Transgender pride flags. Image courtesy of Ted Eytan via Anti-Defamation League.
By Emily Tarinelli ’25
Sports Editor
For the first time ever, a report titled “Transgender Women Athletes and Elite Sport: A Scientific Review” has shown that no existing scientific literature has proven trans women to have inherent competitive advantages over cisgender women in high-performance athletics. The report, which was published in late 2022, is a comprehensive review of all English-language studies published between 2011 and 2021 exploring trans participation in elite sports. It was commissioned by the Canadian Centre of Ethics in Sport, a nonprofit organization dedicated to making sports more safe, accessible and inclusive for all, and conducted by E-Alliance, a group made up of scholars and organizations committed to gender equity in athletics.
As stated in a summary of the 86-page review by Athlete Ally, a nonprofit advocacy group for LGBTQ+ athletes, the report cites two fields of interest when it comes to drafting trans eligibility requirements: the biomedical and the socio-cultural. Under the flawed assumption that trans women athletes possess an inherent biological advantage over their cisgender counterparts, policymakers tend to use only biomedical research to inform regulations for trans inclusion, without considering sociocultural elements that also impact athletic performance. According to Athlete Ally’s summary, “Biomedical and social scientific information should both be used in policy-making. However, biomedical research is often overvalued to the detriment of athlete well-being.”
The review provides an in-depth assessment of current biomedical research, which found that most studies used to back trans inclusion policies are structured around cis men or non-athlete trans women subjects, not elite trans women athletes themselves, Athlete Ally reported. Additionally, these studies avoid recognizing instances in sports where cis women possess advantages over cis men — for example, in long-distance open water swimming, according to one comparative study. Furthermore, most literature only considers one variable, like testosterone or grip strength, and plays up that variable’s effect on athletic ability, while ignoring additional social characteristics that contribute to an athlete’s prowess. According to the review, the available biological data is not only “methodologically flawed,” but also “severely limited.”
Additionally, the review made several other findings based on the biomedical literature. First, the report found no indication that naturally produced testosterone is associated with stronger athletic performance among cis women. Moreover, the distribution of testosterone levels between elite cis men and women athletes overlap, given that everyone produces estrogen and testosterone. In addition, the review found that recent research showed that biological characteristics like bone density, lung capacity and hip-to-knee joint angles do not correspond with performance advantage. Lastly, the review stated that based on the only three studies to have explored the subject of trans athletes, any possible competitive advantages are neutralized through testosterone suppression after 12 months — and occasionally sooner.
The review then transitions into an in-depth examination of the sociocultural factors that contribute to trans athletic performance. To begin, the report states that there are many social elements that impact competitive differences between men’s and women’s sports that specifically target the latter. Sexual harassment and abuse of women athletes, comparatively lower numbers of women’s teams, disparate access to facilities and training equipment, scarcity of monetary resources, inequitable pay and societal body standards, as well as various interlocking forms of oppression including racism, homophobia and transphobia, all contribute to inequities between men’s and women’s sports and directly impact performance. According to the review, “Faulty and/or absent data about trans women’s performances makes transphobia especially present and prominent in this context of scarcity and scrutiny for women in elite sport.”
Additionally, the review summary by Athlete Ally acknowledges that trans women are extremely underrepresented in sports, particularly at the elite level, and that factors such as coaching, training time and equipment accessibility often affect performance more than biological factors like testosterone.
Athlete Ally provided several recommendations to advance a fair competitive environment for all athletes, beginning with recognizing that there is no obvious connection between testosterone and competitive advantage and that trans women have no inherent edge over cis women in athletics.
“If your sport requires testosterone-based restrictions at the elite level, research suggests that 12 months of hormone replacement therapy is adequate and that longer waiting periods are not justified,” the summary stated.
Secondly, Athlete Ally advocated the rejection of misinformation and prejudiced research. Lastly, they provided specific, actionable steps to increase gender equity in sports.
“To level the playing field for all athletes, and especially for women and girls in sport, focus on ending sexual abuse and harassment, [increasing] access to equipment and facilities, pay equity and investments in nutrition and diversifying recruitment strategies,” Athlete Ally said in the summary.
The summary also identified key points from the review about what makes a quality study.
“Studies used in policy-making should include large populations, control for factors like height and weight, and compare trained athletes to untrained people. Current studies used in policy-making about trans athletes do not do this,” the summary said. “Ideally, studies should also be sport-specific. For example, biomedical factors that contribute to success in the long jump may differ from factors in marathon running. While sport-specific studies of trans athletes may not currently exist, it is important to be thoughtful about specific sports and how variables studied in literature may or may not apply.”
“There is strong evidence that elite sport policy is made within transmisogynist, misogynoir, racist, geopolitical cultural norms,” the review said in conclusion. “Sport organizers need better education, dedicated resources and high-quality research to confront, disrupt or transform gendered systems.”
