Apr 30, 2025, 2:22 PM
Apr 28, 2025, 12:11 PM

Nike faces backlash for allegedly funding transgender athlete study

Provocative
Highlights
  • A New York Times article suggested that Nike allegedly funded a study investigating gender-affirming care for transgender youth athletes.
  • The company has stated that the study was never initiated and is not moving forward, creating confusion about its alleged involvement.
  • This controversy has drawn significant criticism from GOP lawmakers while many prominent Democratic figures have remained silent on the issue.
Story

In recent weeks, a controversy has emerged regarding Nike's alleged financial involvement in a study focused on the effects of gender-affirming care among transgender youth athletes in the United States. The New York Times published a detailed article featuring former San Jose State volleyball player Blaire Fleming, who is a biological male identifying as a woman and competed on the women’s team. Central to this controversy is a claim that the study, led by Dr. Kathryn Ackerman from Boston Children's Hospital, was partially funded by Nike. The study aims to explore how hormone therapy affects transgender adolescents, including the implications for their participation in sports. Dr. Joanna Harper, one of the study's researchers, is also a biological male who identifies as female. Following the publication of the New York Times story, Nike officials stated that the study was never initiated and was not moving forward, yet they did not provide any clarity regarding the alleged funding. This situation has prompted significant backlash from some GOP lawmakers, who argue that the company is engaging in unethical practices that endanger children by potentially promoting life-altering treatments. Senators such as Marsha Blackburn and Tommy Tuberville have publicly criticized Nike, while Democrats have largely refrained from commenting on the issue. The lack of response from prominent athletes associated with Nike, including stars in basketball, soccer, and golf, has only intensified scrutiny from media and advocacy groups, aiming to highlight concerns over the company’s financial practices and their impact on sports. The controversy has sparked debates around the treatment of transgender athletes and the role of corporate funding in potentially controversial medical research.

Opinions

You've reached the end