本文選自《經濟學人》20201017期
今年10月9日，世界橄欖球聯合會宣布，將禁止跨性別女性運動員參加國際橄欖球女子比賽，這一消息隨後引發了人們的熱議。目前，國際奧委會以睪酮激素水平為標準對跨性別女性運動員參加女子比賽項目加以限制，但這一做法也飽受爭議。那麼，跨性別女性運動員究竟該不該參加女子比賽呢?
Letting trans women play in women’s sports is often unfair
允許跨性別女性運動員參加女子比賽往往有失公平
Other sports could learn from World Rugby’s approach
其他體育項目或可借鑑世界橄欖球聯合會的做法
On october 9th World Rugby, the global governing body for rugby union, announced that it would bar transgender women—people born male, but who identify as women—from playing in the international women’s game. The decision drew condemnation from some quarters and praise from others; England’s rugby authorities have already said they will carry on allowing trans women to play at all other levels of the game within England.
10月9日，全球橄欖球聯盟主管機構——世界橄欖球聯合會宣布，將禁止跨性別女性(即出生時為男性，但後來變性為女性)參加國際橄欖球女子比賽。有人對這一決定表示譴責，但也有人表示支持;英格蘭橄欖球協會已經表示，他們將繼續允許跨性別女性參加英格蘭境內的所有其他級別的橄欖球比賽。
It puts World Rugby at odds with the International Olympic Committee (IOC), whose rules allow trans women to compete in women’s Olympic events, and with several other sports that have followed the IOC’s guidance. Trans women competitors have enjoyed success in sports including weightlifting, cycling and athletics. Yet World Rugby’s decision to exclude them was the right one. Other sports should follow its lead.
這一決定將使世界橄欖球聯合會與國際奧林匹克委員會的規則相悖，國際奧委會目前允許跨性別女性運動員參加奧運會的所有女子比賽項目。跨性別女性運動員如今在舉重、自行車和田徑等體育項目上都取得了優異的成績。但世界橄欖球聯合會將「她們」排除在外的決定是正確的，其他體育項目也應該這麼做。
The first thing they should note is how the decision was made. The debate over transgender rights, especially online, can be extremely bad-tempered and poisonous. World Rugby brought scientists, ethicists, athletes and lawyers together in person, to present calmer arguments directly to the sport’s administrators. Those presentations were made public, in the interests of transparency. And the decision relied, as far as possible, on the evidence.
首先應該注意的是，這一決定是如何做出的。有關跨性別者權利的問題尤其在網上引發了激烈的討論，人們甚至為此惡語相向。世界橄欖球聯合會邀請科學家、倫理學家、運動員和律師一道前來，向這項運動的管理者提出了深思熟慮的建議。整個討論過程都是公開透明的。而最終的決定也儘可能基於事實證據。
They should also note what that evidence shows. It came in two strands. One confirmed what everyday experience suggests. Most males are bigger, faster and stronger than most females; some males are bigger, faster or stronger than any female.
人們應該注意到這些證據所說明的問題，主要來自於兩個方面。其一主要來自於日常經驗的啟示。男性大多比女性有著更大的體格、更快的速度和更強壯的肌肉;而有些男性的身體素質佔據著絕對優勢。
The second concerned the role of testosterone, the male sex hormone and anabolic steroid that is responsible for much of that sporting advantage. The IOC permits trans women to compete in women’s events only if they suppress the amount of testosterone circulating in their blood.
其二是關於睪酮的作用，這是一種男性性激素和合成代謝類膽固醇，它是男性具有運動優勢的主要原因。國際奧委會雖然允許跨性別女性參加女子比賽項目，但前提是她們必須控制血液中的睪酮含量在一定範圍內。
The evidence presented to World Rugby was not perfect, but it was enough to suggest strongly that this compromise does not work. Suppressing testosterone appears to have only a minor impact on strength—too small to undo the advantages bestowed by male puberty. And no amount of hormone therapy can shrink skeletons.
