In a world more obsessed with rules than a hall security guard with a new whistle, the International Women’s Sports Federation (IWSF) announced today that Lia Thomas, the transgender athlete turned lightning rod, has been banned from participating in women’s sports.
First, let’s address the elephant in the room, or in this case, the grizzly bear on the diving board. Ms. Thomas, a trans woman, has been making waves in the world of swimming for some time now – literally. It seems that every time he dips his toe in the water, he plunges us into the heated depths of the debate surrounding transgender athletes in sport.
Well, the IWSF, having all the common sense of a group named after an imaginary Star Trek Federation, decided they had had enough of this fuss. They showed Thomas the way out, like a matador waves his cape and says, “See you soon, baby,” or whatever Spanish bullfighters say.
The IWSF’s decision came amid an increasingly heated debate about the physiological advantages and disadvantages between cisgender athletes and transgender women. According to them, their decision was based on a “scientific consensus.” One cannot help but remember the time when the scientific consensus believed the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. Let’s hope its sources are more credible this time.
At a recent press conference, IWSF President Sir Reginald Pompous III defended the decision with the grace of a walrus on a unicycle, noting: “We just need to level the playing field.” In fact, it is quite an innovative vision of equality that can be achieved by banning individuals. Perhaps someone should tell Sir Reginald that innovative thinking is what gave us things like the Berlin Wall and the ban.
The ban has sent shockwaves, as expected. Critics argue it’s just the latest step in a trend of increasing regulations that threaten to turn the sport into a bureaucratic nightmare. The IWSF’s solution to the problem of trans athletes? Just remove them from the equation. Why didn’t we think of it? It’s so simple it almost seems medieval. But I guess when you’re a federation that sounds like it was named by George Lucas, subtlety isn’t really the way to go.
While there is a legitimate debate about equity in sport, the solution should not lie in total exclusion. However, the IWSF seems to have all the subtlety of a charging rhinoceros. Rather than sitting down and developing an inclusive policy that respects the rights of all athletes, they have decided to follow the path of an 18th century monarch and simply ban everything they don’t like.
Meanwhile, Lia Thomas’ fans reacted to the news with the calm and measured reaction of a cat being thrown into a pool, pointing out that Lia has complied with all hormonal norms and that by leaving her out, the IWSF is as fair as a game of poker with a card player.
At a time when we should be championing diversity and inclusion, it seems rather odd to be having a discussion about banning athletes because they don’t fit a certain mold. Then again, this is the same sporting world that gets angry every time a footballer takes a knee, so maybe we shouldn’t be too surprised.
As the debate continues, one can’t help but wonder what’s next for the IWSF. Will they start banning athletes for being too big, too strong, or too good at their sport? Only time will tell, but it’s clear that for now they’ve plunged headlong into a decision that’s as popular as a porcupine in a balloon shop.
This decision may please those who believe in rigid definitions of sports categories, but it’s worth remembering that the world of sports was once a place where a man named Babe was one of the best baseball players, a guy named Magic was a basketball wizard, and… a woman named Billie Jean King broke barriers in tennis. It was a world where individual achievements were celebrated, not reasons for exclusion.
In this case, it seems that in its attempt to ensure a level playing field, the IWSF has forgotten the spirit of sport: competition, diversity and inclusion. This ban on Lia Thomas could be seen as a worrying sign of the times, or a misstep by a governing body with all the grace of a bull in a glass shop. Either way, it is a decision that will undoubtedly continue to resonate in the world of sport, reminding us that even in the 21st century, we still have a long way to go before we truly understand the meaning of fair play.
