PDC chief Matt Porter has defended the decision to ban transgender women from competing in female-only darts events, insisting the policy was introduced following an independent review based on scientific evidence.
The Darts Regulation Authority (DRA) recently implemented new eligibility rules that prevent transgender women from taking part in women’s competitions, including the PDC Women’s Series and the Women’s World Matchplay.
As a result, Dutch player Noa-Lynn van Leuven is no longer eligible to compete in those events.
The policy change followed a detailed review commissioned by the DRA, which included research from developmental biologist Dr Emma Hilton. The report concluded that a combination of biological differences can create a competitive advantage for males in darts.
Porter stressed that the decision was made by the DRA after extensive consultation and was not simply influenced by policies adopted in other sports.
Speaking to oche180, he said: “The DRA is our governing body, and we follow its rules across all aspects of our operations.
“There was open communication throughout the process, and we were fully aware of the review taking place. The DRA sought legal advice and also spoke with other sporting governing bodies about their own policies and procedures.
“They reached a position that had to be legally defensible and justifiable, and it is a position that all organisations affiliated with the DRA, including the PDC, are required to follow.”
Porter also dismissed suggestions that the governing body merely copied decisions made elsewhere in sport.
He said: “I don’t think developments in other sports significantly influenced the outcome.
“They may have provided some validation, but they didn’t determine the direction of the decision.
“The policy was formed independently and was based on a specific report that had been commissioned and contained scientific evidence. That was the basis for the DRA’s change in policy.”
The decision has sparked debate across the darts community, but Porter maintains that the governing body followed its own review process before introducing the new regulations.
Comments are closed.