Donna Lopiano is an eternal optimist about her meet-in-the-middle solution to male inclusion in women's sports
It seems like the trans community is a lot further from that middle
Donna Lopiano, a sports management consultant and member of Women’s Sports Policy Working Group, wrote an article recently in Forbes entitled Listen To The Voices Of Female Athletes. Starting with a link to a groundbreaking report featuring female athletes describing how they have been adversely affected by policies that allow trans-identified males to compete in women’s sports, Lopiano penned an imminently reasonable, science-backed manifesto. Which is to say, eyebrow raising in today’s environment.
She showed how trans organizations have silenced and threatened women who dare to speak up about their own opportunities, safety, privacy, fairness. And how fear of saying something “transphobic” keeps people from engaging on this topic. She took on the need for accurate language to educate people about the difference between sex and gender identity, and in the process, said some uncontroversial things that would never make it into the New York Times, such as, “Males cannot become female regardless of gender identity and medical treatments; nor can females become males.” And “Gender identity is flexible,” and “Transwomen are women is a political statement, not a fact.” And that saying these things is neither disrespectful nor transphobic. Lopiano debunked an argument still used to allow males who identify as women in women’s sport: “The transgender communications campaign has sought to convince the public that taking hormones or surgically removing male testicles eliminates male sport performance advantage and effectively converts males to females. This is simply not true.” And finally, she pointed out these statistics: “Therefore, most trans-identified adults (at least 84 percent) have not had surgery, and at least 69 percent have not taken any medications. Other research confirms that most men who self-ID as women (between 87 and 96 percent) have not removed their testicles or penis.”
In a postscript to the article, Lopiano provided a list of ways males who identified as female could participate in sports, starting off with remaining in the male category. She also spoke of “accommodations” that would allow males to participate in alignment with their gender identity: “There could be separate scoring in individual sports, separate teams and leagues for team sports, new transgender categories, or other solutions – so long as there is no direct competition against females and no reduction of female athletes’ rights to receive their equitable percentage of all participation, scholarship, and prize-money opportunities.”
I read it several times, and then had to lie down for a bit, fanning myself. The simplicity, the directness, the respect for all athletes, the respect for facts—it was so … refreshing. Lopiano was my shero, my new best friend.
Later, in trying to find the article again, I came across a 2022 article Lopiano wrote with Mariah Burton Nelson entitled A Fair and Inclusive Solution For Transgender Women in Sports. I was shocked. Yes, the article started out with the physiological differences between males and females that underpin the reason for sex-separated sports. But then there was this: “Yet trans girls and women must not be relegated to the sidelines. These brave athletes, who come out as trans despite widespread discrimination and even threats of violence against them, must be welcomed onto women’s teams. Considering their grace and determination under pressure, who wouldn’t want trans women as teammates?”
Must be welcomed onto women’s teams? Why? Why not men’s teams?
There was also this: “Our nonbinary solution is called the Women’s Sports Umbrella. Under this umbrella, all people who identify as female would be invited to try out for women’s sports teams, with one caveat: Competition. The vast majority of team experience revolves around such things as practice, meetings, weightlifting, team travel, and social activities. There is no reason why this environment should not include all who identify as female.”
My blood pressure shot up. Invited to try out? For limited spots? Team travel, the kind with shared hotel rooms? These were all things that women in the 2024 report said were adverse effects of inclusion.
Throughout the 2022 piece, she used “trans women” and “cisgender women,” the language of gender ideology. There was no mention of the aggressive silencing tactics of trans rights organizations, nor statements that she made in her 2024 article that would elicit claims of transphobia from trans organizations like: “A transwoman is a woman is a political statement. Not a fact.”
Puzzled by the change in content and tone between the two articles, I checked several times to see if this was the same author who wrote the 2024 article. Then I rang Lopiano up.
*****************************************************************************************************
“Unfettered inclusion of transgender athletes in women’s sports will disadvantage biological women whose immutable differences do not compare with biological males,” Lopiano said, starting out on solid ground. “If you want transgender women in the women’s sports category it has to be through separate scoring or events that allow then to compete as women without taking away benefits from biological women. It’s fine to discriminate on the basis of sex.”
But, but, I spluttered, the title of the 2022 article was A Fair and Inclusive Solution and the very first sentence of the 2024 article linked to a report about the harm inclusion was causing women. Explain!
“Fair Play For Women [the organization that compiled the report of women’s voices] is philosophically opposed to transgender women in sports in any circumstance,” Lopiano said. “The importance of that report was to refute popular claims by transgender organizations that inclusion in women’s sports does not do harm. Governing bodies have admitted head-to-head competition between male bodied athletes and women, and sharing changing rooms. Everyone has been arguing about the social justice benefits of inclusion, that it would save trans athletes from suicide and not harm women. The trans community said, Don’t worry, and everybody believed it. Well, science said, sorry, you can’t change male to female at the cellular level. But women’s voices are new to the game. That report is critical because now for the first time we’re hearing from women of the downsides of not making accommodations when we included male athletes who identify as female. And transgender athletes have not been embraced as they would like to be. Neither of these responses would have occurred if we had made accommodations for transgender athletes. Sports are based on sex, not gender identity, and male bodies have a performance advantage, but you want them to have the social advantage of being with people who identify like them. You make that permissible by making sure you don’t harm biological women. Both parties need to understand why these accommodations are necessary. We are not educating both parties, that they can coexist in this space under these circumstances, and why this makes sense.”
