What do you think?
Rate this book
Let Us Play: Winning the Battle for Gender Diverse Athletes
A crucial subversion of the misconceptions around the participation of gender diverse athletes—advocating for the inclusion of trans and nonbinary athletes across all levels of sport
The debate over the inclusion of gender diverse people in sport has become the latest battleground in the fight for basic human rights and equality. Trans and nonbinary people around the world are facing physical harm and violence—including death—at unprecedented rates. In Let Us Play, trans athlete Harrison Browne and investigative journalist Rachel Browne reveal how the opposition towards gender diverse athletes is fueled by fear and a moral panic as opposed to facts around what makes “a level playing field.”
Interweaving Harrison’s first-hand experience as a transgender athlete with exclusive accounts—from athletes, coaches, policymakers, and advocates on the front lines—Let Us Play dismantles the illusion that sports have ever been fair, that trans athletes pose a threat to women’s sports, and that gender-affirming healthcare for athletes should be prohibitive to play.
Calling for a reframing of the binaries from youth and high school levels all the way to the national leagues, Browne and Browne offer a new path forward, led by solutions proposed by gender diverse athletes themselves.
The debate over the inclusion of gender diverse people in sport has become the latest battleground in the fight for basic human rights and equality. Trans and nonbinary people around the world are facing physical harm and violence—including death—at unprecedented rates. In Let Us Play, trans athlete Harrison Browne and investigative journalist Rachel Browne reveal how the opposition towards gender diverse athletes is fueled by fear and a moral panic as opposed to facts around what makes “a level playing field.”
Interweaving Harrison’s first-hand experience as a transgender athlete with exclusive accounts—from athletes, coaches, policymakers, and advocates on the front lines—Let Us Play dismantles the illusion that sports have ever been fair, that trans athletes pose a threat to women’s sports, and that gender-affirming healthcare for athletes should be prohibitive to play.
Calling for a reframing of the binaries from youth and high school levels all the way to the national leagues, Browne and Browne offer a new path forward, led by solutions proposed by gender diverse athletes themselves.
232 pages, Hardcover
First published May 27, 2025
32 people are currently reading
2811 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 22 reviews
November 14, 2025
A valuable read, co-written by a transgender former professional hockey player and his journalist sister, this encompasses elements of memoir with a more journalistic exploration of the inclusion of trans and non-binary people in sport. The authors add much needed nuance and reflection. Some things I appreciated reading:
- the authors situate the current ‘debate’ about trans athletes within the framework of past ‘moral panics,’ ie media focusing attention on behaviour by a group of people, with a gap between the perceived and actual threat, with the resultant hysteria potentially leading to far-reaching legal changes
- the diverse experiences of past and present trans and non-binary athletes, as well as young trans and non-binary people and their families who just want them to be able to benefit from all sport has to offer
- an interesting exploration of what ‘fairness’ in sport really means, noting for example the impact of socioeconomic backgrounds and even birth month on success and performance
- the lack of robust data on the relationship between hormones and athletic performance (not surprising that when policymakers and others wade in with what they insist is common sense, it’s not always grounded in the evidence)
- teasing apart some of the biases in the idea that women in sport must be ‘protected’ by the exclusion of trans people
- reflection on and discussion of locker room culture, both the negatives and the positives
- thinking about what sport is actually for, and what it can do for those involved, beyond a narrow focus on winning, including increasing people’s sense of comfort in their own bodies and inclusion within communities and peer groups.
Lots of helpful information and food for thought and conversation. It also made me really sad that even in the brief time since this was published, the situation has deteriorated so dishearteningly. I looked up a couple of the families of trans kids who spoke with the authors, and see they are now feeling compelled to leave their homes and move to new states. The authors also write about swimmer Lia Thomas, who became the focus of so much anti-trans rhetoric, and whose swimming records have since been erased. I hope people will read this book and share insights from it.
- the authors situate the current ‘debate’ about trans athletes within the framework of past ‘moral panics,’ ie media focusing attention on behaviour by a group of people, with a gap between the perceived and actual threat, with the resultant hysteria potentially leading to far-reaching legal changes
- the diverse experiences of past and present trans and non-binary athletes, as well as young trans and non-binary people and their families who just want them to be able to benefit from all sport has to offer
- an interesting exploration of what ‘fairness’ in sport really means, noting for example the impact of socioeconomic backgrounds and even birth month on success and performance
- the lack of robust data on the relationship between hormones and athletic performance (not surprising that when policymakers and others wade in with what they insist is common sense, it’s not always grounded in the evidence)
- teasing apart some of the biases in the idea that women in sport must be ‘protected’ by the exclusion of trans people
- reflection on and discussion of locker room culture, both the negatives and the positives
- thinking about what sport is actually for, and what it can do for those involved, beyond a narrow focus on winning, including increasing people’s sense of comfort in their own bodies and inclusion within communities and peer groups.
Lots of helpful information and food for thought and conversation. It also made me really sad that even in the brief time since this was published, the situation has deteriorated so dishearteningly. I looked up a couple of the families of trans kids who spoke with the authors, and see they are now feeling compelled to leave their homes and move to new states. The authors also write about swimmer Lia Thomas, who became the focus of so much anti-trans rhetoric, and whose swimming records have since been erased. I hope people will read this book and share insights from it.
