The politics of banning transgender athletes in universities

Modern liberalism is characterized by tensions between conflicting rights and privileges. A case in point is the recent decision by the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) to ban transgender women from women’s competition starting August 1st.

Anti-transgender activists, however, argue that restricting transgender athletes is to protect the safety of biological women. Meanwhile, transgender rights advocates say transgender athletes must be able to participate in sports in a safe environment.

Nevertheless, behind discussions about rights, power struggles often lie beneath the veil of well-intentioned actions.

For years, anti-transgender activists have argued that differences in men’s and women’s physiology are important in sports. Their lobbying efforts have been fierce and vocal, leading the NAIA to point out this week that the sport “involves a combination of strength, speed and stamina that provides male student-athletes with a competitive advantage.” Significant physical differences therefore affect the fairness of “gender-sensitive sports.”

In short, “Including trans women in the women’s category in most sports does not balance equity, and in some sports, safety.” Providing competitive access to transgender athletes “must not deprive natal women of the opportunity to compete.” Participate in fair and safe sport. ”

The inclusion agenda is disruptive in many ways, challenging dualistic thinking and social structures around the world. But it comes at a time when the sex/gender issue, which has been debated for centuries, remains unresolved and unresolved. Most importantly, this movement challenges many traditional groups’ sources of power. Therefore, anti-transgender rhetoric is actually a conservative campaign aimed at eliminating so-called ideologies such as diversity, equity, and inclusion as a way to regain influence over the policies of college sports governing bodies. It is.

It’s no wonder that transgender rights have long been the subject of conservative attack and scrutiny, leading nearly half of U.S. states to enact laws banning transgender women and girls from college politics. Similar episodes can be seen in the recent ouster of two Ivy League university presidents, Liz McGill of the University of Pennsylvania and Claudine Gay of Harvard University. After all, it’s just America’s right and left fighting on different playing fields. This fight is not a deep debate about human rights or how to create a better society.

The literature surrounding the alleged physical advantages of transgender women over cisgender women remains unexplored. It is usually believed that sports are physical in nature, but it is only related to all other sports. Next, we need to consider a more sociological approach.

Gender categorization in sports began with the aim of ensuring a safe environment and at the same time allowing women to develop their abilities and skills fairly through competition among their peers. In recent decades, women have focused on creating a safe environment that not only guarantees a safe environment free of harassment, but also emphasizes unequal differences in resources and pay and guarantees fair and equal treatment. I left it behind. This is not because women conform to men’s physical abilities, but because women have the right to dignity in sport, just as in other social aspects. It is true, then, that women, like transgender people, need to compete in a fair and safe sporting environment.

In that case, we need to recognize that sport is not just a competition, but also a means for people to increase their personal development, and that no one should be excluded from the fulfillment that sport provides. Although many transgender people find sports to be a good environment for self-expression, they often encounter the same discriminatory attitudes they normally experience in everyday life, both inside and outside of the locker room. This often happens. Therefore, a ban is not a solution, but a means to make the problem even worse. In order to reconcile these contradictory ideas, it is necessary to shift the discussion from “fair and safe sports” to “fair, safe, and dignified sports.” We should adopt a human rights-based approach, especially considering those who have overcome adversity to prove themselves in the sporting world. This creates a larger sporting community, rather than intensifying and deepening social divisions.

The underlying principle of sport is to prove that we can not only become faster, taller and stronger, but also better people.

Dr. Christopher Barinas Valdez is a scholar, policy maker, and former diplomat who wrote international policy on human rights and feminist foreign policy for Mexico.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own.