29 ms·

Olympic Committee bars transgender athletes from women’s events

• breakyerself 6mo ago
  I can't imagine trans women who avoided male puberty are statistically any better athletes than cis women. A total ban seems discriminatory to me.
  • cmiles8 6mo ago
    You’re getting into a separate issue of blocking puberty in children, which may would consider abuse. Separate from that there are still measurable differences between sexes that you can’t just magically change with a pill or surgery.
    • crote 6mo ago
      > Separate from that there are still measurable differences between sexes Ever seen pre-puberty kids play against each other? The girls and boys perform about the same.
      • machomaster 6mo ago
        No, they are not when equated with the same developmental stage (girls' growth spurts start earlier). Looking at the athletic measurements, boys are better/stronger/faster than girls by a noticeable 5-10%. After the hormones finally kick in, this jumps to 40-100%.
      • loeg 6mo ago
        Boys are stronger than girls even pre-puberty (~10%). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/bd2689e4-7094-4e0b-919a-edf002de89f0/ejsc12268-fig-0001-m.png https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/cms/asset/bd2689e4-7094-4e0b... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ejsc.12268 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ejsc.12268
• gsky 6mo ago
  so sad to see how trans women are treated.
• thatmf 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • raffael_de 6mo ago
    well, testosterone is a pretty hard fact. having said that, i firmly believe there should be no competitions based on gender at all. olympics should be 100% unisex.
  • MaxHoppersGhost 6mo ago
    I am a "cis folk with Strong Opinions on other people's bodies" and I have met plenty and even work with a couple.
• TheGuyWhoCodes 6mo ago
  [flagged]
• bwoah 6mo ago
  https://archive.is/WRmUo https://archive.is/WRmUo
• xvxvx 6mo ago
  I wonder if anyone has measured the speed in which reality is codified into law or regulation. Women have been fighting against males in female sports for many, many years. Why did it take so long for something so obvious to be acted upon?
  • happytoexplain 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    • moi2388 6mo ago
      What a ridiculous reply to a perfectly reasonable comment.
    • LunicLynx 6mo ago
      If anything your comment is trying to personally vilify someone. Something the other comment clearly did not.
  • pasquinelli 6mo ago
    how many actual cases does that amount to, i wonder.
    • enoint 6mo ago
      Other comments mention the 1996 screen, which found 8/3387.
  • tensor 6mo ago
    To educate others reading this, it's far from "obvious" how to classify gender in sports. Checking if they have the right "parts" physically doesn't do it. Checking for hormone levels doesn't do it. Even checking for Y chromosomes doesn't do it. In my opinion the way forward is to stop trying to find arbitrary ways to define gender, and just start making competition classes based on whatever factors are relevant to the event. E.g. a women with high testosterone? They can compete with men or women with the same testosterone bracket. This would also let men with low-T compete fairly rather then be excluded from the games. It's also relevant at what point other genetic changes are "unfair." There are absolutely genetic traits that give people HUGE advantages in various competitions. Just like the gender-related properties, these are natural and yet result in unfair competitions.
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
• spamizbad 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • dmbche 6mo ago
    Right? It must've cost a fortune for absolutely no measurable impact, let alone any kind of possible benefit. Shameful
    • johnnyanmac 6mo ago
      Sounds like your average political decision.
  • petesergeant 6mo ago
    In this case they're also banning female athletes with DSDs, which will affect quite a lot more athletes, including all three of the medalists for the women's 800m in Rio[0] 0: https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-what-is-dsd-iaaf-regulations https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-wh...
    • deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
    • lelanthran 6mo ago
      > In this case they're also banning female athletes with DSDs, which will affect quite a lot more athletes, including all three of the medalists for the women's 800m in Rio[0] This makes it seem that women without DSD need not bother competing.
      • petesergeant 6mo ago
        Anyone who's not genetically gifted need not bother competing, though. Would you ban basketball players above a certain height?
        • 6mo ago
• nilslindemann 6mo ago
  Only logical result is Transgender Olympics
  • koolba 6mo ago
    Already in the works: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Games
    • space_fountain 6mo ago
      But trans women aren't in anyway enhanced in their ability to compete?
      • undersuit 6mo ago
        And from the linked Wiki: "According to D'Souza, athletes should also be categorised based on their chromosomal sex."
  • bertylicious 6mo ago
    Why not Human Olympics?
    • cm2187 6mo ago
      Already exists, it's what people refer to as "male olympics". As far as I know, females aren't banned from competing. It is just that they don't stand a chance in most disciplines. The whole point of female olympics is to keep males out.
