What’s ahead for transgender women and girls competing in women’s sports

Image

Dr. Kirsten Hextrum

February 19, 2025

President Trump signed an executive order on February 5, aimed at prohibiting transgender women and girls from competing in women’s sports, whereby schools that choose not to comply could lose federal funding. The next day, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) followed suit by barring transgender women from competing in NCAA events. Both policies are likely to have a significant impact on the university sporting landscape and perception of women’s sports.

Though, it’s not as straightforward as it seems, says Kirsten Hextrum, assistant professor in the School of Language, Culture, and Society, who uses critical theories to examine college-going opportunities for underrepresented students. Here, Hextrum, author of Special Admission: How college sports recruitment favors white suburban athletes, discusses the recent executive orders, who they affect, what they mean for student-athletes, and how her recent research on public opinions about transgender athletes’ rights paint a different picture.

How do you interpret the latest news from the Trump Administration and NCAA about excluding transgender student-athletes from women’s sports?

The Trump Administration’s actions are the latest and most severe in a broader anti-trans movement to prohibit the very small number of trans girls and trans women from playing sports. It’s important to recognize that banning trans girls and trans women from playing is explicitly anti-trans and targets expressly those communities. But they also are born out of preserving a binary, hierarchical gender order, and have broad sweeping impacts on gender non-binary individuals, gender non-conforming individuals, cisgender girls/women who are masculine presenting, and girls and women generally. And, that girls/women of color and from low-income communities will be the most harmed by these policies. The long-history of sex-segregated sports, gender policing, and sex-testing are all interrelated and disproportionately place more scrutiny on girls/women to “prove” their gender status than on men. These policies and practices scrutinize any girl/woman whose athleticism encroaches on male performance, effectively placing a ceiling on what we believe girls/women capable of. In contrast, no limit is placed on what boys/men can do. We also know these policies do little to keep girls/women safe and are more about protecting and preserving the gender order and associated male hierarchies. 

What do you believe the broader effects of these policies will be?

Research has also found that the mere existence of such policies have a chilling effect on girls/women’s sports participation, especially for those who may be trans, gender questioning, non-binary, or masculine presenting (Fischer and McClearen, 2020; Phipps, 2021). They report being fearful of scrutiny, surveillance, and hostile team climates, all of which push them out of sport (Fischer and McClearen, 2020; Phipps, 2021). These findings are particularly troubling, considering girls/women still have about 1.1 fewer participation opportunities than boys/men across our youth sports (Hextrum et al., 2024).

The NCAA’s actions are particularly shameful as they are choosing to opt into the Trump Administration’s broader anti-trans attack. The NCAA already had strict and robust policies regarding trans-athlete participation. They did not need to take this step further, and doing so, is a direct violation of their purported values around increasing opportunities for women to play, and diversity and inclusion, more broadly. 

What are the next steps for the NCAA here?

Of major concern, is that the NCAA released this new policy and has yet to detail their surveillance and enforcement mechanisms. How will they verify someone’s sex-assigned at birth? What kind of data will they collect, how will this be protected, and who will oversee enforcement? Like the Trump Administration’s suggestion, do they plan to set up a reporting line for people to “out” possible trans women playing for women’s teams? How will these practices disrupt team dynamics and communities? There are real and harmful consequences to their swift action that, it seems, they have yet to account for.

We know that these policies do little to end the actual perpetrators of violence in women’s sports. Research, along with high-profile public scandals such as Larry Nasser’s actions as trainer at USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University, continually shows that cisgender men in positions of power and authority, not trans women, are far and away the largest perpetrators of violence against women. And, that girls and women generally still face higher rates of gender based violence in sport than boys/men. Sports organizations often dismiss or choose not to investigate claims of sexual abuse, violence, and harassment in girls/women’s teams, and have even retained and promoted coaches and leaders with credible claims against them (Fasting, 2015; Parent and Fortier, 2018; Owton and Sparkes, 2017). The lack of actions on these real issues shows where these organizations priorities actually lay. 

The Trump Administration used transgender athletes as a key theme of his election  campaign. What does your research – with Chris Knoester of The Ohio State University – show in terms of public opinion of transgender student-athletes participating in collegiate sports?

Our first wave of research examined public opinions in 2018, prior to this broader polarization of trans-athletes, around a range of gender and sport issues. We  found that those who were generally against trans women playing sports were also more likely to hold stereotypical views of gender, support the notion of separate sphere, and felt that women athletes deserved fewer resources, attention, and media coverage than men’s athletes. These findings indicate that political movements and policies stating they are in the interest of supporting women’s sports are more about containing girls/women into separate and subordinated athletic worlds. Our findings also revealed that, overall, Americans were favorable of trans-athlete participation and supported their competition with accommodations and limits. This was a hopeful insight, showing that these policies may be broadly unpopular. However, much has changed in the intervening years and the Republican Party has effectively weaponized and politicized trans communities. Our research is on-going and we recently collected another wave of opinions from the same people in the year 2024. We are interested to see how opinions on trans-athlete participation may have changed in the intervening years as the issues have become more politicized. 

What are universities and policymakers doing to respond to these exclusions of transgender student-athletes?

I have yet to see an organized and coordinated response from universities to oppose the NCAA’s actions, but there are some fractured efforts to mobilize a response. The President of the North American Sociology for the Study of Sport (NASSS), Dr. Travers, emailed all members (I am one!) encouraging us to write letters opposing the ban to the NCAA.

Dr. Travers also shared these resources and responses that we can engage with to support trans athletes:

• a response from Athlete Ally;
• an essay by Bear Bergman about how to support trans and non-binary people; 
• and Dean Spade's Mutual Aid.

Is there anything that you would like to personally share on the topic? 

As a former DI college athlete, I am deeply aware of the pressures and anxieties women athletes face every day in competing in their sports. We do so with less resources, support, and public interest, and often encounter implicit and explicit sexism as we pour countless hours into our sport and push our bodies to their physical limits. Within these organizational conditions of scarcity, it's easy to look inward and blame an easy target for the struggles we face, as we’ve seen other high-profile women athletes do. But I encourage all women-identifying athletes to not take this route and try to keep a bigger and broader perspective. These most recent attacks will not make our sports safer, more accessible, or more resourced. They will instead push competent athletes out, reinforce vulgar gender norms, and stymie the progress we’ve been fighting for over generations. Instead, keep our fight targeted toward expanding opportunities and resources, not restricting them.

Sources cited:

Fasting K (2015) Assessing the Sociology of Sport: On Sexual Harassment Research and Policy. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 50(4–5): 437–441.

Fischer M and McClearen J (2020) Transgender Athletes and the Queer Art of Athletic Failure. Communication & Sport 8(2): 147–167.

Kirsten Hextrum, Chris Knoester & James Tompsett (2024) Inequalities in Girls’ High School Sports Participation: How Social Class, Race/Ethnicity, and Gender Route Opportunities to Play and Persist in Athletics. Sociological Focus, 57:2, 63-93, DOI: 10.1080/00380237.2024.2317480

Owton H and Sparkes AC (2017) Sexual Abuse and the Grooming Process in Sport: Learning from Bella’s Story. Sport, Education and Society 22(6): 732–743.

Parent S and Fortier K (2018) Comprehensive Overview of the Problem of Violence Against Athletes in Sport. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 42(4): 227–246.

Phipps C (2021) Thinking Beyond the Binary: Barriers to Trans* Participation in University Sport. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 56(1): 81–96.