The Debate Over Transgender Student Athletes

Image: Pride by Angela Yuriko Smith (CC0)

I wrote this research paper for my AP United States History class in the spring of 2021.

Over the last decade, as America has become increasingly polarized, voters have been pushed to sort themselves into two categories – Republican or Democrat – and let their party of choice be their moral compass. One issue that has been especially polarizing is LGBTQ+ rights. In 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage, encouraging LGBTQ+ advocates and prompting conservative backlash. With the rise of the fight for LGBTQ+ rights, questions have arisen regarding the rights of transgender Americans. Should transgender people be allowed to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with? Should they be allowed to use the same changing rooms? These questions and others like them have been central to transgender-related policies from elementary school rules to state and federal legislation. One debate that has been especially heated at the high-school level is whether transgender students, particularly transgender girls and women, should be allowed to play on the sports teams of the gender they identify with, and if so, what restrictions, such as required hormone therapy, should be in place. 

This question has permeated the political atmosphere for the past several months, and many conservative states have proposed, implemented, or upheld trans-exclusive sports legislation, while the federal government has encouraged inclusive legislation. One such state is Montana. The aforementioned laws generally ban transgender girls from competing on girls’ teams, and several conservative states, including Arkansas and Mississippi, have vowed to uphold their trans-exclusive sports legislation, with the governor of Arkansas stating that these laws "will help promote and maintain fairness in women’s sporting events" (Fordham and Laco). This has created a political dilemma in which states like Montana must choose between political affiliation and federal guidelines in a decision that has the power to seriously impact the lives of teenage athletes. 

Additionally, there is the factor of public opinion. According to a May 2021 poll from Gallup, 62% of Americans think transgender athletes should be restricted to playing on the teams of their biological sex, while only 34% believe transgender athletes should be allowed to play according to their gender identities (Choi). Furthermore, the majority of Democrats think transgender athletes should have the right to play on the teams of their gender identities (Choi). Montana is a conservative state, so perhaps the percentage of people who think transgender athletes should be banned from playing according to their identities is higher than reflected by a national poll. 

While the federal government currently supports trans-inclusive legislation, this only began 6 months ago when President Biden was inaugurated. Former President Trump and President Biden present disparate attitudes towards transgender Americans and have enacted very different policies regarding them. Their stances have influenced transgender policies not only on a federal level but on a state level as various governing bodies have reacted to their positions. During his presidency, Trump’s administration issued several trans-exclusive rules, including a particularly controversial rule regarding homeless shelters. The rule allowed federally-funded homeless shelters to turn transgender people – or people who appeared transgender – away from shelters that corresponded with their gender identity (Mosley and Hagan). Trump also reversed a law that prevented insurance companies from refusing to cover transitions (Mosley and Hagan). Biden, on the other hand, has promoted an attitude of inclusion so far during his stay in the White House. In April, when he first addressed a joint session of Congress, he spoke to transgender Americans, saying, “I want you to know your president has your back” (Shear and Sanger-Katz). He also announced that the health care rights of transgender Americans are protected from discrimination based on the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010, a provision disputed by Trump (Shear and Sanger-Katz). This markedly different attitude towards transgender Americans has sparked backlash from conservatives unhappy with the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, reflecting the increasingly polarized nature of American politics. 

Polarizing presidents like Trump and Biden draw intense reactions from state legislatures dominated by the opposing party. In Biden’s case, several conservative states have responded aggressively to his trans-inclusive message. Whether they feel threatened by a Democrat in power or are simply determined to uphold their positions, many conservative lawmakers seem to consider the debate to be personal with President Biden. The attorney general of Arkansas, a state that has recently passed trans-exclusive sports laws, said “Bring it on, Biden!” regarding the discrepancy between Arkansas’ and the federal government’s positions on transgender athletes (Fordham and Laco). This demonstrates the partisan divide in this debate – it is not entirely about sports. It is not solely about fairness, equality, and the common good of high school girls but rather about the ever-growing conflict between Democrats and Republicans, and especially with a Democrat in the White House, between federal and state authority. This complicates the decision that states like Montana face by muddying the waters of what should be the real issue: the good of high school athletes. 

