Trans Women in Women's Prisons, Sports, and Restrooms

Unfortunately, there are many misconceptions in our society that lead people to wrongly perceive the presence of transgender women as a threat in spaces like cisgender women’s prisons, sports, and bathrooms. These misunderstandings often stem from misinformation, fear, and a lack of awareness about the realities.

This article aims to provide a clear, evidence-based overview of these issues to dispel these myths and foster a more informed and compassionate understanding. By addressing these concerns with facts and empathy, we can work toward creating a society that is fair, inclusive, and safe for everyone.

(1) The issue of Trans women in women's Prisons:

Court Blocks Trump's Order to Send Transgender Women to Male Prisons:

It is deeply unfortunate that far-right religious groups have managed to undermine the rights of vulnerable transgender individuals. Equally concerning is the fact that supporting transgender rights has become a politically sensitive issue that could harm us. However, standing for justice should not be about short-term political gain. I firmly believe that protecting transgender people remains the right thing to do, regardless of the political cost.

Although this battle is ongoing, justice is ultimately on our side. A major step forward occurred when the courts blocked Trump’s directive that would have forced transgender women into male prisons. Reuters.

The ruling was based on several key points:

1. Transgender Women Face Extreme Harm in Male Prisons: Numerous government reports and legal rulings, including Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994), have confirmed that transgender individuals suffer significantly higher rates of physical and sexual violence when housed in prisons that match their biological sex rather than their gender identity. People are raped, and assaulted, and even killed for being trans. The Trump administration’s legal team did not even attempt to challenge this point in court, essentially conceding both the legal and moral argument.
2. Right-Wing Arguments Are Based on Rare Cases: The most common counterargument is that transgender women with a history of sexual offenses might pose a risk to female inmates. While there have been isolated cases, they are extremely rare compared to the widespread violence transgender women face in male prisons. The harm caused by placing transgender women in male facilities far outweighs the risk posed by the few cases where transgender offenders have committed crimes in female prisons.

Trans women, unlike cisgender men, undergo hormone therapy and take testosterone blockers, which significantly reduce their muscle mass and overall physical strength. This hormonal transition makes them physically more fragile, often bringing their strength levels closer to those of cisgender women rather than cis men.  

Because of this, placing trans women in men's prisons puts them at severe risk. In most cases, they are completely defenseless against the physical aggression of powerful cisgender male inmates, many of whom have histories of violent crime. Prisons are already environments where physical dominance plays a major role in survival, and trans women—lacking the biological advantages that cis men have—are often unable to protect themselves.  

This is why many human rights advocates argue that trans women should be housed in women's facilities. Ignoring these biological and medical realities can lead to severe consequences, including increased violence, assault, and psychological trauma and even killing for trans inmates.

Perfection Is Not Possible, but Solutions Exist

There is no 100% perfect God present in the heavens. Thus, our world is not 100% perfect. We face a lot of challenges, and we have to make a lot of compromises to survive in this imperfect world. 

Yet, far-right religious groups demand an unrealistic, absolute solution—one that simply denies the existence of transgender people. This refusal to acknowledge reality only deepens the suffering of transgender individuals, pushing many toward extreme distress and even suicide.

A practical approach must involve compromise. The possible solutions are:

1. Dedicated transgender prison facilities (a costly and logistically difficult option).

2. Placing trans women in male prisons (proven to be highly dangerous).

3. Placing trans women in female prisons while carefully monitoring behavior and, if necessary, transferring offenders to solitary confinement or male facilities—this was the previous policy before Trump’s orders.

Even if a transgender woman is not physically assaulted in a male prison, simply being forced to live as a man—being referred to as male, forced to wear male clothing, and subjected to male searches—causes significant psychological harm. Government reports and psychiatric studies confirm that this distress alone is enough to cause severe mental health issues.

When these reports were presented in court, once again, the Trump administration’s lawyers did not contest them. This marks another legal and moral defeat for those who seek to erase transgender identities.

The far-right’s refusal to accept scientific reality only worsens the suffering of transgender people. While there are risks with any policy, the solution should not be to ignore or erase an entire group’s rights. As history has shown, progress may be slow, but justice will ultimately prevail.

