The Impact of Transgender Biological Male Athletes on Women’s Sports: An Objective Analysis episode artwork

EPISODE · Jul 3, 2026 · 5 MIN

The Impact of Transgender Biological Male Athletes on Women’s Sports: An Objective Analysis

from The Active Center · host David Sepe

I genuinely have zero problem with boys dressing like girls or girls dressing like boys, live and let live, I say. My point of contention arises when biological facts are disregarded, such as being told a biological male is a girl or a biological female is a boy. I believe some generational context is appropriate in this situational assessment. As a proud and unapologetic Gen Xer, I remember how easily “most of us” accepted other people who did NOT look like us, and specifically how we accepted androgynous artists like Boy George, Grace Jones, and the brilliant Annie Lennox with her short, ‘boyish’ hair. Their style didn’t phase “most” of us; we appreciated their authenticity, individuality, and talent. “The system” made them multi-millionaires, celebrated for their music and unique looks. What they never did was demand that we redefine our understanding of basic biology. Our acceptance was always rooted in a genuine ‘you do you, I’ll do me’ approach.” Today’s youth, like previous generations, have the freedom to express themselves and explore their identities. Hell, if you’re a male and want to dress like a female and you have a unique talent and if I like your music, I’ll buy your album, and I’ll even go see your live show. I’ll contribute to your future wealth, and if you become a multimillionaire, I have no problem with it. However, while individuals are free to identify as male or female, regardless of their biological sex, such personal beliefs do not alter biological realities, particularly in the context of athletic competition. This distinction becomes especially critical around the age of 14, as athletes enter high school. The participation of transgender women, who are in reality biologically male, in women’s sports has become a focal point of debate, raising significant questions about fairness, equal opportunity, and the biological distinctions between sexes in athletic competition. This exploration of the issue aims to objectively examine the arguments and evidence concerning the potential impact of biological males competing in women’s sports on biological females, drawing upon scientific studies, specific case examples, and statements from relevant organizations. A central aspect of the discussion revolves around the inherent biological advantages typically observed in males due to puberty. Scientific literature suggests that these advantages, primarily driven by higher testosterone levels during male puberty, confer significant athletic benefits. According to a review by Women in Sport, referencing a September 2021 study by the Sports Councils’ Equality Group, “There are significant differences between the sexes which render direct competition between males and females unfair in most ‘gender-affected sports’.” On average, adult males exhibit 40–50% greater upper limb strength and 20–40% greater lower limb strength compared to age-matched females, alongside approximately 12 kg more skeletal muscle mass. These physiological distinctions extend to larger and denser skeletons, greater blood volume, higher hemoglobin concentration, and larger lung capacity, contributing to superior performance metrics such as 10–12% faster times in linear running and swimming events, 20% better results in jumping, and 35–50% greater weightlifting ability. Even after hormone suppression, studies indicate that these advantages may not be fully mitigated. Research cited by Women in Sport suggests that transgender women retained an average of 25% residual advantage in muscle mass/strength after 12 months of testosterone suppression and remained about 12% faster in running speed after more than two years. The American College of Sports Medicine notes that “for up to three years after suppressing testosterone, the loss of lean mass and strength is not as low as it is in adult females.” The theoretical biological advantages translate into tangible impacts in competitive settings, leading to specific instances where biological females have been directly affected. One prominent case involves Lia Thomas, a transgender woman swimmer for the University of Pennsylvania. In 2022, Thomas won the NCAA Division I national championship in the 500-yard freestyle, a victory that displaced a biological female from the top position. Also, in that same race a biological female who would have experienced placing third and being able to stand upon the podium finished in fourth place and was denied that opportunity. Similarly, in Connecticut high school track, transgender sprinters Terry Miller and Andraya Yearwood have accumulated numerous state titles, prompting a lawsuit from biological female athletes who contend they were denied fair competition. Beyond competitive outcomes, concerns about safety have also emerged. Payton McNabb, a biological female volleyball player in North Carolina, sustained a concussion and neck injury in 2022 after being hit in the face by a spiked ball from a transgender female player. Another incident involved a girls’ basketball game between Collegiate Charter School of Lowell and KIPP Academy in Massachusetts, where a transgender female player reportedly caused injuries to multiple biological female players, leading to a forfeiture. Organizations like the Women’s Sports Policy Center have documented numerous such instances, highlighting a pattern of biological males securing victories in female sports across various disciplines. The implications of biological males competing in women’s sports extend to college athletic opportunities and the integrity of athletic records. When biological males achieve top placements, it can directly impact biological females’ chances for athletic scholarships, coveted roster spots, and recognition in historical record books. The U.S. Department of Education has voiced this concern, urging the NCAA and the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) to “restore to female athletes the records, titles, awards, and recognitions misappropriated by biological males competing in female categories.” Candice Jackson, Deputy General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Education, underscored this point, stating, “The next necessary step is to restore athletic records to women who have for years been devalued, ignored, and forced