In sport, trans guidelines deny women a chance
Males who identify as transgender, along with males who have intersex conditions, will still be welcome in the men’s categories if they can make the cut.
Despite this it seems Australian bureaucrats will continue backing male inclusion in women’s sport. In response to the IOC news, Kieren Perkins, head of the Australian Sports Commission, said: “The ASC remains committed to fairness and inclusion for all athletes, while taking into account the legal frameworks in Australia (Sex Discrimination Act 1984).”
This directly contradicts what he told Channel 9’s Today show in 2022 when he said: “We need to set fairness aside for a minute and actually have a real conversation about ‘what is sport trying to achieve?’.”
The fact is, Perkins and the ASC gave up on fairness in women’s sport when they partnered with Australia’s largest LGBTQIA+ lobby group to rewrite the rules for women’s sport.
In 2019 the Australian Human Rights Commission published its guidelines for the inclusion of transgender and gender-diverse people in sport. It told sporting clubs they must include males who identify as women in female sport. Not just that, those males also had to be included in the girls’ showers and changerooms.
The guidelines supposedly have the backing of the federal Sex Discrimination Act. In 2013, under Julia Gillard’s leadership, the Act was amended to include “gender identity” as a protected characteristic. Those same amendments erased the definitions of “woman” and “man”.
But the explanatory memorandum that accompanied the Gillard amendments makes clear it was never the intention of the legislation to include males in women’s sport.
The memorandum states: “It is legitimate to recognise that biological differences between men and women are relevant to competitive sporting activities.”
So why do the AHRC guidelines ignore those biological differences?
Enter ACON – the AIDS Council of NSW. This is Australia’s largest LGBTQIA+ charity. In the 2023-24 financial year, it received just over $20m – 72 per cent of its income – from government handouts. ACON also runs a for-profit scheme called Pride in Sport. Sporting organisations pay a membership fee to join Pride in Sport, which then advises them on how to make their club LGBTQIA+ compliant.
Both the AHRC and the Australian Sports Commission were founding members of ACON’s Pride in Sport, calling into question the impartiality of the trans inclusion guidelines.
Did the AHRC write the guidelines? Or did ACON?
To date, the AHRC has consistently refused to reveal exactly who was consulted in the development of the guidelines.
Along with the AHRC and ASC, the trans sport guidelines also bear the logo of COMPPS – the Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports. This group is made up of the peak bodies for Australia’s most popular sporting codes – AFL, rugby union, Cricket Australia, Football Australia (soccer), the NRL, Netball Australia and Tennis Australia.
The individual peak bodies that make up COMPPS are all paying members of ACON’s Pride in Sport. COMPPS itself is also a member.
Was there anyone involved in writing the guidelines who did not already have a relationship with ACON?
The AHRC could have easily interpreted the Sex Discrimination Act amendments differently to how it has chosen to. The Act states that when it comes to sport, it’s not unlawful to discriminate on the basis of sex where “the strength, stamina or physique of competitors is relevant”.
Instead of relying on this section to protect women’s sport, the AHRC guidelines warn sporting clubs that the words “strength”, “stamina” and “physique”, are not defined in the Act. “Their meanings have not been conclusively settled by the Federal Court of Australia.” Look out, sporting clubs. Stand up for girls and women and you could land yourself in Federal Court!
The AHRC also could have relied on the explanatory memorandum, which, as mentioned, highlights the relevance of “biological differences between men and women” in sport. Again, it didn’t. Because what does “biological differences between men and women” mean if the words “man” and “woman” are not defined in the Act? No one knows. Not even Sex Discrimination Commissioner Anna Cody, who claimed in a Senate estimates hearing that “I don’t understand the term biological men”.
The AHRC’s trans sports guidelines are an activist document, designed by and for the transgender lobby. ACON’s fingerprints are all over it. Women weren’t consulted when the Sex Discrimination Act was gutted, and we weren’t consulted on the guidelines either.
Stassja Frei is the writer and producer of the documentary podcast series Desexing Society.
Zelensky defies Trump pressure over Ukraine peace deal
Female athletes around the world will be breathing a sigh of relief after recent news that the International Olympic Committee looks set to ban males from competing in women’s events.