      • xeonmc 6mo ago
        Can trans male who transitioned before puberty compete in male olympics while being pumped full of steroids legally?
        • mikkupikku 6mo ago
• happymellon 6mo ago
  Has anyone measured trans athletes performance? I see this topic come up repeatedly in different guises, protect women from the evil trans-agenda. But I haven't seen where this is actually a problem. Do trans-athletes regularly out perform "born as" (not sure the best way to phrase it) athletes?
  • lelanthran 6mo ago
    > Do trans-athletes regularly out perform "born as" (not sure the best way to phrase it) athletes? Regularly. It's the competing women who are complaining, though. They feel it is unfair to compete with men.
    • happymellon 6mo ago
      Citation? I asked because I'm curious, and Googling just gives opinion pieces and not data. [Edit] Currently -3 but no study referenced. Do people just not like the idea of providing evidence for their position? The women I've spoken to about this article cite men being the problem, whether its sexual harassment, or other sexist attitudes. Not one felt that trans participation in their sport of choice was in their top ten complaints.
      • lelanthran 6mo ago
        > I asked because I'm curious, and Googling just gives opinion pieces and not data. Women complaining are voicing an opinion. Is this a good enough citation for the claim that women don't want to compete with men? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gndSDgsMnKI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gndSDgsMnKI
        • happymellon 6mo ago
          Considering I was asking whether there was evidence on trans-performance, sure it matters a little. That's fine if they don't want to compete with men, but the statements were because "it's unfair". I was curious if there had been any studies on this.
• changoplatanero 6mo ago
  I thought this article does a good job explaining why some people care a lot about this topic https://www.theargumentmag.com/p/how-youth-sports-supercharged-the https://www.theargumentmag.com/p/how-youth-sports-supercharg...
  • lelanthran 6mo ago
    That article does seem very one-sided: > of youth sports have created clear incentives for them to prioritize competitive fairness over principles like inclusion, well-being, and fun. In an event that is primarily focused on competitive fairness, what does inclusion have to do with it? If playing sport is about fun, well-being, etc, then don't play in competitive events. You can't very well want to play in competitive events while complaining about competitive fairness.
    • icegreentea2 6mo ago
      It feels one sided because the author is an outsider - as the author readily admits - "It has been brought to my attention, however, that my blasé attitude toward sports makes me an outlier". Turning to some actual numbers - this 2024 survey tells us that only ~15% of respondents said that their children participate in club sports or independent training (note that the categories are not exclusive). The same survey also says that ~10% of respondants think that their child can compete in professional sports, or be a national level team member. Finally, a similar 10% say that the "only the best players should receive time in games" is a fair policy at your child's age and level. https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/National-Youth-Sports-Parent-Survey-FINAL.pdf https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Na... I think the point of the article is to maybe highlight how large the gulf might be between an typical outsider (and looking at the numbers above... and reminding ourselves that only ~50% of American youth are involved in organized sports at all), someone who is somewhat "in the game", and those who are really playing it (that 10% from above).
  • happytoexplain 6mo ago
    On this topic, I feel like "why do some people care a lot about this" is probably the question least in search of an answer.
• b3ing 6mo ago
  This always should of been left to sports committees than our government, what a waste of our representatives times, but I guess they got the culture war points
  • IlikeMadison 6mo ago
    >should of why
    • messe 6mo ago
      Because they're probably a native speaker. EDIT: this is exactly the kind of mistake that native speakers make, that ESL speakers don't.
  • bdangubic 6mo ago
    unless you live in the olympics the olympic committee is not your representative
    • SirFatty 6mo ago
      Try reading the comment again.
      • bdangubic 6mo ago
        ohhhh :)
• jasonlotito 6mo ago
  It's gonna get buried, but petesergeant had a good comment sharing this article. They are also banning females from female sports as well with this ruling. https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-what-is-dsd-iaaf-regulations https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-wh...
  • weezing 6mo ago
    Intersex category would be perfect fit but this is very rare condition so there wouldn't be enough competition.
  • badc0ffee 6mo ago
    Caster Semenya is XY with a DSD (5-ARD), and absolutely should not compete with females. The same goes for Imane Khelif who was the same DSD. People with this condition have internal testes, a male level of testosterone, and a male level of muscle development. That a doctor assigned them female at birth and put a F on the birth certificate does not change this.
    • thunderfork 6mo ago
      The upshot of this is that women with a genetic advantage are banned, but men with a genetic advantage aren't; is this not straightforwardly sex discrimination?
