When and Where are Men Allowed to Compete “as Women?"
Everything You Need to Know about "Transgender-Related Sports Policies" — Which Should Really Be Called "Female Eligibility Sports Policies"
Rules about who gets to compete "as a woman" are numerous and complicated. Recently, many of these policies have been updated in the right direction: toward preserving female athletes' single-sex rights. Here's everything you need to know:
At every age group, in virtually every sport, males are unquestionably stronger and faster than women. Males have taller stature, denser bones, larger hands, larger hearts, larger lungs, and greater endurance, all of which affect performance. You probably know that. Every casual sports observer does. Male performance advantage ranges from ten to fifty percent, with some outliers involving upper-body strength. Men’s punching power is 162 percent greater than women’s. That’s why there are virtually always two categories based on sex.1
Here are 41 more reasons males don’t belong in women’s sports, all related to female-sized equipment and rules. For instance, women’s volleyball nets are seven-and-a-half inches lower than men’s – because women are six shorter and because men’s jumping ability is, on average, one hundred percent higher than women’s. When males compete against women, such equipment disparities amount to additional, hidden performance advantages for males. Sports eligibility policies never mention this, nor do the ones that allow trans-identified males to compete “as women” require males to use male-sized equipment.
Trans-Related Sports Policies should be called Female Eligibility Policies. If you see a policy with the word transgender in the title, the organization is usually more concerned about including men in the women’s category than creating a fair playing environment for women.
People who identify as transgender do not need their own sports eligibility policies. They can compete in the category based on their actual sex, just like everyone else. Gender identity is irrelevant in sports.
“Inclusion” in a sports policy is another red flag. Why? Because sports categories are designed to exclude. The category for ten-and-unders, for instance, excludes everyone over ten. No one expects that category to “be inclusive” and allow thirty-six-year-olds who feel “young at heart” to be included.
Sorting out who has the authority to make and enforce rules can be complicated. Female eligibility policies vary by sport, by school district, by state, by country, and by national and international governing body.
World organizations do not necessarily govern individual country policies. For instance, World Sailing, the international governing body for sailing, has implemented a Transgender Participation Policy that excludes from the female category males who have undergone male puberty. U.S. Sailing, however, still allows a sailor to “self-identify and compete as his/her identified gender” upon providing one form of documentation that proves “the sailor’s gender in his/her ‘everyday life’ matches his/her racing gender.”
References to puberty constitute another red flag. Even before puberty, boys are faster and stronger than girls.
Since 2023, the Women’s Sports Policy Working Group has been tracking evolving policies governing who can compete in the female category. Here’s the sport-by-sport listing of United States and international policies and the group’s model policy.
Some international sports organizations (such as the International Olympic Committee, or IOC) defer to other organizations – in their case, the international governing bodies for each sport. But in 2024, the IOC famously stripped the International Boxing Association of its authority and allowed two male boxers who had been deemed ineligible in 2023 to enter women’s rings, punch women in the face, and walk away with gold medals because they had “female on their passports.” Which was a travesty.
Now there’s a new international boxing organization approved by the IOC called World Boxing, which has promised to implement sex testing for all who want to compete in its events. Sex testing is the gold standard.2
Sex testing was used in the Olympics for more than thirty years, until 1999. Female athletes were tested with a non-invasive cheek swab, and those with XX chromosomes were granted a pass they carried everywhere. More than 80 percent of female athletes wanted this to continue.
The IOC’s new president, Kirsty Coventry, seems to be leaning toward protecting the female category from males. She is assembling a working group, she announced at her first press conference, and mentioned consulting with World Athletics – which meets the gold standard of sex testing.
When reading a sports policy, look for this odd word: nanomoles, which means the group is allowing some males to compete “as women.” In some policies such as the National Women’s Soccer League) you’ll see references to males being required to suppress testosterone to under ten nanomoles per liter, or T<10 nmol/L, in order to gain eligibility to compete “as women.” Other organizations require suppressing testosterone to under five nanomoles per liter, or T<5 nmol/L: USA Rowing, World Skate (skateboarding); International Surfing Association; USA Swimming; Ironman Triathlon. Others require less than 2.5 nanomoles per liter, or T<2.5 nmol/L: World Archery, International Powerlifting Federation, WTA, World Triathlon. Keep in mind that males have more testosterone than females. There’s no overlap. The female range tops out at 2.4 and the male range starts at 7.7 and extends to 29.4. Pretending that males who lower their testosterone artificially “become women” and granting them female eligibility is insulting and incorrect. Even after males lower their testosterone, they retain male performance advantages in strength, size, endurance, and more. Therefore, the best policies do not mention nanomoles. If you see references to nanomoles per liter, pretend you are being chased by a small, scary animole, and run.
