In a controversial move, the University of Wyoming women’s volleyball team found itself in the midst of a heated debate regarding an upcoming match against a rival—the San Jose State University Spartans—who roster a transgender player, Blaire Fleming. Documents recently released reveal that while the team considered whether to compete, the ultimate decision to forfeit was influenced by external factors and pressures from university officials, not solely by the athletes themselves.
The records suggest that following the forfeit decisions of two other schools in protest of Fleming’s inclusion, both the team and university representatives felt substantial societal pressure to also withdraw from the Oct. 5 contest against the Spartans. This escalating tension was compounded by the urgent calls trailing from media reports and public sentiment, which labeled the situation as a matter of fairness in women’s sports.
On Oct. 1, UW officially announced the forfeit through a terse email that failed to provide substantial reasoning, merely indicating the conclusion was reached after a “lengthy discussion.” In what seemed an attempt to shed light on the decision-making process, WyoFile, along with several other media organizations, filed public records requests for communications related to the forfeit. Their efforts yielded results late Friday, strategically timed before the commencement of a three-day holiday weekend.
One notable document highlighted the context surrounding the decision. On Oct. 2, a day subsequent to the forfeiture announcement, Assistant Women’s Volleyball Head Coach Becky Baker sent an email to Head Coach Kaylee Nicole Prigge, who was reportedly away, updating her on the events of the previous week. Within this correspondence, Baker mentioned that a meeting was held where players were invited to cast their votes anonymously regarding whether they wished to compete.
In her briefing, Baker noted that team member Whisenant informed her the vote had resulted in a split decision of 9-9, with one abstention. Baker further emphasized Whisenant’s communication as stating, “He then told me we won’t be playing.” This document indicated her insistence on making it clear to the head coach that the pressure exerted from higher-ups had ultimately overridden the team’s wishes, stating, “I asked him and Taylor very specifically to make this about the people up top and the political pressure essentially taking the decision away from us.”
Additionally, on that specific day—Oct. 1—the coaching staff informed players of the forfeit’s final decision. According to Baker’s documentation, when a team member inquired if the vote had been a factor in the forfeit, Whisenant acknowledged that while the vote held value, ultimately, the direction for the decision came from above the coaching staff. The document mentioned that the players continued with their practice afterward but felt “out of sorts,” reflecting the emotional turmoil the athletes were experiencing in light of the decision.
In her correspondence, Baker expressed her concerns about how the narrative might unfold in the media. She noted, “Don’t think it’s going to go over well though that Tom’s quote is essentially that we chose this,” presaging the backlash she anticipated from players who felt unjustly represented in the decision-making process.
Changing course
At the time of the controversial discussion, the Cowgirls had already faced Fleming and her team twice in 2022 without any hindrance or dispute, which raises questions regarding the school’s sudden shift in policy and sentiment regarding competition against trans athletes. A university spokesperson had not provided a clear explanation following inquiries about why the Cowgirls reversed their stance and opted not to engage in play against San Jose State this time, especially as it remains uncertain whether the University of Wyoming was aware of Fleming’s gender identity during past matches, given that media discussions only gained momentum earlier this year.
On Sept. 14, the sports media site Outkick reported that Southern Utah had canceled its impending match against San Jose State due to Fleming’s alleged advantages as a transgender athlete. Following Southern Utah’s lead, Boise State—also in the Mountain West Conference—decided to cancel as well, heightening the stakes for Wyoming. As the Cowgirls faced mounting pressure to follow suit, initial indications suggested they intended to proceed with the match. An email from university spokesman Chad Baldwin dated Sept. 27 confirmed the team’s anticipated return from Utah, indicating it was imperative to assess their aspirations during a subsequent meeting.
As the situation intensified, Burman, along with other university officials, was inundated with correspondence from constituents advocating for the matches to be called off. The arguments against competition centered on claims that it was inequitable for a transgender player to participate in women’s sports and that the inclusion posed potential safety risks to other athletes. Burman’s response reiterated the legality surrounding the NCAA standards for competition to note that although the situation had garnered significant scrutiny, it remained compliant with existing regulations.
He pointed out that foregoing the matches would mean forfeiting not just the game on October 5 but another scheduled for November 14, deepening the implications for the team’s overall standing in the conference. Burman articulated in his communications that the student-athletes were not in favor of forfeiting two matches, demonstrating that their competitive spirit remained intact despite the swirling controversy.
Outside pressure
The calls for the decision to vacate the matches were not limited to unofficial channels; they came from public figures, former athletes, and even political representatives. Among the documents obtained through records requests, one email from an individual described as a concerned citizen and season ticket holder beseeched the university to act in the interest of its athletes’ safety, stating, “I’m asking you to forfeit the game against San Jose to keep YOUR athletes safe.” This sentiment reflected the rising fears that extended beyond the sport itself and into broader societal discussions about safety and inclusion.
