The renowned novelist J.K. Rowling, fueled by evident appearance-based prejudice, accused a few athletes at the Paris Olympics of being transgender competitors. While her intent to defend female athletes is understandable, this episode sheds light on a rarely addressed issue: The employment discrimination faced by non-transgender athletes, particularly those with differences in sexual development (DSD).
In most domestic and international competitions, biological sex is used to separate competitors.
However, consider female athletes with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS), who possess XY chromosomes. These athletes are born with external female characteristics and raised as girls, only to be diagnosed with XY chromosomes during puberty due to the absence of menstruation. Should these women not be guaranteed protection from discrimination?
In sports, fairness is a core issue that often overshadows inclusivity. Competing against opponents with natural advantages in body size, strength and speed is commonplace and generally accepted as a matter of individual genetic makeup. Just as some athletes are naturally taller or stronger, facing a female athlete with CAIS should be no different. These athletes do not possess the typical male physiological advantages, and their performance falls within the normative range for female physiology. However, the complexity of biological sex might be exaggerated, leading to the perception that these athletes pose an unfair threat to other female competitors.
There are two categories of athletes with DSD who compete alongside typical female athletes: 46XY-AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome) individuals, who are genetically male but resistant to androgens, and 46XX-CAH (congenital adrenal hyperplasia) individuals, who are genetically female but exhibit atypical hormone levels. The eligibility of the first category is intuitively denied, while the eligibility of the second is intuitively accepted. However, it is actually the androgen levels of the second category that may place typical female athletes at a disadvantage.
Apart from the previously mentioned CAIS athletes, another group of XY female athletes are those with partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS). Members of this group partially respond to androgens, and their external characteristics might fall between typical male and female traits. Thus, using external checks to determine sex might reveal traits that do not align with traditional binary standards, making classification more challenging.
Since PAIS involves some androgen influence, it remains uncertain how this might manifest under intense training, potentially raising concerns about fairness during competitions. Consequently, this group faces greater challenges in the gender verification processes required for competition eligibility. Given that gender equality is a modern goal across all fields, why not begin by ensuring that female athletes with CAIS, who face no such controversy, are fully included?
It is crucial to clarify the symptoms and mechanisms of androgen insensitivity syndrome, understand these athletes’ biological sex and its impact on physical development, and prevent misunderstandings from fostering prejudice. Born with the physiological limitations that give them a female appearance without the corresponding internal anatomy or male-like physical capabilities, these athletes should be allowed to shine in the sports arena. If they can succeed through their efforts, why not provide them with a more inclusive environment where they can tell their own life stories, showcase their talents and contribute to the legacy of sustainable talent development?
Chu Jou-juo is a professor in the Department of Labor Relations at National Chung-cheng University.
RSS