Expert blog: Gender eligibility boxing row demonstrates ongoing issues with gender diversity in sport

The Paris 2024 Olympic Games were a turning point for gender equality in elite sport, with 50/50 male and female athlete representation for the first time in Olympic history.

While this should be celebrated, this progress is accompanied by ongoing debates and challenges concerning the inclusion of gender-diverse athletes, such as trans athletes and those with differences in sex development.

As we saw with boxers Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting, the conversation around these issues is complex, touching upon sports regulation, science, human rights, and ethics.

The evolution of gender eligibility policies

The Tokyo 2020 Olympics saw New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard become the first transgender woman to compete in the Games' female category after meeting the required gender eligibility criteria.

However, there are now tighter restrictions on gender-diverse athletes, aimed at minimising perceived male athletic advantages. The regulatory landscape continues to evolve, often sparking intense debates and a variety of viewpoints from different stakeholders.

The International Olympic Committee's Framework

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) introduced the Framework on Fairness, Inclusion, and Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations in 2021.

This non-binding framework outlines ten key principles aimed at ensuring inclusive participation in sports. These principles include inclusion, prevention of harm, non-discrimination, fairness, evidence-based approaches, health and bodily autonomy, stakeholder engagement, privacy rights, and periodic reviews of eligibility criteria.

The framework, which has received mixed responses, shifts the focus from scientific evidence to multidisciplinary decision-making. Critics argue that this downplays the impact of testosterone exposure on male athletic performance, even after testosterone suppression.

Diverging policies across sports

International sports federations have adopted varied approaches to gender eligibility, this autonomy has led to inconsistencies. For instance, while World Rowing and World Triathlon allow transgender women to compete in female categories if their testosterone levels are sufficiently reduced, other bodies like World Rugby and World Athletics have imposed outright bans on gender-diverse athletes in female elite competitions.

Even in sports with minimal physical exertion, such as chess, gender eligibility policies have sparked controversy. The International Chess Federation temporarily restricted transgender women from female-only events, a stance that contrasts with the more inclusive policies of national federations like the English Chess Federation.

The scientific debate

The debate over gender eligibility often centres on the role of testosterone as a marker for athletic performance. Some studies suggest that trans women who have undergone medical transition and women with some differences in sex development traits might possess an unfair advantage.

However, the scientific community has yet to reach a consensus on the extent of these advantages and their impact on sports performance.

Human rights considerations

The IOC's Olympic Charter emphasises that sport is a human right, free from discrimination based on sex or other statuses. The intersection of sports regulations with human rights has been highlighted in cases like that of South African sprinter Caster Semenya. The Court of Arbitration for Sport and the European Court of Human Rights have both been involved in adjudicating the compatibility of sports rules with human rights principles.

Legal challenges and policy reforms

Gender eligibility rules are increasingly subject to legal challenges. For example, transgender swimmer Lia Thomas has initiated arbitration proceedings against World Aquatics' gender eligibility policy, arguing that it is discriminatory.

The legal framework surrounding these issues remains complex, with provisions like Section 195 of the UK Equality Act 2010 allowing sports bodies to discriminate based on sex in certain contexts. This provision, however, is seen by some as outdated and in need of reform.

The importance of athlete voices

A significant gap in the policymaking process is the lack of representation from athletes who are directly affected by these rules. Research examining the lived experiences of gender-diverse and cisgender athletes is sparse. Instead, these groups are often portrayed as being in opposition, which exacerbates divisions and misunderstandings.

Balancing fairness and inclusion

The core of the debate on gender eligibility in sports revolves around balancing fairness and inclusion. Some argue that excluding gender-diverse athletes is necessary to maintain fair competition, while others believe that inclusion should take precedence. The question remains as to what level of biological advantage is considered acceptable in sport, and how this should be addressed in policymaking.

Conclusion

The Paris 2024 Olympics represent a significant step towards gender equality in sport.

However, the complex issues surrounding gender diversity and eligibility highlight the need for more robust, transparent, and inclusive policy-making processes.

Engaging a broader range of voices from sports, science, human rights, and ethics can help create policies that are fair, inclusive, and reflective of the diverse realities of all athletes.

The Olympics provide an opportunity to rethink and refresh approaches to gender eligibility, promoting a collaborative and evidence-based agenda for the future of sport.

Associate Professor Seema Patel, Nottingham Law School