Staff Reports
The Harvard Crimson recently showed its love for transgender athletes by publishing a piece that argues against bans on transgender athletes. The article claims that the evidence showing men have a physical advantage over women in sports is shaky at best. But in making this case, the writers ignored plenty of evidence that contradicts their claim.
Harvard Crimson Claims It’s ‘Unclear’ Whether Men Have an Athletic Advantage over Women
Oh good grief what world do they come from. Ask any Alpha male, do men have an advantage over women in sports? For that matter ask any woman? https://t.co/YYIrfMMR9V
— Gayle Forbess (@GayLou1953) April 18, 2024
The April 16 editorial, called “There Are Many Obstacles Facing Women’s Sports. Trans Athletes Aren’t One,” argues that the “science” isn’t clear on whether transgender women have a biological edge over cisgender opponents. The piece suggests that men who transition and take female hormones lose their male strength because their testosterone levels resemble those of their cisgender counterparts after a year of hormone therapy.
But the article conveniently overlooks other studies that show the inherent advantages the male body has over the female body in sports. For example, one study found that transgender women still have a 10 to 50 percent advantage over women, regardless of their testosterone levels. Another study found that men who transition to women maintain some of their physical advantages over women despite hormone therapy.
The Harvard Crimson completely ignored these studies while claiming that their “science” represents the majority view of the Editorial Board. They also dismissed the impact of transgender athletes on women’s sports by pointing out the small number of trans athletes. But even if the number of trans athletes is minuscule, it doesn’t change the threat they pose to women’s sports.
The editorial criticizes the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics for its ban on transgender athletes, claiming that the ban is discriminatory and reductive without strong scientific evidence. It also urges the NCAA to oppose the ban and vocally support the rights of trans athletes.
Unfortunately, The Crimson’s reliance on cherry-picked evidence and assertions does little to settle the debate over whether people with male bodies should compete as females. It’s clear that The Crimson’s stance is more about pushing an agenda than presenting a fair and balanced view of the issue.
