Olympic Fairness in Consideration of ALL Athletes

Much discourse surrounds the participation of transgender athletes in the Olympics. While this paper will bypass majorly oppressive arguments against transgender athletes/people in general, there are still real points of concern and differences regarding physiological factors that can and should be discussed in the best interest of fairness for all participants, regardless of gender. Lorde writes, “It is not those differences between us that are separating us. It is rather our refusal to recognize those differences…” (Lorde 115). I believe that transgender and intersex athletes absolutely deserve the right to participate in the Olympics, but that the reasons for resistance must be analyzed and worked through as well--not just for cisgender athletes to feel secure in an event’s fairness, but to provide that same security to transgender and intersex athletes too. As we will soon get into, most issues of physiological fairness have counterparts that put transgender athletes at a disadvantage as well. Our goal should be fairness to all players, regardless of gender.

        Of the arguments against transgender athletes participating in Olympic events, the primary cause for concern is physiological fairness. Some worry that transgender athletes have physiological advantages compared to their fellow cisgender athletes. For example, a transwoman’s high testosterone levels can aid her endurance performance, which one may view as an advantage in a competitive setting--and the Olympics are one of the most competitive (Anderson). Though this concern appears reasonable, and perhaps to some extent is, it becomes less so when we address the situation from a wider scope. There are three additional perspectives to round out this concern: disadvantages that transgender athletes face, physiological (dis)advantages due to reasons other than gender, and a history of controlling/policing trans bodies.

The counterparts to the advantages of transgender athletes that are women are the disadvantages of transgender athletes that are men. Transgender men can be physiologically disadvantaged compared to cisgender men for similar reasons as the above. Bringing these concerns to light is not to negatively single out transgender individuals, but a necesarry recognition of differences as Lorde describes, for the benefit of transmen athletes as well. Knowing that there are advantages and disadvantages for all athletes involved does warrant concern--so what are we supposed to do about these physiological (dis)advantages?

Though this may not sound like a satisfying solution, our best option may be to leave these physiological factors alone and allow participation regardless. It may not sound like a solution at all, actually, yet it is--and it makes more sense in the context of physiological factors as their own category that transgender athletes happen to tie into rather than vice versa. Physiological (dis)advantages are broader, spanning beyond transgender athletes. To circle back to the example with testosterone, there are also several hormonal diseases that affect testosterone, raising it in cisgender women or lowering it in cisgender men. Should we exclude people from Olympic participation based on hormonal differences rooted in a disease? Some might still say yes, but this is discriminatory. Transgender athletes, athletes with hormonal diseases, and any other physiologically different athletes share commonality beyond physiological complications: they are all athletes--they all must work/train incredibly hard to reach the Olympics regardless of physiological factors in order to improve their skill.

Whether one wishes to exclude someone for physiological factors based on hormonal disease or gender, it appears discriminatory--ableist or transphobic--because these circumstances do not come with the poor intention of gaining an advantage; these individuals are simply living as themselves. Athletes with hormonal diseases obviously would not choose to have health issues with the intention of getting advantages in the Olympics, nor would someone come out as transgender with the goal of entering the Olympics with physiological advantage. It is extremely unlikely that a cisgender individual would fake being transgender for this purpose when, despite our shift toward more trans representation and disability, “we are also living in a time of anti-trans violence” (Gossett 15). An individual transitioning with the intention of cheating in the Olympics would have to be willing to endure traumatic backlash from the public, as transgender individuals “[remain] subject to explicit forms of prejudice and violence” (Gossett 25). In addition to transphobic backlash and potential violence, someone cheating this way in order to win a medal would have to accept that a portion of viewers--those opposed to participation of transgender athletes--will reject/dismiss the legitimacy of their win over cisgender athletes based on their gender already. Someone taking on the toll of faking one’s gender for the rest of their life is highly unlikely when there are easier and more common methods of cheating, which also must be discussed.

If we are looking to exclude any participants from the Olympics games, we should be focused on excluding those who intentionally cheat to gain advantages, as many athletes do through the use of anabolic steroids. Striegel reports that 6.8% of elite athletes participating in their study “confessed to having practiced doping” within their athletic careers (Striegel). This number is not insignificant and represents an overall large number of elite athletes. Usage of anabolic steroids is a deliberate decision that some athletes make in order to physically perform better--and that intention of performing better is where the problem lies. This intent equates to cheating, and it is unfair because the intention is to cheat. Those who wish to participate in the Olympics simply as themselves, even if that includes physiological differences based on gender or hormonal disease, do not have the intention of cheating, and deserve a fair shot. We should penalize those who wish to invalidate the integrity of the games through cheating, rather than penalizing individuals for having bodies that don’t adhere to cisgender, able-bodied categories.

Ultimately, arguments against the participation of transgender athletes based on concerns of physiological fairness seem to be rooted in transphobia or ableism, if not both. Transgender athletes are not the only athletes with physiological differences, so concern exclusively tied to the participation of transgender athletes appears to be another way of trying to control trans bodies. Beyond this, concerns tied to physiological differences themselves can also be ableist when physiological differences are normal for those with hormonal diseases. Our issue should lie with those who wish to intentionally make the Olympic games unfair through methods of cheating like steroid usage, rather than discriminating against hardworking athletes for their bodies. When it comes to fairness, we should be viewing inclusivity as a primary concern rather than (dis)advantages over physiological factors that can affect many people in different ways. Moving forward, we should recognize these three factors as truly unfair: intentional cheating, the discrimination that transgender athletes face solely for their identity, and exclusion from participation for reasons outside of an athlete’s control.

Works Cited

Anderson, Lynley et al. "Trans-athletes in elite sport: inclusion and fairness." Emerging topics in life and sciences, vol. 3,6. 2019, pp. 759-762, doi:10.1043/ETLS20180071.

Gossett, Reina, et al. Trap Door: Trans Cultural Production and the Politics of Visibility. MIT Press, 2017.

Lorde, Audre. "Audre Lorde: Reflections." Feminist Review, vol. 45, no. 1, Nov. 1993, pp. 4-8, doi:10.1057/fr.1993.34.

Striegel, Heiko, et all. "Randomized Response Estimates for Doping and Illicit Drug Use in Elite Athletes." Drug and Alcohol Dependence vol.  106, 2-3 (2010): 230-2. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.07.026