I don’t wanna write about the Olympics again. But I’ve got to. They’re forcing me to! Look what you made me do, the Olympics! Look what you made me do by talking about trans people again! In a statement released on June 6th, the International Olympic Committee released a statement about “problematic language” in their media Portrayal Guidelines that can impede reporting on the Olympics, in particular trans competitors.
Seriously, I’m sorta sick of talking about the Olympics, but I had to cover this one because it’s an incredible intersection of two things I’ve harped on a lot in the past: Trans inclusion in Olympic sports and absolutely noxious terms like biological women. See, I’ve written about World Aquatics’ de facto ban of trans women competing and how Lia Thomas is challenging it, as well as World Sailing’s nearly identical ban on trans women competing, and how both bans—in addition to being horrific and blatantly transphobic attacks on our community—generate primarily racist collateral damage in the process.
And, of course, I’ve mentioned countless times just how disgusting and meaningless I find the concept of a “biological woman.” I must unfortunately ask you, what is a woman? She’s not a miserable little pile of secrets, I know that much for sure. But what is she? Somebody who menstruates? That doesn’t fit; there are trans men and nonbinary people who menstruate, and they aren’t women. Is she somebody who has ovaries? Sorry, no, see my previous answer. What about having two X chromosomes? Well, that might entitle you to celebrating on Real Women’s Day (congratulations!), but considering there are plenty of intersex women who don’t have two X chromosomes, I don’t think that works as a rubric either.
By the way, if you think you know what chromosomes you have? Yeah, you don’t. Not unless you’ve undergone genetic testing to find out, for whatever reason. So until then, consider yourself on notice. You could be anything, baby!
The guidelines state, “A person’s sex category is not assigned based on genetics alone and aspects of a person’s biology can be altered when they pursue gender-affirming care. It is always preferable to emphasize a person’s actual gender identity rather than potentially calling their identity into question by referring to the sex category that was registered on their original birth certificate.”
Some of the language the IOC suggests you steer clear of includes biologically/genetically male or female, born male or female, and labels like male to female and female to male. That’s an interesting one, to me, since I’m kind of a broad supporter of somewhat outdated terms like MtF and FtM. The preference among queer youth today seems to be Assigned Male at Birth or Assigned Female at Birth, and that’s what the guidelines recommend if for some reason you must refer to an athlete’s assigned sex at birth.
Regardless of what’s in vogue, I actually don’t want reporters saying any of that shit! Stop talking about my people entirely, you fucks!
Kidding aside, I actually agree with pretty much everything the IOC recommends on this front. In fact, I wish more journalists reporting on trans people would use these guidelines as an example. Or, if you feel like really being a top notch journalist, perhaps you could check out and memorize the absolutely fantastic Trans Journalist Association’s Stylebook and Coverage Guide!
The problem is that the IOC, in spite of this pretty little “best practices in reporting” guide, does not in any way have trans people’s backs when it comes to, you know, actually competing in the fucking Olympics. The IOC has instituted a few different policies regarding trans competitors over the years, but their most recent guidelines are a sort of gentle suggestion to world governing bodies for Olympic sports that gives these third-party groups carte blanche to institute the sort of poorly disguised out and out bans on trans competitors that we’ve seen in the last few years. This, in spite of recently released evidence that makes it clear trans competitors have no significant advantage over their cisgender peers, and are in fact likely to perform less admirably in some areas.
I’m sick of having to talk shit about my brothers and sisters in athletics just to justify their right to compete, but the reality is that we simply are not the hulking freak beasts shattering world records every day that right-wing pundits want you to believe we are. Like any other group of people, there are many incredibly talented trans athletes, and there are many more perfectly average trans athletes, and none of them are some sort of existential threat to the validity of cis competitors.
In my opinion, it’s about time the IOC started handling their own competitor rules again and giving trans people the right to compete that they pretend to care about with the sort of face saving media guidelines they released last week.
Alyssa Steinsiek is a professional writer who spends too much time playing video games!
Correction. I wrote there will be no trans women (AFAB) that will be competing in track & field in Paris. I meant AMAB.
It is very likely though that Nikki Hiltz will be competing in the women’s 1500m run (Go Nikki!). Nikki is non-binary transgender but AFAB and is currently national champion in the USATF 1500m run both indoors and outdoors and a silver medalist in this year’s World Indoor track & field Championships. They are currently ranked 14th in the women’s category world rankings in the 1500.
It will be interesting to see if journalists treat Nikki according to the IOC guidelines. The broadcast television commentators have been pretty good about using Nikki’s preferred pronouns of they/them rather than using she/her. Some critics have decried the IOC guidelines because, they say, it prohibits discussion of fairness regarding trans female participation in the women’s category. It does not. I pointed out on Twitter (in response to Ross Tucker) how fairness can be fully addressed within the language suggested by the IOC guidelines. This can be done by referencing the athletes own gender identity, the use of AMAB and AFAB, as well as the salient, sex-based regulations that athlete must comply with in order to compete. Those who still decry this "woke" IOC policy are just mad that they can’t use their preferred biased language.
Another athlete, subject to sex-based restrictions that is likely to be competing in Paris is Christine Mboma, a sprinter from Namibia. Journalists covering the Olympics should discuss her as a female who must lower her testosterone levels in order to compete. She has a DSD condition that falls under WA’s latest rules regarding eligibility. Whether that policy is fair to Christine or not is another story. Journalists can discuss the fairness of that policy without referring to Christine as a "biological male". She was AFAB and most certainly is not male. It will be interesting to see how coverage of her is handled. Sebastian Coe, the president of World Athletics and former member of the House of Lords in the UK has already violated the IOC guidelines by referring to Mboma as a "biological male". Seb Coe is an asshole.