Nearing 70, Joanna Harper still goes for a run every day. In these days spent in Madrid at a friend’s house, he made long shots in the Casa de Campo. “I’m preparing for the Canadian cross country championships in the masters category,” says Harper, who ran the marathon in 2 hours and 23 minutes when competing in the men’s category. “I’ve played sports my whole life and I’ve considered myself a woman my whole life, but until I transitioned I lived like a man and played men’s sports. But once I transitioned, I wanted to do everything women do. And because I’m an athlete, I want to play sports with other women. And that’s a big part of who I am. I still want to compete. Compete with other women. I don’t think I have any unfair advantages. I’m not even the fastest in the club. I run in Canada, in my age group.” This vital background, a doctorate in Sports Science from Loughborough University (England) and a long research career, currently at the University of Oregon in the field of sports performance of transgender people, and numerous scientific publications and books, make Harper, perhaps, the person best equipped to analyze the decision of World Athletics (WA) to resurrect the SRY genetic tests abandoned in 1999 to protect, officially, the female category. And, in practice, banning competition for people who have the Y on their chromosomes, both transgender and intersex women (DSD: with differences in sexual development). “I think it is very likely that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will be in favor of following WA and implementing the SRY test for the 28 Games in Los Angeles to ban DSD and transgender women in all sports,” says Harper. “And I think his motivations are more political than scientific.”
Ask. Do transgender women have such an advantage that they endanger the female category?
R. Very important changes occur in transgender women when we suppress testosterone until it reaches typical female values. I remain of the opinion that these changes and the resulting decline in sporting performance are sufficient to allow transgender women to compete in the women’s category and for all women to enjoy valid competition. They are banning transgender women, but I don’t think it’s necessary.
Q. But it’s not all testosterone. Scientists also talk about anatomical advantages, narrower hips, greater efficiency…
R. Not all of the benefits trans women gain by going through male puberty are eliminated by testosterone suppression. But I think overall the changes are big enough to be sufficient in most sports. Perhaps, for example, in rugby, no more than one transgender woman would be allowed on the team.
Q. For several years, WA has allowed women with DSD (with XY chromosomes, male, but considered female from birth and with different sexual development) to compete without restrictions, and one of them, Caster Semenya, has won two Olympic titles. Then they forced them to take drugs to reduce testosterone and finally, now, they were simply banned from competing…
R. In women with differences in sexual development, testosterone suppression also has a substantial effect on athletic performance, but there are several sociological considerations when transgender women are asked to suppress testosterone. For many transgender women, becoming hormonally feminine is important. And, as a group, we are healthier, happier, and less likely to commit suicide when our hormone levels are typical of women. On the other hand, some women with DSD are happier at typically female levels, but others are not. And requesting it for sport is difficult. There are many complications related to testosterone-based rules in sports, however I believe that, for transgender women, these are still the best rules we could have.
Q. Everything seemed to work well with limiting testosterone to less than 5 nanograms per milliliter, but a few months ago WA failed the genetic test. What reasons might its president, Sebastian Coe, have for doing so?
R. I think the reasons are more political than scientific. And WA, which experienced the Semenya case, was the most affected federation. So it is easier for them to do a chromosome test rather than deal with the complications of testosterone suppression in women with DSD. It’s a cleaner solution for them. I’m not defending him, but I understand why they made this decision. And this is partly what happened with WA at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). They won the Semenya case and then there was another case in 2023, I think, where there was a group of Namibian women with DSD who appealed, but the CAS rejected their case. I think their court victories led them to believe that they could successfully exclude women with DSD rather than go through the difficulties of having a testosterone period for them. There are moral questions about asking women with DSD to reduce testosterone; This way, they don’t have to address this issue and simply say that women with DSD can’t participate. They are the ones who worry, because there has never been a transgender woman who has achieved international success in the sport of athletics.
Q. Rumors are coming from Lausanne that the IOC wouldn’t mind applying the same PCR test as WA in Los Angeles 28…
R. The IOC hasn’t made a decision yet, but last year at the Paris Games, you know, there were two boxers, one from Algeria and one from Taiwan, probably with DSD, who won gold medals. Then the Olympic president was Thomas Bach and another man, Richard Budgett, headed the medical commission. Both positions have since changed. Kirsty Coventry chairs the IOC and the chief medical officer is Canadian Jane Thornton. Both have been quite cautious in their public statements, but I think it is very likely that they are both in favor of following WA.
Q. Interestingly, both Coventry and Thornton are women. Are women more combative than men in the so-called defense of the female category?
R. I think both of them, and not just because they are women, but because they have also been top-level athletes, are against the inclusion of transgender women and women with DSD in the category. They know how effective testosterone can be at improving performance due to the prevalence of doping in all sports. And they understand it. What they don’t or don’t know is what happens to transgender women or women with DSD when they suppress testosterone. And they rely on the fact that most polls have indicated that about 80% of elite athletes don’t want transgender and DSD women to fall into the category.
Q. Do you think there is a lack of empathy from Coventry?
R. I think this is a very deliberate attempt to paint transgender women as men invading women’s sports. And those who think this way believe that any success a trans woman has in sports is an affront to them, who don’t see them as women. And what I would suggest as an alternative is that people think of transgender women as a physiologically distinct subcategory of all women. Therefore, transgender women belong in women’s spaces unless there are compelling reasons to exclude them. If transgender women were to become overrepresented in sport, it would mean that the rules are not effective and need to be changed. But that’s not what happened. In the United States, more than 200,000 women compete in NCAA sports each year. In 2011, the NCAA established a rule allowing trans women to compete in the women’s division after a year of hormone therapy. In December 2024, the president of the NCAA said there were fewer than 10 trans women. Now, trans people make up about 1% of humanity, so 1% of 200,000 is 2,000. They are not overrepresented, on the contrary. In England there are 2.6 million women registered to play football. The FA said about a year ago there were 28 trans women. And 1% of 2.6 million is 26,000… About 5,000 women compete in the Olympic Games each year. 1% of 5,000 are 50 years old. The IOC first allowed transgender women to compete in 2004. And since then there has only been one transgender woman in every Summer and Winter Games. And there should be 50 of them at every Summer Games. Therefore, I would argue that when trans women are allowed to compete, they are not taking over women’s sports and, in fact, are still very underrepresented.
Q. But that doesn’t mean they have any advantages…
R. Do transgender women have any advantages? YES. But all transgender people also have huge disadvantages in life. Therefore, it is clear that the advantages of transgender women do not outweigh all the disadvantages. This can be deduced from this underrepresentation.
Q. Doesn’t the return of femininity tests, a test reserved only for women, represent a setback in the feminist fight against male control over women’s bodies?
R. It depends on who you ask. If you ask most women who compete in the Olympics, they probably won’t mind getting tested. Not all, but most. But, without a doubt, if you talk to people who are committed to human rights, people who understand human rights, it’s a big step backwards.
Q. And it all coincides with Donald Trump’s aggressive policy against trans women… He announced that he will not allow any trans woman or woman with DSD to participate in the 28th Games in Los Angeles…
R. I certainly hope that people outside the United States don’t pay much attention to Donald Trump. He knows virtually nothing about science and his knowledge of sports is superficial at best; although, of course, he is the president of the United States. I hope Donald Trump’s views haven’t influenced those of the IOC, but who knows. I think certainly in many parts of the world there has been a significant political movement against transgender women and WA has used that political environment to justify removing both trans women and women with DSD from their sport and other sports have followed suit.
