Transgender women have been banned from women’s Olympic events after the International Olympic Committee (IOC) announced a new policy that aligns with U.S. President Donald Trump‘s “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports” executive order issued last year.
The IOC announced the “Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport and Guiding Considerations for International Federations and Sports Governing Bodies” on Thursday, following approval from the IOC Executive Board.
“Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females, determined on the basis of a one‑time SRY gene screening,” the IOC said in its press release.
“Evidence‑based and expert‑informed, the policy – applicable for the LA28 Olympic Games onwards – protects fairness, safety and integrity in the female category.”
The IOC also said the policy is not retroactive and doesn’t apply to any grassroots or recreational sports programs. The Olympic Charter states that “the practice of sport is a human right.”
According to The Associated Press, there were no transgender women competing in the women’s category at the 2024 Olympics in Paris, though there was one, weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, at the Tokyo Games in 2021.
IOC President Kirsty Coventry, who is just over one year into her tenure, spoke about the policy in a video released by IOC Media.
“As a former athlete, I passionately believe in the rights of all Olympians to take part in fair competition. The policy that we have announced is based on science, and it has been led by medical experts with the best interests of athletes at its heart,” said Coventry, who is the first female in the IOC’s 132-year history to hold the position.
“The scientific evidence is very clear. Male chromosomes give performance advantages in sports that rely on strength, power, or endurance.
“At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat. So it’s absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category.”
Athletes will have to take one mandatory gene test during their career to determine their eligibility.
From the IOC release:
Eligibility for the female category is to be determined in the first instance by SRY gene screening to detect the absence or presence of the SRY gene.
Based on scientific evidence, the IOC considers that the presence of the SRY gene is fixed throughout life and represents highly accurate evidence that an athlete has experienced male sex development. Furthermore, the IOC considers that SRY gene screening via saliva, cheek swab or blood sample is unintrusive compared to other possible methods.
Athletes who screen negative for the SRY gene permanently satisfy this policy’s eligibility criteria for competition in the female category. Unless there is reason to believe that a negative reading is in error, this will be a once-in-a-lifetime test.
You can read the full policy here.
Last summer, Coventry announced the creation of a working group focused on “protection of the female category,” one of her first key initiatives after taking over as president.
In 2022, World Aquatics (then FINA) voted to ban transgender women who had gone through from participating in the women’s category. Along with swimming, the rule was also implemented in track & field and cycling.
Lia Thomas, the trans woman who competed at the 2022 Women’s NCAA Swimming & Diving Championships and won the national title in the 500 freestyle, attempted to appeal World Aquatics’ ban, but was denied by the Court of Arbitration for Sport as she was no longer a member of USA Swimming and therefore “not entitled to engage with eligibility to compete in World Aquatics competitions.”
President Trump signed the “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” executive order last winter, which dictated that “only athletes who meet the Executive Order’s definition of ‘women’ or ‘girls’ may compete in the Women’s Competition Category.”
Both the NCAA and USA Swimming changed their policies to align with the executive order last year.
I’m sure they say the same thing about you…
anti-trans-people-in-sports suck. You gave us ⵜrump
My question is when does this end.. testing chromosomes can very easily open a bad can of worms. What’s stopping them from banning biological woman who naturally produces above average levels of testosterone, or woman who are naturally taller and more muscular than others..aka the “biological advantages” but in reverse.
It wasn’t long ago when Barbra Banda was ruled ineligible to compete for Zambia in a 2022 World Cup-qualifying tournament because testing revealed her natural testosterone levels were above those allowed by the Confederation of African Football
So again I ask, when does this end?
Dude, it’s not that hard.
It kinda is, tho. The IOC themselves rejected this exact testing 20 years ago as bunk.
I agree with this decision for competitive sport, but don’t want trans people to feel rejected or hurt. It is a diabolically hard call to make.
Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games is now limited to biological females on the basis of a one-time SRY gene screening.
Who came up with this title?
Cause clearly this is the biggest most pressing issue will have to deal with in our lifetime, not nuclear annihilation or environmental collapse or war in the Middle East or anything like that.
Most people are capable of caring about more than 1 thing at a time.
This is the IOC dealing with with IOC problems. They really can’t do a lot about any of the other stuff you mentioned. If it wasn’t a big problem before, it’s even less of a problem now, thanks to the IOC’s ruling.
Here is an article by an expert who responded to World Athletics’ requirement for the same test. https://www.mcri.edu.au/news/insights-and-opinions/world-athletics-sry-gene-conversation
A few quotes from the article:
“Using SRY to establish biological sex is wrong because all it tells you is whether or not the gene is present.
It does not tell you how SRY is functioning, whether a testis has formed, whether testosterone is produced and, if so, whether it can be used by the body.”
“It is worth noting these tests are sensitive. If a male lab technician conducts the test he can inadvertently contaminate it with a single skin cell and produce a false positive SRY result.”
There are definitely issues of fairness which… Read more »
What should be done then. A junk test? I understand the argument that the testing is only for the presence of a gene but expanding that to other biological advantages is out of the scope. Their could be a few women outliers who maybe somehow don’t have XX but calling this a complex problem when it’s rather binary is a overstatement.
You may choose to ignore the facts, but this testing has happened before:
https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/decision-to-abolish-gender-testing-at-sydney-olympics-supported-by-yale-physician/
While you want to believe that all women will pass this test, 8 out of 3,387 is far from rare in a small, but similar… Read more »
It begs the question, are transgender men allowed to compete? Oh wait, they can’t make the cut line.