Lia Thomas is the nation’s most controversial athlete. With a recent victory in the women’s 500-yard freestyle NCAA championship, the University of Pennsylvania swimmer, who is a biological man, sparked an intense public debate about transgender athletes in women’s sports.
This hasn’t been a clear right-wing vs. left-wing issue, but many progressives and conservatives have been vocally expressing competing views in recent weeks. Some individuals, including Olympic Silver Medalist Erica Sullivan, have come out in support of Thomas, arguing that trans athletes “deserve to be respected and included (emphasis mine).” Others — mostly conservatives but also a conspicuous cohort of liberals — have expressed outrage over Thomas’ ability to compete against women, even attacking the athlete personally at times. Ultimately, both sides, due to their intense fervor, have lost perspective of key elements in this debate.
Progressives who support Thomas competing in women’s sports often fail to consider the physical, biological advantages that athletes such as Thomas have over their biologically female competitors. Thomas started hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) in 2019 and, as a result, is in compliance with NCAA rules. But HRT, as recently pointed out in the New Yorker, may not counteract all the biological advantages a trans athlete possesses such as lean body mass, pelvic width, grip strength and wingspan.
A few years ago, as a swimmer on the Pennsylvania men’s team, Thomas was the 462-ranked men’s swimmer in the country. Now, Thomas is the No. 1-ranked swimmer nationally in the women’s division.
Thomas’ participation has a direct, negative effect on the biological females who have trained their whole lives just to see themselves precluded from accomplishment. For example, Virginia Tech swimmer Reka Gyorgy wrote a letter, assailing the NCAA after she came up one spot short in a championship qualifying race that Lia Thomas dominated. Gyorgy wrote, “(Thomas’ involvement) doesn’t promote our sport in a good way, and I think it is disrespectful against the biologically female swimmers who are competing in the NCAA.”
Progressives often invidiously attempt to link inclusion of trans athletes with respect for them, but inclusion is not a necessary component of respect in this circumstance. In her letter to the NCAA, Gyorgy also wrote that she “fully respect(s) and stand(s) with Lia Thomas.” She merely does not agree with the NCAA’s permitance of Thomas’ competition. Dozens of UPenn swimmers also wrote a letter to their school and to the Ivy League, arguing Thomas should not be allowed to compete but, in that letter, also affirmed their support for Thomas as an individual.
Unfortunately, some prominent conservatives have not approached the situation with the same grace as those swimmers. A few days ago, Donald Trump Jr. posted a photoshopped picture on Instagram of Thomas holding a trident with the caption “Hahahahhaha. Aqua Ma’am.” And Jenna Ellis, who is best known for her work on Donald Trump’s legal team, sent out a Tweet, in which she dubiously asserted that Thomas is “selfish” for competing against women.
Instead of attacking Thomas’ character, posting insensitive memes and failing to employ a basic level of decency, conservatives should direct their energy and ire solely toward the NCAA. After all, the NCAA has the power to change the rules — Thomas was just following them.
We ought to fight for the integrity of women’s sports and protect the interest of biological women to compete against biological women. Whether progressives want to recognize it or not, men have a clear and unfair advantage when competing against female athletes. Even so, you don’t have to hold an inclusionary stance on the transgender movement in order to give folk the basic respect every human deserves. Whether Lia Thomas is a man or woman is irrelevant to the fact that human beings should be treated with dignity.
Sadly, prominent voices on both sides are failing to acknowledge these key elements of this debate. They’re unnecessarily increasing passions and rendering productive conversation next to impossible — when conversation is what we need more than anything.
