"> Skip To Content


May 02, 2019 | Press Releases

Steube Stands Up for Women’s Sports

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Yesterday, Congressman Greg Steube (R-Fla.) introduced an amendment in the House Judiciary Committee to H.R. 5, the so-called “Equality Act” to ensure that nothing in the bill could be construed to require biological females to compete against biological males in sports. Upon introducing the amendment, Steube offered the following statement:

“I’m offering this Amendment today to ensure that our daughters are provided an equal playing field in sports for generations to come, and that female athletes are not competing against male athletes for athletic scholarships and Title IX funding.

As we debate this so called “Equality Act,” I want to guarantee that biological women are not forced to compete against biological men at all levels of athletic competition.

Science has proven time and time again that there is a significant performance difference between biological males and females from puberty onward.

From percentage of lean muscle, to heart size, body fat, and joint angles, the bodies of men and women are distinctly unique and produce a vast and tangible athletic performance differences. In fact, there is an average 10-12 percent performance gap between elite biological male and female athletes.

These differences are largely due to the large influx of testosterone males receive during puberty. Science is very clear here—there is no doubt that testosterone is the reason that biological men as a group perform better than women in sports—that’s why both men and women dope with androgens that are high in testosterone.

On average, in elite biologically male athletes, there is 30 times more testosterone present, leading to physical characteristics that almost guarantee a higher rate of success in sporting events.

But don’t take my word for it. Let’s look at some examples:

  • CeCe Telfer, a biological male who won three titles in the Northeast-10 Championships for women’s track and received the Most Outstanding Track Athlete award.
  • Fallon Fox, a biological male who shattered female fighter Tamikka Brents’ eye socket and gave her a concussion. Brents said she “never felt so overpowered in her life.”
  • Gabrielle Ludwig, a 50-year-old, 6-foot-8-inch, 230-pound biological male, who led the Mission College women’s basketball team to a national championship with the most rebounds.
  • Just this past weekend, a biological male, won all 9events in weightlifting at the 100% Raw Weightlifting Federation competition in Virginia in the women’s category as a “transgender lifter.”

In reaction, British Olympic swimmer Sharron Davies took to Twitter to express her disdain over a trans woman competing in a female category.


These are just a few examples, the list goes on and on.

I for one don’t think it’s fair—or equal—to make young, biological women compete against biological males. That’s why I’m introducing this amendment.”

During debate, Steube also read the following excerpt from a recent opinion editorial by Doriane Coleman, Martina Navratilova, and Sanya Richards-Ross, in The Washington Post entitled, “Pass the Equality Act, but don’t abandon Title IX,” saying:

“The legislation would make it unlawful to differentiate among girls and women in sports on the basis of sex for any purpose. For example, a sports team couldn’t treat a transgender woman differently from a woman who is not transgender on the grounds that the former is male-bodied. Yet the reality is that putting male- and female-bodied athletes together is co-ed or open sport. And in open sport, females lose.

Some Equality Act advocates argue that this is hyperbole and outdated stereotype. They say, as the ACLU has, that there is “ample evidence that girls can compete and win against boys.” They are wrong. The evidence is unequivocal that starting in puberty, in every sport except sailing, shooting and riding, there will always be significant numbers of boys and men who would beat the best girls and women in head-to-head competition. Claims to the contrary are simply a denial of science.”

The full editorial was also entered into the record.

Following debate, the amendment failed in a 22-10 vote. Steube intends to reintroduce the Amendment when H.R. 5 comes up for consideration on the House Floor.