The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, one of the most significant governing bodies in sports, approved extraordinary restrictions on transgender women’s participation now, which could influence other major sports organizations, such as the National Collegiate Athletics Association, to follow suit.
Only NAIA student-athletes whose biological gender is female may compete in NAIA-sponsored female sports, according to the standard press release. The policy doesn’t define biological sex or provide any clarification about what it means for transgender players. Additionally, it excludes players who have begun “any masculinizing estrogen therapy.”
This ban comes as transgender rights are being challenged more frequently in sports, and there is an explosion of anti-trans laws. At least 24 states have passed laws to limit transgender sports participation, 18 of which specifically restrict school sporting membership.
Since 2020, state legislatures have intensified to accommodate tougher laws, but this one appears to be the first to come from a nationwide college governing body. Although the NAIA, which includes primarily smaller institutions, is not as large a body as the NCAA, its decision sets a dangerous precedent and may cause a significant change in undergraduate sports.
The NCAA has long set the bar for trans athlete involvement in college sports, starting with its first policy in 2011, which allowed students to participate on teams that matched their gender identity, albeit it required one year of testosterone suppression for trans woman athletes.
The NCAA changed its policy in 2022 when it adopted a sport-by-sport approach to determine eligibility requirements for participation, based on the platform used by the International Olympic Committee, an evidence-based technique that emphasizes non-discrimination and the well-being of trans and transgender athletes while acknowledging the major differences between sports.
Compared with the IOC guidelines, the NCAA’s sport-by-sport policy has clear issues, including a lack of safeguards against invasive procedures like genitalia examinations. However, the policy allows trans athletes to participate and maintains the possibility for discussion.
The NAIA’s new ban fails to achieve even this. The change seems to contradict false claims that transgender athletes, particularly trans women, enjoy an unfair advantage. But this is simply incorrect. There is a lot of evidence suggesting that testosterone isn’t a reliable indicator of athletic ability.
Moreover, such a view fails to acknowledge the biological diversity inherent in, and even necessary for, sport. The most successful Olympian of all time, Michael Phelps, is frequently praised for his unique physical traits, including a wingspan longer than his height and abnormally low levels of lactic acid production.
Additionally, the impact of specific physical traits on performance varies greatly from sport to sport. By regulating all sports as though they are identical, the NAIA’s blanket policy arbitrarily harms trans women athletes.
Trans people are not arguing for zero regulation; rather, they want regulators to adhere to evidence-based recommendations for fair trans inclusion. Although providing such guidance also creates obstacles to trans athlete participation, they at least give trans athletes a chance to compete in the sports they enjoy.
Beyond the ban’s effects, we are deeply concerned that this new ban has been fueled by growing anti-trans pressure, most recently by a lawsuit brought against the NCAA by 16 college athletes.
Reka Gyorgy, a former Virginia Tech swimmer and plaintiff in the case, claims in the lawsuit’s opening statement that she believes her rights were violated after placing seventeenth in an event, behind trans athlete Lia Thomas and fifteen cisgender athletes. Losing a race hardly seems to violate individual Title IX rights, especially when the choice is to completely exclude transgender athletes from the race, which is undoubtedly a more obvious infringement of Title IX rights.
And for those who want to support women’s athletics — a laudable, important goal — trans participation is the last place to start.
According to a report from 2022, 86 percent of NCAA institutions still give male athletes disproportionately more athletic opportunities 50 years after Title IX was passed. In the 2019-2020 academic year, this translated to 58,913 missed opportunities for female athletes. There are many other well-documented threats to women in sports, including sexual abuse, harassment, and unequal access to resources like facilities and coaching.
We have firsthand experience as trans leaders and trans athletes in how trans people’s ability to live their day-to-day lives is impacted by anti-trans athletics policies. We agree that there is a need for conversations, both in research and in the trans community, about fair trans inclusion in athletics. But by enacting a blanket ban on trans athletes, the NAIA has not created space for conversation — they have shut it down completely.
The NAIA is sweeping in its denial of trans women’s participation. If that is not the definition of discrimination, what is?
Even though Harvard is not an NAIA member, it is crucial that we speak out in this crucial situation. The University, the Ivy League, and their affiliates should make it clear to the NCAA that they will not stand for a similar policy. This ban is not just an affront to transgender athletes, it is an affront to Harvard’s most central values: veritas, diversity, and civil discourse across difference.
We call on Harvard Athletics to publicly reaffirm its commitment to protecting trans+ student-athletes, and the University to ensure trans+ athletes are safe, happy, and welcome at Harvard. We urge cisgender athletes to support their transgender counterparts in their legal efforts to play.
Sports are for everyone. Transgender athletes deserve access to life-saving sport spaces, to build community and engage in competition, at all ages and levels. We must continue to fight to defend it.
We cannot allow the NCAA to succumb to pressure and follow suit because of the NAIA’s abhorrent and unacceptable ban on trans women. The ball is in our court now, Harvard. We can’t drop it.
E. Matteo Diaz ’27, a Crimson Editorial editor, lives in Grays Hall. Chris King ’24 competes for Harvard’s curling team, a non-federated club sport. She is a joint concentrator in the fields of history, women, and gender studies.
