On Mar. 3, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed bill HF 2416 into law. This law prohibits transgender girls and women in the state from competing in public and private K-12 school sports as well as community colleges and colleges affiliated with the NCAA and NAIA. In the context of this law, transgender refers to a person who was assigned male at birth but now identifies as female.
“This is a victory for girls sports in Iowa,” said Reynolds. “It’s simply a reality of human biology. Forcing females to compete against males is the opposite of inclusivity, and it’s absolutely unfair.”
Iowa becomes the 11th state, among 10 other Republican-led states, to ban transgender students’, specifically women’s, access to sports. Since 2019, there have been 11 states who have banned trans athletes in sports, with Iowa being the latest. Additionally, across the United States, three bills on the issue have failed, several court cases are pending, and 23 states have considered related legislation.
Despite the recent wave of attacks on transgender athletes, many citizens don’t agree with the state legislatures. A recent poll by Selzer and Co. shows that Iowans are almost evenly split in their opinion of the recent law. When asked if they favor or oppose the initiative to ban transgender women from competing in female sports offered by schools, 45% of Iowans polled were opposed and 46% were in favor.
However, many opinions on these laws don’t fall within a simple “agree” or “disagree” answer. The intersection of gender, sexuality, equality and athletics complicates the issue for many.
Those in support of excluding trans athletes are commonly centered around the argument that trans athletes have an unfair physical advantage and therefore creates an inequality within competition. They also stress that women’s sports have struggled, and continue to fight, for equality and allowing trans athletes to compete would roll back such progress.
“That’s why I oppose biological boys who are trans competing in girls’ sports in school. It just isn’t fair. And we have to protect girls’ sports in our schools,” said Caitlyn Jenner, a former Olympic athlete who came out as transgender in 2015.
Proponents of banning trans athletes, like Jenner, encourage the idea of unfairness in competition because of the unique physical and chemical composition of transitioning athletes.
State Representative Michelle Davis (R-IA-58), who wrote the bill, said its purpose is to “maintain fair competition in girls’ sports.”
The Independent Women’s Law Center (ILWC) director, Jennifer C. Braceras, in response to the NCAA’s policy to allow a sport-by-sport approach to transgender athletes, called this decision “a colossal act of cowardice.” She continued stating, “Make no mistake, by asking female athletes to step aside to make room for biological males, the NCAA discriminates against women.”
Proponents of the bill utilize studies that show trans athletes have a physical advantage over cisgender athletes. For example, according to a 2021 study by the British Journal of Sports Medicine, after one year of transitioning hormonal treatment, trans women performed at higher physical levels that cisgender females. However, just because a transgender female may have higher levels of testosterone, which causes physical changes like an increase in muscle mass, does not mean they are going to succeed.
“But the question is whether there is in real life, during actual competitions, an advantage of performance linked to this male hormone and whether trans athletes are systematically winning all competitions,” said Eric Vilain, physician and geneticist who has advised the International Olympic Committee and the NCAA. “The answer to this latter question, are trans athletes winning everything, is simple — that’s not the case.”
People may have genetic or physiological athletic abilities but this does not directly translate to success in sports.
“Studies of testosterone levels in athletes do not show any clear, consistent relationship between testosterone and athletic performance,” said Katrina Karkazis, expert on testosterone and bioethics at Yale University. “Sometimes testosterone is associated with better performance, but other studies show weak links or no links. And yet others show testosterone is associated with worse performance.”
Additionally, “An estimated 10 percent of women have polycystic ovarian syndrome, which results in elevated testosterone levels. They [cis gender women] are not banned from female sports,” writes Jack Turban of Scientific American. This argument is similar to that made against Black athletes who have been historically discredited due to a claim of “natural talent.”
Another argument that people forget is the wealth of disadvantages trans athletes encounter. Often, the attention is focused on the inequity of cis gendered athletes but in reality, there are experiences that disproportionately affect trans people. Transgender kids suffer from higher rates of bullying, anxiety, and depression than their cis gender counterparts. This makes it extremely difficult to live life let alone compete in sports. Also, trans kids face higher rates of homelessness and poverty due to familial rejection.
However, when including trans athletes in sports, the risk for such harmful behavior is extremely lower. The Center for American Progress reports, “Transgender students in states with fully inclusive athletic policies were 14 percentage points less likely to have considered suicide in the past year than students in states with no guidance.” This is not to mention the revolutionary benefits that are provided by just being involved in sports.
The science behind the arguments in favor of laws like Iowa’s is often underdeveloped and imbalanced. The support rests on the singular studies, as previously discussed, that show trans women have a physical advantage even after transitioning. When in reality, the science is complex and multifaceted. It includes not only physiological science but psychological as well.
Aside from the factual evidence, there are two interpretations of the situation that divide the two sides on this issue. The first is the notion of sports. Those against transgender athletes defend their position on the basis that the goal of sports is to win. If trans women were not winning in their sports, Chris Surpernant, Professor of Ethics, Strategy, and Public Policy at the University of New Orleans argues no one would care about this issue.
Secondly, and more fundamentally, is the idea that trans women are not women. Therefore, they don’t belong in womens’ sports. Despite the overwhelming presence of scientific evidence advocating for the benefits of including trans women for the sport but also for the athletes, there are people who do not accept the identity of trans people.
The issue of trans women in sports is more complex than it seems. There are often personal opinions and political talking points used when considering this topic. However, there’s also science that is commonly left unconsidered. These parts of the conversation that are ignored are important in fully understanding what is really at stake when we debate trans athletes’ livelihoods.