Position Statement on Transgender Swimming

Dear Members,

You will be aware that the WSCA Board have spent a significant period of time since the commencement of 2022 in drafting and re-drafting a Position Statement to aid FINA in constructing their own Transgender Policy. The Board considered three Options and the Option which became known as ‘Option 3’ was their clear preference in terms of a Position Statement to be put to you as our members. In receiving consultation from our membership at large, we received overwhelming support for this Position Statement and, with some edits made following this membership consultation, this will now be put to FINA for their consideration and support.

We thank all of those who took the time to respond to us. Your counsel was much appreciated.

For completeness purposes and so that our members can note the deliberations that took place at the Board level, please find below the final version that will be presented to FINA, plus ‘Option 1’ and ‘Option 2’ which, at this time, will not be submitted to them. If members have comments on Option 1 and/or Option 2, we will happily receive them via admin@wscacoach.org.

Thank you all and our kindest regards to you,

WSCA Board

Introduction

The World Swimming Coaches Association (WSCA) has an unequivocal agenda for the sport of swimming to be experienced in an environment where everyone can partake in the sport and where everyone is treated with both dignity and respect. However, the inclusion of transgender people into female sport cannot be balanced with fairness due to the retained differences in strength, stamina and physique that are present when comparing the average female with the average transgender female/non-binary person who was assigned male at birth (whether with or without the involvement of testosterone suppression). This is the primary factor to be considered in an endeavour to balance fairness with inclusion.

WSCA’s Key Pillars

1.       WSCA is committed to the inclusion of all people in competitive swimming. The introduction of a new and different model within the competitive realms of our sport will offer an alternative option to meet the needs of all people;

2.       Categorisation through birth sex remains to be the most useful and functional division relative to sporting performance. This categorization acknowledges the broad range of significant performance differences between the sexes. Hence, the sport of swimming should retain traditional sex categorization - in association with age and, where appropriate, disability – whilst finding a model of inclusion for transgender athletes;

3.       Evidence indicates that it is fair for transgender people to be included in the sport of swimming either within a Male category and/or as athletes racing within a Male category but additionally entered within an ‘Open’ category. This assumes that the transgender person will often be using testosterone supplementation, for which a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) will always be required under anti-doping rules that must apply evenly to all athletes in competitive swimming, regardless of category;

4.       Competitive fairness cannot be reconciled with self-identification into the female category in a gender-affected sport such as swimming. The average differences in strength, stamina, and physique between the sexes is significant. Transgender females are, on average, likely to retain physical advantages listed above even if testosterone suppression is utilised;

5.       Categorisation by sex is lawful, and hence the requirement to request information relating to birth sex is appropriate. No individual is compelled to provide any information to a sports organisation. However, failure to provide such information should mean that that person would not be able to compete in the category of their choice. The sport of swimming should therefore  provide options for those people who prefer not to advise of their sex or gender. This would also be fair to and comply with the rules related to anti-doping officers collecting samples, which requires observation and an accompanying obligation to grant permission for any athlete wishing to compete in events which are subject to the WADA Code.

For the sport of swimming, the inclusion of transgender people on the grounds of fairness cannot co-exist in the current competitive model. Swimming should choose to offer competition in which the female category is protected for reasons of competitive  fairness.

In many deliberations that are currently taking place within sports, the concept of an ‘Open’ division is touted widely – one where Biological Males and Transgender Females would race in one division or categorization. However, there is a view that the use of an ‘Open’ option merely ‘puts the Trans problem away’. With an Open division, Trans females swimming against biological males may not even make the required time standards to be able to enter certain events/meets. Additionally, Trans males competing against biological males does not raise a concern in terms of performance imbalance within the biological sexes. An Open competition takes care of the issue we face, but we also have to ask if it takes care of the athletes holistically.

When we look back through Peter Daland’s record of swimming history, we see coaches continually working on expanding the sport. Previously to now, every expansion was based on a biological difference. At first, there was only Open competition. Any female wanting to compete had to do so on male teams and in m events. Then female events commenced and at first, there were very few. That is no longer the case.

The next expansion was that of age-group swimming. 9-year-olds did not compete against adults because of the obvious differences in maturity. There are now boys’ and girls’ competitions and many different ways of defining ages to level the growth and maturity playing fields.