      • zahlman 6mo ago
        No. Nobody is banned from the "men's" category, including unambiguously cisgender women of completely unambiguous sexual characteristics. They just wouldn't stand a chance, practically speaking (for example, in the 100 metre sprint, the all-time women's world record time would not meet the qualification standard). There was already "sex discrimination" in the fact of the women's category existing in the first place; this was done as a pragmatic matter so that the world has the opportunity to celebrate peak female physical achievements. The debate is really around how the handling of intersex and transgender athletes intersects with the original purpose of creating a separate category for women.
• tdb7893 6mo ago
  Trans women have competed as women in the Olympics once ever and have 0 medals. By the numbers it's a non issue under previous rules (despite the incredible amount of ink spilled over it). People are talking about trans women here but the vast majority of people affected by this change are women who are not trans who have a "disorder of sexual development".
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • mothballed 6mo ago
    The Olympics are looked up to by a large range of people and organization that don't actually participate in the Olympics. This goes beyond just affecting the Olympics, but setting an example for the world to follow and gives other organizations the cover and courage to follow while being able to deflect to simply setting the same standards of the Olympics.
  • lewdev 6mo ago
    Is it fair to say that they can just compete in the men's division?
    • harveychess 6mo ago
      It would not be fair, because the point of having divisions is allow women to compete in a competition that is not dominated by men.
      • bpodgursky 6mo ago
        [flagged]
      • rolymath 6mo ago
        [flagged]
        • watwut 6mo ago
• generj 6mo ago
  Not only trans athletes, but any biologically born women the IOC thinks are insufficiently feminine. It’s an unfair advantage apparently. You know, like being born tall for basketball players. Curious how no other biological advantages are being policed.
  • EA-3167 6mo ago
    That doesn’t seem to be the case, given the first paragraph of the article: > The International Olympic Committee has barred transgender athletes from competing in the women’s category of the Olympics and said that all participants in those events must undergo genetic testing. Genetic testing doesn’t leave a lot of room for accidentally or intentionally targeting women for being “insufficiently feminine.”
    • altruios 6mo ago
      just going to leave this here for you to read... https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-what-is-dsd-iaaf-regulations https://www.olympics.com/en/news/semenya-niyonsaba-wambui-wh...
      • EA-3167 6mo ago
        Oh thank you, but I’m not uninformed, and genetic testing wouldn’t have missed Castor Semenya either.
    • pasquinelli 6mo ago
      wouldn't a woman with a y chromosome be disqualified then?
    • poizan42 6mo ago
      Is the "genetic testing" for the presence of a Y chromosome or the presence of the SRY gene? And what about people with AIS? If it's just karyotype, are men with XX male syndrome (SRY gene without an Y chromosome) then allowed to participate in women's sports?
• LetsGetTechnicl 6mo ago
  It's clear how insane this culture war against trans people is when you consider this only applies to trans women and not trans men? Also, so many of these anti-trans efforts end up hurting cis women too, the ones who happen to look too masculine or have too high of testosterone. Gender is not as straightforward as bigots and transphobes would like to think. I wonder how many cis women will be affected by this ruling because their chromosomes and hormones aren't within so called "normal levels"
  • GaggiX 6mo ago
    >It's clear how insane this culture war against trans people is when you consider this only applies to trans women and not trans men? I believe the logic is based on the fact that male athletes are stronger than female athletes.
  • LetsGetTechnicl 6mo ago
    Also there has only been one (1) trans woman, Laurel Hubbard, who has competed in a women's event (weightlifting) and she not place.
    • mvdtnz 6mo ago
      She didn't place at the Olympics but it's worth noting she was the oldest competitor by far, and this after she had cleaned up gold medals in numerous international competitions despite having a relatively thin background in the sport. She was expected to podium at the Olympics and it's not really clear why she performed so poorly (the only athlete in the division to DNF). Mrs Hubbard's background, if you read it honestly, is great evidence for why this decision was the correct one.
      • fretboard 6mo ago
        Indeed. Hubbard's trajectory in female weightlifting is entirely unprecedented: re-entering the sport after a fifteen year break, with a stronger performance than those of elite female weightlifters with decades of competitive careers behind them and who had won Olympic medals. The only reason why this was possible is because Hubbard is male.
• beachWholesaleS 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • LunicLynx 6mo ago
    Is it yours?
    • beachWholesaleS 6mo ago
      When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle
    • beachWholesaleS 6mo ago
      Yes my friend.
      • LunicLynx 6mo ago
        So which sport are you competing in, on an Olympic level? And who either man or woman did take a place from you, so that you weren’t able to take part or won’t be able to take part in the Olympics?
• whatever1 6mo ago
  Men who weigh 100kg are also banned from participating in the 63kg weightlifting category. So what? There are physical traits that offer advantages in sports. We bucketize so that we see more interesting competitions (aka a 120kg weightlifter would completely dominate all of the smaller folks, every single time, so what's the point of competing ).
