...
By Anna Rahmanan
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Sophie Cunningham of the WNBA’s Indiana Fever said the thing out loud just as women’s tennis was putting it in writing.
That is the strange new rhythm of the transgender-athlete debate in women’s sports. One athlete makes the argument in plain language and the internet turns it into a test of courage, prejudice, feminism, tolerance and political identity. Then, somewhere away from the shouting, a governing body turns the same argument into a rule.
Cunningham ignited a firestorm when she said she did not believe transgender women should compete in women’s sports, arguing that the issue was about fairness rather than exclusion. Her comments became the viral flashpoint, but the Women’s Tennis Association’s new eligibility policy—released at nearly the same time, purely by coincidence—may prove to be the more revealing development.
Read More on Analysis
Under its new policy, WTA players competing on the women’s tour must undergo a one-time genetic test for the SRY gene, which is associated with male sex development. The rule arrives as other major sports governing bodies move toward sex-verification policies ahead of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, suggesting that women’s sports may be entering a new phase: less argument over what female athletes are allowed to say, and more attention to what they may be required to prove.
Cunningham's comments became the cultural event but the WTA policy is something different, moving the conversation to institutional policy.
The Verification Era is Here
Women’s sports bodies are no longer relying mainly on identity declarations, testosterone thresholds or case-by-case review. The WTA’s 2018 gender participation policy allowed a transgender woman to compete after declaring a female gender identity and keeping testosterone below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months.
Related Story
Sophie Cunningham Is the Angel of Death for Cancel Culture
By 2024, the WTA had tightened that standard: its women’s eligibility policy required some transgender or nonbinary athletes to show testosterone below 2.5 nmol/L for the previous 24 months.
The new rule goes further. It suggests the center of gravity has moved from hormone management to sex verification, and from inclusion-by-process to eligibility-by-test. The WTA said the policy was designed to “promote equal athletic opportunities” and “maintain fair competition,” while also saying players would be treated with dignity.
Tennis Is Following the Olympic Line
The WTA is not moving alone. World Athletics approved once-in-a-lifetime SRY testing for athletes seeking to compete in the female category, with rules that took effect in 2025.
World Boxing adopted mandatory sex testing and said the issues of safety and sporting integrity were most pronounced in the female category.
The biggest signal came from the Olympics, though, as the International Olympic Committee’s 2026 policy limits female-category eligibility at IOC events, including LA28, to biological females determined through one-time SRY screening.
For tennis, that makes the WTA rule partly a sports-governance decision and partly an Olympic alignment decision. The 2028 Los Angeles Games give governing bodies a deadline, and deadlines turn moral fights into forms, lab protocols and enforcement language.
...
Who Pays the Price and What is the Price?
Supporters say the new rules are a long-delayed defense of the female category.
U.N. Special Rapporteur Reem Alsalem welcomed the IOC’s female-category policy, saying it restored “dignity, fairness and safety for women and girls in Olympic sport.”
The strongest critics say they are concerned about what verification does to women athletes themselves. Human Rights Watch called broad sex testing a discriminatory rights violation, arguing that such policies revive a history of invasive scrutiny of women with variations in sex characteristics.
The next fight is likely to be procedural before it is political: who sees test results, how appeals work, how athletes with differences of sex development are handled and whether national privacy laws complicate enforcement.
Cunningham’s comments, and the public’s reaction to them, showed why the issue still travels fast through politics. The WTA’s policy, on the other hand, shows why the next phase may be quieter, more technical and more consequential.
The shouting may still happen online, but the decisions will increasingly be made by the people writing the rules.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines