McGowan: Modified Men Versus Natural Women
by Richard McGowan, Ph.D.
A few weeks ago the Indianapolis Star reported that a bill passed out of committee prohibiting trans women from entering women’s collegiate athletic competition. The bill “requires, for purposes of interscholastic athletic events, state educational institutions and certain private postsecondary educational institutions to expressly designate an athletic team or sport as one of the following: 1) a male, men’s, or boys’ team or sport; 2) a female, women’s, or girls’ team or sport. 3) a coeducational or mixed team or sport.” The bill, among other directives, “prohibits a male, based on the student’s biological sex at birth in accordance with the student’s genetics and reproductive biology, from participating on an athletic team or sport designated as being a female, women’s, or girls’ athletic team or sport.”
The Star noted that the bill passed by a 12-1 committee vote with bipartisan support. The bill resembles the 2022 HB1401 bill banning trans-girls from competing in k-12 athletic competition. The 2025 bill aligns with President Donald Trump’s executive order banning trans-women from competing at the collegiate level. Indiana’s bill is the result of legislative action as opposed to executive action, action that could be withdrawn on the president’s authority alone.
A committee member voted for the bill but said it was “a waste of time,” reasoning that the NCAA had already taken the action of prohibiting trans-athletes from competing against the other sex. That reasoning runs parallel to the thinking of the Indiana ACLU, which also said the bill was unnecessary. Again, the NCAA is an authoritative body that could change policy without consulting Indiana government, its officials, and its citizens.
World class athletes have weighed in on the issue. The Journal of Sports Sciencespublished an article (April 2024) entitled “The perspective of current and retired world class, elite and national athletes on the inclusion and eligibility of transgender athletes in elite sport.” The authors found that “athletes in the present study favoured categorisation by biological sex and did not support trans women eligibility for the female category in sports reliant on performance-related biological factors that differ between sexes.” However, that is the judgment of expert sports performers.
What do the scientists say? It is more accurate for me to ask, “What do scientists continue to say?” having traveled down this road once before. Recent studies, like the one out of England, state that “Studies show that transgender women (male-born individuals who identify as women) with suppressed testosterone retain muscle mass, strength, and other physical advantages compared to females; male performance advantage cannot be eliminated with testosterone suppression.”
The publication, The Physician and Sportsmedicine (2024), had an article on combat sports which concluded that “Numerous studies have proven that transgender women may have a competitive athletic advantage against otherwise matched cis-gender women. Likewise, transgender men may suffer a competitive disadvantage against cis-gender men.”
The bill’s prohibiting modified men, i.e., trans women, from competing in women’ sports, certainly follows the science. The law should provide what the bill’s author, Whiteland Republican Michelle Davis, hoped to provide: “a safe and even playing field” for female athletes.
Not everyone was pleased with the bill’s passage, a common occurrence with any bill. Emma Vosicky, Executive Director of GenderNexus, a group whose stated aim is to provide “a safe, inclusive space for gender-diverse people and their loved ones to find the support they need,” was not pleased. The Star reported that she said, “You don’t have to watch the pain that occurs from folks that are impacted by your legislation.” Her reasoning follows that of the lone committee member who voted against the bill. The Star reported that “he decided to vote against the bill because he doesn’t see any evidence of a problem, other than a few isolated cases, and this only adds anguish to a group that is already struggling.” Committee member Ed Delaney noted how few cases there have been with trans athletes, a tact that the NCAA leaders have taken.
That reasoning is not very inclusive, though. What of the natural females who fail to win a medal in a swimming competition by losing to a modified male? Is their pain relevant? Modified male Lia Thomas beat Olympic performers in swimming competitions during NCAA events. How do the losing women feel? Do the feelings of modified men take precedence over the feelings of natural women? I think not.
How much do natural women enjoy a modified male gazing at them in a locker room? Protection of the long-established right to privacy should mean something. Protecting that right does not constitute “harassment of women athletes who look like they don’t belong,” as the ACLU phrased the matter. What the bill does is ensure a safe and comfortable locker room.
The ACLU states about the bill that “the only logical motivation for its consideration is to send a message to Transgender Hoosiers – you don’t belong here.” But, in fact, modified men do belong here — just not on the playing field competing against natural women. On the playing field, modified men still retain the physiological advantages from being born male. As one high school coach said, “It breaks all the universal standards that the essence of sports is supposed to entail.
It’s simply not fair that modified men can compete against natural females.
\
Richard McGowan, Ph.D., an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, has taught philosophy and ethics cores for more than 40 years, most recently at Butler University. Research citations for Dr. McGowan’s articles are available at www.inpolicy.org.
Resources
https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2025/bills/house/1041/details
Digest
Requires, for purposes of interscholastic athletic events, state educational institutions and certain private postsecondary educational institutions to expressly designate an athletic team or sport as one of the following: (1) A male, men’s, or boys’ team or sport. (2) A female, women’s, or girls’ team or sport. (3) A coeducational or mixed team or sport. Prohibits a male, based on the student’s biological sex at birth in accordance with the student’s genetics and reproductive biology, from participating on an athletic team or sport designated as being a female, women’s, or girls’ athletic team or sport. Requires state educational institutions and certain private postsecondary educational institutions to establish grievance procedures for a violation of these provisions. Establishes a civil action for a violation of these provisions. Provides that state educational institutions and certain private postsecondary educational institutions are not subject to liability in a civil, administrative, disciplinary, or criminal action for acting in compliance with these provisions.
https://www.aclu-in.org/en/legislation/student-eligibility-interscholastic-sports-hb-1041
This bill would prohibit transgender women from participating in women’s sports at public and private colleges – expanding Indiana’s current K-12 ban. In addition, the bill opens up Indiana colleges to lawsuits by people who suspect that a transgender woman is participating in violation of the ban.
Already discriminatory, this bill was made unnecessary by recent actions at the federal level and a change in national policy at the NCAA. Passage of the bill will not change a single thing for Indiana college athletes. Bills like HB 1041 and policies like the NCAA’s actually result in harassment of women athletes who look like they don’t belong. Given that this bill is unnecessary, the only logical motivation for is consideration is to send a message to Transgender Hoosiers – you don’t belong here. The ACLU of Indiana opposes this bill because it is terrible public policy and because we know the contributions that transgender Hoosiers make every day in our state. They deserve the opportunity to fully live their lives, including as competitive athletes.
From its website
Since 2014, GenderNexus has served Indiana as a safe, inclusive space for gender-diverse people and their loved ones to find the support they need.
https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/109/2/e455/7223439 The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Volume 109, Issue 2, February 2024, Pages e455–e465, https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgad414
Published:
13 July 2023
Article history
”While push-up performance declined in trans women, a statistical advantage remained relative to cisgender women.”
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02640414.2024.2326354#abstract
Journal of Sports Sciences Volume 42, 2024 – Issue 5
The perspective of current and retired world class, elite and national athletes on the inclusion and eligibility of transgender athletes in elite sport
“Nevertheless, athletes in the present study favoured categorisation by biological sex and did not support trans women eligibility for the female category in sports reliant on performance-related biological factors that differ between sexes.”
https://shura.shu.ac.uk/33208/
“Studies show that transgender women (male-born individuals who identify as women) with suppressed testosterone retain muscle mass, strength, and other physical advantages compared to females; male performance advantage cannot be eliminated with testosterone suppression.
Review
Transgender competition in combat sports: Position statement of the Association of ringside physicians
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00913847.2023.2286943
“Numerous studies have proven that transgender women may have a competitive athletic advantage against otherwise matched cis-gender women. Likewise, transgender men may suffer a competitive disadvantage against cis-gender men.”
Comments...