls’ sports” really cared about girls’ sports, they would work to combat the discrimination that exists in the form of physical abuse by coaches, fewer girls’ sports teams, pay inequality in pro sports, etc.34 I don’t see this happening.
Myths such as these are abundant in today’s politics. Fear-mongering by transphobic people and politicians has led to hysteria about this issue. Interestingly, younger survey participants are more in favor of trans rights than older people, and people who actually know a trans person are in favor of trans women’s participation in sports.35
VI. Alternatives to Bans, and Final Thoughts
I wasn’t that surprised about the Trump administration policies, given their stated opposition to trans people.36 But the IOC decision made me angry and disappointed. Over 100 human rights organizations are opposed to the new IOC policy.37 A UN panel convened on this topic issued a statement earlier this year opposing blanket bans as well as required sex testing.38
Depriving one segment of the population of the chance to participate in sports is a serious infringement on their freedom. It’s ironic that the IOC’s own governing document, the Olympic Charter, states that “the practice of sport is a human right,” but they’re now denying that right to certain individuals: trans women.
In my opinion, there should not be total bans on trans girls/women competing in sports, at any level. Here are other options:
Instead of banning trans girls/women:
Don’t have separate sex groupings in every sport
Is there a way that we could have fair competitions, but not use “men” and “women” for the groupings? Well, start by getting rid of those groupings where they don’t make sense, as in the case of rifle shooting. Get rid of them in the young ages before puberty. For adults, we could devise a way of leveling ability by a handicapping system in certain sports. We already have this in recreational golf, bowling, track and field, and other sports, so it’s certainly possible to devise a handicap for larger/stronger people based on statistics.39
In separate-sex sports, don’t have total bans
Use a sport-specific approach
Some experts advocate for different rules for different sports. Skill-based sports that don’t rely on strength (some parts of gymnastics, for example) don’t have the gender differences that power sports have, even for cis women and men, and there’s no reason to exclude trans women.40 Some people argue that we should allow trans women to particpate in all but full-contact sports, where body mass makes a difference.41
Use criteria based on medical history
The research on trans vs. cis women (see section III above) argues for a case-by-case approach for each athlete. One option is to use medical treatment histories, with a threshold for the length of hormone therapy.
Another approach, in use for many years, is a limitation on women’s testosterone levels to determine eligibility. While it can discriminate against certain cis women as well, and it’s not ideal for anyone, it’s better than a total ban on trans women athletes.
Let all trans girls/women compete, but add more slots or medals
California, which allows trans girls to compete in its K-12 schools, faced public criticism when a trans girl (AB Henderson) did well in track and field in 2025. In advance of the 2025 state championship, the State introduced a “pilot rule” that permitted an extra cis girl to qualify in each event in which the trans girl qualified; it also gave an additional “tying” medal for each medal the trans girl earned.42
Closing Thoughts
I’m more upset about banning teenage girls than I am about elite adult women. Sports are popular with young people because they’re fun, but there are also well-documented advantages: better physical and mental health, better academic outcomes, learning the value of teamwork and persistance.43 Now take teens in middle school or high school who may have suffered through gender dysphoria, bullying, conflicts with parents, and more, and deny them the right to participate in an activity that would help their mental health? That’s cruel.
I’ve personally learned a lot through sports in my life. I’ve learned how to be mentally tough and not quit. I’ve learned how to lose gracefully (I hope), and how to win without gloating. I learned that hard work pays off. Although my brother should have been much faster than me in the 1984 Chicago Triathlon, I was able to tie his time due to my training in biking and running (sorry, that might be gloating a bit).
These lessons learned from sports apply to much of life. I don’t want any kids to be told they can’t do sports. Plus, think about the message that these bans send to cis kids. Parents and elementary schools have long told kids that they can’t say ‘you can’t play.’ No matter how much you don’t want Jane on your kickball team, you have to let her play; everyone is included. But now, when kids get to middle school, they’ll think: “Well, it’s okay to exclude certain people.” Let’s be better than that.
This issue of trans girls/women in sports will probably be on the ballot in 3 more states in November (Colorado, Maine, and Washington). I’ll end this post the same way I did my last one: an appeal to look into the views of politicians before you vote. Even where sports participation is not a direct ballot issue, you should know where your local, state, and federal politicians stand on the matter before voting for them. Because these politicians can make a difference for athletes. And for kids.
TOPLINE & METHODOLOGY New YorkTimes/Ipsos Survey, p.14 (2025). Other studies have shown that people’s opposition to trans-inclusion in sports is correlated with negative bias towards trans people more than actual concerns over fairness in sports. Why are People REALLY Opposed to Transgender Athletes? (2024).
Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports (2025); Trump signs executive order intended to bar transgender athletes from girls’ and women’s sports | AP News (2025); What Trump’s Trans Athlete Ban Means for Schools and States (Education Week, 2025). Trump has tried (but failed) to get Congress to pass a law to the same effect. In 2025, a bill was defeated in the Senate; in March 2026, legislation was introduced that would amend the SAVE America Act bill to add a prohibition against trans girls/women in women’ s sports.