June 2, 2025
How should we engage with the question of gender diverse and transgender participation in sports? This is not simply about answering the question at the heart of the topic itself, but asking ourselves
how
to answer it.
Let's start off with some meta-reflective prompts. What do we really know? Should we shake our heads and toss the text aside, digging our heals in and asserting what we "already know" or "feel in our hearts"? Should we go along with the crowd—whichever crowd we favour—without a second thought? Why are we certain there is an answer? Do we have enough information to say? And on which points in particular? Do we really understand all matters involved, from what it means to be trans and/or gender diverse to what it means to be an athlete or simply a participant in sport?
What I'd like to drive home from the start is the meta-level issue of how we engage with this topic, regardless of whatever position we have, now or in the future.
The authors are attuned to this issue. They are so reflective and in sync with this idea that they admit boldly that it was difficult to write this text, and together, and that the process involved brushing up against uncomfortable assumptions and disagreements and a few shocks when it comes to "what is known" (primarily from a research perspective).
We should enter this text prepared for some level of ambiguity and accept the present unknowns.
Part of the challenge is the sheer lack of research on trans and gender diverse athletes (or really, trans and gender diverse people in general). This is compounded by the small numbers we're dealing with. There are so few trans and gender diverse athletes that running the typical studies we'd need to find generalizable results is extremely difficult. On top of that, one of the uncomfortable truths revealed here is a level of bias in who is motivated to carry out such research. In one case, a runner-researcher who transitioned later in life uses herself as a test subject, part of an already small pool of similar subjects, with some shaky methods that don't account for bias. Yet, this was the best available research at the time.
What we need is research: big numbers, bias-controlled experiments, pre-registered hypotheses, open data, open science.
Sadly, this is not likely to happen any time soon, at least in the cesspool that the States has become. And this is a problem for the world, given the nation's power and participation in global sports. Politics and bigoted scapegoating have killed federal funding in the one place that would normally have all the resources to carry out this work. Hear me: All other nations who can to step up must do so and potentially pool resources to get the work done.
Now let's turn to what we do know.
Contrary to popular belief, scientific evidence does not suggest whether, or to what degree, hormone levels consistently grant competitive advantage.
So, we don't know. They don't know. You don't know. Let's internalize this for now. Let it spark our curiosity. We all want to know!
We can, however, take what little evidence there is, within and beyond science. The authors cover the famous case of Semenya, who is intersex and identifies as a woman. One point struck me, a point that I think makes clear how illusory these ideas of sex and gender really are. The authors write:
Semenya has said that her biology should be praised the same way Michael Phelps's arms are, Michael Jordan's height is, or Usain Bolt's wider-than-average stride is. Nobody is suggesting any measures be taken—certainly not impositions entailing invasive medical procedures or drugs—to address Phelps's, Jordan's, or Bolt's advantages.
When we gender and sex these "biological advantages" in non-cismasculine ways, suddenly they're a problem. That should bring us up short. All this reveals is the privilege of being a gender-conforming cis man with a non-intersex masculine body .... and how vilified all other bodies are.
Another point that struck me is how the conversation is almost exclusively focused on trans women. How about trans men? Here's where sexism enters the picture. "Of course 'women' are no threat!" I loved how the authors tackled this. Did you know that trans men in the US Air Force outperform cis men when it comes to sit-ups? The idea that "a body assigned female at birth is supposed to be weaker than a body assigned male," one that goes through "a testosterone-driven puberty" (a major "reason" why trans women are excluded) is mere sexist slurp. Otherwise, there's a lot of variation that evens out after about a year of testosterone. Why aren't people more excited about Patricio Manuel defeating cis men 3-1? Hm ... think about that.
Yes, hormones seem to matter, although it's complicated. Internalized sexism occurs among trans women who believe that women will get weaker on hormones. But anecdotal accounts from those who move past that mental barrier show that, with effort, they can regain core strength. Examples are covered in the book.
Now, to the main point: Inclusion. The authors roughly divide the problem of inclusion into two: non-pro and pro sports. All of the available evidence is in favour of full inclusion of kids in the sports they want to play, on the (gendered) team they identify with. Read the text for all of the details, including what research is still missing.
On the pro front, what's the solution? We know that bodies differentiate after puberty and in adulthood, for various reasons. We know that hormones play some role, although it's murky and inconsistent (as far as we understand it). There's at least two solutions on the table. One is a gender-free format, where participation is based on skill and body type regardless of gender. Let's not forget that divisions exist in male-dominated sports because when boys grow up, their bodies and abilities change, and they simply can't compete with all other men. The meta-level question here is: Why is this based on gender? On a personal note, this is a solution that I've proposed several times to gentle naysayers, only to have it go in one ear and out the other. If that was you, especially if you claim to "support trans people," pause and reflect: Why are you dismissing this solution? I won't speculate here.
The other option is spaces for trans and gender diverse athletes only: teams, tracks, and events. In fact, this might be the more popular option overall, but for very different reasons. A survey of 2,513 non-binary Canadian youth found that 66% desire this and actually avoid joining team sports because they would have to choose a binary gendered team. But guess what? This has already been tried (e.g., for swimming) and nobody showed up. We can only speculate why at this time.
An inclusion-first mentality, rather than succumbing to a scarcity mentality and creating barriers, is the only way forward.
