The Economist - UK (2022-03-19)

(Antfer) #1

34 United States The Economist March 19th 2022


Women’ssport

Swimming in controversy


C


ollegeswimmingisfarfromthemost
talked­about sport in America. But this
year’s National Collegiate Athletic Associa­
tion (ncaa) Women’s Swimming and Div­
ing  Championships,  which  take  place  be­
tween March 16th and 19th in Atlanta, have
attracted unusual attention. Most of it has
been focused on a single athlete: Lia Thom­
as, from the University of Pennsylvania.
Ms Thomas has already broken records
in previous competitions. In December she
won  a  1,650­yard  freestyle  race  by  38  sec­
onds.  On  that  kind  of  form,  in  Atlanta  Ms
Thomas was expected to win comfortably. 
But  not  without  controversy.  For  al­
though  Ms  Thomas  identifies  herself  as  a
woman,  biologically  she  is  a  male.  Her
dominant  performances  have  thrust  her
into  the  centre  of  the  debate  around
whether transgender women—males who,
like  Ms  Thomas,  identify  as  women—
should be allowed to compete in women’s
sport. It is an argument that is increasingly
splitting sport, in America and beyond. 
The argument is playing out inside sta­
diums, newspapers and state legislatures.
At past events, some in the crowd have re­
fused  to  applaud  Ms  Thomas’s  victories,
waiting  for  the  second­place  swimmer  to
finish before cheering. In February a letter
by 16 of Ms Thomas’s team­mates was sup­
portive  of  her  new  identity,  but  said  that
“biologically  Lia  holds  an  unfair  advanta­
ge...in the women’s category.” (Citing fears
about future employment, none was will­

ingtosigntheirname.)A  broader  letter,
published  on  March  15th  and  signed  by
more than 5,000 people—including many
Olympic athletes—took a similar view. 
On March 3rd Iowa became the 11th state
to pass a law forbidding trans women from
competing  in  women’s  sports  (others  in­
clude Texas and Florida). Such rules have,
in  turn,  prompted  lawsuits  attempting  to
get  them  overturned.  Big  national  non­
profit organisations, including glaadand
the  American  Civil  Liberties  Union,  sup­
port  Ms  Thomas  competing  in  the  wom­
en’s  category.  (A  third  letter,  this  time
signed by 300 athletes, likewise supported
Ms Thomas.) The argument ranges far be­
yond  swimming,  too,  covering  cycling,
high­school athletics and even weightlift­
ing. In 2021 usaPowerlifting, a weightlift­
ing  organisation,  was  sued  over  its  policy
that athletes should compete on the basis
of their sex, not gender identity.

Testosterone-driven
Ms Thomas is breaking no rules. For many
years  the  ncaa’s  policy  was  that  trans­
women athletes could compete so long as
they took medication designed to suppress
their  testosterone  levels.  Testosterone  is
the  main  male  sex  hormone  and  a  potent
anabolic  steroid.  Levels  surge  during  pu­
berty, which is the main reason why adult
males outperform females in almost every
sport. In swimming the women’s world re­
cord  for  the  400­metre  freestyle,  for  in­

stance, stands at three minutes and 56 sec­
onds.  The  men’s  record  is  3:40.  In  some
sports  the  gap  is  much  larger.  The  Ameri­
can men’s combined powerlifting record is
1,296kg. The women’s record is 793kg.
The  hope  was  that  suppressing  testos­
terone  levels  would  reduce  those  advan­
tages, letting female athletes compete with
trans women on a reasonably level playing
field.  The  science  suggests  that  the  com­
promise  does  not  work.  A  pair  of  review
studies,  published  in  2020  and  2021,  con­
cluded that testosterone suppression does
not  go  far  in  removing  the  advantage  be­
stowed by male puberty.
America’s  swimming  authorities  are
split.  Having  originally  said  it  would  fol­
low the lead of usaSwimming, which gov­
erns elite swimming in America, the ncaa
changed  its  mind  in  February  when  usa
Swimming  passed  new,  more  restrictive
rules  that  require  trans  women  to  prove
that “prior physical development” had not
given them a competitive advantage. 
The issue is just as contentious outside
America.  In  September  a  group  of  British
sporting  bodies  concluded  that  balancing
fair competition and the inclusion of trans
women in women’s sport is impossible; in­
dividual  sports  would  have  to  decide
which was more important. Some of them,
such  as  British  Triathlon,  welcomed  the
guidance. Others, such as the British Kick­
boxing Council, seemed less keen. (As with
Ms Thomas’s teammates, the report found
that few elite female athletes were willing
to speak publicly about the topic, lest they
lose sponsorship deals or team places.) 
In 2020 World Rugby decided that trans
women  would  not  be  allowed  into  the
women’s game on grounds of both fairness
and safety. But its remit extends only to in­
ternational  matches,  and  most  domestic
unions  have  the  opposite  policy.  In  Den­
mark, sports authorities have recommend­
ed that trans women be barred from wom­
en’s sport at the elite level. The result, says
Ross Tucker, a South African sports scien­
tist who was involved with the World Rug­
by decision, is a patchwork. Male athletes
can compete against female ones in some
sports, in some countries, and at some lev­
els—but not others. 
In the short term, that seems unlikely to
change.  Many  sports  take  their  lead  from
the International Olympic Committee. Be­
fore  the  Tokyo  games  last  year,  it  had  re­
quired  trans­women  athletes  to  suppress
their  testosterone  levels.  However,  in  the
light of the scientific evidence, it promised
new  rules.  Its  new  policy,  announced  in
November, was greeted with bafflement. It
threw  the  hot  potato  back  to  individual
sports, but warned them, despite what the
record­books  say,  that  there  should  be  no
automatic assumption that males possess
any advantageatall.Clarity seems further
away than ever.n

The issue of transgender women is splitting the sporting world
Free download pdf