Movement Advancement Project | Bans on Transgender Youth Participation in Sports (2026). See generally Gender and School Sports: Federal Action and Legal Challenges to State Laws | Congress.gov (2025). Other States rely on their state civil rights laws to protect trans girls.
See Supreme Court Concludes Oral Arguments in Historic Transgender Rights Hearing - Lambda Legal (2026); BPJ and Hecox: Two Supreme Court Cases Impacting Transgender Student Inclusion in Sports - National Women's Law Center (2026). In both cases,W. Va v. BPJ, and Little v. Hecox (state of Idaho), the trans girls raise an Equal Protection claim. In the BPJ case, they also argue a violation of Title IX. Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of “sex,” and case law has established that the word “sex,” at least in one other civil rights law dealing with “sex discrimination,” does not mean only biological sex from birth, but includes gender identity. See Bostock v. Clayton Cty, U.S. (2020), in which the majority opinion (6-3) by Justice Gorsuch held that “sex” for purposes of Title VII of the Civil Rights Law (employment discrimination) includes gender identity and sexual orientation.
W. Va. argues that its law is consistent with Title IX’s permissible separation of the sexes for purposes of sports (under the Title IX regulations), because “sex” meant, when Title IX was passed, only biological sex.
Oral arguments for both cases were held in January 2026, and the decisions are expected in spring or summer. I expect the court to rule against the trans women, and find a way to distinguish Bostock, as they did in the Skrmetti case on gender-affirming care. See my post (Let's Talk about Gender Identity).
It’s ironic that Title IX is the center of this legal debate. Title IX created so many opportunities for women in sports, but did so by continuing the classification of sports into “male” and “female.” See The Debate Over Transgender Athletes in Schools | GovFacts (2025).
IOC Policy, March 2026. The gene screening will determine if a woman athlete has the SRY gene, which only appears on the Y chromosome, meaning they were born male, or DSD (“intersex”). I discuss this new policy later in this post.
The 2026 IOC document states, with regard to Olympic sports: “There is a 10-12 per cent Male performance advantage in most running and swimming events. There is a 20+ per cent Male performance advantage in most throwing and jumping events. The Male performance advantage can be greater than 100 per cent in events that involve explosive power, e.g. in collision, lifting and punching sports.” See IOC, footnote 6.
From 2015-2021 the IOC imposed a limit on women’s natural testosterone levels. See Hormone Levels Are Being Used to Discriminate against Female Athletes | Scientific American (2021); The Olympics is scrapping its controversial testosterone limits for trans and intersex athletes (2021). This test for women’s eligibility was different from the anti-doping tests used to discover the illegal use of artificial testosterone, for both men and women. While artificial testosterone helps performance, the research isn’t clear on naturally-occurring testosterone; many top-ranked cis male athletes have low levels, and high levels in women don’t necessarily mean better performance. Between 2021 and 2026, the IOC permitted different sports to set their own rules for participation in women’s events. See TRANSforming the Olympic Games . . .(emory.edu 2022)
Sex Differences in Swimming Disciplines—Can Women Outperform Men in Swimming? (2020). Girls often outperform boys until age 10, and again in the oldest Masters age groups (over 80). This is fascinating. Maybe it’s because the female’s easier flotation from body fat is a strong advantage before and after the male’s prime years? More studies are needed. See also The sports where women outperform men (BBC, 2024).
The only current Olympic sports in which women compete against men directly are the equestrian events. There are many other sports that have mixed teams, with required numbers of men and women on each team.
Studies done in 2020 and 2014 found equal performance in rifle shooting for men and women. Pistol and Rifle Performance: Gender and Relative Age Effect Analysis - PMC (2020); Gender Performance in the NCAA Rifle Championships: Where is the Gap? | Sex Roles | Springer Nature Link (2014). These studies also show that men outperform in dart throwing and pistol shooting; in both of these, you extend your arm away from the body, while in rifle shooting the gun is supported against the body.
See BBC, footnote 10; Are Women Naturally Better Shooters Than Men? (NRA, 2020).
See BBC, footnote 10; NRA, footnote 13.
Body composition and physical fitness in transgender versus cisgender individuals: a systematic review with meta-analysis | British Journal of Sports Medicine (2026). The study, which includes a review of 52 existing studies, has been criticized for failing to focus on elite athletes rather than a broad group of athletes, as well as studying general ability rather than sport-specific performances. However, previous studies have similar findings. A 2022 literature review of elite trans women athletes (2011-2021) who had undergone testosterone suppression showed no advantage over cis women across sports. Literature Review Does Not Support Bans on Transgender Women Athletes | Sport Integrity Canada (2022). A 2024 study found that trans women athletes had one strength advantage (grip strength) over cis women, but lower VO2 max capacity and lower jumping height. Strength, power and aerobic capacity of transgender athletes: a cross-sectional study | British Journal of Sports Medicine (2024).