Thanks to the Kennedy Family, the Special Olympics was born. This group initially served those with intellectual development disabilities, and, primarily at that time, that with Downs Syndrome. It recognised the biological differences between children on a ‘regular’ intellectual development curve and those with developmental disabilities.

It seems that the British Royal Family’s interest in wounded warriors greatly aided the development of the Paralympics. In recent times, the Paralympics also serves those who have significant trauma, congenital disabilities, cancer surgeries, and suchlike within their lives. The biological difference between those with their legs blown off in war and someone running on two good legs is quite apparent. The Invictus Games has become another event on the calendar which supports such differences within the makeup of the athlete population.

When the Paralympics started, it was called the Wheelchair Games. It was small. There were veterans’ and civilians’ divisions that have now disappeared. Now, classifications are based purely on biological factors.

There is an argument for needing to follow this path when advocating for our Trans athletes – to start with the question ‘What is the biological difference?’ If we do that, we could create a Trans Division, a Trans Meet, or even a Trans Games, but we would start small with a Trans Division.

Trans females cannot compete fairly with biological females; however, providing them with the competition that is predominantly that of competing against biological males becomes unfair to the Trans female. It is the exact mirror image for the Trans Male. He has the same biologic disadvantage that the trans female has as an advantage. Yet forcing him onto a female’s division would in many cases (and in the least) violate our doping rules.

One such solution is to create a Trans Division. The Trans Females will race each other. The Trans Males will race each other. There is an argument that the Trans Males have been completely lost in this debate because they are uncompetitive in our current structure. This would also allow those of indeterminate gender to be factored into such a solution.

Our role as coaches is not to decide if the athlete is ready for transitioning or if they should transition. That is up to them, their parents, and their physicians. Our role is to help them swim faster and develop lifetime health and fitness habits.

On the typical club team, age-group athletes, elite athletes, Special Olympians, and Paralympic athletes all share the same practice pool. They train together every day for weeks, then go their separate ways for their competitions. It could be precisely the same for our Trans Athletes. 99% of the year, every athlete trains together. 1% of the year, they attend their appropriate competitions.

A coaches’ historical role has been to expand the sport and create the best competitive opportunities for our athletes. The ‘Trans situation’ affords us the same opportunity. We must protect female sports, but we must endeavor to create fair competition for everyone. It could be seen that Trans males have become lost in this debate.

If we want to protect female sports, grow our sport, and create fair competitions, there is a strong argument that we need to follow the path of history and create a new division for such Trans athletes – as per this Option 3.

Summary Considerations for the Future

1.       Fairness is paramount to all sports, including the sport of swimming;

 2.       The sport of swimming is gender affected and that manifests itself through the physical differences between males and females;

3.       The sport of swimming rewards greater strength, stamina, and/or physique;

4.       Sex categories within the sport of swimming exist to provide fairness and opportunity in competition;

5.       Through a re-categorisation process, the sport of swimming should offer an alternative competitive model which would ensure inclusion and fairness.

Option 1 & Option 2 – Not to be Submitted to FINA at this time

For the sport of swimming, the inclusion of transgender people on the grounds of fairness cannot co-exist in the current competitive model. Swimming should choose to offer competition in which the female category is protected for reasons of competitive  fairness. As such, WSCA believes that one of the following scenarios should be adopted for future swimming competitions:

Female entrants into competition would be required to declare themselves as persons recorded as female at birth. An Open category would be available for any competitor to enter. All competitors would need to be compliant with anti-doping regulations. In Option 2, athletes in the Open category would compete in Male events. Option 2 also provides for athlete choice of racing suits in the Open category, providing for Open athletes to choose the cut of the suit they wish to wear, subject to the standard ‘decency’ rules already in place. Option 1 and 2 would require a change to entry forms for events, and it is recommended that the two types of  entry forms are:

1.       Female

2.      Male and/or Open. In Option 2, male athletes have the right to check a ‘Male’ box (by birth right) and Transgender athletes have the right to check an ‘Open’ and ‘Male’ box if that is how they identify, leaving the ‘Male’ check box blank if that does not reflect how they identify.