Transgender activists don't see it as a reasonable solution, they in fact see this as transphobic. They claim that transgender women have no competitive advantage if they have transitioned early (before puberty I think) so should not be discriminated against. I'm not sure this "open" category (which is in practice a male at birth category at high level) really does much other than serve as a token offering to placate the transgender community over the fact that they're not fundamentally being regarded as being any different from their birth sex by the English badminton association. It also seems to differ from World Aquatics definition of an "open" category as mentioned by Arisuin above which appears to be specifically for transgender and non-binary participants so it's already confusing.
Unless it is definitively proven that such an advantage does not exist, they shouldn't be included. In sports, the integrity of the competition is more important than inclusion. And if it is proven, then a line is needed to determine at what age puberty is considered to have started. If that line is too generous, some athletes may slip in that have an advantage. If it is too conservative, some athletes without unfair advantage are excluded. There is always going to be an overlap, and it is better to be conservative with it to ensure a fair competition. And even then, if they win something it will always be questioned.
Edit:
It's been a while since this comment. I'm editing because I no longer believe that trans women that have undergone hormone replacement therapy for a sufficient time hold an advantage compared to cis women, regardless of their age at the start of their transition. At the first time of posting, there had been less research, I had less experience, and my statements were based on an intuitive belief that has turned out to be incorrect. Based on the following systematic review including 52 studies, published in february 2026, as well as continued personal experience with HRT, I now believe that after a sufficient amount of time of HRT, trans women's physical performance is equal to, or in some cases even inferior, to cis women's physical performance. However, I feel like it takes between 2-3 years for the full decline of performance to occur, at least for some athletes.
Regardless, I know that despite the definitive proof, there will always be people that don't believe it to be true, or will question anytime a trans woman wins anything. I play badminton for fun. I don't want to deal with the judgement and harrassment that competing in the women's category would bring me. I don't want people to feel like my performance and achievements are due to my transness. And I quite enjoy playing in the team in the open category that I have played with for years.
I wouldn't want to win by cheating. If I have match point in the most important match of my life and I have to make a line call that no one else could reasonably see, I won't call it in my favour if I don't think it was. Some players on club nights will make an accurate call in the opponents favour and joke that they would have taken it in competition, as if it's acceptable and normal. This puts a bad taste in my mouth. If you know, or think you might have an unfair advantage, you shouldn't want to compete. I know there are people who don't care how they win, but those people are a poison to sports and competition, and shouldn't be indulged. They should be limited by rules and regulations to protect the integrity of the sport. Therefore, any trans woman player that transitioned in or after puberty that decides to enter in the women's category is either a cheater or wilfully naïve. The question is more open if they truly transitioned before puberty, but that would be the minority of trans women.
Edit:
Oof. It's funny yet uncomfortable to know how confident I was while being wrong.
The world aquatics definition of an open category is wrong. Words have meaning. If the competition is closed to most people, it is not an open category. Just because they are wrong doesn't mean the BWF or BE has to be.
The thing that most concerns me with this solution is that the document states that females at birth i.e., transgender men can play in the womens category. Transgender men may have taken testosterone during transition which is a banned substance in competitive sports. Is there no competitive advantage from a female deliberately forcing the body to become more masculine at a young age? There appears to be no mention of this in the document so I'm not sure if I've missed how that's supposed to be workable. If I'm not missing anything then I suspect should a transgender man begin winning in the womens category this will start throwing all sorts of questions up on competitive advantage as it has done with transgender women. Will we see top level women take testosterone for competitive advantage under the premise of transitioning if this is adopted by the BWF?
If it is a banned substance for women, then it should be a banned substance for anyone participating in the women's category. Transgender men participating in the womens would already be a disaster when it comes to acceptance, because if they transition they're telling everyone want to be accepted as men. To then participate in the womens is hypocritical, and shows that their motivation for transitioning is corrupt.
I think they've jumped the gun a bit in following UK swimming's lead and this has the potential to cause more problems than it solves personally. The frequent use of the transphobic label and cancel culture doesn't facilitate environments in which these concerns can be discussed openly. Badminton volunteers will have to spend time relabelling documents and players are going to have to be conscious of using "Open" instead of men's for fear of offending others. It has the potential to cause yet more resentment and division in a Country that already has far too much of it and it seems to fall short of offering anything that the transgender community would be happy with, so I don't understand the reasoning behind it.
If the open category was previously known as the mens category (as it would be if this change happens), you will have to expect it to take years for the terminology to completely shift before it becomes natural. To take offence when people (intentionally or not) call it the mens category is to be intentionally thin skinned. I respect the average adult enough to assume they have the mental resilience expected of an adult. There will always be people that disappoint me based on that expectation, but to lower the bar is a disservice to the human race.
Trans people should be accepted for who they are, and they shouldn't be discriminated against. If that causes division then so be it. However biological factors should not be ignored, and the decisions regarding sports need to be made with a level head in the face of political pressures. I know that is easier said than done, but I think the way to deal with cancel culture is to ignore it, push through the correct decisions and trust that the silent majority are reasonable people.
I fully agree that my rigid perspective might be naïve, and that I might misunderstand the situation or don't know the depths of the politics involved, but I don't much care to involve myself in politics at whatever level or institution, because it is almost always a miserable situation.