The opposition to the participation of transgender girls playing on girls’ high school sports teams arguably began with a track controversy in Connecticut. Terry Miller, a transgender high school girl, began a remarkable winning streak after coming out and switching to the girls’ track team (Hobson). As a sophomore and junior, she won over a dozen titles, which sparked outrage among the cisgender girls she beat and their families and coaches (Hobson).  Four girls who lost to transgender girls in track competitions sued the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) with the help of Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), arguing that the CIAC’s trans-inclusive policies violated Title IX, which is intended to protect women’s rights (Roberts). The Title IX argument is popular among the opponents of trans-inclusive sports teams but derided by supporters. The claim that trans-inclusive policies harm women’s rights implies that transgender women are not women and that their rights are less important. The ADF is a highly conservative and religious legal non-profit organization that opposes abortion and other policies that are widely seen as liberal. While the lawsuit failed, it has been cited as an example of the unfairness of transgender girls participating in girls’ sports by lawmakers who support transgender sports bans (“Montana governor...”). The lawsuit exemplifies the debate over the participation of transgender girls in high school sports as the conflict between fairness for cisgender girls and opportunity for transgender girls. 

Another source cited by those who oppose trans-inclusive sports legislation is the Justice Department’s 2020 brief against the inclusion of transgender individuals in sports. The department claimed that the participation of transgender women on women’s teams was not supported by Title IX (a law that prevented discrimination on the basis of sex) but might actually violate the title (Daniels and Baiocchi). This supports the argument that the participation of transgender women in women’s sports is detrimental to women’s rights and inherently sexist. 

On the other hand, proponents of trans-inclusive sports policies argue that sports offer crucial benefits to transgender teenagers. Many transgender people experience discrimination, with 77% of transgender adults in 2015 reporting that they had experienced harassment or assault while in school (Goldberg and Santos). It can be argued that participation in sports can help combat the discrimination transgender students face. Transgender students who participate in sports have higher grades and less depressive symptoms than their non-athlete counterparts, and transgender youth in states with trans-inclusive sports policies are less likely to consider suicide than those in other states (Goldberg and Santos).  These statistics indicate that the benefits of inclusive sports policies for transgender teenagers can be life-saving. Whether the statistics are enough to catalyze change depends on whether lawmakers value the lives of transgender teenagers as much as they value current opportunities for cisgender teenagers. 

A crucial factor in the debate over transgender sports policies is science regarding the potential benefits of testosterone for transgender women. A 2020 study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine revealed that transgender women have a significant advantage over cisgender women even two years into hormone therapy (Ingle). Transgender women were shown to run 12% faster and perform 10% more push-ups and 6% more sit-ups with a “higher power output” than cisgender women after two years of testosterone-suppressing treatment (Ingle). Testosterone was also shown to significantly increase the performance of transgender men. Only a year into hormone therapy, their push-ups and running times were on par with their cisgender male counterparts, and they could perform more sit-ups on average (Ingle). Not all studies share these results, however. A review conducted by Jones et al concluded that transgender women have no “athletic advantage at any stage of their transition” (Jones et al). While the review is older, published in 2017, it was extensive, covering 31 sports policies and 8 research articles. Although there is some contradicting evidence about the athletic benefits of testosterone, it overall appears to substantially benefit those who produce more of it, prompting some people to believe that, as transgender women frequently have more testosterone than cisgender women, they have an unfair advantage in women’s sports. 

In addition to the debate over testosterone, there is contention about the definition of gender and what makes a person a woman. Conservative lawmakers often define gender by sex chromosomes, but there is more to human biological gender than XXs and XYs. Some cisgender women have hyperandrogeny, a natural condition in which they produce more testosterone than is considered normal (Henne). Men with certain intersex variations also have a hormonal advantage over their peers, but sex-related sports regulation is disproportionately focused on women (Henne). This lack of a solid, accurate definition for the diverse group known as women makes regulating sports based on sex difficult to do fairly. 