This is the authors' thesis. Rather than rehash everything in the book, I encourage the reader to read it and read deeply. Let's keep in mind that trans and gender diverse athletes and their allies are typically placed at the lower rungs of power. When powerful nations like Russia, which have deemed LGBTQ+ support "extremism" and imprison supporters, also participate in sports on the international stage, this can drastically shift how trans and gender diverse folk are treated. One hockey player from Russia can refuse to wear a jersey expressing support for queer people on a Pride Night, citing "religious" reasons, causing a ban on all pride-touting across the NHL ... and then a straight cis male player can use his power to wear a pride pin anyways, an excellent display of allyship ... but also a deeply troubling revelation about how little power queer people hold and how easily swayed the masses are towards bigotry.
The authors leave us with a challenge: Name one trans woman athlete who has an Olympic medal. Bet you can't. So, where is the threat of unfairness, really, except in the minds of presumptive bigots? If that's you, I hope that makes you feel very, very uncomfortable ... and prompts you to rethink how you draw conclusions about the world and the most vulnerable people in it.
____
Original post on May 28:
This book is under attack by trolls. I’ll have a proper and certainly more cogent review later.
Let's start off with some meta-reflective prompts. What do we really know? Should we shake our heads and toss the text aside, digging our heals in and asserting what we "already know" or "feel in our hearts"? Should we go along with the crowd—whichever crowd we favour—without a second thought? Why are we certain there is an answer? Do we have enough information to say? And on which points in particular? Do we really understand all matters involved, from what it means to be trans and/or gender diverse to what it means to be an athlete or simply a participant in sport?
What I'd like to drive home from the start is the meta-level issue of how we engage with this topic, regardless of whatever position we have, now or in the future.
The authors are attuned to this issue. They are so reflective and in sync with this idea that they admit boldly that it was difficult to write this text, and together, and that the process involved brushing up against uncomfortable assumptions and disagreements and a few shocks when it comes to "what is known" (primarily from a research perspective).
We should enter this text prepared for some level of ambiguity and accept the present unknowns.
Part of the challenge is the sheer lack of research on trans and gender diverse athletes (or really, trans and gender diverse people in general). This is compounded by the small numbers we're dealing with. There are so few trans and gender diverse athletes that running the typical studies we'd need to find generalizable results is extremely difficult. On top of that, one of the uncomfortable truths revealed here is a level of bias in who is motivated to carry out such research. In one case, a runner-researcher who transitioned later in life uses herself as a test subject, part of an already small pool of similar subjects, with some shaky methods that don't account for bias. Yet, this was the best available research at the time.
What we need is research: big numbers, bias-controlled experiments, pre-registered hypotheses, open data, open science.
Sadly, this is not likely to happen any time soon, at least in the cesspool that the States has become. And this is a problem for the world, given the nation's power and participation in global sports. Politics and bigoted scapegoating have killed federal funding in the one place that would normally have all the resources to carry out this work. Hear me: All other nations who can to step up must do so and potentially pool resources to get the work done.
Now let's turn to what we do know.
Contrary to popular belief, scientific evidence does not suggest whether, or to what degree, hormone levels consistently grant competitive advantage.
So, we don't know. They don't know. You don't know. Let's internalize this for now. Let it spark our curiosity. We all want to know!
We can, however, take what little evidence there is, within and beyond science. The authors cover the famous case of Semenya, who is intersex and identifies as a woman. One point struck me, a point that I think makes clear how illusory these ideas of sex and gender really are. The authors write:
Semenya has said that her biology should be praised the same way Michael Phelps's arms are, Michael Jordan's height is, or Usain Bolt's wider-than-average stride is. Nobody is suggesting any measures be taken—certainly not impositions entailing invasive medical procedures or drugs—to address Phelps's, Jordan's, or Bolt's advantages.
When we gender and sex these "biological advantages" in non-cismasculine ways, suddenly they're a problem. That should bring us up short. All this reveals is the privilege of being a gender-conforming cis man with a non-intersex masculine body .... and how vilified all other bodies are.
Another point that struck me is how the conversation is almost exclusively focused on trans women. How about trans men? Here's where sexism enters the picture. "Of course 'women' are no threat!" I loved how the authors tackled this. Did you know that trans men in the US Air Force outperform cis men when it comes to sit-ups? The idea that "a body assigned female at birth is supposed to be weaker than a body assigned male," one that goes through "a testosterone-driven puberty" (a major "reason" why trans women are excluded) is mere sexist slurp. Otherwise, there's a lot of variation that evens out after about a year of testosterone. Why aren't people more excited about Patricio Manuel defeating cis men 3-1? Hm ... think about that.
Yes, hormones seem to matter, although it's complicated. Internalized sexism occurs among trans women who believe that women will get weaker on hormones. But anecdotal accounts from those who move past that mental barrier show that, with effort, they can regain core strength. Examples are covered in the book.
Now, to the main point: Inclusion. The authors roughly divide the problem of inclusion into two: non-pro and pro sports. All of the available evidence is in favour of full inclusion of kids in the sports they want to play, on the (gendered) team they identify with. Read the text for all of the details, including what research is still missing.