  • zahlman 6mo ago
    Sure. Meanwhile, men in the 63kg powerlifting class have a higher record total than even superheavyweight women: https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/womens-world-records/ https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/womens-world-records/ https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/mens-world-records/ https://worldpowerlifting.com/records/mens-world-records/
    • whatever1 6mo ago
      I don’t see where we disagree. It is exactly why we have different buckets for men and women. Otherwise why would ever a woman try to compete in weightlifting?
      • zahlman 6mo ago
        It came across that you proposed to solve the problem with just weight classes, which is clearly not sufficient. Sorry if I misunderstood.
• josefritzishere 6mo ago
  Generally.. I think people takes sports far too seriously.
  • LunicLynx 6mo ago
    So if I take your house. And you complain, I just say: „some people take ownership far too seriously!“ For some people sports is their life and livelihood for that matter, this should be acknowledged.
    • jpkw 6mo ago
      I think a more fair and accurate comparison would be religion.
      • LunicLynx 6mo ago
        You are aware that this is about athletes and not spectators, right? I agree when it comes to spectators, at least in some sports. But people do make a living, especially in poor countries, by being successful in sports.
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
• ck2 6mo ago
  The easiest way to explain this nonsense is that in 100+ years of Olympics, there are ZERO elite athletes who were transgender none it's brought to you by the some of the very same people who want you to prove you are a citizen every time you vote because there have been no previous cases of that either However there are women who have given birth who will fail that SRY test Because biology is messy, not black and white, never "on" or "off", there is always overlap They tried this before in 1996 and quickly ended it by 2000 because the result was a disaster
  • gpm 6mo ago
    There's also cis-male people who will "pass" that SRY test if they take it for some reason... This is a dumb ass way to try and define the woman's category... which is about the expected result of bigots trying to work backwards from the result they want headlines about.
    • badc0ffee 6mo ago
      > There's also cis-male people who will "pass" that SRY test if they take it for some reason... This is news to me - which males are you talking about here? > This is a dumb ass way to try and define the woman's category... It's really not, though. They found a marker they can test for, and have clearly defined exceptions.
      • gpm 6mo ago
        > This is news to me - which males are you talking about here? This poor bloke who found out he was infertile during a premarital medical exam, for instance: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7760426/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7760426/ > It's really not, though. They found a marker they can test for, and have clearly defined exceptions. Have you heard of the politician's fallacy, "something needs to be done, this is something, so this needs to be done"... Your argument here is that... needing a test, and having a test, doesn't mean it's the right test. You're also assuming that we even need a test... evidence (no transfemale olympians ever coming not dead last) suggests we don't.
• zb3 6mo ago
  Sports already exclude most people as they're not performant enough. So I don't see a problem with excluding biological males from female sports. But, we should compare actual body parts that are relevant, for example I'm male but I'd not belong in male sports as my body is more feminine.. Still, it's not who you think you are that should decide, it's the body type so the competition can be more interesting as that is the point of sports anyway..
• throw83838489 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • twiclo 6mo ago
    > Sex objects
• puppycodes 6mo ago
  The differences between cisgender bodies are already so varied that the logic falls apart almost immediately. For that matter why not restrict rich athletes who have access to training and equipment that poor athletes do not? The point at where the line is drawn is entirely arbitrary. Gattaca vibes.
  • happytoexplain 6mo ago
    Don't we already sub-categorize within a gender? E.g. boxing. I don't actually know how common that is or why some sports get this treatment and not others.
    • puppycodes 6mo ago
      Boxing is often the example given because its someone getting hurt, but when you actually break it down it also falls apart for boxing. If we measured everyones strength, bone density, etc... in order to stop people from risking injury that would be one thing But basing it on your Chromosomes is lazy and inaccurate. The point is that "fairness" being tied to whether your Cis or Trans is a hilarious hill to die on when we have advanced medical technology to actually test what we deem "fair".
      • happytoexplain 6mo ago
        To be clear, I used that example because it was the only one I could think of, not for some rhetorical reason (which serves your point anyway, really). I agree if we could just distill "here's your objective good-at-tennis score" for everybody and draw lines using those numbers, that makes sense. It feels unrealistic? I.e. we already don't do that - it doesn't necessarily feel like 100% an anti-trans thing (orthogonal obviously to the large amount of anti-trans sentiment that generally exists). Maybe Elo for everything?
        • puppycodes 6mo ago
          Yeah for sure. My point is just that fairness in the Olympics is fake and always has been. Someones Chromosomes are such a poor way to measure their physical abilities especially when the bar is so high for top athletes in the field.
