User login
Over the last several years, the United States has seen a substantial increase in proposed legislation directed toward transgender individuals, particularly youth.1 One type of this legislation aims to prevent participation of transgender girls on female sports teams. While at first glance these bills may seem like common sense protections, in reality they are based on little evidence and serve to further marginalize an already-vulnerable population.
The majority of the population, and thus the majority of athletes, are cisgender.2 According a limited data set from the 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, only 1.8% of high school students identify as transgender.3,4 Overall, this is a very small percentage and it is unlikely that all of them, or even a majority, participate in athletics. In fact, many transgender individuals avoid athletics as it worsens their dysphoria. Winners are no more likely to be transgender than cisgender.
While proponents of this legislation say that trans women have an unfair advantage because of elevated testosterone levels (and thus theoretically increased muscle mass), there is no clear relationship between higher testosterone levels in athletes and improved athletic performance.2 In fact, there are plenty of sports in which a smaller physique may be beneficial, such as gymnastics. A systematic review showed “no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals ... have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition.”5 Furthermore, trans women are not the only women with elevated testosterone levels. Many cisgender women who have polycystic ovary syndrome or a disorder of sexual differentiation can have higher levels of testosterone and theoretically may have higher muscle mass. Who is to decide which team would be most appropriate for them? Is the plan to require a karyotype, other genetic testing, or an invasive physical exam for every young athlete? Even if the concern is with regards to testosterone levels and muscle mass, this ignores that fact that appropriate medical intervention for transgender adolescents will alter these attributes. If a transgender girl began gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists early in puberty, she is unlikely to have increased muscle mass or a higher testosterone level than a cisgender girl. Those trans girls who take estradiol also experience a decrease in muscle mass. Additionally, adolescents grow and develop at different rates – surely there is already significant variability among hormone levels, muscle mass, sexual maturity ratings, and ability among individual athletes, regardless of gender identity? The argument that trans women should be excluded based on a theoretical genetic advantage is reminiscent of the argument that Black athletes should be excluded because of genetic advantage. Just as with cisgender athletes, transgender athletes will naturally vary in ability.6
In addition, there are many places and organizations that already have trans-inclusive policies in place for sports, yet we have not seen transgender individuals dominate their peers. In the 8 years since implementation of a trans-inclusive sports policy in California, a trans woman has never dominated a sport.7 The same is true for Canada since the institution of their policy 2 years ago. While transgender people can participate in the Olympics, this year marks the first time a trans woman has ever qualified (Laurel Hubbard, New Zealand, women’s weightlifting). The lack of transgender Olympians may be in part because of problematic requirements (such as duration of hormone therapy and surgery requirements) for transgender individuals, which may be so onerous that they are functionally excluded.2,5
In reality, athletes are improving over time and the performance gap between genders is shrinking. For example, in 1970 Mark Spitz swam the 100-meter freestyle in 51.94 seconds, a time that has now been surpassed by both men and women, such as Sarah Sjöström (women’s world record holder at 51.71 seconds). Athletes’ physical attributes are often less important than their training and dedication to their sport.
More importantly, this discussion raises the philosophical question of the purpose of athletics for youth and young adults. Winning and good performance can – though rarely – lead to college scholarships and professional careers, the biggest benefit of athletics comes from participation. We encourage youth to play sports not to win, but to learn about leadership, dedication, and collegiality, as well as for the health benefits of exercise. Inclusion in sports and other extracurricular activities improves depression, anxiety, and suicide rates. In fact, participation in sports has been associated with improved grades, greater homework completion, higher educational and occupational aspirations, and improved self-esteem.8-12 Excluding a population that already experiences such drastic marginalization will cause more damage. Values of nondiscrimination and inclusion should be promoted among all student athletes, rather than “other-ism.”