On the pro front, what's the solution? We know that bodies differentiate after puberty and in adulthood, for various reasons. We know that hormones play some role, although it's murky and inconsistent (as far as we understand it). There's at least two solutions on the table. One is a gender-free format, where participation is based on skill and body type regardless of gender. Let's not forget that divisions exist in male-dominated sports because when boys grow up, their bodies and abilities change, and they simply can't compete with all other men. The meta-level question here is: Why is this based on gender? On a personal note, this is a solution that I've proposed several times to gentle naysayers, only to have it go in one ear and out the other. If that was you, especially if you claim to "support trans people," pause and reflect: Why are you dismissing this solution? I won't speculate here.
The other option is spaces for trans and gender diverse athletes only: teams, tracks, and events. In fact, this might be the more popular option overall, but for very different reasons. A survey of 2,513 non-binary Canadian youth found that 66% desire this and actually avoid joining team sports because they would have to choose a binary gendered team. But guess what? This has already been tried (e.g., for swimming) and nobody showed up. We can only speculate why at this time.
An inclusion-first mentality, rather than succumbing to a scarcity mentality and creating barriers, is the only way forward.
This is the authors' thesis. Rather than rehash everything in the book, I encourage the reader to read it and read deeply. Let's keep in mind that trans and gender diverse athletes and their allies are typically placed at the lower rungs of power. When powerful nations like Russia, which have deemed LGBTQ+ support "extremism" and imprison supporters, also participate in sports on the international stage, this can drastically shift how trans and gender diverse folk are treated. One hockey player from Russia can refuse to wear a jersey expressing support for queer people on a Pride Night, citing "religious" reasons, causing a ban on all pride-touting across the NHL ... and then a straight cis male player can use his power to wear a pride pin anyways, an excellent display of allyship ... but also a deeply troubling revelation about how little power queer people hold and how easily swayed the masses are towards bigotry.
The authors leave us with a challenge: Name one trans woman athlete who has an Olympic medal. Bet you can't. So, where is the threat of unfairness, really, except in the minds of presumptive bigots? If that's you, I hope that makes you feel very, very uncomfortable ... and prompts you to rethink how you draw conclusions about the world and the most vulnerable people in it.
____
Original post on May 28:
This book is under attack by trolls. I’ll have a proper and certainly more cogent review later.
November 21, 2025
I’m genuinely really impressed with this book. I thought it was going to be a memoir about one of the author’s experience being trans in hockey, but it’s actually an overview of trans participation in sports for the last 75 or so years. I listened to the audio book so a lot of the specifics like dates and which sports organization was which were lost on me, but there was a lot of examples and studies that I had never heard of.
The structure is a little wonky as chapters are grouped by topic when I think it would have made more sense chronologically or maybe by sport? The authors also had the tendency to make wide sweeping statements about what is right or wrong when they could have let the reader come to their own conclusions. But over all I found the book to be very informative and persuasive!
I know everyone isn’t going to read this book. (even thought they should!) So I’ve summarized the key arguments that the authors are making which will hopefully entice you to read more!
For starters the argument for the exclusion of trans athletes hangs on three key assumptions that actually have nothing to do with trans people. 1 that women are inherently weaker than men, 2 that it is possible to cleanly define a “biological woman” and 3 that sports should be/can be/currently are fair for all players.
1. Women are inherently weaker.
Defining strength/weakness is really context specific. It matters more in single person events like weight lifting or running where the person is pushing the limits of their own bodies but training and aptitude still plays a big role. The book uses the example of Usain Bolt’s whose race times in 800m which are actually slower than many of the top women’s times. One on one competitive sports like boxing often have co-ed sparing for training with no concerns about men’s strength. As well, matches are already divided to pair people of similar strengths using factors such as weight, height, and skill level within a gendered category. In team sports, the combination of a player skills and their cooperation with each other is usually more important than an individuals speed or strength.
2. Women are one thing.
Using biological to refer to women and men is an interesting dog whistle for transphobes. It assumes that biology proves that there are only two genders. But when we look at the science, genitalia, chromosomes, and hormones align less often than we think they do (let alone body, expression and gender identity) and often people who do have intersex characteristics don’t know until they go through testing. Claiming that any specific trait defines a biological man/woman in order to exclude trans people inevitably ends up excluding cisgender people as well. Interestingly enough, men’s sports never seem to have a problem with people different hormone levels (cis or trans) gaining an unfair advantage.
3. Sports are fair.
Unfortunately every player does not come to sports with the same advantages. Economic and class differences play a huge role in who gets training from an early age and who has the money (putting a kid through hockey can cost tens of thousands a year) to continue in a sport. Girls have less opportunities in sports overall and when they play professionally they make vastly less money (for hockey $50,000 a year compared to male players who make an average of $3 million a year) which means they don’t get as many resources for their training. Even the month a player is born in can give them an edge (people born in January make up something like 30-50% of elite hockey players because of the cut off times for kids divisions are in January and at a young age a few months gives them a big advantage over kids born later on in December.)
I think that seriously considering these three factors almost makes enough of an argument to just let people play sports in which ever categories make them the most comfortable, especially for youth who mostly play for fun, exercise and social reasons. Competing against people of all genders would probably make all athletes play better.
The authors talk about how it doesn’t make sense to have one sweeping policy for all trans athletes, but they also express a frustration that by allowing sports organizations to individually set their own guidelines, the sports governing bodies absolve themselves of their responsibility to protect trans players from discrimination and allow for the flip flopping that we see around these policies (which usually happens when a trans woman excels at a sport and the rules are reshuffled to make her ineligible to compete).