• eirini1 6mo ago
  what always strikes me as weird is how often the conversation is framed around "men competing in women's sports" when trans women cant really be said to be biologically male anymore. Taking Estrogen and blocking testosterone has a huge effect on how fast/strong/athletic someone is. I feel like that should be the key point of discussion, but somehow always gets burried under other, kind of less relevant subjects (for example I dont think it matters that up until now no trans woman has really won anything significant, as that could always change in the future).
  • mizuki_akiyama 6mo ago
    i agree
  • lelanthran 6mo ago
    > what always strikes me as weird is how often the conversation is framed around "men competing in women's sports" when trans women cant really be said to be biologically male anymore. Just because they are not male, does not mean that they are female.
    • kcmastrpc 6mo ago
      [flagged]
  • nradov 6mo ago
    That isn't the key point. Taking hormone therapy as an adult doesn't erase the huge athletic advantage conferred by going through male puberty.
    • dnlzro 6mo ago
      I think both of these points are two sides of the same coin. There's an athletic advantage that most transgender women will have over most cisgender women, but there's also an athletic disadvantage that most trans women will have compared to cis men. i.e., unless something fundamentally changes about how leagues are divided, there's going to be perceived unfairness in sports. As long as things are unchanged, I think the real conversation boils down to who we prioritize: cis women or trans women.
• deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
• yomismoaqui 6mo ago
  Obligatory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig
• harveychess 6mo ago
  Trans women are women. If you want to see men dressed as women, watch "This is the Army" (1943), an American wartime musical comedy film that features actor Ronald Regan, and a lot of musical numbers performed by men in drag.
  • rolymath 6mo ago
    If they were you wouldn't need to call them "trans"
    • hananova 6mo ago
      We don’t have to, it’s outsiders who insist on it.
    • fwip 6mo ago
      "Tall women aren't women."
• metalman 6mo ago
  I think that alt gender athletes can compete as there own group, or we do away with gender (ha), and everybody can compete in everything "fairly", and by fairly I mean nobody gets to have any feelings about this! since when does an ancient universal reality get to be re-decided behind closed doors by anonimous interest groups? and then become taboo to question, hmmmmm?
• cmiles8 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • nradov 6mo ago
    Exactly. It's impossible to have both inclusion and fair play. We have to pick one, and as a parent of daughters who compete at fairly high levels it's more important to preserve the integrity of women's sports.
    • CamperBob2 6mo ago
      [flagged]
      • lelanthran 6mo ago
        > More important than national security and government integrity, I'm told. Certainly seems that way for a certain subset of voters. They'd rather lose the election than let women compete against females only.
        • jmye 6mo ago
          > They'd rather lose the election than let women compete against females only. Fascinating political analysis. It's weird how a small group of people are deeply driven by identity politics above literally anything else, especially when those people typically aren't even slightly affected (and generally have never watched a single women's event in their life). I sometimes wonder if people like you scream at politicians because of the introduction of the pitch clock in baseball, too? Do you waste this much energy on the rulebooks other sports come up with? Or just like, when you think it's icky sex stuff?
          • huhkerrf 6mo ago
            If you can find me some politicians, I would gladly yell at them that the DH and the pitch clock are unnatural and immoral.
• homeonthemtn 6mo ago
  I always thought the more elegant approach to all of this was to add a mixed sex league. Keep the traditions, add a novel new one, and let people consent to who they want to compete against and watch
  • Aurornis 6mo ago
    In the sports I competed in, the men's class was really an open class. (EDIT: Looking at past results, we didn't even have a "men's division". There was just a separate women's division) Anyone could compete in it. The women's classes were the only restricted classes. There are several sports where female physiology (skeletal structure, etc) has inherent advantages over male physiology where this may not be true, though.
  • DrJokepu 6mo ago
    That already exists. That’s the men’s category. There are no rules forbidding women from competing in men’s categories at Olympic events.
    • cmiles8 6mo ago
      Correct and it’s the same in many sports. Theres generally not “men’s golf” and “women’s golf” there’s just “golf” and “women’s golf.” Women are not excluded from golf tournaments, but the requirements to compete (primarily how far one hits the ball) are vastly different. Thats why both play the same golf course, just from different tee boxes.
    • homeonthemtn 6mo ago
      Right but why not a specific carve out instead of a loop hole? If it's called "men's" the intention is clear. If it's called "mixed league" the intention is clear
      • array_key_first 6mo ago
        I think they're trying to say that if there was a mixed league it would always end up being 100% men at the highest level. Like, mixed league basketball would almost certainly be just men at the highest level because of how the sport works.
