A Calgary woman's decade-long participation in her local masters swim club has been abruptly terminated, a direct consequence of new provincial regulations requiring athletes to disclose their sex at birth and gender.
New Registration Questions Halt Participation
The author, a self-described "distinctly mediocre" recreational swimmer, found her annual registration renewal for the adult club blocked this year by new mandatory questions. The form, governed by Swim Canada and Swim Alberta, now requires members to answer both "sex at birth" and "gender."
The registration system explicitly states both fields are compulsory and cannot be left blank. Furthermore, a validation note instructs that the answers to both questions must match for the registration to be accepted.
Link to Alberta's Bill 29
This new requirement stems from the Government of Alberta's Bill 29, the Fairness and Safety in Sport Act, and its accompanying policy which took effect on September 1, 2025. The policy's validation rules are what enforce the matching answers.
The swimmer objected to the questions, arguing that her biological sex and gender identity have no bearing on her non-competitive, community-focused swimming. She raised her concerns with her club's executive, who noted her as an "objector" but could not override the provincial mandate.
Membership Revoked After Refusal
Despite repeated reminders, the author refused to complete the form. The standoff culminated in a notice received on December 9, 2025, informing her that her swim training privileges were revoked, effective December 14, 2025.
In her view, the policy is less about safety in a recreational adult sports setting and more an extension of the provincial government's broader approach to transgender individuals. She specifically references the government's recent use of the notwithstanding clause to pass laws affecting transgender youth.
The result is the loss of a community-based physical activity she has enjoyed for nearly ten years, not due to skill or conduct, but because of her principled objection to personal disclosure requirements she deems irrelevant and invasive.
