On Creating a Place, Space and Time for the Trans Athlete

The two concepts are inextricably linked: access and equity. Each are so often paired in discussions and organizational structures that one could confuse them as one and the same. Nevertheless, each connotes something different, even if the goal of inclusion undergirds both. Access pertains to having a space for all to participate and, ideally succeed — whether that is in an of fi ce space, voting booth, or athletic arena. Equity pertains to the fairness within that opportunity, ensuring a level playing fi eld in which no one enters the equation with an inherent advantage or impediment to achievement. Both are worthy pursuits that must be honored and elevated within any society. But what happens when the terms are pitted against one another, with access and equity seen as a zero-sum game? That appears to be what is unfolding in many aspects of today ’ s society as it relates to the trans athlete. Such debates often are formed on the crucial distinction of what is most important in the sporting sphere: (a) providing a place for all to be included or (b) ensuring that those entering a competitive space are competing on fair physiological footing. Those advancing access-based arguments equate banning trans athletes from a sporting competition as heresy to the presumption that sports should provide a playing fi eld open to all. Those advancing equity-arguments often prioritize the reasons for biological sex divisions in sports using the rationale of fairness in competition and pointing to biological markers such as testosterone, muscle mass, and respiratory systems. We do not claim to have the scienti fi c knowledge to navigate this dif fi cult terrain, but we do believe Communication & Sport can be a place to discuss and interrogate valid claims from hyperbole as well as the legitimate concern from the moral panic. If a primary aim of cultivation theory is to uncover the manner in which communication can