Additionally, sex-related sports regulations have historical and cultural ties to sexism and racism. These rules are generally based on the “advantage thesis,” the long-held assumption that men are physically superior to women and that women, therefore, are unable to compete against men (Henne). While the advantage thesis might have some basis in the biological advantage men have over women concerning testosterone levels, it is also rooted in sexism. In the United States, women have long been excluded from “male” domains, be it politics or corporate America. The idea of male superiority – even when biologically factual – can be problematic in a society where women are paid less and respected less than their male counterparts. Furthermore, sex-related sports regulations have often been based on an ideal version of femininity: small, pretty, and white. Athletes like Caster Semenya (a Black woman) have been discriminated against in sports by organizations and competitors because of traditionally masculine and non- Euro-centric features (Henne). Semenya’s biological gender was questioned by the public, sports organizations, and her competitors, and she was referred to as “breathtakingly butch” after winning a race by 2 seconds (Henne).  The scrutiny sparked by Semenya’s nonadherence to the feminine prototype shows how society’s view of biological sex can be distorted by a prejudiced and archaic view of femininity, supporting the idea of loosening sex-related sports regulations. Allowing transgender people to compete according to their identities could potentially heal society’s fractured view of what makes a woman a woman and prevent future harm from coming to the careers and psyches of female athletes who appear more traditionally masculine. 

While it is likely that testosterone gives transgender women a significant athletic advantage over their cisgender peers, I believe that transgender high school girls should be allowed to play on girls’ teams. I consider transgender women to be part of the overarching group “women,” and therefore, I do not believe transgender women’s success is detrimental to women. I think that transgender women’s rights are women’s rights – cisgender women are not more important than transgender women. Although biologically male people tend to have an athletic advantage over biologically female people, there is no way to make sports independent of biological advantages. Should 6’3” cisgender women be banned from women’s volleyball and basketball because of their unfair biological advantage? Women of average height might go into competitions with no hope of victory because of their biologically-advantaged opponent. Would these women of average height be more deserving of victory simply because they “work hard too” and “can’t compete”? Transgender women already face enough discrimination in everyday life. Their rights are used as a political pawn by old, white, cisgender men who have never actually met a transgender person. By many, transgender women aren’t viewed as women – they are viewed as perverted men in dresses determined to subvert women’s rights and poison the minds of children.  

To be fair, I am distanced from this debate. I am not an athlete – I have never competed against transgender girls for scholarships or prestige. Nor am I a transgender girl striving to be accepted in a community where my identity is viewed as a political issue. Additionally, my attitude toward transgender sports policies is likely influenced by my overarching political views. As a Democrat, I am statistically more likely to think that transgender girls should be allowed to compete on girls’ sports teams (Choi).  

As I mentioned previously, I have never competed in an athletic capacity against transgender girls. However, as I have a genetic muscle disorder that prevents me from building muscle and causes my muscles to function poorly relative to others’, I have been at a biological disadvantage in every physical competition I have ever participated in. I have never had the option to compete “fairly” for scholarships or prestige in an athletic setting, and many teenage girls are in the same situation. Countless teen girls are athletically limited by disabilities or unable to participate in sports because of duties at home. It’s an old adage, but it’s true: life isn’t fair. And because life isn’t fair, it is impossible for sports to be. Biology can never be removed from athletic performance; therefore, I think it is important to be inclusive toward transgender girls. There simply aren’t enough transgender girls (about 2% of youth), much less transgender girl athletes, to replace cisgender women’s representation in sports (“Montana governor...”). Being inclusive towards transgender girls doesn’t threaten women’s rights or opportunities and provides resources and experiences that can greatly improve transgender girls’ lives. 