• barrance 6mo ago
  Headline is inaccurate. Transgender athletes are not barred from women's events. Female athletes who identify as men, or otherwise do not identify as women, can still compete in this category, as they have been doing already. What the IOC's new policy actually does is make male athletes ineligible for competition in the female category, with very few exceptions. These exceptions are for athletes who are technically male but have a disorder of sex development that confers no male advantage, e.g. CAIS.
  • lux-lux-lux 6mo ago
    Transgender women aren’t ’male athletes’
    • barrance 6mo ago
      Why do you believe that?
    • asterix_pano 6mo ago
      Why not? Aren't you mixing gender and sex?
      • harveychess 6mo ago
        If you try to define athletic divisions by sex, you're going to have a hard time. The world's best athletes probably all have some unusual biology. About 1.7% of people are not completely biological male or female. I would expect that proportion to be higher for Olympic athletes. Excluding 1.7% or 2% or 10% of the world's best athletes from competing would not be fair.
        • zeven7 6mo ago
          Anybody can compete in the unsexed category. It’s only the female sex category where someone can be barred. No one is barred from competing at the highest level.
    • dyauspitr 6mo ago
• loteck 6mo ago
  I wish people would care a lot less about sports.
  • beej71 6mo ago
    So much interest in fairness in the tiny slice of human existence that is sports, and so little interest in the rest of it.
  • Aurornis 6mo ago
    I actually wish non-sports people would care less about sports, too. Because the decisions should be left to those of us playing the sports. Not bystanders trying to impose their own agendas on to activities they don't even participate in.
    • songshu 6mo ago
      Yes, putting out cones. Bending over, laying down a cone, taking five steps, laying another. Hard work. Meanwhile Malcolm Gladwell changes his mind about it. Put out some cones, Malcolm!
    • genthree 6mo ago
      Strongly agreed. I think there was ever a good reason for this to be a topic outside those with a direct interest in various sports governing bodies. Those should be making these decisions. It's deeply stupid that this has become a major point of contention up to the federal level of government.
    • LanceH 6mo ago
      And money from non-sports people should be left with the non-sports people.
      • renewiltord 6mo ago
        This is, in general, a good idea. Nostalgia etc. and some kind of misguided paternalism causes us to “fund” sports when really all of this stuff should have to just pay for what it is. The market economy is a good way to allocate things so that you don’t end up with a $40k/yr income person paying taxes so that rich people get tennis courts in Russian Hill. We should probably just have market functions for most things. The government doesn’t have to leave the sphere. It just has to manage the market. For instance, a specific amount of space in a park could be allocated to dynamically priced programming. This could be auctioned on an annual basis with teardown costs pre-allocated. Then you don’t have the argument over whether tennis or pickleball. It could be cricket or sepak takraw for all we know. Proponents of various sports could group together to share the space. This is obviously far superior to the communist style committee allocation. And obviously the government should not fund sports. Creating the environment where sports funding can occur by ensuring a framework for contracts and so on, yes. But actually deciding that baseball or football or basketball need to be played is patently ridiculous.
• amykhar 6mo ago
  When I was growing up, I remember some drama because East German and Soviet male athletes were trying to compete as women. If male to female trans athletes were allowed to compete, I imagine it would just be a matter of time before a female athlete would HAVE to be trans in order to stand a competitive chance.
  • postflopclarity 6mo ago
    your imagination is wrong. obviously.
    • amykhar 6mo ago
      Doubtful. Despite your articulate counter-argument, I am unconvinced of your viewpoint.
• hananova 6mo ago
  This also bans cis women with genetic anomalies. Until men with genetic anomalies are equally banned from sports (for example, being an outlier in height for basketball), this is nothing more than a misogynist attempt to make women’s sport as unimpressive and average as possible. Rules set by mostly old men of course. Remember, sport is and has always been about statistical outliers competing. Fairness has never been, and will never be, a genuine consideration. It’s also mighty interesting how it’s always the male division that’s open, until you happen to have a sport where women are beating men at it, and then suddenly it’s the women’s division that’s the open one! (See shooting.) Stuff like this is why professional sports is widely seen as a cheater’s club where everyone tries to cheat as hard as possible just shy of getting caught, then acts completely innocent and indignant when someone else just barely crosses the line into getting caught.
  • noncoml 6mo ago
    [dead]
  • decimalenough 6mo ago
    Why should open divisions not work that way? They're meant to determine who's the best, regardless of sex or gender.
