Former WNBA star Sue Bird and U.S. soccer icon Megan Rapinoe are among the latest high-profile athletes to publicly criticize the International Olympic Committee (IOC) following its sweeping new policy restricting transgender participation in women’s Olympic events.
The policy, announced in March, limits eligibility in women’s categories to athletes deemed biologically female through a one-time SRY gene test. The IOC has defended the rule as “evidence-based” and necessary to preserve fairness and safety in competition.
RELATED: IOC Bars Trans Women From 2028 Olympics, Mandates Genetic Testing
However, Bird dismissed the rationale behind the decision, calling it “fearmongering” during a conversation on Rapinoe’s podcast. She argued the issue of transgender inclusion is being exaggerated for political gain rather than grounded in actual problems within women’s sports.
“It’s not solving a problem that exists,” Bird said, echoing comments from nonbinary Olympic runner Nikki Hiltz, who has also criticized the policy.
Rapinoe, a longtime advocate for LGBTQ+ inclusion, went further, questioning the scientific legitimacy of the IOC’s approach. She described the rule as invasive and suggested it disproportionately targets a very small group of athletes while reinforcing broader political narratives around gender.
The IOC’s decision marks a significant shift from its previous stance, which allowed individual sports federations to set their own eligibility rules. Now, the centralized policy will apply across Olympic events beginning with the 2028 Games in Los Angeles.
Supporters of the policy argue it is necessary to maintain competitive equity in women’s sports. The IOC has cited research suggesting that athletes who have undergone male puberty may retain certain physical advantages, even after hormone therapy.
But critics, including human rights organizations and medical experts, have pushed back on both the science and implementation. Concerns have been raised about the accuracy of SRY gene testing and the broader implications of reintroducing sex verification practices, which were largely abandoned decades ago due to ethical and scientific limitations.
The policy has also drawn scrutiny for its political context. It aligns with broader efforts by the administration of Donald Trump, which previously issued an executive order restricting transgender participation in sports and has advocated for similar measures internationally.
As the debate continues, Bird and Rapinoe’s comments highlight a growing divide within the sports world. While some athletes and organizations support stricter eligibility rules, others warn that such policies risk excluding already marginalized competitors and reshaping women’s sports in ways that extend far beyond fairness.
