The Moderate Case Against Transgender Sports Bans

Bans on transgender competition in sports tend to be controversial, with some even otherwise supportive people siding with such bans. I present the moderate case against doing so.

Photo by Vince Fleming on Unsplash

Transgender participation in sports—long a go-to flashpoint for the right’s outrage machine—has become one of the most visible battlegrounds in the broader fight for trans rights in the United States. Polling suggests that even some Democrats express discomfort with the issue, though whether voters actually want lawmakers legislating it is another question entirely. I know at least some of my readers fall into this uneasy middle: moderates with transgender friends or family members, people who support trans rights broadly but still feel uncertain when it comes to sports bans. This article is for you—the ones still figuring it out, and the ones who want to be better equipped to push back when lawmakers try to turn sports into a political weapon.

Recently on Bluesky, an older gentleman replied to a story I wrote on a transgender sports ban. “I am a diehard liberal, 62 year old man,” he wrote, “And I agree with banning male-born bodies from female teams. It’s clearly a huge advantage and unfair for the women… I [also] disagree that athletes with advanced prosthetics should be able to compete. Bionic people can run faster. Where does it stop? It’s OK to ban them.”

It would have been easy to dismiss this man as just another transphobe—and I’m sure some readers would have, understandably. But I didn’t. I scrolled through his comment history to see if he was a troll. He wasn’t. In fact, he had engaged earnestly with many of my posts: supporting trans rights, opposing bathroom bans, speaking out against the transgender military ban. He was, in other words, exactly the kind of person reflected in polling—an ally who still felt unsure when it came to trans participation in sports. So instead of writing him off, I responded. I asked a few questions, listened to his concerns, and made what I hoped was a reasonable, moderate case against transgender sports bans… and it worked!

When most people think about transgender participation in sports, their minds jump to the handful of high-profile cases amplified by Fox News—swimming, track, boxing, and other highly physically demanding sports. What they don’t realize is that transgender sports bans often reach far beyond those edge cases. In West Virginia, for instance, the ban targeted a single 12-year-old transgender girl who had never undergone male puberty. And it didn’t stop at contact sports—transgender women have been banned from participating in activities like darts and fishing, where no conceivable athletic advantage exists. These laws aren’t about fairness in competition; they’re about exclusion, plain and simple.

So I asked him… “Even in darts? In pool? Competitive Irish Dancing? Chess? These bills treat all of the above the same.” And they do—each one of these sports has seen transgender bans on competition, leaving even some conservatives unable to defend their position on bans in sports. This man quickly responded, “Good points… no, that’s not fair. Can’t they just ban those that are clearly superior, physically? I don’t mind if a trans [person] switches if it doesn’t change the playing field. The bill should be reasonable. If not, don’t vote it in.”

I could tell I was getting through to him. To be fair, I expected I would—this wasn’t the first conversation like this I’ve had. That’s because once you pull back the curtain, the reality of transgender participation in sports looks nothing like the version fed to the public by conservative media—and, frankly, even some liberal outlets. Most people who take a stance on the issue, aside from the diehards, haven’t given it much real thought. They haven’t looked closely at how these bans are written, how they’re enforced, or who they actually affect.

The physical demands of chess differ wildly from those of disc golf or pool—and those, in turn, are nothing like the requirements of running or swimming. Yet transgender sports bans never account for these distinctions. And while no study has shown that transgender women on hormone therapy for more than two years retain a biological advantage in any sport—testosterone suppression significantly reduces muscle mass and strength—that’s often not the place to start. The science can come later. What I’ve found more effective is showing how trans participation is already being handled—and how, in practice, it’s far fairer and more thoughtful than the blanket bans being pushed across the country.

“So let me take this a step further… would it not make more sense to allow each sport to set their own regulations, as the regulators in those sports know what is fair? We shouldn’t treat swimming the same as golf the same as chess the same as darts. That is how it is handled now,” I asked the man.

“Yes… that makes sense. I apologize. Don’t waste your time on me. There’s a ton more here than I have room for. I’m on this platform to read the latest on our country’s demise. I’m scared and fucking pissed that everything I thought America to be were either lies or con jobs. The good days are past,” he replied.

I reached him. Maybe not all the way, but enough that the next time someone brings up transgender athletes, he might pause. He might say, “Did you know they actually banned trans people in chess and darts? I don’t know, that’s a step too far.” And that moment of doubt matters. This is someone who sees himself as a moderate—and here’s the truth: broad transgender sports bans are not moderate policy. They’re sweeping, reactionary, and often absurd. But polling rarely captures that nuance. Most surveys skim the surface, never probing deeper than a gut reaction. The more people actually learn about how these bans work, the harder they are to defend.

There’s so much more to say about this issue—and so many angles people overlook. Transgender sports bans don’t just harm trans athletes; they’ve also led to cisgender kids being subjected to invasive genital exams just to play in youth leagues. The science doesn’t support the bans: many trans athletes compete at a disadvantage, and in even the most populous states, only a handful participate at all. These laws waste public money, codify discrimination, and serve as gateways for even broader anti-trans attacks. And politically, they don’t offer the protection some Democrats hope for—just ask New Hampshire, where some Democrats caved on sports bans, lost 20 House seats, and are now staring down a flood of new anti-trans legislation. There is no moderate case for these bans. If you’re not a reactionary conservative, you shouldn’t be backing them.

I’ve written extensively about transgender participation in sports, and I hope you’ll take the time to read more. But if you’re someone who sits in that “uneasy middle”—or if you have friends and family who do—I hope this story sticks with you. I hope it reframes the issue in a way that’s clear and human. Because transgender sports bans aren’t moderate. They’re extreme, often absurd in their scope, and rooted in fear rather than fairness. If we’re serious about finding a reasonable path forward for transgender people, these blunt, exclusionary policies are not the way.