Many policies use problematic terms. “Born male” implies that people can become not-male, which is not true. “Biological male”: same. “Assigned female at birth”: Except in rare cases, sex is easily observed. This definition of female is good: “Participation in the female category [is] limited to those born with female reproductive biology and genetics” -- from the National Scholastic Athletics Foundation’s new (March 2025) Eligibility Policy for the Female Category.
There is a clear trend toward sensible policies that exclude all males from the female category. It started with World Rugby in 2020: “Transgender women [males] may not currently play women's rugby. Why? Because of the size, force- and power-producing advantages conferred by testosterone during puberty and adolescence, and the resultant player welfare risks this creates.”
The WNBA was next, in 2022. Its Collective Bargaining Agreement quietly states, “Only players who are women are eligible to play in the WNBA.” So simple! They do not even address trans, non-binary, or other gender identities. The WNBA knows who women are and knows that such beliefs do not affect sex.
Between 2023 and 2025, another fifteen U.S. and international sports organizations adopted policies restricting the female category to females. This snowballing pattern reflects a series of victories for female athletes and allies.
The UK Supreme Court decision in the case of For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers, which clarified that men cannot legally be considered women, is having a positive effect, with several U.K. organizations, such as the Football Association, already fixing their policies to exclude “transgender women” (males).
World organizations have also been influenced by the UK Supreme Court. The International Eightball Pool Federation recently excluded all males from the female category, explaining that pool is a “gender-affected sport” and transgender women [males] retain male advantages." Good policies must have verification procedures, such as this:
“Confirmation that an athlete qualifies for the female category will be accomplished by, depending on the competitive level of sport (age, regional or international, etc.):
A copy of an athlete’s original, unaltered / unedited birth certificate; or
A physician’s verification based on pre-season physicals conducted for school or other like participation and competitions; or
A signed statement (from the athlete or, in the case of youth, the athlete’s guardian) that the athlete is not misrepresenting her or his birth sex; and, when applicable,
A biological sample, such as a cheek swab consistent with World Athletics, World Anti-Doping Agency and/or U.S. Anti-Doping Agency rules.
Good policies address disorders of sexual development (DSD athletes), for instance:
“All athletes with XX chromosomes are eligible to compete in the female category.
“All athletes with XY chromosomes who have complete androgen insensitivity (CAIS) are eligible to compete in the female category.
“All athletes with XY chromosomes who have partial androgen insensitivity (PAIS) are not eligible to compete in the female category.
“All athletes with XY chromosomes who produce bioavailable testosterone (meaning the testosterone is able to androgenize the body) at male levels (7.7 - 29.4 nm/ml) are not eligible to compete in the female category.
“Results of biological tests [such as cheek swabs] that show an athlete is XY… should be reported back to the athlete with great sensitivity.”
Keeping All Men Out
There is a long history of sex-verification tests in women’s sports because there’s also a long history of men trying to cheat their way onto female winner’s platforms. The recent influx of trans-identified male athletes into women’s sports over the past decade or so, and the subsequent need sports organizations are feeling to implement fair, safe, common-sense protections for female athletes, will have the added benefit of verifying exactly who is female and who is not, and thus keeping male cheaters of all gender identities out.
Rare exceptions include equestrian sports, where “the real athlete is the animal,” some say, but don’t tell equestrians that I said that, because of course they’re real athletes, too.
It’s not necessary to sex-test people who want to compete in the male category. Generally, people in lower categories are allowed to “level up” to older age groups if they’re young, younger age groups if they compete in masters sports, heavier weight groups, or the male sex group if they choose to. Maybe World Boxing wants to be sure no women box in the male category. Most women are smarter than that, but all that really matters is restricting the female category to females, which World Boxing is doing.
Genspect publishes a variety of authors with different perspectives. Any opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect Genspect’s official position. For more on Genspect, visit our FAQs.
Join Mariah Burton Nelson at the Genspect Bigger Picture Conference 2025
Checkout our latest list of speakers and sessions here.
 | A guest post by
|
Thank you for this very informative article!