No simple solution in the battle over trans inclusion in women’s sport

Forget Centre Court, St Andrews or Wembley. The biggest battles in this summer of sport are being fought over in the boardrooms and backrooms, as federations wrestle with the thorniest question of all: should transgender women be allowed to participate in female sport?

For years most have regarded the issue as too dangerous to touch: the sporting equivalent of playing pass the parcel with a live grenade. Now, though, they have no choice. The emergence of elite trans women, such as the weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, the swimmer Lia Thomas and the cyclist Emily Bridges, has seen to that. Decisions are having to be made. Hard choices, too.

On Sunday swimming’s global body, Fina, created a seismic ripple when it voted to bar trans women from international female competition. Its argument, in short, was that swimmers such as Thomas retain significant physical advantages – in endurance, power, speed, strength and lung size – from undergoing male puberty even if testosterone is later suppressed.

The science backs that up. Research from the biologists Emma Hilton and Tommy Lungberg on the effects of testosterone suppression on muscle mass and strength in transgender women “consistently show very modest changes [which] typically amounts to approximately 5% after 12 months treatment”. Another study from Joanna Harper, a trans woman at Loughborough University, also found that “strength may well be preserved in transwomen during the first three years of hormone therapy”.

But despite the science – and Fina’s decision at the weekend – it does not necessarily mean that most sports will follow suit. World Athletics is the most likely, given Sebastian Coe’s comments on Monday that “fairness is non-negotiable” and “biology trumps identity”.