It is deeply troubling how the religious right approaches issues of gender and sexual violence. Their stance reveals contradictions and a deeper ideological motive:

1. 1. Selective Concern for Sexual Violence: They focus heavily on protecting cisgender women from sexual violence (which is, of course, important). However, they ignore or refuse to address the widespread sexual assault occurring between individuals of the same sex, especially in men’s prisons.
   2. Deliberate Harm to Trans People: They are fully aware that their policies will result in suffering for trans individuals. Instead of seeing this as an unintended consequence, they view it as an intentional and desirable outcome. Their goal is not just to exclude trans people but to erase them from public life entirely.

   3. Mocking and Dehumanizing Trans People: Rather than acknowledging the violence and discrimination trans people face, they trivialize and mock their suffering. They make jokes at the expense of trans individuals who are subjected to abuse.

   4. The Threat to Patriarchal Beliefs: Trans people disrupt long-held gender norms that religious conservatives see as divinely ordained. They believe gender is assigned at birth and should never be altered. Any deviation from these rigid roles is perceived as a direct challenge to "God’s plan."

   5. The Fear of Losing Control: Conservatives have invested deeply in the idea that gender roles are immutable and dictated by a higher power. If people are free to define their own identity, it undermines the authority of religious doctrine. They fear that without strict gender roles, society will descend into "chaos," as they believe God’s order is the foundation of civilization.

Far Right Argument: Reform Male Prisons Instead

A common argument from far-right religious groups is: "Why not reform male prisons instead of transferring trans women to women's prisons?"

Our Response: While prison reform is an important and necessary discussion, it is a separate issue from the immediate concerns we are addressing. Our focus here is on minimizing harm to transgender individuals within the current prison system. Reforming male prisons is a long-term goal, but it does not solve the urgent risks faced by trans women in male facilities today. We must prioritize their safety and well-being within the existing framework while advocating for broader systemic changes in the future.

Scandinavian countries, particularly Norway and Finland, have implemented mixed (unisex?) prisons. These systems often feature "open prisons," where inmates experience conditions that closely resemble life outside incarceration. In Norway, prisons like Halden are designed to simulate a village environment, promoting a sense of normalcy and community among inmates. This approach aims to prepare prisoners for successful reintegration into society upon release. Research indicates that these rehabilitative models have yielded positive outcomes. Centre for Economic Policy Research.

For individuals convicted of violent or aggressive crimes, separate wings or specialized confinement may be necessary. However, for non-violent offenders, a unisex prison system could offer a more humane and effective solution. 

(2) The Issue of Transgender Women in Sports

Once again, let us begin with the reminder that the world is not 100% perfect, as it has not been made by any 100% perfect god. We have to make COMPROMISES and find solutions (which may not be 100% perfect) in order to survive. 

So, what is the solution?

Option 1: Separate Sports Categories for Trans Women: One idea floating around is to create separate sports categories for transgender women, kind of like how we have separate events for cisgender men and women. On paper, this sounds inclusive, but let’s be honest—it’s not exactly practical. The costs and logistics of setting up entirely new categories would be a nightmare. Plus, it risks further isolating trans athletes instead of integrating them into the existing system. Do we really want to create more divisions in a world that’s already too divided?

Option 2: Trans Women Competing with Men: Another suggestion is to have transgender women compete in men’s categories. But here’s the thing: hormone replacement therapy (HRT) significantly lowers their testosterone levels and reduces muscle mass, bringing them in line with cisgender women. Forcing trans women to compete against men not only puts them at a physical disadvantage but also takes a huge toll on their mental and emotional well-being. Imagine being told you don’t belong in the category that aligns with your identity—it’s not just unfair, it’s downright cruel.

Option 3: Trans Women Competing with Cisgender Women: This option, while not perfect, might be the most balanced approach we have right now. Trans women on HRT have testosterone levels and muscle mass comparable to cisgender women. And let’s be clear: there’s little evidence to suggest they dominate women’s sports. In fact, they often lose more than they win—it’s just that the media loves to hype up their victories while ignoring their losses. This approach strikes a reasonable balance between inclusivity and fairness. It’s not about giving anyone an advantage; it’s about giving everyone a fair shot.