So what advantages does a person’s assigned gender at birth and their hormones during puberty actually make? This was the part I found the most interesting, though it comes with a caveat. Many of the studies that have been done, particularly on trans people have a very small sample size (one was as small as 8 women but most were between 30-100 people) so it’s hard to say conclusively, but more studies aren’t going to happen because people are interested in banning trans women from sports regardless of the science. The book also looks at the performance of individual trans people who are competing at various levels. Nearly all of the vitriol circulating right now is aimed at trans women competing, but the examples of trans men are just as interesting.
Based on the evidence the book provides, girls and boys before puberty perform very similarly, with boys participating in sports in larger numbers, but girls preforming slightly better. This is likely attributed to cultural expectations of girls to focus and work harder than boys. When puberty starts those who go through a testosterone based puberty will typically become taller and develop their muscles faster (this is not the case for every individual, there are plenty of short boys and strong girls). There’s really no reason to separate kids’ sports by gender before puberty except for cultural norms.
Many sports organizations base their trans policies on what kind of puberty the individual went through so if young trans kids are lucky enough to transition early they should actually experience any marked difference playing in the category that matches their gender. (In Alberta they have just used the notwithstanding clause to ban trans people from sports and trans youth from transitioning before they are 18 so that’s fun.)
Another common basis for deciding if a trans woman can compete in the women’s category is how long she’s been been taking hormone therapy. It seems like within 4-12 months of taking estrogen and suppressing testosterone a woman’s overall strength declines as much as 30%. Typically her sports performance is in about the same tier in the women’s category as it was in the men’s category. One study showed that trans womens’ performance was on par with cis womens’ in every category except for running where their times were a little faster on average. One woman referred to taking estrogen as reverse doping and that it’s very difficult to train while taking a drug that suppresses muscle mass. Interestingly trans men who were taking testosterone for a year were also on par with cisgender men and in one study they were able to complete more sit-ups in a given time than the average cis man. (No one seems to complain that trans men have a biological advantage over cis men). For trans women, it’s really a lose lose situation, if they transition physically, they are often unable to compete in men’s sports at the same level, but if they succeed in women’s sports they are accused of cheating and dominating the sport.
The Brownes cite many examples of trans women being portrayed in the media as trying to take over women’s sports and steal all of their medals and take opportunities from cis women. In many of these cases the elite athletes were already at the top of their given divisions before their transitions so it makes sense that after their transition they are still high preforming athletes. When we look at the events they have competed in, (races are won by a few milliseconds and currently no trans woman has shattered records set by cisgender women.) there are no results that indicate that simply being trans is giving these people an advantage.
I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the topic, both for academic interest and for some talking points to discuss with your government representatives to let them know it is unacceptable to continue banning trans people from from sports.
The structure is a little wonky as chapters are grouped by topic when I think it would have made more sense chronologically or maybe by sport? The authors also had the tendency to make wide sweeping statements about what is right or wrong when they could have let the reader come to their own conclusions. But over all I found the book to be very informative and persuasive!
I know everyone isn’t going to read this book. (even thought they should!) So I’ve summarized the key arguments that the authors are making which will hopefully entice you to read more!
For starters the argument for the exclusion of trans athletes hangs on three key assumptions that actually have nothing to do with trans people. 1 that women are inherently weaker than men, 2 that it is possible to cleanly define a “biological woman” and 3 that sports should be/can be/currently are fair for all players.
1. Women are inherently weaker.
Defining strength/weakness is really context specific. It matters more in single person events like weight lifting or running where the person is pushing the limits of their own bodies but training and aptitude still plays a big role. The book uses the example of Usain Bolt’s whose race times in 800m which are actually slower than many of the top women’s times. One on one competitive sports like boxing often have co-ed sparing for training with no concerns about men’s strength. As well, matches are already divided to pair people of similar strengths using factors such as weight, height, and skill level within a gendered category. In team sports, the combination of a player skills and their cooperation with each other is usually more important than an individuals speed or strength.
2. Women are one thing.
Using biological to refer to women and men is an interesting dog whistle for transphobes. It assumes that biology proves that there are only two genders. But when we look at the science, genitalia, chromosomes, and hormones align less often than we think they do (let alone body, expression and gender identity) and often people who do have intersex characteristics don’t know until they go through testing. Claiming that any specific trait defines a biological man/woman in order to exclude trans people inevitably ends up excluding cisgender people as well. Interestingly enough, men’s sports never seem to have a problem with people different hormone levels (cis or trans) gaining an unfair advantage.
3. Sports are fair.
Unfortunately every player does not come to sports with the same advantages. Economic and class differences play a huge role in who gets training from an early age and who has the money (putting a kid through hockey can cost tens of thousands a year) to continue in a sport. Girls have less opportunities in sports overall and when they play professionally they make vastly less money (for hockey $50,000 a year compared to male players who make an average of $3 million a year) which means they don’t get as many resources for their training. Even the month a player is born in can give them an edge (people born in January make up something like 30-50% of elite hockey players because of the cut off times for kids divisions are in January and at a young age a few months gives them a big advantage over kids born later on in December.)
I think that seriously considering these three factors almost makes enough of an argument to just let people play sports in which ever categories make them the most comfortable, especially for youth who mostly play for fun, exercise and social reasons. Competing against people of all genders would probably make all athletes play better.
