Fair and/but discriminatory? The use of fairness and discrimination in trans* athletes debates

Debates around trans* athletes and their participation in sports competitions tend to appeal to two very broad concepts – fairness and discrimination. According to recent empirical studies, both trans*-exclusionary and trans*-inclusionary proponents seem to use the notion of "fairness" while arguing for their respective sides; similarly, both sides refer to discrimination, either painting the policy as one discriminating against trans individuals or cisgender women. How is it that both sides use the same concepts? This study aims to explore the meanings behind the concepts of fairness and discrimination within debates on trans* athletes and investigate the relationship between the two notions in laypeople's perceptions. I argue that within the debates, people use two understandings of fairness – fairness as in "fair play" and fairness as in non-discriminatory treatment. Those fairness concerns can co-exist; however, the exclusionary and inclusionary narratives differ in the application of each understanding. Furthermore, I argue that discrimination is also conceptualized in two ways, as direct and indirect differential treatment. In both accounts, discrimination is used in a moralized sense. Inspired by the Xphi literature, I test these claims in an empirical study that aims to demonstrate people's intuitions in policy assessment. Within a survey-based experiment, I manipulate the salience of the "fair play" concern and ask participants to assess a policy regulating the participation of trans* athletes in elite sports competitions across three concepts: how fair, discriminatory, and wrongful the policy is. I hypothesize that irrespective of attitudes toward trans* individuals and experimental conditions, people will provide cohesive assessments across the three measures (low fairness – high discrimination – high wrongfulness, or vice versa). I further hypothesize that trans* inclusionary policies in high "fair play" concern condition will show a lower average for fairness (and higher averages for discrimination and wrongfulness) compared to low "fair play" concern vignette. The results highlight the conceptual irregularities in current debates on trans* athletes and their rights, pointing to factors other than individual prejudice towards trans* individuals that contribute to the polarization on the topic.