Recent debates and policies (NCAA 2025; IOC 2026)  regarding transgender athletes have failed to address and include non-binary athletes, who may not necessarily identify as transgender. Approaches to resolving trans inclusion in sport often follow two paths: (1) the creation of a third category or (2) merging systems, namely sex-based and gender-based systems. Importantly, these approaches often share metaphysical assumptions: one can apply methods used to address women’s oppression-by-exclusion (of mere participation), i.e., determining and resolving what constitutes the oppression, to non-binary athletes. For example, women's sabre fencing was created to resolve exclusion sustained by interlocking institutional rules and cultural narratives (Frye 2000; Young 1990). In this paper, I argue that the aforementioned accounts and approaches are misguided because they misunderstand relevant metaphysical implications. Drawing on Dembroff (2018), Bettcher (2014), Jenkins (2016), and MacKinnon (1984), I contend that, because women are subordinated within a recognized social category, whereas non-binary athletes are oppressed through categorical non-recognition, resolving non-binary exclusion in sport requires merging two metaphysically distinct systems, possible only by (1) imagining a third system, which I establish cannot resolve non-binary oppression, or (2) altering one to comply with the other - an approach resulting in (1) and carrying unpalatable consequences (Hirji 2021; Ritchie 2021).

Athletic identity is defined as “the extent to which one identifies with the athletic role” (Brewer et al., 1993). This definition positions athletic identity within identity theory from social psychology, which suggests that individuals can identify with multiple identities that align with roles they play (e.g., mother, friend, colleague) and groups they belong to (e.g., gender, religion) (Stets et al., 2000). In other words, athletic identity is one of many sub-identities an individual may identify with (Geary et al., 2025). This brings us to the current study: Current research in sports psychology has failed to examine the impact of identity as a whole, namely, personal identity, on athletic identity. It is important to investigate, however, given that athletic identity, as a sub-identity, significantly impacts athletic performance. The theoretical work in this paper shows that athletic identity can be causally related to personal identity and, therefore, that personal identity can impact athletic performance. The aims of this study are twofold: (1) to examine the conceptual correlation between athletic identity and personal identity, and (2) to develop a feasible research design capable of examining this identity correlation on athletic performance.

This paper explores the relationship between a self-regarding emotion, namely moral shame, and the self. This investigation requires that we carefully parse through existing accounts of the self and of shame to understand what utility comes with shame. What does it mean for us when we experience shame? And what does it mean for others when we ask them to feel shame? These questions are at the center of this paper. I argue that there ought not to be morally justifiable utility to shame because it is harmful to the self. This paper has salient practical implications for today’s society; especially when we consider the use of online shaming and the shaping of personal identity on the internet, considering the interactions between moral shame and the self is of particular importance.