Forcing trans women to compete with men will worsen their dysphoria and further ostracize the most vulnerable, giving credence to those that believe they are not “real women.” Allowing transgender individuals to play on the team consistent with their gender identity is appropriate, not only for scientific reasons but also for humanitarian ones. Such laws are based not on evidence, but on discrimination. Not only do trans women not do better than cisgender women in sports, but such proposed legislation also ignores the normal variability among individuals as well as the intense training and dedication involved in becoming a top athlete. Limiting trans women’s participation in sports does not raise up cisgender women, but rather brings us all down. Please advocate for your patients to participate in athletics in accordance with their gender identity to promote both their physical and emotional well-being.
Dr. Lawlis is assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, and an adolescent medicine specialist at OU Children’s. She has no relevant financial disclosures.
References
1. Cooper MB. Pediatric News. 2020 Dec 11, 2020.
2. Turban J. Scientific American. 2021 May 21.
3. Redfield RR et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(8):1-11.
4. Johns MM et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(3):67-71.
5. Jones BA et al. Sports Med (Auckland, New Zealand). 2017;47(4):701-16.
6. Strangio C et al. ACLU News. 2020 Apr 30.
7. Strauss L. USA Today. 2021 Apr 9.
8. Darling N et al. J Leisure Res. 2005;37(1):51-76.
9. Fredricks JA et al. Dev Psych. 2006;42(4):698-713.
10. Marsh HW et al. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2003;25(2):205.
11. Nelson MC et al. Pediatrics. 2006;117(4):1281-90.
12. Ortega FB et al. Int J Obes. 2008;32(1):1-11.
Over the last several years, the United States has seen a substantial increase in proposed legislation directed toward transgender individuals, particularly youth.1 One type of this legislation aims to prevent participation of transgender girls on female sports teams. While at first glance these bills may seem like common sense protections, in reality they are based on little evidence and serve to further marginalize an already-vulnerable population.
The majority of the population, and thus the majority of athletes, are cisgender.2 According a limited data set from the 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, only 1.8% of high school students identify as transgender.3,4 Overall, this is a very small percentage and it is unlikely that all of them, or even a majority, participate in athletics. In fact, many transgender individuals avoid athletics as it worsens their dysphoria. Winners are no more likely to be transgender than cisgender.
While proponents of this legislation say that trans women have an unfair advantage because of elevated testosterone levels (and thus theoretically increased muscle mass), there is no clear relationship between higher testosterone levels in athletes and improved athletic performance.2 In fact, there are plenty of sports in which a smaller physique may be beneficial, such as gymnastics. A systematic review showed “no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals ... have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition.”5 Furthermore, trans women are not the only women with elevated testosterone levels. Many cisgender women who have polycystic ovary syndrome or a disorder of sexual differentiation can have higher levels of testosterone and theoretically may have higher muscle mass. Who is to decide which team would be most appropriate for them? Is the plan to require a karyotype, other genetic testing, or an invasive physical exam for every young athlete? Even if the concern is with regards to testosterone levels and muscle mass, this ignores that fact that appropriate medical intervention for transgender adolescents will alter these attributes. If a transgender girl began gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists early in puberty, she is unlikely to have increased muscle mass or a higher testosterone level than a cisgender girl. Those trans girls who take estradiol also experience a decrease in muscle mass. Additionally, adolescents grow and develop at different rates – surely there is already significant variability among hormone levels, muscle mass, sexual maturity ratings, and ability among individual athletes, regardless of gender identity? The argument that trans women should be excluded based on a theoretical genetic advantage is reminiscent of the argument that Black athletes should be excluded because of genetic advantage. Just as with cisgender athletes, transgender athletes will naturally vary in ability.6
In addition, there are many places and organizations that already have trans-inclusive policies in place for sports, yet we have not seen transgender individuals dominate their peers. In the 8 years since implementation of a trans-inclusive sports policy in California, a trans woman has never dominated a sport.7 The same is true for Canada since the institution of their policy 2 years ago. While transgender people can participate in the Olympics, this year marks the first time a trans woman has ever qualified (Laurel Hubbard, New Zealand, women’s weightlifting). The lack of transgender Olympians may be in part because of problematic requirements (such as duration of hormone therapy and surgery requirements) for transgender individuals, which may be so onerous that they are functionally excluded.2,5
In reality, athletes are improving over time and the performance gap between genders is shrinking. For example, in 1970 Mark Spitz swam the 100-meter freestyle in 51.94 seconds, a time that has now been surpassed by both men and women, such as Sarah Sjöström (women’s world record holder at 51.71 seconds). Athletes’ physical attributes are often less important than their training and dedication to their sport.