The authors talk about how it doesn’t make sense to have one sweeping policy for all trans athletes, but they also express a frustration that by allowing sports organizations to individually set their own guidelines, the sports governing bodies absolve themselves of their responsibility to protect trans players from discrimination and allow for the flip flopping that we see around these policies (which usually happens when a trans woman excels at a sport and the rules are reshuffled to make her ineligible to compete).
So what advantages does a person’s assigned gender at birth and their hormones during puberty actually make? This was the part I found the most interesting, though it comes with a caveat. Many of the studies that have been done, particularly on trans people have a very small sample size (one was as small as 8 women but most were between 30-100 people) so it’s hard to say conclusively, but more studies aren’t going to happen because people are interested in banning trans women from sports regardless of the science. The book also looks at the performance of individual trans people who are competing at various levels. Nearly all of the vitriol circulating right now is aimed at trans women competing, but the examples of trans men are just as interesting.
Based on the evidence the book provides, girls and boys before puberty perform very similarly, with boys participating in sports in larger numbers, but girls preforming slightly better. This is likely attributed to cultural expectations of girls to focus and work harder than boys. When puberty starts those who go through a testosterone based puberty will typically become taller and develop their muscles faster (this is not the case for every individual, there are plenty of short boys and strong girls). There’s really no reason to separate kids’ sports by gender before puberty except for cultural norms.
Many sports organizations base their trans policies on what kind of puberty the individual went through so if young trans kids are lucky enough to transition early they should actually experience any marked difference playing in the category that matches their gender. (In Alberta they have just used the notwithstanding clause to ban trans people from sports and trans youth from transitioning before they are 18 so that’s fun.)
Another common basis for deciding if a trans woman can compete in the women’s category is how long she’s been been taking hormone therapy. It seems like within 4-12 months of taking estrogen and suppressing testosterone a woman’s overall strength declines as much as 30%. Typically her sports performance is in about the same tier in the women’s category as it was in the men’s category. One study showed that trans womens’ performance was on par with cis womens’ in every category except for running where their times were a little faster on average. One woman referred to taking estrogen as reverse doping and that it’s very difficult to train while taking a drug that suppresses muscle mass. Interestingly trans men who were taking testosterone for a year were also on par with cisgender men and in one study they were able to complete more sit-ups in a given time than the average cis man. (No one seems to complain that trans men have a biological advantage over cis men). For trans women, it’s really a lose lose situation, if they transition physically, they are often unable to compete in men’s sports at the same level, but if they succeed in women’s sports they are accused of cheating and dominating the sport.
The Brownes cite many examples of trans women being portrayed in the media as trying to take over women’s sports and steal all of their medals and take opportunities from cis women. In many of these cases the elite athletes were already at the top of their given divisions before their transitions so it makes sense that after their transition they are still high preforming athletes. When we look at the events they have competed in, (races are won by a few milliseconds and currently no trans woman has shattered records set by cisgender women.) there are no results that indicate that simply being trans is giving these people an advantage.
I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the topic, both for academic interest and for some talking points to discuss with your government representatives to let them know it is unacceptable to continue banning trans people from from sports.
June 2, 2025
Harrison and Rachel haven’t written a book that does an incredible job of teaching and relaying information in a digestible way. I’ve always felt scared to engage in debate around these topics because I felt I didn’t know enough facts to support my thoughts. This book equipments me with the tools to do so. Plus it’s just an engaging read!
June 26, 2025
I received a free advance copy of this through a Goodreads giveaway in exchange for my honest review.
I am glad to have read this book, simply because now I know I can recommend it to others. I am not the target audience, because I already strongly support trans people being able to compete in sports in the area that best fits their gender, and I'm already aware of most of the cases and scientific studied brought up (and even some studies that came out after it was written.) So I didn't need any convincing from this book, I see it more as a tool I can share with others who have doubts or don't fully understand the topic.
Harrison and Rachel did a great job of balancing high level discussions of policy and theory against individual stories that help humanize. I appreciated Harrison's story and input throughout the book because trans men are left out of the discussion so often. And I'm guilty of that exclusion too, because I'd never really considered the point of view of a trans man required to quit his sport in order to make the changes needed to be comfortable in his body. All the media focuses on are trans women, who are considered unfit to join women's sports no matter how much they change.
The greatest weakness of this book is something that is out of its control: the speed with which everything is changing. It was written in 2023 so does not have the latest studies or responses to the shitstorm that trans rights are experiencing in 2025.
Like I said I believe this book will be something valuable to recommend to people I encounter who are unsure or want to hear the trans positive side of the argument- the people who say "I support trans people, BUT..." More hardcore anti-trans people won't care about any scientific evidence or examples of harm. You can tell that by the negative reviews on this book (likely by people who haven't read it). But it's great tool to have available when having good faith conversations.
I am glad to have read this book, simply because now I know I can recommend it to others. I am not the target audience, because I already strongly support trans people being able to compete in sports in the area that best fits their gender, and I'm already aware of most of the cases and scientific studied brought up (and even some studies that came out after it was written.) So I didn't need any convincing from this book, I see it more as a tool I can share with others who have doubts or don't fully understand the topic.
Harrison and Rachel did a great job of balancing high level discussions of policy and theory against individual stories that help humanize. I appreciated Harrison's story and input throughout the book because trans men are left out of the discussion so often. And I'm guilty of that exclusion too, because I'd never really considered the point of view of a trans man required to quit his sport in order to make the changes needed to be comfortable in his body. All the media focuses on are trans women, who are considered unfit to join women's sports no matter how much they change.
