Modern sport has always been a mirror for society. It reflects our ideas of fairness, identity, and what it means to compete on equal terms. But today, that mirror is fractured. The debate over transgender athletes isn’t just a technical rulebook issue — it’s emotional, political, and deeply human. Too often, the conversation gets reduced to a single headline name or a single sport. If we’re serious about understanding the dilemma, we need to look deeper, at the athletes whose stories unfold outside the spotlight, at the science that keeps shifting, and at the messy legal battles happening far from Olympic stadiums.

Why Inclusion Matters?

Whenever the issue comes up, the example of Lia Thomas, the U.S. swimmer, dominates the debate. But clinging to one name oversimplifies everything. In truth, the more interesting, and arguably more important, examples are the lesser-known athletes fighting in less commercialized sports.

Take Chris Mosier. Unless you follow duathlon or triathlon, you probably wouldn’t recognize him. Yet in 2015, Mosier became the first openly transgender man to qualify for a U.S. national men’s team in duathlon, a sport that combines running and cycling. He wasn’t splashed across headlines the way Thomas was, but his advocacy changed the International Olympic Committee’s 2015 policy — removing the old requirement for gender-affirming surgery and instead focusing on testosterone levels. A man from a relatively obscure sport, not an international superstar, helped push the IOC into a new era. That’s worth remembering.

But inclusion isn’t only about trans women. It’s also about trans men, whose struggles rarely get airtime. Consider Mack Beggs, a teenage wrestler from Texas. Because the state tied competition categories to birth certificates, Beggs was forced to wrestle in the girls’ division despite being on testosterone therapy. He won titles, but instead of celebration, he was met with boos and lawsuits. Critics accused him of cheating, though the real injustice was that the rules denied him the chance to compete as a boy, as himself. His story proves that when we talk about “trans inclusion,” we can’t just imagine it as women’s sports being invaded by men. It’s far more layered than that.

Inclusion matters not because it guarantees gold medals, but because it ensures that every athlete has the chance to stand on the mat, the track, or the starting line with dignity.

Why Fairness Cannot Be Ignored?

Still, fairness is the cornerstone of sport, and ignoring it would be just as wrong. The physiological questions are not mere prejudice — they’re rooted in data.

For example, a 2021 study in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that even after one year of testosterone suppression, trans women runners were still 9–12% faster than cisgender women. That’s not an abstract number; in elite competition, even a 1% advantage can decide who qualifies for finals and who stays home.

But the real problem is that the advantage isn’t consistent across sports. World Rugby, after reviewing safety research, chose to ban trans women from elite female competition because of collision risks. They argued the probability of injury was too high. On the other hand, sports where physical strength is secondary — like chess or equestrian riding — have stayed open and inclusive, since the competitive gap is irrelevant. These contrasts make one thing clear: a single universal policy is almost impossible. Fairness in rugby looks very different from fairness in chess.                                                                                             So yes, fairness cannot be brushed aside. But it also cannot be flattened into one-size-fits-all rules.

Science Isn’t a Final Referee!

The debate often turns to science as if it could give a neat answer. But science is messy, provisional, and always changing. Look at the IOC’s own history of policy swings:

• 2003: Athletes needed gender-affirming surgery and two years of hormone therapy.
• 2015: Surgery was dropped as a requirement; testosterone levels became the key standard.
• 2021: Even testosterone limits were scrapped. Instead, the IOC passed the responsibility to each sport, saying there should be “no presumption of advantage.”

That’s not a straight line — it’s a pendulum.

And then there’s the research itself. Scholars like Joanna Harper, a trans woman and medical physicist, have been studying how transition impacts athletic performance. Her work, also published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, shows that while hormone therapy reduces muscle mass and hemoglobin, some performance advantages can persist in speed and power-based sports. The nuance is important: not every sport is affected in the same way, and not every body responds identically to transition.

This is why science can’t serve as the ultimate referee. It can provide probabilities, but sport is decided by margins too small for science to settle definitively. Policymakers are left making judgment calls in a fog of incomplete evidence.

Looking for a Middle Ground

If the extremes — total inclusion or total exclusion — don’t work, then where do we go? Some creative models are already being tested.

In certain powerlifting competitions, organizers have created an “open” or “unclassified” division. It allows athletes who don’t fit into the traditional male or female categories to compete. The system isn’t perfect — some argue it risks isolating trans athletes — but it’s a step toward giving people a place without erasing existing categories.

Legal challenges also shape the middle ground. In Hecox v. Little (Idaho, 2020), college runner Lindsay Hecox challenged a state law banning trans women from competing in women’s sports. The case hasn’t captured international headlines, but it speaks volumes. It asks whether states can legislate identity in sport or whether such decisions should rest with sporting bodies. Cases like this, tucked away in state courts, may end up being more influential than Olympic controversies.

These experiments and lawsuits remind us that solutions don’t have to be theoretical. They’re being tested, right now, in small competitions and local courts.

The inclusion of transgender athletes is one of the hardest questions modern sport has ever faced. Not because there’s a simple answer we refuse to see, but because there may never be a perfect answer at all.

Athletes like Chris Mosier and Mack Beggs remind us that inclusion is about more than records — it’s about the right to compete without being humiliated by the rules themselves. Studies in journals like the British Journal of Sports Medicine remind us that fairness isn’t just a social construct — biology still matters. The IOC’s shifting policies prove that governing bodies are still searching for a balance, while legal cases like Hecox v. Little show that the battlefield stretches well beyond arenas.

What lies beyond the finish line isn’t just medals. It’s the ethical structure of sport: who we let in, on what terms, and why. If we cling to easy binaries, we’ll fail both fairness and inclusion. But if we accept nuance, tailor policies sport by sport, and keep experimenting with models like open categories, then maybe — just maybe — we can build a sporting world where no one is excluded and no one feels cheated.

.    .    .

Sources:

• Harper, J., O’Donnell, E., Sorouri, K., & Witard, O. (2021). How does hormone transition in transgender women change body composition, muscle strength, and haemoglobin? Systematic review with a focus on the implications for sport participation. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(15), 865–872. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-103106
• International Olympic Committee. (2003). Stockholm Consensus on Sex Reassignment in Sports.
• International Olympic Committee. (2015). Consensus Meeting on Sex Reassignment and Hyperandrogenism.
• International Olympic Committee. (2021). Framework on Fairness, Inclusion, and Non-discrimination.
• USA Triathlon. Athlete profile: Chris Mosier.
• Associated Press. (2017). Texas transgender wrestler Mack Beggs wins girls’ state title again. ESPN.
• World Rugby. (2020). Transgender Guidelines.
• Hecox v. Little, 479 F. Supp. 3d 930 (D. Idaho 2020).