50 meters left. The track lays bare in front of you. The world slows down as you push yourself to a first-place win. Suddenly, a girl rushes past you and a sudden hit of disappointment comes over you as you cross the finish line. Hours pass but the anger doesn’t go away. Later, you find out that the winning athlete was transgender. Were you really given a fair chance at victory? Did you deserve to lose?
Transgender athletes around the U.S. are met with scrutiny when crossing the finish line. An onslaught of arguments considering the biological advantages of transwomen brings about questions about how we should treat their inclusion. While those who argue against inclusion state that biological discrepancies create an unfair advantage, many fail to consider factors like hormone therapy, time of transition, and the exact biological systems that allow cisgender men to perform, on average, better than cisgender women.
Testosterone affects many different aspects of the human body, the most important factors being muscle mass, bone structure, and cardiorespiratory abilities.
Cisgender men, on average, have a 30% greater amount of cross-sectional lower body muscle compared to cisgender women. Cisgender men also have 10% greater bone density and 10-12% larger lung volume. They experience a higher intake of oxygen and better respiratory functions due to testosterone regulating hemoglobin synthesis. These statistics contribute to an argument against chosen gender divisions due to these inherent advantages that those born male could experience.
However, in order to compete at an international level in the Olympics, it is required that transgender women have testosterone levels below 5 nanometers per liter. Many people who are in opposition to transwomen competing in the women’s division fail to consider the effects of estrogen on the body and factors like age, time of transition, and length of time taking hormones.
According to Joanna Harper, an advisor on the International Olympic Committee, hormone therapy has a large impact on such factors. 95% of cisgender women have testosterone below 2 nanometers per liter, and 94% of transwomen in a study of 250 have a similar amount. She argues that this sharp drop in testosterone coincides with lower hemoglobin levels, with a similar hemoglobin level to cisgender women appearing in 3-4 months of hormone therapy.
“Hemoglobin levels follow the testosterone.” Harper explains, “With their new lower testosterone levels, they will have fewer red blood cells and lower hemoglobin.”
However, with muscle mass, the answer isn’t as clear. Definitive and peer-reviewed studies on the effects of estrogen on muscle mass are limited and there isn’t enough data to support a clear answer.
Many clinical opinions consider the long-term effects of testosterone. In a study testing testosterone depletion on mice, only the youngest showed signs of reduced muscle mass, leading some physicians to argue that testosterone depletion doesn’t have a large effect on human muscle. In spite of this, the study fails to consider longer transitions that may occur and no evidence is currently available until studies are done comparing transgender women and cisgender women.
When looking at biological advantages, we can also look at discrepancies between cisgender women. It wouldn’t make sense for a woman to not be able to compete in say, soccer, because she has a different bone structure that contributes to her having longer legs. One could argue this is a biological advantage that creates unfair competition.
However, competition itself is inherently “unfair”. Competition is created due to discrepancies that make one person more athletically skilled than another, and biological advantages play a large role. Due to this, many oppositions to including trans women in sports tend to fall flat.
“We always focus on advantages,” notes Harper, “Well, we actually allow advantages in sport.”
When looking at discrimination against trans athletes, we only see it towards those who experience success. There is hardly any mention of transmen in sports because they are believed to be at a disadvantage and therefore do not support the case for excluding them from competing. There is also no mention of transwomen losing, there is only anger over the few instances where they win. This displays the blatant bias against transgender people that stands alone from the biological arguments that should be addressed. The argument was hardly about unfairness, otherwise, transmen would be included in the conversation. It is more about separation from a group of people based on biases and prejudice.
It is hardly a standalone statement to say that transwomen should be banned from competing in sports. To say that is to ignore the many factors that affect their performance and the way that we view competition. It is based on the idea that transwomen are not “real” women, and are “stealing” rights, opportunities, and the spotlight from cisgender women. In reality, transwomen seek respect and inclusivity in all aspects of their personal and professional lives.
According to a survey of a sample of transwomen, 83% of them report experiencing verbal harassment, and an alarming 56% of them said to have experienced physical abuse due to the nature of their identity.
Transwomen do not crave superiority over cisgender women but rather rights and protections that protect them from such physical and verbal discrimination. This includes their legitimacy in sports and professional endeavors. To be respected for their hard work and celebrated for their successes is a baseline for their inclusion.
