Can a sport’s commitment to inclusion align with its aim to protect the integrity of the game? That is the question thrown up by the new set of eligibility rules approved by the International Cricket Council (ICC) on November 21. The rules bar players who have transitioned from male to female and have been through puberty from playing in international women’s matches, regardless of any surgery or gender reassignment treatment they may have undergone. As per the ICC, the rules are based on the following principles, in order of priority: “protection of the integrity of the women’s game, safety, fairness and inclusion.” They have effectively ended the international career of Canada’s Danielle McGahey who, only two months ago, became the first transgender cricketer to play in an official international game.
The argument against the inclusion of trans athletes in women’s games is based on the perceived physical advantage they gain — greater lung capacity, stronger bones, more lean muscle mass — from having undergone male puberty. However, research that compares the actual pre and post transition performance of transgender athletes is limited and the question cannot be treated as settled. Some sporting bodies, notably in swimming, have got around the issue by introducing open categories for trans athletes, but a long-term resolution would require not only more nuanced policy, but also more research on the science of gender and its relation to sports.
