IOC Backs Trans Competitors When it Doesn’t Count
The International Olympic Committee has released an advisory update to their media guidelines for coverage of the Olympics by journalists, specifically regarding the sort of language journalists use to discuss trans competitors. But considering trans competitors are few and far between thanks to the IOC’s hands off approach to participation rules and multiple de facto bans on trans competitors, their words ring hollow.
Opinion, by Alyssa Steinsiek
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!