The greatest weakness of this book is something that is out of its control: the speed with which everything is changing. It was written in 2023 so does not have the latest studies or responses to the shitstorm that trans rights are experiencing in 2025.
Like I said I believe this book will be something valuable to recommend to people I encounter who are unsure or want to hear the trans positive side of the argument- the people who say "I support trans people, BUT..." More hardcore anti-trans people won't care about any scientific evidence or examples of harm. You can tell that by the negative reviews on this book (likely by people who haven't read it). But it's great tool to have available when having good faith conversations.
June 12, 2025
If you’re interested in sports, human rights, gender identity in general or trans issues in particular, and you want to understand the reality rather than the hyper-politicized biases that flood our media, Harrison Browne and Rachel Browne bring the receipts in their concise, readable analysis Let Us Play: Winning the Battle for Gender Diverse Athletes.
November 1, 2025
This book presents an interesting narrative on inclusion and identity within the world of sports. While Harrison’s personal journey offers valuable insight, the book’s discussion of athletic equity would have benefited from a more comprehensive consideration of biological differences between male and female athletes. These physiological distinctions are central to ongoing debates about fairness and competition, and a balanced exploration of both scientific and social dimensions could have strengthened the overall argument.
The narrative assumes that gender is entirely a social construct, dismissing biological data that contradict this claim. There was barely any discussion on the fact that biological males generally have stronger grip strength, bigger lungs and larger wingspans. Those are just a few of the many biological differences between men and women. By erasing biological distinctions, the book inadvertently undermines fairness in women’s sports, promoting ideology over objective standards.
The authors themselves acknowledge that a majority of Americans oppose trans women competing against biological women. Rather than reflecting on the underlying reasons for this widespread sentiment, they appear intent on persuading the public to adopt their own ideological position. Although the authors claim to welcome open dialogue, the tone of the book suggests otherwise, often dismissing dissenting views with moral superiority. Furthermore, the text contains several passive-aggressive remarks regarding race and gender. For example, the authors criticize the racial composition of professional hockey for being predominantly white, yet they neglect to note that leagues such as the NBA and NFL are overwhelmingly black, an inconsistency that undermines the credibility of their argument.
Additionally, the authors assert that “very few cisgender men could beat Serena Williams at tennis,” a claim for which they provide no empirical evidence. This statement is presented as fact despite the absence of supporting data. Notably, Serena Williams herself has acknowledged the inherent physical differences between the men’s and women’s games, openly stating that male players serve harder, hit with greater power, and play at a faster pace.
Ultimately, Let Us Play reads less as a fair-minded discussion and more as an ideological manifesto. The authors dismiss legitimate public concerns about fairness in women’s sports while promoting unsubstantiated claims as fact. Their unwillingness to engage with biological realities or counterarguments limits the book’s credibility. What could have been a nuanced exploration of inclusion and competition instead becomes an exercise in advocacy, reflecting conviction rather than critical thought.
The narrative assumes that gender is entirely a social construct, dismissing biological data that contradict this claim. There was barely any discussion on the fact that biological males generally have stronger grip strength, bigger lungs and larger wingspans. Those are just a few of the many biological differences between men and women. By erasing biological distinctions, the book inadvertently undermines fairness in women’s sports, promoting ideology over objective standards.
The authors themselves acknowledge that a majority of Americans oppose trans women competing against biological women. Rather than reflecting on the underlying reasons for this widespread sentiment, they appear intent on persuading the public to adopt their own ideological position. Although the authors claim to welcome open dialogue, the tone of the book suggests otherwise, often dismissing dissenting views with moral superiority. Furthermore, the text contains several passive-aggressive remarks regarding race and gender. For example, the authors criticize the racial composition of professional hockey for being predominantly white, yet they neglect to note that leagues such as the NBA and NFL are overwhelmingly black, an inconsistency that undermines the credibility of their argument.
Additionally, the authors assert that “very few cisgender men could beat Serena Williams at tennis,” a claim for which they provide no empirical evidence. This statement is presented as fact despite the absence of supporting data. Notably, Serena Williams herself has acknowledged the inherent physical differences between the men’s and women’s games, openly stating that male players serve harder, hit with greater power, and play at a faster pace.
Ultimately, Let Us Play reads less as a fair-minded discussion and more as an ideological manifesto. The authors dismiss legitimate public concerns about fairness in women’s sports while promoting unsubstantiated claims as fact. Their unwillingness to engage with biological realities or counterarguments limits the book’s credibility. What could have been a nuanced exploration of inclusion and competition instead becomes an exercise in advocacy, reflecting conviction rather than critical thought.
June 3, 2025
As trans people across all aspects of society (not just sports and not just in the US and UK) endure the relentless propagandized moral panic from politicians and keyboard warriors on social media, this book opens the door to a real conversation. How can we move forward supporting trans men and women in sport and beyond?
There are some with whom you can never talk about the rights of trans athletes to play because they do not see that trans people have the right to exist, period. This book is not for them. This book is for everyone else - the majority - who are afraid they don’t understand and want to or who have a few more questions or who are allies who’d like the language and tools to communicate with friends and family with more knowledge and a greater understanding.