to watch men steal their accolades.” The argument is that limited college athletic resources, such as scholarships and team positions, when allocated to individuals with a biological male advantage, can diminish the pathways for biological females to pursue higher education and athletic careers. Furthermore, the establishment of new performance benchmarks by biological males in women’s categories can fundamentally alter the historical context and meaning of women’s athletic achievements. The debate surrounding transgender women, who in reality are biological men, in women’s sports highlights a tension between the critical theory subjective hypothesis of “inclusivity” and the foundational classical liberal principles of fair competition and equal opportunity for biological females. Evidence suggests that inherent biological advantages, even with hormone therapy, can persist, leading to direct impacts on competitive outcomes, potential safety concerns, and the erosion of athletic opportunities and records for biological girls and women. As this amazingly simple, yet needlessly made complex issue continues to be navigated, the focus remains on how to best ensure fair and meaningful athletic participation for all, while upholding the integrity and purpose of women’s sports. The rational moderate in me says that there are only males and females; however, living in the communist mono-party run State of California, and with wishing to protect biological female athletes, I propose separate competitive categories for boys, girls, and transgender athletes, ensuring all groups have the opportunity to experience fair competition. For team sports, a student-athlete’s biological sex would generally determine team placement. An exception could be made for a female student-athlete wishing to play a contact sport like tackle football if no girls’ team is available. Ultimately, we must protect female athletes and the common-sense rationale and honor of girl’s and women’s sports. *About after an hour after I finished editing this essay, news broke about this very issue in the State of California, although not a perfect outcome, it does show cracks in the ideological armor of the far-left California mono-party progressive Democrats. Nice to see the two female athletes who qualified in the California CIF Prelims and Finals are going to be invited for their rightful opportunity to compete later this week in Clovis. This is yet another reason that I am happy that I voted for President Trump. Had Trump not won the 2024 election and applied the pressure to Governor Newsom and CIF I truly don’t think these girls would get their chance to compete. Trump is definitely far from perfect, but he gets the job done, and in this case, these biological females get their opportunity. “The California Interscholastic Federation on Tuesday announced a new pilot entry process for the upcoming Track and Field Championships, allowing a “biological female” student-athlete to compete who may have otherwise been displaced from gaining entry to the competition by a trans athlete. “Under this pilot entry process, any biological female student-athlete who would have earned the next qualifying mark for one of their Section’s automatic qualifying entries in the CIF State meet, and did not achieve the CIF State at-large mark in the finals at their Section meet, was extended an opportunity to participate in the 2025 CIF State Track and Field Championships,” CIF said in a statement. “The CIF believes this pilot entry process achieves the participation opportunities we seek to afford our student-athletes.” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office clarified that the CIF’s pilot policy also means events at the Track and Field Championships on May 30–31 in Clovis will score separately for transgender students. So there could now be three first place winners in the Long Jump competition, for example: One biological boy, one trans athlete, and one biological girl.” Bibliography American College of Sports Medicine. (2023, October 6). Explainer: New report affirms the biological basis of sex differences in athletic performance. ERLC. https://erlc.com/resource/explainer-new-report-affirms-the-biological-basis-of-sex-differences-in-athletic-performance/ Heritage Foundation. (2024, March 5). Trans Athlete Injures Multiple Girls, Forcing Team To Forfeit. Wither Thou, Feminism? https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/trans-athlete-injures-multiple-girls-forcing-team-forfeit-wither-thou-feminism National Review. (2025, February 6). NCAA Bars Men from Competing in Women’s Sports. https://www.nationalreview.com/news/ncaa-bars-men-from-competing-in-womens-sports/ Outsports. (2025, January 16). These 45 out trans athletes have competed in college sports. https://www.outsports.com/2025/1/16/22850789/trans-athletes-college-ncaa-lia-thomas/ Senefeld, J. W., Hunter, S. K., Coleman, D., & Joyner, M. J. (n.d.). Case Studies in Physiology: Male to female transgender swimmer in college athletics. PMC. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10110692/ U.S. Department of Education. (2025, February 11). U.S. Department of Education Urges the NCAA, NFHS to Restore Female Athletics Records Wrongfully Erased by Male Competitors. https://www.ed.gov/about/news/press-release/us-department-of-education-urges-ncaa-nfhs-restore-female-athletics-records-wrongfully-erased-male-competitors Women in Sport. (2021, September). Trans Inclusion & Women’s Sport. https://womeninsport.org/transgender-inclusion-womens-sport/ Women’s Sports Policy Center. (n.d.). 578+ Male Victories in Female Sports: A Nine-Month Tally*. https://womenssportspolicy.org/253-male-victories-in-female-sports/ *California Changes High School Track and Field Championship Rules Amid Trump Threats Over Trans Athletes: https://www.kcra.com/article/california-high-school-track-field-championship-transgender-trump-threats/64894427 Hello, and thanks for listening to my podcast For years, my mission has been to foster a community around engagement, unique takes on interesting stories, and conversation. If you value what I do, please consider supporting me. I've started a GoFundMe to cover my production and operational costs, including those pesky social media fees. If you can’t contribute to my GoFundMe, I get it, but you can help me by subscribing to my account or sharing this particular story with friends and family that you think would appreciate it. Your contribution, big or small, helps me keep going. Thank you. GO FUND ME