世界橄欖球聯合會給出的證據並不充分，但足以證明國際奧委會的這種妥協是不合適的。抑制睪酮含量對於力量的影響微乎其微，並不足以抵消男性青春期所帶來的體能優勢。再大劑量的激素也無法使骨骼縮小。
That was enough for World Rugby to decide that the risk posed by trans women to other players in the women’s game would be too great. It has said it is ready to fund more research and will review its decision regularly. But in a risky sport already worried about the long-term impact of common injuries like concussion, its conclusion makes sense.
這足以促使世界橄欖球聯合會認定，跨性別女性在女子比賽項目中對其他選手構成了太大的風險。世界橄欖球聯合會已經表示，將為更多相關研究提供資金，並會定期對這項決議進行評估。但就橄欖球這樣一項常見傷病(例如腦震蕩)會給運動員帶來長期影響的高風險運動而言，世界橄欖球聯合會的決定是完全合理的。
That evidence matters for non-contact sports, too, for it also concerns fairness. Women’s sport exists precisely to exclude males. That is true at both the elite level, where rewards are greatest, and at the recreational one, where the vast majority of sport is actually played. Without it, half the population would be left struggling against an insurmountable advantage granted by mere biological chance to the other half.
這些證據對於非接觸類運動也有著重要的意義，因為它還涉及到公平性問題。單獨設置女子項目的目的正是為了將男性排除在外。無論是獎勵豐厚的專業比賽還是大眾參與的業餘比賽，都是如此。如果不進行區分，那麼有一半人將不得不與另一半具有絕對優勢的人相競爭，而這種優勢僅僅是由生物機會所賦予的。
If testosterone suppression cannot remove that advantage, then it is unjust for those who still possess it to compete against those who never did. (It is worth noting that this leaves room for trans men—those born female—to play in men’s sports if they wish, since they possess no biological advantage, and in contact sports are unlikely to pose a danger to their fellow competitors.)
如果抑制睪酮水平無法消除這種優勢，那麼讓那些仍然擁有睪酮的人與那些不曾擁有睪酮的人相競爭是不公平的。(值得注意的是，跨性別男性——即出生時為女性，但後來變性為男性——如果願意是可以參加男子比賽項目的，這是因為他們不具有生理優勢，並且在接觸類運動中也不會對其他競爭對手構成威脅。)
Advocates for trans women often argue that inclusion should trump such worries. But sport is a zero-sum game, which means inclusion cuts both ways. If trans women possess a biological advantage, then allowing them to compete risks depriving others of victories they might otherwise have won, or a place in a team they might otherwise have earned.
跨性別女性的支持者們常說，人們應該更多去包容，而不該過度擔憂。但體育本身是一場零和遊戲，這意味著包容對雙方都不公平。如果跨性別女性確實具有生理上的優勢，那麼允許她們參加比賽就有可能剝奪他人原本可以取得的勝利，或是搶 佔了團隊中原本屬於他人的位置。
Most sports acknowledge that trade-off, at least in principle. The IOC itself notes that 「the overriding sporting objective is and remains the guarantee of fair competition.」 It is, in the end, simply a question of fact whether testosterone suppression can guarantee that fair competition in practice. And the evidence so far suggests it cannot.
大多數體育運動至少在原則上承認這種取捨。國際奧委會也指出，「一直以來，體育運動最重要的目標是保證公平競爭。」但從目前來看，這一目標並未實現。
condemnation [ˌkɑːndemˈneɪʃn] n. 譴責;定罪
suppress [səˈpres] vt. 抑制;鎮壓;廢止
compromise [ˈkɑːmprəmaɪz]
n. 和解 v. 妥協;折中
puberty [ˈpjuːbərti] n. 青春期;開花期
concussion [kənˈkʌʃn] n. 衝擊;震蕩;腦震蕩
insurmountable [ˌɪnsərˈmaʊntəbl]
adj. 不能超越的;難以對付的
trade-off [ˈtreɪd ɔːf] n. 交換;取捨;權衡