I have played softball for more than 10 years; nine years presenting as a girl, and now one year presenting as myself: a trans man. This last year, after coming out, I thought I was done. I thought that, as a trans man, I could no longer play softball—the sport I love—so I shut it out of my life for a year. It didn’t even occur to me that I could still play. It’s a “girl’s sport,” and I’m not a girl. I couldn’t even bring myself to watch softball. I would just want to play it myself so badly that I would be out of my seat pacing. I tried doing other sports, and even though I enjoyed them, nothing made me as happy as softball.

Eventually, I confronted myself and asked, “Why can’t I play?” There is no reason to give up the sport I love just because I now live authentically as myself. I decided to return to softball, and when I did, I got to re-experience the joy that it gave me. I feel so energized and excited when I play, and I was lucky to be met with inclusion from others when I started playing again, just as I am now.

But this is not the case for everyone.

Trans athletes in sports have recently become the subject of political debate in the United States and Wisconsin. Gov. Tony Evers recently vetoed a bill that would have banned transgender athletes from high school sports. Current regulations allow transgender athletes to participate but with a lot of rules and regulations that make it incredibly difficult.

The rules for high school transgender athletes are created by the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association (WIAA), which creates rules for all high school sports in Wisconsin. For trans men, the rule states that “a [female to male] student who has started hormone therapy (example: testosterone) is only eligible for male teams.” For trans women the regulations are harsher, “A [male to female] student must have one calendar year of medically documented testosterone suppression therapy to be eligible to participate on a female team, consistent with WIAA policy.”

These current policies are very black-and-white and fail to take into consideration the nuances involved, especially when it comes to access to and effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). With these current policies, a trans man cannot compete on a women’s team if he desires. This may sound good, but some trans men may feel more comfortable remaining on a team with people they’re already familiar with. These policies could and do easily lead to bullying and trans athletes feeling uncomfortable on teams with less supportive peers.

In my experience, men’s teams aren’t always the safest place for trans men—testosterone or not. Trans athletes in high school sports in Wisconsin should not be regulated the way they are now. Trans athletes should be allowed to play on the team they choose. If advantages or disadvantages become a problem as seen by the coach, an unbiased council can help decide how they can participate.

Current regulations are failing trans kids 

The current regulations are not working, and this is because of their inconsistency and lack of equity. An example of these inconsistencies is presented by Eric Vilian, a professor and scientist specializing in the differences in sex development. He expresses concerns that individual-based rulings deciding whether a trans athlete can play will “create a quite inequitable patchwork of inclusion and exclusion throughout the country, with some states or some cities more likely to include and others not. And the same trans athlete may be eligible in one school and, if they move, may not be in another school.” This shows how even if we transitioned away from the all-out bans that have been proposed and away from WIAA’s current requirements, individually deciding rulings create inequity as well.

This is why trans athletes should automatically be allowed to play on the team where they feel most comfortable. This would help eliminate some of that inequality. Another problem with the all-out ban is illustrated by Laura Meckler, a journalist specializing in education and with experience writing about health and social problems. She says that “schools that want to limit trans athletes’ participation in sports would have to consider the sport, the level of competition, and the grade or education level involved… Some teams require advanced skills and others allow anyone to participate, such as intramural or junior varsity squads, and said rules must ‘reflect these differences in competition.’”

This helps illustrate all the factors that go into different levels of sports and different kinds of sports that need to be thought about before banning trans athletes from all of them. If an athlete wants to play for fun, they should be allowed to. That really should be what grade school sports are about, more than competitiveness. An outright ban would bar trans grade school athletes from exploring sports and all of the benefits they bring: fun, confidence building, community/friendships, and mental and physical wellbeing. This is one of the reasons why an outright ban is not right.

Who really has the advantage? 

Another thing to consider about an outright ban is that, when it comes to so-called “advantages” for trans athletes, we ignore the other ways that even cisgender athletes have inherent advantages and disadvantages. Again according to Vilian, “There are all sorts of advantages coming into play for athletic abilities—genetic advantages, metabolic differences, physical characteristics, height, for example—and all the socioeconomic access to better nutrition, better coaching, better training equipment. [Are] all of these differences that provide some advantages dwarfed by the fact of being a trans athlete? We simply don’t know.”