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Jul 3, 2026

Embed this episode

I genuinely have zero problem with boys dressing like girls or girls dressing like boys, live and let live, I say. My point of contention arises when biological facts are disregarded, such as being told a biological male is a girl or a biological female is a boy. I believe some generational context is appropriate in this situational assessment. As a proud and unapologetic Gen Xer, I remember how easily ”most of us” accepted other people who did NOT look like us, and specifically how we accepted androgynous artists like Boy George, Grace Jones, and the brilliant Annie Lennox with her short, ’boyish’ hair. Their style didn’t phase ”most” of us; we appreciated their authenticity, individuality, and talent. ”The system” made them multi-millionaires, celebrated for their music and unique looks. What they never did was demand that we redefine our understanding of basic biology. Our acceptance was always rooted in a genuine ’you do you, I’ll do me’ approach.” Today’s youth, like previous generations, have the freedom to express themselves and explore their identities. Hell, if you’re a male and want to dress like a female and you have a unique talent and if I like your music, I’ll buy your album, and I’ll even go see your live show. I’ll contribute to your future wealth, and if you become a multimillionaire, I have no problem with it. However, while individuals are free to identify as male or female, regardless of their biological sex, such personal beliefs do not alter biological realities, particularly in the context of athletic competition. This distinction becomes especially critical around the age of 14, as athletes enter high school. The participation of transgender women, who are in reality biologically male, in women’s sports has become a focal point of debate, raising significant questions about fairness, equal opportunity, and the biological distinctions between sexes in athletic competition. This exploration of the issue aims to objectively examine the arguments and evidence concerning the potential impact of biological males competing in women’s sports on biological females, drawing upon scientific studies, specific case examples, and statements from relevant organizations. A central aspect of the discussion revolves around the inherent biological advantages typically observed in males due to puberty. Scientific literature suggests that these advantages, primarily driven by higher testosterone levels during male puberty, confer significant athletic benefits. According to a review by Women in Sport, referencing a September 2021 study by the Sports Councils’ Equality Group, ”There are significant differences between the sexes which render direct competition between males and females unfair in most ’gender-affected sports’.” On average, adult males exhibit 40–50% greater upper limb strength and 20–40% greater lower limb strength compared to age-matched females, alongside approximately 12 kg more skeletal muscle mass. These physiological distinctions extend to larger and denser skeletons, greater blood volume, higher hemoglobin concentration, and larger lung capacity, contributing to superior performance metrics such as 10–12% faster times in linear running and swimming events, 20% better results in jumping, and 35–50% greater weightlifting ability. Even after hormone suppression, studies indicate that these advantages may not be fully mitigated. Research cited by Women in Sport suggests that transgender women retained an average of 25% residual advantage in muscle mass/strength after 12 months of testosterone suppression and remained about 12% faster in running speed after more than two years. The American College of Sports Medicine notes that ”for up to three years after suppressing testosterone, the loss of lean mass and strength is not as low as it is in adult females.”

Distinct summary based on available episode metadata or transcript content.

Ready to play

The Impact of Transgender Biological Male Athletes on Women’s Sports: An Objective Analysis

0:00 5:33

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

No similar podcasts found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of The Active Center?

This episode is 5 minutes long.

When was this The Active Center episode published?

This episode was published on July 3, 2026.

Can I download this The Active Center episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!