In the public discussion, the pushback was evident, particularly as voices like that of state Senator Cheri Steinmetz began to resound. Known for her opposition to UW’s gender studies curriculum, she circulated a letter among colleagues that urged university leaders to reassess their position about the game against the Spartans, vehemently opposing the inclusion of transgender athletes in women’s sports. Senator Steinmetz’s sentiments mirrored a wider backlash against what some have termed an “extremist agenda” surrounding gender identity discourse in athletics.
Although the university had made its forfeiture announcement prior to the dissemination of Steinmetz’s letter, the influence of such public figures was evident in the climate of semi-political activism that had coalesced around the issue. In the aftermath of the forfeiture, UW was again inundated with emails, with a significant portion supporting the team’s decision. Among them, a former collegiate volleyball player from California praised the choice, indicating that it resonated with the community who perceived the decision as an act of solidarity.
Conversely, criticism rolled in from various factions, condemning the university for yielding to perceived political pressures and neglecting its commitment to supporting the LGBTQ+ community. One alumnus expressed profound disappointment, stating, “Up to this point, I was proud to tell people I’m from Wyoming, but I can genuinely say that this is the most disappointed I’ve been in my State and University.” Such sentiments served as a reminder of the university’s public image, especially as it aspired to uphold the title of the “Equality State.”
As of Monday, the Cowgirls stood at seventh place in the Mountain West Conference rankings, a stark contrast to the Spartans’ favorable position, which had been bolstered, in part, by the forfeits from other competing teams.
**Interview with Dr. Emily Thornton, Sports Ethics Expert**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Thornton. The recent decision by the University of Wyoming to forfeit a volleyball game against San Jose State University has sparked significant debate. Can you provide some context on the implications of such a decision, particularly regarding the treatment of transgender athletes in sports?
**Dr. Thornton:** Thank you for having me. This situation is emblematic of the broader conflicts we face in sports today regarding gender identity and inclusion. The University of Wyoming’s decision to forfeit not only affects the team’s standings but also sends a message about the institution’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. It raises questions about fairness in women’s sports and how policies evolve as societal perceptions change.
**Interviewer:** The documents revealed that external pressures played a significant role in the decision to forfeit. How does this outside influence impact the autonomy of student-athletes and coaching staff in such scenarios?
**Dr. Thornton:** That’s a critical point. When student-athletes and coaches feel pressured by external forces—be it lawmakers, alumni, or public sentiment—it can undermine the integrity of the decision-making process within the team. Ideally, teams should operate based on their operational values and the well-being of their athletes. When those values are overridden by external pressures, it raises ethical concerns about how decisions affecting the athletes are made.
**Interviewer:** The team reportedly had a split vote, with players feeling conflicted about the forfeit. How do these internal dynamics affect team cohesion moving forward?
**Dr. Thornton:** A split decision can be detrimental to team dynamics. It often creates divisions among players, particularly when they perceive that their voices aren’t being heard. This can lead to feelings of disillusionment and can impact their performance on the court. Trust and solidarity are essential in athletic teams, and when players feel that decisions are being made for them, it can erode that foundation.
**Interviewer:** Many supporters of the forfeiture cited concerns over fairness and safety in women’s sports. In your view, how should institutions balance these concerns with the need for inclusivity?
**Dr. Thornton:** That’s the million-dollar question. The concept of fairness is subjective, and institutions must navigate these tricky waters carefully. Inclusivity should not inherently compromise fairness and vice versa. Ongoing dialogue, education, and realistic assessments of what competition looks like in an inclusive environment are crucial. Stakeholders must base their discussions on data, longitudinal studies, and grounded research to better inform their policies and attitudes.
**Interviewer:** In past competitions, the University of Wyoming faced the same team without any issues regarding the transgender athlete’s participation. What does this sudden shift indicate about societal attitudes toward inclusion in sports?
**Dr. Thornton:** The sudden change suggests that social, political, and cultural climates are fluid and can shift dramatically based on current events or advocacy work. It also reflects a growing polarization around these issues, which can pressure institutions to take stronger or more conservative stances than they might have otherwise. It emphasizes how crucial it is for universities to engage in ongoing dialogue with all stakeholders to navigate these complexities.
**Interviewer:** what advice would you give to athletic programs grappling with these types of issues?
**Dr. Thornton:** Communication is key. Programs should engage openly with their athletes and staff about their concerns and perspectives, creating an inclusive environment where all voices are heard. Additionally, it would be prudent for universities to have clear policies regarding inclusivity and to prioritize education about gender identity issues. This groundwork can provide a framework for addressing future situations more effectively and compassionately.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. Thornton, for sharing your insights on this crucial topic. It’s clear that the intersection of sports, gender identity, and societal pressures is a complex and evolving landscape that demands careful consideration.
**Dr. Thornton:** Thank you for having me. It’s essential that we continue to discuss these matters with openness and a commitment to understanding all viewpoints involved.
