The WNBA convened a task force to figure out what a woman is, emerged without an answer, scheduled more meetings to keep figuring it out, then scolded everyone else for the “hate and vitriol” surrounding the debate.
On Wednesday, the WNBA finally offered an update on its progress.
Turns out, the answer is more meetings.
WNBPA ISSUES STATEMENT EMBRACING DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION AMID TRANS ATHLETE DEBATE IN WOMEN’S SPORTS
“Today’s meeting covered a wide range of topics, including ongoing discussions on transgender athletes and the continued hate and vitriol directed at players online. We will continue to engage all league stakeholders in the coming weeks and months. We will approach these important conversations thoughtfully and in alignment with the values of our league. There are no immediate eligibility matters affecting the WNBA, and we strongly denounce the bad-faith efforts to use these topics to demean or marginalize others.”
The WNBA took the corporate escape hatch. Dodge the question, scold the critics and kick the can down the road.
Somewhere in all these meetings is WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert, who runs a women’s league that still can’t settle on who qualifies as a woman. Quite the predicament.
The loophole gets a lot more complicated to ignore when ex-NBA players Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White declared for the 2027 WNBA Draft just to expose it.
The league’s own CBA says “only players who are women are eligible to play in the WNBA.” Pretty straightforward. Except there’s one small problem: nowhere in the 400-plus-page agreement does the WNBA define what a woman is.
While executives spin their wheels in meetings, women willing to defend the purpose of women’s sports are left to stand alone. Indiana Fever guard Sophie Cunningham has publicly supported keeping women’s sports and locker rooms for biological females.
Then, after Chicago Sky guard DiJonai Carrington was ejected for a Flagrant 2 foul for striking Cunningham across the head, Carrington went to social media and posted “WHITE PRIVILEGE @indianafever.”
Fever coach Stephanie White eventually called the hit “egregious,” but only after criticism mounted over her initial silence. When she addressed the controversy, much of her response focused on the “online community” and condemning “hate,” “fear-mongering” and “divisiveness.”
THE WNBA HAS LIMITED OPTIONS AFTER TWO MEN DECLARED FOR THE DRAFT, AND THOSE OPTIONS AREN’T GREAT
That’s the recurring problem. Cunningham stands up for female competition, absorbs the backlash and gets hammered on the court, while the people running women’s basketball seem more comfortable policing the tone of the debate than standing behind women raising uncomfortable questions.
Meanwhile, global sports bodies like World Aquatics, World Athletics and the UCI have established firm, biological eligibility standards. The WNBA remains stuck in an endless loop of listening sessions, stakeholder engagement and sanitized PR statements. Eventually, the league has to decide what it exists to protect. Stalling with PR spin won’t alter basic biology.
If the WNBA continues to run meetings instead of making decisions, and lecture critics instead of standing up for women willing to speak, it won’t be long before an eligibility disaster makes the decision for them.
OutKick reached out to the WNBA for comment/explanation on what defines a woman. We have not received a response.
Send us your thoughts: alejandro.avila@outkick.com / Follow along on X: @alejandroaveela
