By A powerlifting competition in Virginia in 2019, organised by the 100% Raw Powerlifting Federation, became the focus of an international scandal. Mary Gregory, a transgender athlete, broke several female world records only to have them taken away a few days later. The incident reignited debates about gender identity, biology, and fairness in sport, and these discussions now extend well beyond powerlifting.
Breaking Records, Shattering Headlines
However, on 27 April 2019, Mary Gregory participated in 100% Raw, where she was registered in the female category. Her results were impressive: she surpassed the record in squat, bench press, deadlift, and the total for her age and weight category. Gregory was nearly 44 years old and had been on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for almost a year.
During the immediate aftermath, Gregory celebrated openly, expressed her thanks, and felt welcomed as just another female lifter. This remarkable performance caused a stir until the federation suddenly reversed the decision.
From Glory to Disqualification
A few days later, the RAW Powerlifting Federation disqualified Gregory’s records and barred her from competing in the female division. According to Paul Bossi, President of Federation, their regulations classify competitors based on physiological sex, not gender identity. Under their understanding, Gregory did not meet the criteria for the female category.
Some people were shocked by this decision, while others approved of it. In the case of RAW, the concern was about maintaining the fairness of competition. To Gregory and her supporters, it seemed as though her identity was being dismissed, along with the records she had worked so hard to achieve.
Identity vs. Biology: The Core Conflict
The scandal highlighted one of the most challenging issues in sports: how to balance gender identity with fair athletic competition. Supporters of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) argue that a year of hormone treatment significantly reduces testosterone levels and muscle mass, bringing transgender women closer to cisgender physiological norms.
However, critics contend that despite HRT, biological factors such as bone structure, lung capacity, and muscle memory may still provide advantages in strength-related sports. This ongoing conflict reflects the core of the debate: whether gender categories should be based on identity, hormone levels, or strict biological definitions.
Divided Reactions: Applause and Outrage
The decision sparked a furious reaction on social media and within the sporting community. Advocates of the ban argued that it was necessary to protect the integrity of women’s sports, expressing concern that allowing transgender women to compete without stricter guidelines would create an unfair playing field.
Conversely, supporters of inclusion viewed the ruling as discriminatory, emphasising that transgender athletes deserve recognition and that sports should evolve to embrace diverse identities. Gregory, feeling deeply disappointed, stated that the disqualification felt like a denial of her identity, both as a person and as an athlete.
A Catalyst for Change in Sports Governance
The Gregory case reached a boiling point across federations worldwide. It exposed the lack of universal standards for transgender participation. Sports organisations operate under various criteria, such as testosterone thresholds, medical transitional periods, or physiological classification like RAW.
The case sparked important debates about sports regulations and athlete welfare. It underscored the need for federations to establish consistent, scientifically grounded guidelines to ensure fairness and transparency. Moreover, it highlighted the importance of educating athletes and officials about how medical transition affects athletic performance. Ultimately, the discussion pointed to the difficulty of balancing inclusion and fairness, making sure neither the integrity nor the dignity of the athletes is undermined.
Towards New Solutions: A Separate Category?
As a response to the scandal, RAW hinted that it might consider creating a new category for transgender athletes. While this could promote inclusion, critics worry it might isolate the athletes or lead to token events with fewer competitors.
Other supporters favour a performance-based classification ranking athletes according to strength measurements or hormone levels rather than gender. Although this approach is more objective, it remains complex and open to dispute.
Beyond Powerlifting: A Global Debate
Gregory’s case is not an isolated incident. Similar scandals have occurred in track and field, cycling, and swimming. The key question is: How can sports inclusion be protected while ensuring fairness?
The impact of transition on athletic ability remains under scientific investigation, and there is no consensus yet. For now, governing bodies must navigate a complex landscape of ongoing research, legal considerations, and public opinion.
Sport at a Crossroads
Records of Mary Gregory can no longer stand, and the debate they incited still resonates. Her example pushes the sporting community to ask practical questions about identity, fairness, and the future of competition.
The next developments will likely influence policy not only in powerlifting but across the entire sport. Through new regulations, including different divisions or even advancements in science, the issue is clearly understood: to create a system that makes sport fair, inclusive, and true to the spirit of competition.