But like the difference between her 2022 and 2024 article, Lopiano’s and the Women’s Sports Policy Working Group’s stance, are tough to reconcile. The more I listened to her, and read the WSPWG’s statements, the more confused I became. On one hand, WSPWG comments to the Biden administration were titled: Girls’ and Women’s Sports Are For Females. Period. Pretty unambiguous. “The purpose of the women’s sports category is to exclude men and their male-advantage,” it reads. But farther down in that document was this: “We encourage equitable and inclusive accommodations for males who identify as women; gender-fluid athletes; and nonbinary athletes, so long as those accommodations do not diminish females' sport opportunities or financial rewards, nor females’ right to fair, safe, sex-separated sports experiences.” Encouraging inclusive accommodations for males who identify as women, and at the same time protecting women’s opportunities for sex-separated sports experiences?
WSPWG explained their exclusion/inclusion stance by saying: Total inclusion and total exclusion both miss the mark. Women’s sports programs can offer equitable and inclusive accommodations to people born male who identify as women without compromising the programs’ core rationale: that female and male athletes have fundamentally different bodies, and in competitive sports, those differences matter.
I asked Lopiano about some of those accommodations, things that made my eyebrows explode in that 2022 article. For example, inviting males who identify as female to try out for women’s teams, possibly with limited spots, or limited varsity spots. “The school would have to expand the allowable roster by one so the female was not disadvantaged,” Lopiano said.
Practice and team travel —there is no reason why this environment should not include all who identify as female? In my experience practice and team travel involves change rooms and hotel rooms. “We’ve never advocated for shared change rooms or hotel rooms,” Lopiano clarified.
The need for biologically correct language, and that paragraph in the 2024 article that spoke of the 87% to 96% of trans-identified males who have not modified their body at all—those would elicit howls of transphobia and hatred from the trans community and would never, I contended, have been in the 2022 article.
“That’s a fair critique,” Lopiano said. “Five years ago we were trying to understand the situation. Three to four years ago we used terms created by the trans community, though they’re not well understood. Recently, people have been fired for using the wrong pronouns. That’s crazy. What’s going on in terms of policing language is changing quickly. For example, the Lia Thomas episode. Not allowing women to express dissatisfaction. This is how quickly this space is changing. No one was allowed to speak out two to three years ago. Now they are. This is the first reality check to the system implemented by the trans community. I can’t take back what I said in 2022 and I don’t want to. The Republican position is you must compete in your birth sex. That doesn’t allow some to have an accomodation in the women’s space. Accommodation is equitable treatment, not identical treatment. They’re identically treated at practice which is an important concept, but there is no head-to-head competition between males who identify as female and women. In individual sports like high jump, trans and biological women can compete and no one knows who is who until the trophies are awarded. In team sports, trans athletes may play on a district-wide team. If it’s possible to do this, to give gender dysphoric kids the opportunity to be in a space that they’re comfortable in, then we should do that.”
The key, then, to Lopiano’s solution for the inclusion of trans-identified males is that the trans community and female athletes must agree on the accommodations for trans-identified males—separate change rooms and hotel rooms, separate scoring of individual events, district-wide trans teams, no head-to-head competition with women— and the reason for those accommodations—safety, fairness, privacy, opportunity for women. I am not as optimistic as Lopiano that the trans community would agree to those accommodations, which depends in large part on accepting the reality and primacy of sex over gender identity in sports.
While her 2024 article was hailed by women’s sports advocates, I wondered if she had received feedback from LGBTQ organizations.
“There is intransigence on both sides. Biological females who have been hurt or whose daughters have been hurt, there are those in that community who want full exclusion. Sorry, this is ours. I think that’s short sighted. Both parties have to come to the table. Different is not the same as less than. We’re saying to the trans community that because the accommodations are not identical does not mean they’re less than.
“I have felt male aggression in this discussion, biological males demanding that they come into women’s spaces, that they be privileged. I never felt that bringing women to the table. I have faced accusations of transphobia at speaking engagements. The public are not gender-identity trained linguists. Clarification of language, like using biological male, is insulting to some people. I find this depressing. That language errors can get you canceled, I find terribly unfair. You have to understand the language of the trans community comes from an insecure place. They feel like a discriminated minority. So when the New York Times runs a story that doesn’t question facts about sex, it’s because they are hiring trans people who are making the rules.”
I asked if she’d gotten feedback or an indication of willingness to “come to the table” from Athlete Ally.
“No,” Lopiano said bluntly. “We said we’re going to meet, we’re going to knock this out. The National Women’s Law Center said we’d meet. I’ve tried to be patient, I thought this is going to play out, but there were no biological females in meeting the with the NCAA. Until both sides come together, things won’t change. Things only get solved in the middle. It might take three generations.”
Wha?! Three generations? While women’s places are being taken by men who identify as women? It’s for sure I do not share Lopiano’s patience or optimism. I asked Lopiano if she had heard of a trans-identified male athlete choosing to compete in the male category. “Yes! I’m a consultant to school districts. At the high school level where they may not have medically transitioned, I’ve heard of athletes choosing to remain in the male category. And we have trans women at WSPWG who realize they’re advantaged and won’t compete head-to-head-with women. Of course, we also know of trans women working for organizations like Athlete Ally and other trans organizations who cannot have conversations as employees. They would be attacked internally, they would never speak out.”
Had she heard of a trans-identified male being scored separately in an individual women’s event? “I don’t know of one.”
Or of teams of trans-identified males competing against each other? “I don’t know of one.”
Lopiano said, “We can’t waste time lamenting. I do the best I can to work on eligibility rules. I’m a perpetual optimist. Don Quixote.”
As I opened my mouth to express my pessimism, or as I like to call it, reality, with her meet-in-the-middle solution, Lopiano stopped me: “My patience for lament is limited.”