More female athletes believe it is fair (43%), rather than unfair (36%) for athletes with a DSD – difference in sex development - to be included in the female category for contact sports like rugby and non-contact sports reliant on physical capacity like sprinting, a new study shows.
The study also found that a majority of athletes believe it is unethical to require athletes with a difference in sex development to medicate for eligibility.
The researchers say that athletics governing bodies should use this new data on athletes’ views to update their eligibility policies.
DSD stands for difference in sex development. People with a DSD do not always develop along typical male-female lines. Their hormones, genes, reproductive organs may be a mix of male and female characteristics. The most high-profile athlete with a DSD is South African runner Caster Semenya.
The result from the new study contrasts with the research group’s previous finding, using identical methods, that more female athletes believed it was unfair (48%) than fair (38%) for transgender athletes to compete in the female category.
The study, published in the European Journal of Sport Science is the only paper of its kind. It reports the opinions of 147 national, elite and world-class female athletes from a range of sports and countries regarding the eligibility of athletes with a Difference in Sex Development (DSD).
Respondents included 21 World champions, 15 Olympians - including two gold, one silver and three bronze medal winners - and six Paralympians.
- Most athletes believed it was unethical to require athletes with a DSD to medicate for eligibility (67%).
- Overall, athletes did not support a separate category for athletes with a DSD, an opinion most strongly held for precision sports (70%).
- The survey also revealed that a large majority (82%) believe sporting bodies should improve inclusivity for athletes with a DSD, with only 8.2% viewing such athletes as treated fairly.
As part of The Differences in Sex Development (DSD) and Transgender Elite Sport (DATES) project, the study was led by Dr Shane Heffernan of the Applied Sports Science Technology and Medicine Research Centre (A-STEM) at Swansea University, with principal collaborators Prof Alun Williams and Dr Georgina Stebbings of Manchester Metropolitan University Institute of Sport, and Dr Marie Chollier of the University of Chester.
Dr Shane Heffernan, Senior Lecturer in Molecular Physiology and Nutrition at Swansea University, said: “Athletes with a DSD have one of several complex genetic conditions that lead to varied and individual physiology traits. To date, DSD athletes have not been shown empirically to have an athletic advantage in elite sport. Regardless, their eligibility has been questioned for many years because of a few successful individual athletes. This has sparked many iterations of eligibility criteria, created with little peer-reviewed evidence to support policy choices. One particularly neglected area is the ‘voice of female athletes’ affected by these ever-changing policies on the eligibility of the individuals being regulated, DSD athletes.
“The results of our study show that athletes’ opinions varied depending on sport but as a whole group, slightly more athletes believed that the inclusion of DSD athletes was fair rather than unfair, and that they should not compete in a separate category (>59%). This was driven by Olympic recognised sport athletes, but importantly the majority agreed that recent World Athletic regulation for athletes to medicate in order to comply with regulations was unethical (67%).
“World Athletics and other sport governing bodies have previously used our data on female athlete views of Transgender athlete inclusion when consulting/reevaluating their eligibility policies. They should now also use these new data on athletes with a DSD in the same way and recognise that DSD and Transgender athletes are distinct, viewed as such by current high-level female athletes, and should not be treated identically or collectively when creating new eligibility policies.”
Alun Williams, Professor of Sport and Exercise Genomics at Manchester Metropolitan University Institute of Sport and principal collaborator of the study along with Dr Georgina Stebbings, said: “Athletes with a DSD have rare genetic conditions that affect their biology including their reproductive systems and hormone levels, and their eligibility to compete in the women’s category in sport has been controversial for decades. Different sports have varied eligibility criteria based on very little evidence. One type of evidence missing, until now, is the opinion of women athletes.
“This research is particularly timely because the global body of one sport, World Athletics, has recently said they will combine their regulations for transgender athletes and athletes with DSDs.
“Not only is that not justified scientifically and has huge ethical problems, but now it is also evident that, while opinion is clearly divided, more women athletes believe athletes with a DSD should be allowed to compete than wish to exclude them. World Athletics and other sports organisations should acknowledge this opinion and rewrite their regulations.”
Prof Williams’ expertise lies in genetics and the upper limits of human physical performance, and he has published widely on genetic profiles of elite athletes, the improvements in performance that can result from physical training, and sport-related injuries, as well as ethical and policy issues. He has also appeared as an expert at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) for Caster Semenya in her legal battle with the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF, now World Athletics).
ENDS
Journal
European Journal of Sport Science