At the beginning of May, Governor Greg Gianforte of Montana signed a bill that banned transgender student athletes from competing on the teams of their gender identities (“Montana governor...”). The legal director of Montana’s American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) responded by saying the Montana legislature “could cite not one instance where transgender participation in athletics has been a problem or caused conflict” (“Montana governor...”). Governor Greg Gianforte’s controversial decision joins Montana to multiple other conservative states that have recently passed trans-exclusive sports legislation. These states, when contextualized within the federal government’s current support of trans-inclusive legislation, reflect the polarization of the debate and the trend toward division the United States is experiencing. 

Over the next few years, other states will be presented with similar choices. The decisions they make will either fuel the division currently threatening the survival of the United States or move our country in a more unified direction. The federal government will have to decide how to respond to laws it deems discriminatory and there might be a redefining of federal power regarding LGBTQ+ rights. I hope that our country will take much-needed steps toward inclusivity and uphold the values of equality and diversity that have the potential to make America truly great. 

Works Cited 

Choi, Joseph. “Majority says transgender athletes should play on teams that match sex assigned at birth: poll.” The Hill. 26 May 2021, https://thehill-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/thehill.com/homenews/555472-majority-says-transgender-athletes-should-play-on-teams-that-match-birth-identity?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16220525513154&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2F555472-majority-says-transgender-athletes-should-play-on-teams-that-match-birth-identity. 

Daniels, Benjamin and Baiocchi, Catherine. “Justice Department Says Title IX Doesn’t Cover Transgender Status of Student Athletes.” The National Law Review. 7 April 2020, https://www.natlawreview.com/article/justice-department-says-title-ix-doesn-t-cover-transgender-status-student-athletes. 

Fordham, Evie and Laco, Kelly. “Bans on transgender athletes in female sports to be defended by Arkansas, Mississippi and other GOP states.” Fox News. 6 May 2021, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/transgender-women-sports-ban-arkansas-mississippi-republicans-schools. 

Goldberg, Shoshana K. and Santos, Theo. “Fact Sheet: The Importance of Sports Participation for Transgender Youth.” Center for American Progress. 18 March 2021, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/lgbtq-rights/reports/2021/03/18/497336/fact-sheet-importance-sports-participation-transgender-youth/. 

Henne, Kathryn. “The ‘Science’ of Fair Play in Sport: Gender and the Politics of Testing.” Signs, vol. 39, no. 3, 2014, pp. 787–812. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/674208. Accessed 24 May 2021. 

Hobson, Will. “The fight for the future of transgender athletes.” The Washington Post. 15 April 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/04/15/transgender-athletes-womens-sports-title-ix/. 

Ingle, Sean. “Trans women retain 12% edge in tests two years after transitioning, study finds.” The Guardian. 7 December 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/dec/07/study-suggests-ioc-adjustment-period-for-trans-women-may-be-too-short. 

Jones, Bethany Alice et al. “Sport and Transgender People: A Systematic Review of the Literature Relating to Sport Participation and Competitive Sport Policies.” Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) vol. 47,4 (2017): 701-716. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27699698/ doi:10.1007/s40279-016-0621-y. 

“Montana governor signs bill banning transgender students from sports teams.” The Guardian. 7 May 2021, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/07/montana-transgender-student-athletes-ban-bill. 

Mosley, Tonya and Hagan, Allison. “How The Trump Administration Has Impacted Transgender Rights.” WBUR. 5 August 2020, https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/08/05/transgender-protections-trump. 

Roberts, Caroline. “Connecticut Policy Denies Girls Athletic Opportunities.” Alliance Defending Freedom. 26 April 2021, https://adflegal.org/blog/connecticut-policy-denies-girls-athletic-opportunities. 

Shear, Michael D. and Sanger-Katz, Margot. “Biden Administration Restores Rights for Transgender Patients.” The New York Times. 13 May 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/10/us/politics/biden-transgender-patient-protections.html.