Seattle Times says there is no serious scientific evidence trans athletes hold an advantage over women
Coverage of Initiative 638
The Seattle Times examined the decisive support for Initiative 638, a Washington measure barring biological males from girls’ K-12 sports. Its report considered whether voters acted out of concern for fairness in women’s sports or prejudice against transgender people.
The account says the newspaper included voices from both sides. It focuses its criticism on a paragraph about scientific evidence and athletic advantages.
Disputed scientific claim
The writer calls the paragraph striking and challenges its suggestion that there is no serious scientific evidence of an advantage. The account argues that studies have found physical differences can remain after hormone therapy.
It refers to a 2020 review in Sports Medicine. The review found transgender women typically lost 5% of muscle mass after one year of testosterone suppression, according to the account.
Debate over fairness
The article connects the scientific dispute to wider arguments about women’s sports and transgender athletes. It also describes Washington voters’ support for keeping girls’ K-12 sports separate from boys’ sports under Initiative 638.
The writer’s criticism is presented alongside the Times’ effort to explore competing explanations for the vote. The account does not provide further details about the disputed paragraph’s wording or the newspaper’s response.
Key points
- Initiative 638 bars biological males from girls’ K-12 sports in Washington.
- The Seattle Times explored reasons voters backed the measure.
- The account challenges a paragraph about scientific evidence and athletic advantages.
- A cited 2020 review reported about 5% muscle-mass loss after a year of testosterone suppression.