Olympics’ transgender athlete exclusion reflects systemic gender policing, not fairness—structural bias in sports governance exposed

Indigenous traditions worldwide have long recognized gender as a spectrum, with many cultures celebrating Two-Spirit, hijra, fa’afafine, and other gender-diverse identities in roles that often included physical prowess or athletic competition. The IOC’s policy reflects a colonial imposition of binary gender norms, erasing these traditions and imposing Western medicalized definitions of 'fairness' that ignore the social and cultural contexts of gender. Indigenous critiques of sports governance highlight how these institutions replicate settler-colonial violence by policing bodies that do not conform to imposed norms.

The IOC’s policy echoes the 'sex verification' tests of the 1960s, where women athletes were subjected to humiliating and often inaccurate chromosomal tests to 'prove' their femininity. These policies were rooted in Cold War-era fears of 'masculine' Eastern Bloc athletes and have since been discredited by scientists. The historical pattern shows how sports institutions weaponize gender to exclude bodies that challenge norms, from the 1936 Olympics (where Jewish athletes were barred) to modern anti-doping regimes that disproportionately target Black and Global South athletes.

Cross-culturally, the concept of 'fairness' in sports is not universally tied to binary gender categories. In South Asia, the hijra community has historically participated in sports and cultural performances without gender segregation. In Pacific Islander cultures, gender-diverse individuals (e.g., *fa’afafine* in Samoa) are often celebrated for their physical resilience and leadership in communal activities. The Western insistence on rigid gender categories in sports reflects a narrow, biomedical worldview that ignores these diverse understandings of gender and competition.

Scientific consensus is divided on how to measure athletic advantage in transgender athletes, with studies showing that testosterone levels alone do not determine performance outcomes. Elite sports bodies lack a unified, evidence-based framework for inclusion, instead relying on arbitrary and often politically motivated policies. The IOC’s 'once-in-a-lifetime' test ignores the variability of human biology, including intersex conditions, and fails to account for the social determinants of athletic success (e.g., access to training, nutrition, and institutional support).

Artistic and spiritual traditions often frame gender as fluid and sacred, challenging the rigid binaries enforced by sports institutions. For example, the Hindu concept of *Purusha-Prakriti* (masculine-feminine duality within a unified whole) or the Buddhist idea of non-duality (*advaita*) offer frameworks that reject binary categorization. Artists like Zanele Muholi (South Africa) and Alok Vaid-Menon (USA) use their work to critique gender policing, framing inclusion as an act of spiritual and creative liberation rather than a legal or medical issue.

Future models for sports governance must center human rights and evidence-based inclusion, moving beyond binary gender categories. Scenario planning suggests that sports bodies could adopt flexible, case-by-case evaluations (as seen in some collegiate and amateur leagues) or eliminate gender segregation entirely in certain events. The long-term implications include greater participation of transgender and intersex athletes, but also resistance from institutions invested in maintaining the status quo. A just transition requires dismantling the biomedical-industrial complex that profits from gender policing.

Marginalized voices—transgender athletes, intersex advocates, and Global South athletes—are systematically excluded from policy discussions, with their experiences framed as 'controversial' rather than central to the debate. Athletes like Laurel Hubbard (New Zealand) and CeCé Telfer (USA) have faced public scrutiny and exclusion, while cisgender athletes from marginalized backgrounds (e.g., Black women in track and field) are often subjected to racialized gender policing. The lack of representation in decision-making bodies (e.g., 0% transgender representation in the IOC) ensures that policies reflect institutional biases rather than lived realities.