More importantly, this discussion raises the philosophical question of the purpose of athletics for youth and young adults. Winning and good performance can – though rarely – lead to college scholarships and professional careers, the biggest benefit of athletics comes from participation. We encourage youth to play sports not to win, but to learn about leadership, dedication, and collegiality, as well as for the health benefits of exercise. Inclusion in sports and other extracurricular activities improves depression, anxiety, and suicide rates. In fact, participation in sports has been associated with improved grades, greater homework completion, higher educational and occupational aspirations, and improved self-esteem.8-12 Excluding a population that already experiences such drastic marginalization will cause more damage. Values of nondiscrimination and inclusion should be promoted among all student athletes, rather than “other-ism.”
Forcing trans women to compete with men will worsen their dysphoria and further ostracize the most vulnerable, giving credence to those that believe they are not “real women.” Allowing transgender individuals to play on the team consistent with their gender identity is appropriate, not only for scientific reasons but also for humanitarian ones. Such laws are based not on evidence, but on discrimination. Not only do trans women not do better than cisgender women in sports, but such proposed legislation also ignores the normal variability among individuals as well as the intense training and dedication involved in becoming a top athlete. Limiting trans women’s participation in sports does not raise up cisgender women, but rather brings us all down. Please advocate for your patients to participate in athletics in accordance with their gender identity to promote both their physical and emotional well-being.
Dr. Lawlis is assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, and an adolescent medicine specialist at OU Children’s. She has no relevant financial disclosures.
References
1. Cooper MB. Pediatric News. 2020 Dec 11, 2020.
2. Turban J. Scientific American. 2021 May 21.
3. Redfield RR et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(8):1-11.
4. Johns MM et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(3):67-71.
5. Jones BA et al. Sports Med (Auckland, New Zealand). 2017;47(4):701-16.
6. Strangio C et al. ACLU News. 2020 Apr 30.
7. Strauss L. USA Today. 2021 Apr 9.
8. Darling N et al. J Leisure Res. 2005;37(1):51-76.
9. Fredricks JA et al. Dev Psych. 2006;42(4):698-713.
10. Marsh HW et al. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2003;25(2):205.
11. Nelson MC et al. Pediatrics. 2006;117(4):1281-90.
12. Ortega FB et al. Int J Obes. 2008;32(1):1-11.
Over the last several years, the United States has seen a substantial increase in proposed legislation directed toward transgender individuals, particularly youth.1 One type of this legislation aims to prevent participation of transgender girls on female sports teams. While at first glance these bills may seem like common sense protections, in reality they are based on little evidence and serve to further marginalize an already-vulnerable population.
The majority of the population, and thus the majority of athletes, are cisgender.2 According a limited data set from the 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Survey, only 1.8% of high school students identify as transgender.3,4 Overall, this is a very small percentage and it is unlikely that all of them, or even a majority, participate in athletics. In fact, many transgender individuals avoid athletics as it worsens their dysphoria. Winners are no more likely to be transgender than cisgender.