See GovFacts, footnote 5.
This “zero-sum” issue was discussed in the oral argument in the BPJ case: Oral Argument - West Virginia v. BPJ (2026). But state bans apply to every girls’ sport, not just ones with tryouts. Many teams are open to all (e.g. cross-country running) but the laws still ban trans girls from participating.
IOC, footnote 6. The IOC states that, in these sports, trans women “retain Male performance advantage due in part to training effects and fixed traits,” without offering any sources, details, or supporting facts. It’s also bizarre that the IOC document states twice that trans women have an advantage in sports involving strength, power, or endurance, but then bans trans women from all sports.
The document also states that “[t]he clear majority are androgen-sensitive, meaning that their bodies are receptive to and make use of that testosterone during growth and development and throughout their athletic career.” Yet not all DSD women are androgen-sensitive, and the only exception to the IOC ban is for DSD women who are totally androgen-insensitive. Thus, they have also banned many DSD women.
Why couldn’t I lift the 50-pound hay bales on the farm, but sister Molly, who’s 4 years younger, could? She seems to have inherited more from our dad’s side of the family, while my brother and I got more from our mom’s side (See my post Role Models and Awesome Women).
Thus some commenters have posited that the large opposition to trans women in sports is due to “gender-panic” - the eroding of the historic binary division of sports into males and females. Why do sports fans support or oppose the inclusion of trans women in women’s sports? An empirical study of fairness and gender identity (2021).
Joint Statement on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-Discrimination in Sport (UN Human Rights Council, Special Procedures, 2/25/26).
See footnote 15.
The plaintiff, BPJ, was 11 when she was barred from her middle school sports teams. She has lived publicly as a girl since the 4th grade, and never went through male puberty. See footnote 5; Oral Argument, footnote 17.
Algerian Imane Khelif, who won the gold medal, and Lin Yu-Ting from Taiwan, had been previously disqualified by the organization overseeing international boxing, based on a gender test (unclear if it was testosterone or a different type of test), but the IOC accepted both athletes as women. Algerian Imane Khelif wins boxing gold medal after her gender was wrongly questioned (NBC 2024); What’s Going On With the Two Women Boxers Who “Failed” a Gender Test (Slate 2024). Both suffered verbal abuse because they don’t appear feminine and they box like men, reflecting a common view that women should be less aggressive or “physical” than men. (But the sport is boxing, after all).
See BPJ and Hecox, footnote 5.
Hey IOC, you didn’t think this through! A trans man may have an advantage in the men’s skeet shooting events because they were born female.
See What About the Trans Athletes Who Compete — And Win — in Men’s Sports? (2021). Schuylar Bailar is a successful trans male swimmer, pinkmantaray.com; Chris Mosier, a trans male triathlete, competed in the US Olympic trials in 2020.
One anti-trans group could only identify 5 in the country. In NC, a group identified 15 trans athletes, but only 2 of those were trans girls. In Utah, only 1 of the 4 trans high school athletes was a trans girl. How Many Transgender Athletes Play Women’s Sports? - Newsweek (2023).
The administration has taken numerous steps against trans students in addition to its actions on this issue. See Six Ways Trump Executive Orders. . .(PBS newshour, 2025); Trump Administration Pulls Out of Civil Rights Settlements Backing Trans Students - The New York Times (2026).
See Olympics: Sex Testing Harms All Women and Girls (Sports and Rights Alliance, 2026). The IOC ruling has been criticized as overbroad in many ways. For example, unlike testosterone tests, the genetic test excludes from competition anyone who has a Y chromosome, regardless of hormonal levels or other factors. The IOC previously used a genetic test but discontinued it in 1996 because it was scientifically and ethically unjustifiable. The specific (SRY) test that will now be used is opposed even by the scientist who discovered this SRY gene, as an unreliable proxy for biological sex. Dr. Sinclair wrote in 2025 that: “Using SRY to establish biological sex is wrong because all it tells you is whether or not the gene is present. It does not tell you how SRY is functioning, whether a testis has formed, whether testosterone is produced and, if so, whether it can be used by the body.” World Athletics' . . .(mcri.edu, 2025)
See Joint Statement, footnote 22; Human rights experts raise concerns over Olympics transgender women athlete ban | International Olympic Committee | The Guardian (2026).
See GovFacts, footnote 5.
See Poll, footnote 35.
See The Benefits of Youth Sports in Child Development (Univ. of San Diego).
Thanks Jill. These are very compelling arguments.
Food for thought. You made me see this issue from a different perspective.
In the old days (my youth) my dad told me that no man would want to marry me because my legs looked like a Russian track star. Been married 46 years. Hoping that my granddaughters will never confuse their worth with their body image.