World Athletics plans pre-clearance testing of female category track and field athletes
World Athletics plans to introduce biological pre-clearance tests for track and field athletes before they can compete in the female category, the sport's governing body announced Tuesday.
These tests will screen athletes' genetic samples to determine whether they contain the SRY gene, or 'a genetic surrogate for a Y chromosome,' according to the organization.
The decision comes following a World Athletics Council meeting where the council agreed to adopt multiple recommended conditions of 'eligibility in the female category.'
World Athletics president Sebastian Coe said the tests will be 'non-invasive' during a Tuesday press conference.
'Cheek swab or dry blood tests,' Coe said. 'It's along the lines of something that will be administered once in the career of an athlete, a female athlete.'
Coe said the organization is still looking for a provider to carry out the tests.
'We will doggedly protect the female category, and we'll do whatever is necessary to do it, and we're not just talking about it,' Coe told reporters.
'Preserving the integrity of competition in the female category is a fundamental principle of the sport of athletics,' World Athletics said in a Tuesday press release.
The organization added, 'The majority of stakeholders consulted last month on the proposed new eligibility conditions for the female category agreed that allowing only biological female athletes to compete in the female category was essential to maintaining fairness.'
Coe reiterated this standpoint during the press conference.
'This we feel is a really important way of providing confidence and maintaining that absolute focus on the integrity of competition.'
Transgender athletes' participation in women's sport has been a topical subject of late.
President Donald Trump took executive action in February to deliver on a political issue central to his 2024 campaign: banning transgender women from competing in women's sports.
Trump signed an executive order titled 'Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports' surrounded by dozens of women and some young girls in athletic uniforms.
'With this executive order, the war on women's sports is over,' the president said.
The order is two-pronged, leaning on compliance with Title IX, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities that receive funding from the federal government, as well as federal engagement with the private sector.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
38 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' Advertisement The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. Advertisement 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Fox Sports
3 hours ago
- Fox Sports
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, claiming it violates Title IX
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. "We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion," Hare said. "Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports." The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. "This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes," Hare said. "Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case." The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Reporting by The Associated Press. Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily ! FOLLOW Follow your favorites to personalize your FOX Sports experience NCAA Women's Soccer NCAA Women's Volleyball NCAA Women's Track and Field recommended Get more from College Football Follow your favorites to get information about games, news and more
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___ AP college sports: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