Vilian addresses other factors that give all athletes different performance levels. There is no real cut-and-dried answer to the advantages any competitor has. All competitors have different conditions helping or hurting them, and simply being trans doesn’t guarantee success or overall advantage. An outright ban simply bars any participation from trans athletes and is not fair, considering all other factors that give cis athletes advantages.

Not only are the regulations not working for trans athletes, but the increased scrutiny on all athletes caused by these misguided bans and regulations also causes harm. Cisgender female athletes with high testosterone levels are being discriminated against. An example of this is Caster Semenya, a cis woman who was banned from competing in track because of high testosterone levels. These regulations harm everyone.

Good data on athletic performance differences between trans and cis people is still hard to come by, but one recent study by the International Olympic Committee has begun to shed some light on this. The study concluded that “transgender female participants showed greater handgrip strength than cisgender female participants but lower lung function and relative VO2 max, the amount of oxygen used when exercising. Transgender female athletes also scored below cisgender women and men on a jumping test that measured lower-body power.”

This study shows that, yes, trans women may have an advantage over cis female athletes in certain areas, but cis athletes of both genders have multiple advantages over trans athletes in other categories. Every trans athlete is different, and it is unfair for their participation to be outright banned because of these differences.

Another point to consider is brought up again by Vilian, who thinks that “some [people] are making the argument that the difference between boys and girls should translate directly into …[the] difference between trans and cisgender girl athletes. But there is no good evidence for this, in part because many cases are going to be different, some having undergone blocking of puberty at different ages.” This backs up what the IOC study found because trans athletes scored in between cis athletes of both genders in multiple tests. This helps illustrate the differences between trans people and cis people. It also brings up that every trans person is different, and that is why trans people should be given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to play.

Counter arguments lack understanding 

In contrast, Michael J. Joyner, a Mayo Clinic doctor who focuses on the biology of male and female athletes, argues that “science supports the bans in elite sports, where events can be decided by the smallest of margins. We know testosterone is performance-enhancing, and we know testosterone has residual effects. Additionally, [the] declines in performance by trans women after taking drugs to suppress their testosterone levels do not fully reduce the typical differences in athletic performance between men and women.”

While Joyner may be right that some advantages are seen in trans women, he fails to address the disadvantages that scientists have also found trans athletes to have. The issue is not so simple as Joyner says, and there simply is not enough research to support either opinion. That is another reason why trans athletes should be allowed to play. More trans athletes participating means more studies and data can be collected for research on their performance.

The public has already formed a lot of opinions on trans athletes; this is important because public opinion plays a huge part in whether or not trans athletes can compete, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center. They polled Americans regarding their stance on trans athletes, and “polling [showed that] a majority of Americans oppose allowing transgender women to compete in sports.” Another poll by Maryland University found that “Fifty-five percent of Americans opposed allowing trans women and girls to compete with cisgender women and girls in high school sports.” This shows that the majority of Americans already have pre-formed negative opinions about trans athletes. This is why an unbiased council would need to be chosen to help decide how trans athletes can continue to participate in sports after a coach brings up concerns. It would be unfair for a council with already biased opinions against or for trans athletes to determine how they can play.

Long-distance swimmer Dianne Nyad brings up another possible solution to this problem. She says that “a fairer [solution would be to] give competitions a new ‘open’ classification: Cisgender, transgender, intersex—all are welcome. Okay, there probably won’t be many entries just yet. But there weren’t many women competing in sports when they were first allowed, either. Switzer ran solo not that long ago, and now nearly half of the 30,000 Boston marathoners are women.” This solution is a good idea and promotes the idea of equality and having fun, but trans people should not have to be separated from sports just because of transphobia. Trans people should be allowed to participate fairly until it is proven otherwise to be unfair. There is no true reason to exclude trans athletes other than ignorance and transphobia.

Let trans kids play 

To put this all together, research does not back a total ban on trans athletes, yet neither does it back unregulated participation for them. However, current regulations are inconsistent and unequal. Instead, high school trans athletes should be allowed to play on the team they choose. If their performance is questioned by their coach, then an unbiased council will help determine how they can still participate. The council could help determine if the coach has real concerns or is just being transphobic, and could help foster a plan for each individual athlete if there are real concerns. Overall, high school trans athletes are still just teenagers and should be allowed to explore and have fun.