Sanctioned Self-Destruction

Quantifying the Problem of Males in Female Sports

For years, the public has been told that concerns over males competing in girls’ sports are overblown—fringe talking points from politically motivated corners. But the data now speak for themselves. This isn’t rare or isolated. It’s systemic. And until now, no national institution—neither the NCAA, nor the NFHS, nor any major medical or athletic body—has bothered to count the cost. That silence has come at the expense of young women and girls who are losing scholarships, medals, and hard-earned opportunities to male athletes. This article is the first in a series drawing on data from HeCheated.org, the only public effort systematically documenting where and how this is happening. The goal is simple: to shine light on a growing and measurable injustice that institutions refuse to confront—and to ask why they won’t.

HeCheated.org has assembled the most comprehensive public record to date of biological males competing in female sports. While this issue continues to generate public debate, few institutions have attempted to quantify its scale or impact. Even organizations that support men in women’s sports have shown little interest in tracking numbers, participation trends, or performance outcomes. Instead, the conversation is too often framed in abstraction: isolated examples, not systemic shifts.

But it’s happening—and it’s measurable.

To date, the NCAA, the NFHS, and other major athletic bodies have yet to take a definitive stand affirming the principle of sex-based competition in women’s sports. While some have released statements or issued policy documents, few have taken action that prioritizes fairness or safety for female athletes. Most have opted for ambiguity—gesturing toward inclusion and fairness, while protecting neither.

Part of the problem lies upstream. The medical establishment has increasingly embraced ideological frameworks in place of rigorous evidence. The rapid rise of “gender medicine” has captured major institutions, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, and pushed protocols that many physicians now openly question. High-profile investigations, whistleblower accounts, and internal documents have revealed just how far some systems have strayed from science and caution.

The public conversation has followed a predictable trajectory:

• It’s not happening.

• It’s happening, but it’s rare.

• It’s happening, and it’s good.

We’re currently in the second phase. The existence of males in girls’ sports can no longer be denied—but the scale is still routinely downplayed, and the harms minimized. The loss of titles, scholarships, and fair competition for young women is treated as an unfortunate side effect rather than a central concern.

Recently the Department of Health and Human Services released a landmark report evaluating pediatric gender medicine in the United States. Commissioned by Executive Order, the report documents serious shortcomings in the evidence supporting “gender-affirming” care, and highlights the risks posed by puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical interventions. It marks a notable shift in federal posture—one that signals growing institutional awareness, even if actual reform remains slow.

But clarity at the executive level does not mean the issue is resolved. Our athletic, medical, and educational institutions are captured by trans activists and remain deeply compromised and unaccountable. As J.K. Rowling aptly put it:

“it's a complete waste of time telling a gender activist that their favourite slogan is self-contradictory nonsense, because the lie is the whole point. They're not repeating it because it's true - they know full well it's not true - but because they believe they can make it true, sort of, if they force everyone else to agree.”

The mechanism is recognizable: reality is redefined by repetition, consensus manufactured by institutional power. This isn’t a grassroots movement. It’s a top-down policy agenda, often enforced without public consent or open debate.

I’ll be analyzing where, how often, and in what sports male participation is occurring. The data come from HeCheated.org, which has done the work no major agency has attempted: counting cases, tracking outcomes, and documenting impact.

We begin with high school sports—perhaps the most tragic arena for this issue. Teenage girls, who lack the institutional support or freedom to speak out, are left to watch their records fall to boys with an inherent biological advantage. The adults—coaches, school officials, athletic associations—know better. And yet, many have chosen to say nothing.

In this first report, we’ll examine:

• The states with the most documented cases.

• Placement data from competitive events—who’s winning, and by how much.

• The sports most affected: Track and Field, Cross Country, Swimming, and Volleyball.

Looking at the worst offenders: Connecticut, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Washington State…. what’s the common theme?

As you can see from the chart, boys are predominantly stealing 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place from the girls the compete against.

Track and Field is overwhelmingly the most problematic sport for allowing boys to compete.

What the numbers show is simple and uncontroversial: when boys compete in girls’ events, they win. That this even needs to be said underscores just how detached from reality our institutions and policymakers have become.

All data sourced from HeCheated.org