-
As a child athlete and then as a parent/master swim official, I know one thing with more certainty than anything - if you want to talk about sports and who should be included and how - ask the athletes not the parents, coaches or spectators.
There are some with whom you can never talk about the rights of trans athletes to play because they do not see that trans people have the right to exist, period. This book is not for them. This book is for everyone else - the majority - who are afraid they don’t understand and want to or who have a few more questions or who are allies who’d like the language and tools to communicate with friends and family with more knowledge and a greater understanding.
-
As a child athlete and then as a parent/master swim official, I know one thing with more certainty than anything - if you want to talk about sports and who should be included and how - ask the athletes not the parents, coaches or spectators.
June 14, 2025
A good addition to the conversation about trans and nonbinary athletes.
Because of the pace of the decline of trans rights, there needs to be a new book about every year. This on picks up roughly where Fair Play (Barnes) left off.
Let Us Play focuses less on the science, although it is there, and more on the consequences/impact of not allowing trans young people to play sports and on the impact of sports on the lives athletes who are out there participating now (or in the last few years).
The book does a good job of explaining changes in rules that have happened in the last 15 years or so, especially in the most transphobic sports - tracks & field and swimming - and comparing that to Olympic participation/rules. There's a big focus on hockey, which isn't a sport covered in many other books/articles.
Overall, this is a solid overview that is relatively up-to-date as over early 2025. It's especially good for Canadians interested in the issue, but suitable for the US as well.
Because of the pace of the decline of trans rights, there needs to be a new book about every year. This on picks up roughly where Fair Play (Barnes) left off.
Let Us Play focuses less on the science, although it is there, and more on the consequences/impact of not allowing trans young people to play sports and on the impact of sports on the lives athletes who are out there participating now (or in the last few years).
The book does a good job of explaining changes in rules that have happened in the last 15 years or so, especially in the most transphobic sports - tracks & field and swimming - and comparing that to Olympic participation/rules. There's a big focus on hockey, which isn't a sport covered in many other books/articles.
Overall, this is a solid overview that is relatively up-to-date as over early 2025. It's especially good for Canadians interested in the issue, but suitable for the US as well.
December 25, 2025
This book was clearly made with so much dedication and care, and I love it for that alone. It centers trans people and their experiences the way they should be centered in this issue. It also takes an investigative and scientific approach to the topic, citing research studies alongside personal testimonies. I deeply appreciate how the authors explained the studies in language that any one could understand without a science background. I also loved how they interviewed athletes from multiple sports and with a broad spectrum of ages, identities, and experiences. They also interviewed voices from the opposing perspective, and treated those interviewees with respect and empathy regardless of if the sentiment was returned. All this is to say that the authors did an incredibly thorough job with this book. The only thing I was left wanting more of was Harrison Browne’s first person writing. I loved the introduction and felt more of that conversational tone throughout the book would have helped balance out the density of some sections. But overall I highly recommend!
July 17, 2025
This book is so important, and I learned a lot about the actual science and actual lived experiences of trans athletes. I want many people to read it, because I think it does have the potential to change minds. But it...is not a well-written book. Sentences go in strange grammatical directions, the organization within chapters is often confusing, and there's a ton of repetition (which in itself sometimes creates confusion on facts and timelines). I really wish there had been a stronger editorial hand at work here -- but it's still very much worth reading.
June 11, 2025
Let Us Play is at once an interesting and accessible read that doesn’t just tell you what’s happening when it comes to trans athletes in sports, it shows you why it matters. The authors bring together personal stories and social context in order to cut through the noise and political grandstanding that have overtaken the conversation around trans inclusion in sport. If you’re looking to better understand the REAL issues and stories behind the headlines, this book is a great place to start.
June 2, 2025
Each chapter is concise and engaging. The authors weave in real peoples’ stories with research and mini history lessons, pointing out patterns in the world of sports and tracking the misinformation on trans athletes that has spread like wildfire. Accessible for anyone, but especially if you have a curiosity to understand this topic on a more nuanced level.
July 6, 2025
This book is a great adjunct to "He/She/They" by Schuylar Bailar, "Fair Play" by Katie Barnes, "The Other Olympians," by Michael Waters, and reporting by authors including Erin Reed, Katelyn Burns, Parker Molloy, Frankie de la Cretaz and many more. I don't think this book is the first one to read in that group (I'd start with Bailar then Barnes), but it's excellent read along with those.
July 7, 2025
I’d give it 4.5 but rounded up bc it really is a very good book. It’s a but stays heavy and felt at times like a popular history of trans athletics discrimination. But it really came together at the end in a way that made the entirety of the book fall into place. Good research. Great writing. Empathetic standpoints.
November 4, 2025
More people need to read this book. As a trans woman who saw the hate and discrimination both as a player and a coach in ice hockey, I believe this book could help sway so many parents, coaches and other people associated in sports.
November 22, 2025
An important read, delving into the issues that are surrounding trans athletes and demystifying a lot of harmful rhetoric. Well researched and coming from the personal journey of one of the authors. Just let them play!
June 11, 2025
Repetitive
June 26, 2025
A good intro.
July 5, 2025
Approach with extreme caution and fact check everything.
December 11, 2025
Informative, educational, and engaging! I highly recommend it. It challenged some of my preconceived ideas and helped give me more insight into the topic.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 22 reviews