  • orochimaaru 6mo ago
    >>>> This also bans cis women with genetic anomalies. What are those? fwiw - I don't think they should be included in the ban. Genetic advantage people in their natural gender is how sports works. I'm 5'7" - Lebron definitely has a genetic advantage over me. Banning him from basketball isn't doing anyone favors.
    • kg 6mo ago
      http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/marriage.html http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/marriage.html discusses some of the genetic anomalies that are possible and coincidentally how they've been handled by the IOC.
• nekusar 6mo ago
  The fair answer is to remove sex, gender, and everything related to that from classification. Dont look at it. Dont consider it. Everyone competes together. It means that floor gymnastics is fair for *anyone* to compete in. None of this "wrong crotch shape" bullshit. Or intersex. Or trans. If you are good enough, you get in. If not, you dont. And the whole trans argument would go away. Means testing and gender means testing is a scourge. Time to be rid of it.
  • kakacik 6mo ago
    Then most vocal folks would scream to no end how its unfair first 25 positions in given sport are held by men. You know, women want to see other women getting medals and I don't blame them, I want to see that too. Good luck with that at any sport where strength and/or endurance matter most, just look at any given sport and check top male vs top female records. Running, climbing, hockey, football, rowing and so on and on. Thats not really a fair sport in eyes of most folks. Unless thats your goal.
  • ImJamal 6mo ago
    Women would win almost no sports competition. Maybe that is fine in your view, but many women want to have a chance at winning.
    • puppykito 6mo ago
      And apparently trans women do not want that same chance at winning lol. I find it appalling that only cis women get to have that chance, while literally banning trans women (and some unconventional cis women too) because of the way they were born and brought up. Like that is the definition of discrimination one way or another.
      • ImJamal 6mo ago
        Transwomen are not banned. They are free to compete in the open (men's) competitions if they want.
    • nekusar 6mo ago
• callistocodes 6mo ago
  My two cents as a transfem athlete: The attention this topic receives is disproportionate considering how rare we are, especially close to the Olympics level. Most of us do sports for fun/friends and don’t care how they rank us, but would be sad to be banned. There might be more “biological advantage” nuance with people just starting their transition, but by this many years in it feels silly. I registered as a man for the last event in case anyone might get upset, the staff changed it to say “woman” when I got there anyways, and then I lost to a woman twice my age.
  • locknitpicker 6mo ago
    > The attention this topic receives is disproportionate considering how rare we are, especially close to the Olympics level. We all remember state-sponsored doping scandals from the 60s where iron curtain nations invested heavily on medical research and experiments on prospective athletes to try to get medals. It's not hard to understand how badly this would turn out to be if the same sort of unscrupulous regime could just abuse this loophole to seek the same benefit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_East_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_East_Germany As far as I see, this issue is only tangentially related to transgender rights.
    • turtlesdown11 6mo ago
      [flagged]
    • yakshaving_jgt 6mo ago
      You don't have to go back that far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_Russia
      • lokar 6mo ago
        And china: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_China I don't believe either of them have really stopped.
      • 6mo ago
• mbesto 6mo ago
  This is the most objective viewpoint on transgenders in sports: https://shows.acast.com/realscienceofsport/episodes/whytransgenderathletesthreatenfairnessinwomenssport https://shows.acast.com/realscienceofsport/episodes/whytrans...
  • QuantumGood 6mo ago
    Why?
• raffael_de 6mo ago
  olympics should be entirely unisex. simple as that.
  • htx80nerd 6mo ago
    this is very naive. go compare the Olympic men 5k times to the womens 5k times. i was a very below average cross country runner in high school, if not flat out poor. my times were still fast by female standards.
  • Gud 6mo ago
    No thanks
  • lbreakjai 6mo ago
    Which would effectively make it an entirely male event. Which is why it got segregated in the first place.
• blks 6mo ago
  The only reason is topic is even on the table is the sheer amount of political grifters riding the trans “panic” for many years, trying to rile up a mob. This is a non issue, and online trans investigators and people like jk Rowling so far managed to only hurt multiple (assigned at birth) women in sports, whos looks don’t conform with traditional femininity.
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • walthamstow 6mo ago
    Trans panic is doubly popular on the right because it's a wedge issue within the left, it divided modern feminism into two camps
    • tty456 6mo ago
      Bingo.
    • blks 6mo ago
      You sure about that? I rarely see any debate on the left about trans rights, but I see various right wing politicians and media constantly beat the drums about trans people - bathrooms, sports, claiming them all to be pedophiles, “transinvestigating” various celebrities or figures. Current US executive branch made a few directed hits against trans people, for example creating a bunch of problems with passports. Trans people are certainly one of the most popular scapegoats for the right.