What About Cis Women with High Testosterone?

Consider the case of cisgender women like Imane Khelif, who are biologically female but naturally have higher testosterone levels than the average woman. Should such individuals be required to:

• Compete against cis men?
• Have their own category?
• Or be banned from sports altogether?

It’s a tricky question, and it highlights the fact that athletic performance varies widely even among cisgender athletes. Why single out trans women when natural variation is already part of the game? If we start policing testosterone levels, where do we draw the line?

Should we ban Michael Phelps because his body produces less lactic acid, giving him a natural edge in swimming? Of course not. So why are we so fixated on trans athletes?

Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) and Its Impact

Transgender athletes undergo Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT), which alters their muscle distribution and fat composition, effectively diminishing any biological advantages they may have had prior to transitioning. For transgender women, the physical changes brought about by HRT make them lose the muscle mass and strength typically associated with being assigned male at birth (AMAB). This process works to eliminate any inherent athletic advantages they may have had, aligning their athletic potential equal or at least very close to that of cisgender women.

In simple words, some cis women athletes may have more testosterone and muscle mass than trans women athletes who have undergone hormone therapy. Thus, there is no unfair advantage, as trans women often have even lower testosterone and muscle mass than many cis female athletes.  

If cis women with naturally higher levels of testosterone and muscles are allowed to compete, then why should trans women with lower levels be excluded?

Huge Variations Among Cisgender Athletes, where COMPROMISES were made

Please consider the following issues:

1. There are human populations or racial groups where individuals naturally tend to be lighter and shorter in stature, while others are generally taller and heavier. Despite this natural variation, a compromise has been made, allowing all groups to compete in the same sports events, even though those from shorter-statured populations may be at a disadvantage.
   
2. Even within the same population or racial group, some individuals are naturally taller, stronger, or faster than others. However, this natural variation in physical attributes doesn’t disqualify anyone from competing or imply that they unfairly disadvantage others. It is simply part of the diversity that exists in both sports and life.

Actually, this 2nd crucial point was raised in one scientific study. That study, titled Sex differences and athletic performance by D.J. Oberlin (you can check it out here) concludes that the ability to excel in sports is not solely determined by one’s sex. The study notes that within any given population, whether cisgender or transgender, there are individuals who exceed the average in terms of physical ability due to genetic and hormonal variations. These exceptional individuals may excel in their sport regardless of their sex or gender identity. Key findings from the study include:

• A small percentage of the population (around 2.3%) may NATURALLY excel in sports, regardless of their gender identity. They are naturally gifted—taller, stronger or faster than others. 
• Only 0.5%–0.6% of the population identifies as transgender. The idea that cis men would pretend to be trans women to dominate women’s sports is not only absurd but completely unfounded.

• HRT reduces or even eliminates many of the physical differences that develop during puberty. Trans women on HRT don’t have an unfair advantage—they’re playing on a level field.

• If trans women do excel in certain sports, should we really see that as unfair? Or is it just another example of natural variability, like how some athletes are born with freakish wingspans or superhuman endurance?

Only 10 Trans athelete in NCAA:

Lastly, the NCAA president told Congress in December that there are “less than 10” transgender athletes in the entire NCAA. Meanwhile, states with anti-trans laws have seen a 72% increase in suicide attempts among trans kids, according to an NPR story. Let that sink in. We’re arguing over a handful of athletes while real lives are at stake. Are we really okay with prioritizing hypothetical fairness in sports over the mental health and survival of trans youth?

"You know my child is dead," Kentucky Senator Karen Berg said at the statehouse during the debate over that state's anti-trans bill in Feb. 2023. Her transgender son had died by suicide two months earlier at age 24. "Your vote yes on this bill means one of two things: either you believe that trans children do not exist, or you believe that trans children do not deserve to exist."

History: How Solutions were found to include Women's Sports in Olympics

The Olympic Games originated in Ancient Greece around 776 BCE, held in Olympia as a competition exclusively for men. Women were strictly banned—not only from competing but also from watching the games if they were married. The Greeks saw sports as a display of male strength and heroism, believing that women had no role in such competitions.

