The Logic Of “Safety” Behind USA Boxing’s Controversial Transgender Policy

On January 30, 2024, USA Boxing released an open letter in response to the widespread criticism surrounding its revised 2024 rulebook, which now incorporates a controversial transgender policy. The federation asserted that “safety [is] our primary consideration”. In an effort to balance the imperative of ensuring the “health and safety of diverse Olympic-style boxing community” with the obligation of “non-discrimination”, the federation introduced a stringent trans policy that generated backlash from both supporters of trans inclusion and anti-trans woman boxers.

​

The transgender policy, formulated in August 2022, mandates that trans boxers aged 18 and above must have “completed full surgical reassignment and gone through multiple years of hormone therapy” to qualify for participation in the gender identity category they identify with.  Criticism has been directed at the mandatory medical interventions, including hormones and surgery, as they are perceived as “jeopardizing athletes’ dignity and autonomy”. Additionally, transwoman boxers are obliged to maintain serum testosterone levels below 5nmol/L for a minimum of 4 years before their first competition, a more stringent requirement compared to the 2015 International Olympic Committee’s guidelines, which stipulated that transwomen need to sustain their testosterone level below 10nmol/L for at least 1 year.

Even more shocking is the equally extreme regulation applied to transman boxers. It not only mandates gender-affirming surgeries and regular testosterone testing but also forces them to achieve a testosterone level above 10nmol/L to qualify for competition. The rationale behind this policy is argued to “provide fairness and safety for all boxers”.

​

While terms like “safety” and “fairness” are prevalent in combat sports, the question arises: what is the reasoning behind the implementation of such a transgender policy?

​

Whose safety are we talking about? In the ongoing controversy regarding whether transwomen boxers should be allowed to compete against cisgender women combatants, the discourse around “safety” is often employed to justify safeguarding cisgender, biological women from perceived risks posed by biological “men”. This rationale is problematic as it casts assigned-female-at-birth boxers as inherently vulnerable victims of male-dominant physiology. It presupposes that cisgender women are invariably weaker and biologically inferior, overlooking considerations of their combat skills and years of training.

But is biology the single decisive factor in winning a boxing match? Tatyana Dvazhdova, a cisgender woman boxer who conceals her female identity to compete under the pseudonym Vladimir Ermolaev, has achieved success by winning over half of her matches against men, challenging the assumption that biological women are inherently weaker. However, upon disclosing her true identity, she faced a ban from fighting male boxers. Her story prompts a critical examination of whether binary sexed categories are designed to uphold “fairness” in light of biological differences or if they serve to maintain male superiority in sports.

​

USA Boxing’s policy takes the notion of safety a step further by compelling transmen boxers to maintain their testosterone levels within a “normal” range typical of cisgender men. This requirement goes beyond appearance and identity, emphasizing a perceived need for transmen to be “biologically” similar to cisgender men. The underlying assumption appears to be rooted in societal stereotypes associating higher testosterone levels with qualities like aggressiveness and violence, traits often linked to the perception of a “good” fighter.

​

In contrast to the controversy surrounding transwoman athletes in women’s sports, transmen are generally not viewed as a threat. Patricio Manuel, a professional transman boxer, has encountered a hard time finding cisgender male opponents since coming out in 2018. While a typical new professional boxer fights 4-6 times a year, Manuel has received only three match invitations from cisgender male boxers in four years.  The scarcity of opportunities for transmen in boxing highlights the cultural shame and anxiety associated with potentially losing to an assigned-female-at-birth boxer. This exceptionally strict transgender policy for transmen is a means to preserve the integrity of “men” by maintaining a strict binary sexed categorization.

​

Safety from whom? In boxing, there is a commonly held belief that younger, heavier, physiological male athletes have an advantage in the ring. To ensure a fairer competition, athletes are categorized based on sex, weight, and age. But combat sports, by their nature, are violent. Both physiological male and female boxers have to display a degree of violence and aggression to excel in the sport.

​

In 2021, a tragedy incident occurred when 18-year-old Montreal boxer Jeanette Zacarias Zapata passed away after a bout with another cisgender women boxer, Marie-Pier Houle. Zapata sustained brain trauma from “repeated blows to the head” after being knocked unconscious in the ring. Although Zapata’s death was deemed “violent but accidental”, a different scenario unfolded for transwoman MMA fighter Fallen Fox. She was forced to retire after causing a cisgender woman opponent to suffer a broken orbital bone, which is commonly considered a mild injury. The narrative surrounding Fox’s actions has been exaggerated by anti-trans voices, claiming she broke her opponent’s “skull”. This exaggeration has been used to justify the exclusion of transwomen athletes from the women’s category, purportedly in the interest of “protecting” cisgender women from the perceived aggression of “men”.

​

Former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines went as far as claiming that “it will take a woman getting killed [by transgender women] before these misogynistic fools wake up”. When examining these two incidents together, it becomes apparent that a double standard regarding violence exists. The emphasis on protecting the “safety” of cisgender women athletes is a strategy to uphold the belief that sexed categories should be as biologically distinct and binary as possible.

​

What counts as safety? Sports federations frequently echo the language of safety that narrowly focuses on avoiding physical harm or injury. While physical safety is undoubtedly a crucial consideration, especially in combat sports with the risk of brain and head injuries,  true safety encompasses more than just the physical aspect. Psychological safety in sports plays a significant role in impacting athletes’ performance satisfaction, mental well-being, and positive development outcomes.

 

Notably, trans, queer, and gender-diverse athletes often struggle to find a safe space in sports, encountering rejection, bullying, anxiety, and stress related to their sexuality and gender identity. The enormous pressure faced by Laurel Hubbard, the first transwoman weightlifter in Olympic history, likely contributed to her failure to complete a single lift and subsequent retirement. Limiting the narratives of safety to physical aspects serves as a mechanism to maintain heteronormative sports environments, where biology remains the single determining factor for sexed categorization.

​

Original Article posted in TransGriot.com