By Michael A. Ross, MS
In December 2019, Tennessee representative Bruce Griffey proposed a bill (TN HB 1572) that mandates that athletes who participate in school sanctioned sporting events for elementary and secondary schools in the state of Tennessee that receive public funding are required to compete based on the gender assigned on their birth certificate and not based on the gender they identify with.
Background
As gender identification and sport participation continue to become a more common area of controversy within secondary school offerings, the proposed TN HB 1572 has become the most recent chapter of debate and address for both sides of the issue. Griffey insists the purpose of his bill is not to attack, demean, or degrade those who identify as transgender, but instead to provide a proactive measure towards ensuring fairness for all who participate in this realm of secondary athletics (Asmelash, 2020). Griffey states that due to the biological differences found between males and females, allowing transgender females to compete provides an unfair advantage among their biological female counterparts (Asmelash, 2020). Referencing multiple states which have seen numerous biological females forfeit, completely quit their sport, or raise complaints when having to compete against transgender female competition, TN HB 1572 aims to address this issue.
Those opposed to the proposed bill assert that despite the claims of Griffey’s reasoning, this represents an attack on transgendered individuals and athletes by forcing them to identify as someone they are not. Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project, an advocate for LGBTQ rights, refers to the measures proposed to enforce TN HB 1572 purpose as “draconian” (Asmelash, 2020). TN HB 1572 calls for those schools found violating the purpose of the bill to lose access to public funding. School officials and administration could potentially face civil lawsuits and be fined of up to $10,000 for violations. In addition, said officials could also be fired and be restricted from holding a position in public office or assume a school administrative position within the state for five years.
Despite the obvious differences concerning this topic of debate, there are multiple more concrete platforms in which this debate should find its merit, one of which stems from the potential impact towards Title IX. Since its implementation in 1972, Title IX has helped increase not only opportunities for female athletes within sport but drastically increased involvement simultaneously. A crucial aspect of this debate is stating that transgender athletes could potentially harm the positive results that have come from Title IX in the realm of female athletics. Those in favor of the bill’s intent suggest that competing against transgender competitors creates a barrier and reduces the opportunities biological female athletes have to fair competition and potentially decreases recruiting opportunities to move into the collegiate ranks.
Existing cases provide relevance to the argument in which biological female athletes are being defeated in competition by their transgender counterparts, and increased notoriety has fueled the proverbial fire for this argument when they are defeated at the state championship or national level. While there has not been an influx of biological females losing collegiate scholarships documented, one can understand the argument becoming valid depending on how legislation is handled in the future.
To ensure that instances such as these are reviewed with Title IX acting as the basis for reasoning, parents of female track athletes in Connecticut filed a discrimination complaint in which they insisted the existing policy regarding transgender athletes in the state’s high school competition placed their daughters in a competitive disadvantage and violated the premises Title IX was created to uphold (Pell, 2019). The purpose of said complaint was to show that allowing transgender athletes to compete against their biological specific counterparts can create an adverse effect when it comes to fair competition and potential recruitment issues (Soule Complaint, 2019). For athletes attempting to further their careers at the collegiate level, an influx of transgender competitors could mean fewer opportunities to compete in the biggest competitions which attracts an increased number of scouting and recruiting opportunities.
Another key component in deciding how the proposed bill should be handled is by looking to a larger governing body which focuses on sport, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). Currently the NCAA has a policy in place which allows avenues for transgender athletes to continue participation within the collegiate realm with additional stipulations. As of this article’s publication, transgender males (female-to-male) who are taking hormonal treatments may compete on a male team but will no longer be able to participate on a female team. The policy set in place currently for transgender females (male-to-female) states that an athlete undergoing this transformation must complete one year of hormonal suppression treatment before competing against their biological female counterparts. During this one year of treatment, a transgender female may continue to compete on a men’s team. With TN HB 1572 and current NCAA policy contradicting one another, the debate for which, if either, of these policies is the correct way to handle this complicated issue is sure to continue.
A relevant example of this issue needing to be addressed and resolved for all parties involved can be seen through former Texas wrestling state champion Mack Beggs. Mackenzie “Mack” Beggs, a transgender male, who during her high school tenure fell in love with the sport of wrestling was also taking hormonal treatments to transform into her current male identity (Babb, 2017). Beggs became the center of this controversy because after taking the hormonal treatments, there was a noticeable transformation from a physical and muscular perspective. Beggs petitioned to compete with male wrestlers, but the University Interscholastic League, which governs Texas high school athletics, ruled that she should compete among her female counterparts. With the obvious physical advantages over her biological female opponents, Beggs went on to win the state championship while experiencing excessive negative comments and controversy during the process (Babb, 2017). Many of Beggs’ competitors chose to forfeit their match instead of facing her in the tournament. Other competitors filed complaints attempting to petition against her being allowed to compete with the aid of hormone treatments while they were denied the same opportunity, thus resulting in them not advancing in tournaments for collegiate scouts to watch them perform (Babb, 2017). To further understand why this issue needs to be addressed, it must be noted that Beggs was simply competing in the only realm she was allowed. She was told she could not compete against males based on her biological listing on her birth certificate, and many coaches insisted she could be severely injured. With limited options in the sport Beggs had devoted so much time to while also pursuing a collegiate scholarship, what alternatives can be found for continued participation while avoiding public scrutiny?
Conclusion
With an evident need to address situations in which transgender athletes are competing among their biological counterparts, the question is, can a governing body such as the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) implement a policy similar to the NCAA allowing equal opportunity for all competitors? Does implementing a policy such as the current NCAA policy completely protect Title IX and all those who are influenced by its guidelines? Creating a standard for state high school associations to use as a blueprint moving forward is crucial before more litigation is produced which questions competitors and the impact Title IX has produced thus far, and also to help avoid situations in which transgender athletes face increased scrutiny for their participation in a given sport. TN HB 1572 is the most current chapter to be played out while the need for a more universal solution is prolonged. The NCAA policy seems to be the best measure to adopt while addressing the needs of human individuality, but until it is implemented at the high school and elementary school levels of competition there will certainly be those who advocate for both sides of this discussion.
References
Asmelash, L. (2020, January 8). Tennessee bill would require students to play sports based on gender identified at birth. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/politics/tennessee-transgender-sports-bill-trnd/index.html
Babb, K. (2017, February 25). Transgender wrestler Mack Beggs identifies as a male. He just won the Texas state girls title. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/highschools/meet-the-texas-wrestler-who-won-a-girls-state-title-his-name-is-mack/2017/02/25/982bd61c-fb6f-11e6-be05-1a3817ac21a5_story.html
Pell, S. (2019, June 20). Girls say Connecticut’s transgender athlete policy violates Title IX, file federal complaint. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/06/19/girls-say-connecticuts-transgender-athlete-policy-violates-title-ix-file-federal-complaint/
Soule complaint (2019). Retrieved from http://www.adfmedia.org/files/SouleComplaintOCR.pdf
Tennessee House Bill 1572 (2019). Retrieved from http://wapp.capital.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=HB1572
Michael A. Ross is an Assistant Professor of Sport Management at Shorter University and a PhD student at Troy University specializing in research related to youth sport studies, leadership and participation motivations in sport and recreation.
