The circumstances for cyborg or transgender athletes to participate in competitive sport
should not bar them from competing in the group they would want to altogether. The rules set to
prevent participation of these two groups in sports are based on inconsistencies among the rules
placed upon these athletes. The rules currently in place seemingly jumped the gun to bar these
two demographics from participating in sports. The criteria of allowing for transgender or
cyborg athletes should differ from that implemented on those who use steroids, doping, or
upgraded equipment. The intentions of the cyborgs and transgenders to compete are not to
directly have an advantage over their competition from how they are (Reeser, 2005). There is no
certainty of cyborgs or male to female transexual athletes having an advantage over all athletes
that have not been enhanced or have a female genotype. There have been no consistent results of
cyborgs and male to female transexuals competing to have a drastic advantage over those who
are not of these groups, so there is no certainty of these groups having an advantage against
outside groups. The ethical approach I use to coming to my decision is the Fairness or Justice
approach which considers equals to be treated equally and unequals, unequally (Murphee, n.d.).
The rules set against cyborgs and transgenders in sports seems like blatant discrimination against
them and jumping to conclusions regarding the setting of standards against their participation.
Inconsistencies involving rules put upon cyborg and transgender people in sports help
shape my perspective of not barring them from sports altogether. Inconsistencies in cyborg
involvement stem from how to categorize someone who is using procedures performed on them
and their allowance into sports. For example, a baseball player can participate as a pitcher
despite undergoing a “Tommy John” operation that can improve the athlete’s performance post-
operation (Triviño, 2013). This operation was done on the Dodgers baseball pitcher Tommy
John where he had a tendon taken from his right arm and used it to replace one in his left arm
(Triviño, 2013). John’s performance increased drastically after this operation, leading to him
winning 170 more games in his career (Triviño, 2013). The implementation of this operation
gave John a drastic advantage in his career and did not not disqualify him from athletic
competition. However, cyborg athletes using equipment that might give them advantages in their
career disqualifies them from competition.
The inconsistencies for rules among transgender athletes stem from the manners that are
used to determine what groups transgender athletes are put into. There is a very strong bias
among legislation against male to female transgenders instead of female to male transgenders.
For example, a Texan transgender man named Mack Beggs received two state championships
and a record of 89 wins and 0 losses (Suprenant, 2021). This record is possibly due to Texas
athletes being required to compete in the gender listed on their birth certificate (Suprenant,
2021). However, in the Western States 100-Mile Endurance Run, the Board decided to establish
an official policy for transgender women and not transgender men because of there being the
possibility of a top 10 award winner in the race who is a transgender woman (Clemmons, 2019).
The reasoning for rule implementation against transgenders in both of these cases seem to stem
from last ditch efforts to prevent controversy among male and female transgenders. However,
the rule implementation is instead increasing controversy because the rule makers are preventing
the ability for the transgender woman to win in the endurance run and are using what I am
assuming is traditionalist values to state the transgender man is to compete in the female
grouping.
The criteria of letting cyborgs and transgenders compete in whichever sport group they
would want to should not be in line with the criteria put in place against athletes who use
steroids, blood doping, or upgraded equipment. In regard to transgenders, in the Olympics there
are very specific rules they must follow to compete in the gender group they would want. They
must stay in the gender group they declare for four years, and the amount of testosterone for
specifically transgender females must be measured alongside sexual reassignment surgery as
stated for the 2004 Athens Summer Games (Reeser, 2005). Even within this grouping of
transgender people, there has not been a single transgender athlete to win an Olympic medal
(Clemmons, 2019). Even if this group of transgenders used their transgender status to have an
advantage over competition, as is the case for people who cheat, being solely transgender does
not play much of a role in the results an Olympic medal winner. In regard to cyborgs, there is a
primary distinction among cheaters and those who are cyborgs: the improvement in the cyborgs’
physical ability being enhancing or transhuman in nature (Triviño, 2013). The nature of the sport
itself would not be violated if the interventions cyborgs use are enhancements (Triviño, 2013).
The acceptance of interventions should be allowed among cyborgs if equal opportunity exists
among athletes regarding access to these interventions (Triviño, 2013). However, if the
improvement in ability is transhuman, the effect would be superhuman and among the
characteristic scope of the human species (Triviño, 2013). I would consider the improvement of
ability among those who are cheaters to be transhuman since they are applying techniques that
would go far beyond natural human potential within the typical human realm (Triviño, 2013).
There is no overall consensus if cyborgs or transgender athletes have an advantage over
those who are enhanced or have a 46XX (female) genotype. However, trends in both the cyborg
and transgender demographic have shown that there is not any major advantage in these groups
participating in sports. There have been anomalies among certain transgenders such as the Texan
transgender man, but there is not much consistent information regarding cyborgs and
transgenders having an advantage over people outside of those demographics. The Fairness or
Justice approach is what I used to make the conclusion of considering cyborgs and transgenders
to be allowed to participate in the groups that they would want to in sports. The discrimination
against these two groups imposes burdens on people that are no different from those on whom
burdens are not imposed (Murphee, n.d.).
Works Cited
Clemmons, Anna. (2019). Are testosterone levels the best way to categorize male and female
athletes?. Blue Ridge Outdoors. https://www.blueridgeoutdoors.com/politics/the-new-
gender-rules-in-sports/
Reeser, J C. (2005). Gender Identity and sport: is the playing field level?. British Journal of
Sports Medicine. https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/39/10/695
Suprenant, Chris. (2021). Striking a balance between fairness in competition and the rights of
transgender athletes. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/striking-a-balance-
between-fairness-in-competition-and-the-rights-of-transgender-athletes-159685
Triviño, José. (2013). Cyborgsportpersons: between disability and enhancement. Universitat
Pompeu Fabria. https://asu.instructure.com/courses/129890/files/52004236?wrap=1
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