While proponents of this legislation say that trans women have an unfair advantage because of elevated testosterone levels (and thus theoretically increased muscle mass), there is no clear relationship between higher testosterone levels in athletes and improved athletic performance.2 In fact, there are plenty of sports in which a smaller physique may be beneficial, such as gymnastics. A systematic review showed “no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals ... have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition.”5 Furthermore, trans women are not the only women with elevated testosterone levels. Many cisgender women who have polycystic ovary syndrome or a disorder of sexual differentiation can have higher levels of testosterone and theoretically may have higher muscle mass. Who is to decide which team would be most appropriate for them? Is the plan to require a karyotype, other genetic testing, or an invasive physical exam for every young athlete? Even if the concern is with regards to testosterone levels and muscle mass, this ignores that fact that appropriate medical intervention for transgender adolescents will alter these attributes. If a transgender girl began gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists early in puberty, she is unlikely to have increased muscle mass or a higher testosterone level than a cisgender girl. Those trans girls who take estradiol also experience a decrease in muscle mass. Additionally, adolescents grow and develop at different rates – surely there is already significant variability among hormone levels, muscle mass, sexual maturity ratings, and ability among individual athletes, regardless of gender identity? The argument that trans women should be excluded based on a theoretical genetic advantage is reminiscent of the argument that Black athletes should be excluded because of genetic advantage. Just as with cisgender athletes, transgender athletes will naturally vary in ability.6
In addition, there are many places and organizations that already have trans-inclusive policies in place for sports, yet we have not seen transgender individuals dominate their peers. In the 8 years since implementation of a trans-inclusive sports policy in California, a trans woman has never dominated a sport.7 The same is true for Canada since the institution of their policy 2 years ago. While transgender people can participate in the Olympics, this year marks the first time a trans woman has ever qualified (Laurel Hubbard, New Zealand, women’s weightlifting). The lack of transgender Olympians may be in part because of problematic requirements (such as duration of hormone therapy and surgery requirements) for transgender individuals, which may be so onerous that they are functionally excluded.2,5
In reality, athletes are improving over time and the performance gap between genders is shrinking. For example, in 1970 Mark Spitz swam the 100-meter freestyle in 51.94 seconds, a time that has now been surpassed by both men and women, such as Sarah Sjöström (women’s world record holder at 51.71 seconds). Athletes’ physical attributes are often less important than their training and dedication to their sport.
More importantly, this discussion raises the philosophical question of the purpose of athletics for youth and young adults. Winning and good performance can – though rarely – lead to college scholarships and professional careers, the biggest benefit of athletics comes from participation. We encourage youth to play sports not to win, but to learn about leadership, dedication, and collegiality, as well as for the health benefits of exercise. Inclusion in sports and other extracurricular activities improves depression, anxiety, and suicide rates. In fact, participation in sports has been associated with improved grades, greater homework completion, higher educational and occupational aspirations, and improved self-esteem.8-12 Excluding a population that already experiences such drastic marginalization will cause more damage. Values of nondiscrimination and inclusion should be promoted among all student athletes, rather than “other-ism.”
Forcing trans women to compete with men will worsen their dysphoria and further ostracize the most vulnerable, giving credence to those that believe they are not “real women.” Allowing transgender individuals to play on the team consistent with their gender identity is appropriate, not only for scientific reasons but also for humanitarian ones. Such laws are based not on evidence, but on discrimination. Not only do trans women not do better than cisgender women in sports, but such proposed legislation also ignores the normal variability among individuals as well as the intense training and dedication involved in becoming a top athlete. Limiting trans women’s participation in sports does not raise up cisgender women, but rather brings us all down. Please advocate for your patients to participate in athletics in accordance with their gender identity to promote both their physical and emotional well-being.
Dr. Lawlis is assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, and an adolescent medicine specialist at OU Children’s. She has no relevant financial disclosures.
References
1. Cooper MB. Pediatric News. 2020 Dec 11, 2020.
2. Turban J. Scientific American. 2021 May 21.
3. Redfield RR et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(8):1-11.
4. Johns MM et al. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(3):67-71.
5. Jones BA et al. Sports Med (Auckland, New Zealand). 2017;47(4):701-16.
6. Strangio C et al. ACLU News. 2020 Apr 30.
7. Strauss L. USA Today. 2021 Apr 9.
8. Darling N et al. J Leisure Res. 2005;37(1):51-76.
9. Fredricks JA et al. Dev Psych. 2006;42(4):698-713.
10. Marsh HW et al. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2003;25(2):205.
11. Nelson MC et al. Pediatrics. 2006;117(4):1281-90.
12. Ortega FB et al. Int J Obes. 2008;32(1):1-11.