Workshop Recap: All on the Same Team

On the 21st of July, the SRA Athletes Network for Safer Sport convened “All on the Same Team: Trans, Gender Diverse and Intersex Inclusion;” a workshop exploring the increasing barriers faced by trans, gender diverse and intersex people in sport and how we can collectively support those impacted in navigating this context. 

The session featured Halba Diouf, a Senegalese-French transgender woman and professional sprinter; Dr. Payoshni Mitra, Founder and Executive Director of Humans of Sport; Madeleine Pape, Olympian and sociologist; and Grace McKenzie, a transgender woman and Advisory Council member of the SRA Athletes Network. Highlighting sport governing bodies’ retreat from inclusive policy‑making, the panel discussed the disproportionate scrutiny placed on a small  group of athletes, and the broader harms created by sex testing and exclusionary regulations on all women and girls across all levels of sport. Speakers also emphasised the urgent need for athlete‑centred governance and collective resistance to discriminatory narratives and politically motivated exclusion.

“They did not follow the framework themselves.”

The workshop opened with a clear contrast between the IOC’s widely consulted 2021 Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-Discrimination in comparison to  the new policy adopted in 2026 on “The Protection of the Female Category,”  developed without meaningful participation from impacted athletes and civil society. While the 2021 Framework had been grounded in principles such as harm reduction, no assumption of advantage, bodily autonomy, the new policy completely abandons these commitments and introduces universal genetic sex testing for all women and girls, banning all transgender athletes from the women’s category, as well as intersex athletes unless they undergo further testing to prove testosterone insensitivity. 

The panel emphasised that this shift reflects a deeper governance breakdown: a move away from transparency, human rights-centered consultation and evidence‑based decision‑making, and toward a process that neither explains its reversal nor accounts for the harms it may create.

Speakers stressed that the IOC’s approach also ignored its own recent consensus statement interpersonal violence and safeguarding in sport, published in December 2024. The consensus acknowledges that “sport is often a less inclusive, welcoming and safe space for LGBTQ+ persons as well as people with sex variations,” and specifically stated that “sex testing may be considered to be a form of interpersonal violence with potential physical, psychological and socioecological harms to affected athletes”, emphasizing the need for further research. 

“There are very, very few transgender women in sport.”

Halba Diouf highlighted how an extremely small number of trans athletes are treated as an existential threat. “Transgender people represent less than 1% of the world’s population,” she explained, noting that in France she is one of only two trans women athletes, and the only one competing at elite level.

Despite these tiny numbers, trans women face extraordinary scrutiny compared to cisgender athletes. Halba described the emotional toll it imposes: “It begins in childhood, with families that reject us, schools that exclude us and employers that close their doors, and now entire federations come together to examine our bodies, our hormones and our performances as though we were an existential threat.”

Speakers emphasised that this scrutiny is wildly disproportionate when compared to the scale of real problems in sport such as abuse, harassment, sexism, and unequal resources – issues affecting millions of women and girls in sport  but receiving far less attention. As Grace highlighted: “There are larger forces at play, you know, politically motivated forces at play here – you have to be a critical thinker.”

“You have to prove if you are a woman enough.”

Payoshni detailed how this new IOC policy on sex testing and exclusionary eligibility policies create a culture of surveillance affecting all women and girls. “Not just one athlete is tested; every woman and girl will be tested.”

She emphasised that these policies disproportionately impact gender‑nonconforming athletes and minors. With youth competitions included, children as young as 11 may be subjected to invasive scrutiny. “This policy impacts minor athletes… in the Olympic Games, there are athletes who are as young as 11 years old.”

When speaking about her own legal battle to continue exercising her fundamental right to play sport, Halba underscored the difficulty to prove her place and legitimacy: “being alone is not easy, which is why I started the process against the French Athletic Federation and World Athletics. We presented a 300-page file detailing all offences committed against me as well as studies on physical advantage in comparison to cisgender women.” Despite the lack of evidence on their side demonstrating that going through male puberty would provide an unfair and disproportionate advantage, a conciliation proposal was offered restricting her access to women’s competition. “Of course we rejected  the proposal and initiated a legal proceeding against them at the Paris Criminal Court and the Administrative Court.”

Despite all the setbacks and harms this process inflicts on her, Halba continues to fight: “I stand before you because it is necessary – every obstacle, every refusal and every humiliation has only strengthened my determination to exist and claim my place in a society that constantly tries to make us invisible.”

“Nothing about us without us.”

Madeleine Pape stressed that sports organisations often hope for a simple scientific answer, but the available evidence is contested and context‑dependent. In this uncertainty, athlete voices become even more essential. “It’s just so critical that you start with hearing from the people you’re thinking you’re maybe going to target.”

According to Madeleine, consultation must be the first step – not an afterthought once decisions are already shaped but rather,  with impacted athletes as a way to humanise the policy debate, grounding decision‑makers in lived realities, by hearing directly from those most affected before navigating scientific, legal and political pressures. This early engagement, she argued, is essential to avoid abstract debates that ignore real human consequences.

“If you do speak up, you will not be alone.”

The session closed with reflections on how cis athletes and allies can challenge misinformation and resist exclusionary narratives. Madeleine emphasised the importance of returning to real‑world evidence: “Once we get beyond the abstract… we see that there’s actually been plenty of cases where this has worked.”

Madeleine, who competed against Caster Semeneya during the 2008 Beijing Olympics highlighted the importance of listening to actual stories of what really happens in the field of play when we allow inclusion, instead of what’s been said in the media and the current political environment: “I think it is important to get out there and challenge – not just other people’s assumptions but our own, by seeking real human stories and real human experiences.”

Grace offered examples from rugby, where players and fans have organised and voiced overwhelming support for trans inclusion: “You’ll see an overwhelming amount of support for trans athletes and a full rejection of this ban.” She stressed that while the voices for exclusion are loud, there is also plenty of solidarity: “There are so many folks out there who do support trans athletes… you will not be alone.”