Despite these restrictions, some women still found ways to participate. The Heraean Games, dedicated to the goddess Hera, allowed women to compete in limited athletic events, primarily foot races. However, these games were never given the same recognition or prestige as the men’s Olympics.

When the modern Olympic Games were revived in 1896 by Pierre de Coubertin, women were still banned from participation. At the time, people argued that sports were too physically demanding for women and that their inclusion would disrupt the tradition of competition. This mirrors today's arguments against transgender women in sports—both groups have been framed as a challenge to the established order.

It wasn't until the 1900 Paris Olympics that women were finally allowed to compete, but only in a few events considered "suitable" for them, such as tennis and golf. Over time, more sports opened up to women as society recognized the need for inclusivity. Adjustments were made, such as creating separate women's categories and securing financial support, to ensure fair participation.

Women’s inclusion in sports did not come from a perfect system—it evolved through continuous efforts to find solutions that made competition fair and sustainable. Despite early claims that women’s participation would be unfair to men, that they were biologically weaker, or that they might ruin the integrity of sports, society found ways to accommodate them. The same process can be applied to transgender athletes today, proving that sports can and should evolve to become more inclusive.

(3) The Issue of Transgender Women in Bathrooms and Toilets

Let us begin with this reminder that there is no 100% perfect God present in the heavens. Thus, our world is not 100% perfect. We face a lot of challenges, and we have to make a lot of compromises to survive in this imperfect world. 

Secondly, let’s also talk about something that’s been blown way out of proportion: the idea that transgender girls are a threat to cisgender girls in bathrooms. Spoiler alert: there’s no real evidence to back this up. In fact, the data shows that transgender people are far more likely to be the victims of harassment and violence than the perpetrators. But let’s break it down.

Studies: It is only a false propaganda that Transgender women assaulted and raped cis women in Bathrooms

First off, the whole narrative that transgender women or girls are going to assault cisgender women in bathrooms? It’s just not true. Multiple studies and law enforcement reports have looked into this, and they’ve found no evidence of transgender individuals committing assaults in bathrooms or locker rooms.

For example, a 2018 study checked crime data in states with inclusive bathroom policies and found zero increase in incidents of assault or harassment. So, this fear? It’s based on myths, not facts.

Note: Please be aware of false propaganda. For example, look at this news where it was falsely claimed that a trans girl raped a cis girl in a school bathroom. Later it was found to be a false news and no evidence was found that the perpetrator identified as a trans girl or that he wore a skirt or kilt in an effort to gain access to the girls’ bathrooms.

Actually, trans women are being sexually assaulted when they are forced to use men's bathrooms

Here’s the thing: the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults and harassment in bathrooms are committed by cisgender people, not transgender individuals. Let that sink in. The idea that allowing transgender people to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity is somehow dangerous? It doesn’t hold up. In reality, it’s transgender people who are at risk when they’re forced into unsafe situations.

Let’s talk about what actually happens when transgender students are forced to use bathrooms that don’t align with their gender identity. Spoiler: it’s not good.

• Harassment and Bullying:
  Transgender kids who are forced to use the wrong bathrooms often face verbal harassment, physical intimidation, and social ostracism. Imagine being a teenager already struggling with your identity, and then being bullied just for trying to use the bathroom. It creates a hostile environment that can seriously harm their mental health and academic performance.

• Sexual Assault:
  It gets worse. There have been reports of transgender girls being sexually assaulted or even raped in boys’ bathrooms or locker rooms. For example, in 2014, a transgender girl in California was assaulted by a male student in a school bathroom after being forced to use facilities that didn’t align with her gender identity. Stories like this highlight just how vulnerable transgender students are when they’re put in these situations.

Here’s the good news: schools and institutions that have implemented inclusive bathroom policies haven’t seen an increase in safety issues. In fact, many school districts across the U.S. have allowed transgender students to use the facilities that match their gender identity for years, and guess what? No problems. It’s almost like treating people with respect and dignity actually works. 

At the end of the day, the fear that transgender girls might assault cisgender girls in bathrooms is just not supported by evidence. What is supported by evidence is that transgender individuals are more likely to be victims of harassment and violence in these spaces. Forcing them into the wrong bathrooms doesn’t protect anyone—it just puts transgender people at greater risk.