      • walthamstow 6mo ago
        > Trans panic is doubly popular on the right That's what I said. I'm not sure what you read.
        • blks 6mo ago
          My bad, I read it as “doubtly”, if it’s even a word.
• nikolay 6mo ago
  There should be Genderlympics, similar to the Paralympics. It's only fair!
• frizlab 6mo ago
  Good thing IMHO
• syngrog66 6mo ago
  This story/topic should not be on HN.
• _doctor_love 6mo ago
  [dead]
• fortran77 6mo ago
  This is not completely true. (Not saying I agree or disagree with it.) Trans athletes can compete under the sex indicated by their chomosomes.
  • sapphicsnail 6mo ago
    Trans men can compete as women?
    • enoint 6mo ago
      2026 winter, women’s mogul event
    • pianom4n 6mo ago
      If they are not on PEDs, yes.
      • sapphicsnail 6mo ago
        FTM HRT includes testorone. This debate hinges on what hormone therapy does to your body. No one is arguing that trans women should be able to compete as women without being on HRT.
• gverrilla 6mo ago
  This has little to do with trans people. It has more to do with the appearance of fairness — not in sports, but in the whole social order. Free market, free enterprise, etc. That's critical: if the average Joe doesn't believe he could one day have the power and riches of Musk, the whole social fabric would be dangerously torn apart (dangerous for Musk and his cronies).
• sizzle 6mo ago
  Gift link for HN community, please update @Dang: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/26/world/olympics/ioc-transgender-athletes-ban.html?unlocked_article_code=1.WFA.U8U0.iEs61HsUkQj5 https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/26/world/olympics/ioc-transg...
• rurban 6mo ago
  That's good, because the 3 cases of biological men competeting at women Olympics were scandalous. The runner Caster Semenya, and the two boxers, Algerian Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting of Taiwan. They were all just women by law. Not transgender, just mislabeled at birth.
• t14000 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  • deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  • turtlesdown11 6mo ago
    because the admins clearly don't view the denial of trans existence and rights as spreading hatred?
• lesostep 6mo ago
  It's not just a transgender ban. Everyone who doesn't have XY chromosomes can't participate. The more we protect women rights in sports, the narrower our definition of a woman gets By 2030 would Olympic Committee ask woman that gain muscles too faster then the average woman not to participate? To make it "fair for real woman"? While men are allowed the strongest competition and their unique builds are celebrated, woman are constantly limited by our genetics, hormone levels and chromosomes. "Can't stray too far from an average it aren't fair for woman" is itself not fair for woman
• cindyllm 6mo ago
  [dead]
• ryzvonusef 6mo ago
  The issue is literally one of segregation. You create, as a form of entertainment for the masses, an event for peak athletes to display their talent...by quirk of biology that means men. You create a women's category to let them have their own entertainment niche. You have in fact segregated sports, by gender, or sex, or whatever you want to call it. Now there exist individuals who challenge the boundaries of this segregation. What do? The realpolitik answer would be to segregate these individuals into yet another niche. Of course the question arises, how many segregation categories to you create before it becomes all meaningless?
  • dnlzro 6mo ago
    > how many segregation categories to you create before it becomes all meaningless Considering the fact that most women's leagues barely get any mainstream attention as is, I think any further fragmentation of sports isn't going to be sustainable. Also, ignoring the commercial and entertainment aspect of sports, it's just really hard to organize local leagues if they only serve a small portion of the population. Like, even in a large metropolitan area, how many transgender people are there? Of those, how many are interested in a particular sport? Of those, how many are interested enough to form a club?
    • ryzvonusef 6mo ago
      The problem arises because Trans people in the west (ironically) insist on a binary definition. Here in Pakistan, trans people have fought for (and gained) the right to NOT be part of the binary system; so here we have 'M' for men, 'W' for women and 'X' for trans people. (Homosexuality is still illegal, btw) Or to make it more explicit, the tagline 'trans women are women' would be considered transphobic here, because women is considered to be synonymous with cis women, but they are trans, they earnt the right for that X in their sex column. It's not like we are a bastion of trans rights here, so the issue of bathrooms ( they are required to have their own, iirc, but I doubt compliance is prevalent) and sports (haven't heard anything about trans people in sports) hasn't arisen yet. I feel trans people in the west will have to come to the same realisation that their trans counterparts in the east have; the binary definition is not fit for purpose.
• sporkland 6mo ago
  My deeply naive take is all of this stuff should be done similar to weight classes. I'm not sure what key measurable testosterone or other doping effects but measure that and separate athletes into classes based on that. Want to do steroids? Fine but you just get to compete against other dopers. As a low-T male I can go get my butt kicked by women at athletic events if I want.