"Men in women's sports came ravaging through our cities"????? Is the old coot so far gone that he can't remember whether he's slamming immigrants, Black people or trans athletes? As for the world not laughing at us, Mr. President, EVERYONE with the possible exception of J.K. Rowling is laughing at you.
Did you miss the attacks on any woman who says she doesn’t want to see a male penis in her locker room? You sound like a true member of the crime-attack syndicate. Your post oozes with mental illness.
The Republicans are having a ridiculous overreaction to trans women athletes. Plus, they've taken leave of common sense. No guy, because he's disappointed with his performance in sports, is going to go through the trouble of getting gender reassignment surgery and taking hormones to have a permanent change in identity to female just to win in sports. It's too damned much trouble.
The Democrats have failed in addressing this nonsense. It's an easy argument to disprove and I don't know why they don't develop a quick, fact filled message. There must be some bright young person who can put together a fact sheet, if they're too lazy to educate themselves. Enough of allowing these Heritage Foundation freaks to write an agenda that targets such a small number of people. Maybe the Democrats and the Republikkkans need a quick biology lesson.
I looked at your headline today and thought it simply self-evidently true… and almost skipped reading the article , which would have been such a mistake.
This essay does an especially good job picking the relevant facts from the bad-faith arguments and sheer NOISE out there, and giving it context.
I support trans women (and trans men) because I support humans and human rights. But even if that weren’t the case, as a feminist I would be a fool not to support trans women… if only because there is no world in which trans women are excluded that doesn’t ultimately harm _all_ women.
Thank you for an exceptionally well-written piece!
Great piece full of logical reasoning and actual facts. The problem, I think, is that the Dems let MAGA define this nonissue for too long. It has become an unfalsifiable claim, impervious to facts or truth. If we push back with honest numbers, the rightwing just shifts the claim—“Well, what about this bullshit hypothetical?” The Dems will always be on the defensive.
The way to deal with all cowardly bullying is to go on the offense. Don’t ask why the right is obsessed with women’s sports and virtually nonexistent transgender athletes. Don’t hit the with stats and facts.
Instead, ask what their obsession is with people’s, particularly women’s, genitalia. They want to inspect children’s genitalia? Demand to know why. Who will conduct these inspections? Will they take photos? Will they share them with others?
If this all sounds perverse, it’s because it is. MAGA has an unhealthy obsession with children’s sexuality. Call it out. If a Rep candidate tries to campaign on opposing transgender athletes, their Dem opponent should ask them directly if they intend to personally inspect the children. Raise the spectacle of every child being scrutinized. Let parents imagine the implications of their own kids being exposed to MAGA perversions. Put the MAGA weirdos on the defensive by mocking their obsessions.
Doing so would take guts and resolve beyond what most Dems demonstrate, but it’s the only way to neutralize the unfalsifiable claim and (more importantly) take the heat off our transgender citizens who are just trying to live their best lives.
There are no genital inspections, this is a red herring, a hysterical lie. Athletes’ sex is verified via (a) their original birth certificate, (b) a one time cheek swab, less invasive than a Covid test, which shows whether the athlete has the SRY gene, or (c) their family doctor who conducts the _required_ annual physical every single athlete is required to have before playing, who attests to the athletes’ sex on the form they must bring to the school
There is a difference between what is done and what is being called for, as the article indicates. No one has claimed that genital inspections are taking place, only that they have been proposed.
Who is proposing genital inspections? In Washington state there is a ballot measure before the voters this November that mandates girls’ and women’s sport be only for natal females. The measure specifies verification of female athletes’ sex by the routes I explained above—if it passes no one at a school will be inspecting anyone’s genitals.
Protection of the female category in sport (and prisons and changing rooms) is very important to many many citizens on the political left. A majority (or large plurality) of Democrats in polls over the past three years favors reserving girls’ and women’s sport for females.
These Dems who feel this way (I’m one of them) don’t hate trans people. They (and I) strongly support protecting trans people from discrimination in housing, employment, and public-serving businesses, and we want trans people to live with dignity and safety.
But in a certain limited set of spheres we separate people by sex for very good reason, and sport is one of them. Just as trans people have the right not to be discriminated against in the areas I outlined above, female athletes have a fundamental civil right to fair competition in sport, which means males must not be included in girls’ and women’s sport irrespective of someone’s gender identity.
Athletes compete with their bodies, not their identities, and natal males have substantial strength and speed advantages over females, even after hormone treatment and even if they have had their puberty blocked. (Google “male mini puberty”) This is a girls’ and women’s fundamental human and civil rights issue and many many people on the left feel this way.
I despise Trump and loathe MAGA, they are destroying our democracy and the way they are talking about this issue is ugly and nasty.
But on the issue itself, girls’ and women have a right to female only competition. And all this talk about “genital inspections,” trying to stoke hysteria with something totally false is itself an ugly way to demagogue a girls’ and women’s rights issue.
I’m not going to address everything you claim here. Let this stand as an example of the whole. You state that we divide the sexes in sport “for very good reason.” You also state, “Athletes compete with their bodies, not their identities.” I’m curious how you rationalize that contradiction.
The fact is that transgender females in women’s sports is a shrinkingly rare occurrence. All those on the left who make an issue of this nonissue have fallen into Trump’s trap. It’s like railing against noncitizens voting when we know that they just don’t. I’ll bet you don’t fall for that Trump lie. Why does the lie about transgender women in sports have such traction? And why do you refer to transgender females as “males” as in “males must not be included in girls’ and women’s sport.”
You seem very passionate about this matter, but I wonder why given its near non-existence in reality.
First, I am very passionate about this issue because I am a feminist. I strongly support girls’ and women’s fundamental human and civil rights, which include the right to fair competition in sport, the same right that boys and men enjoy that was enacted into U.S. civil rights law in 1972. This right is a central pillar of enacting female equality with boys/men in the United States.
Second, what is the contradiction between saying we separate athletes by sex for a very good reason and saying athletes compete with their bodies not their identities? These statements are complementary not contra doctor. Males (male bodies) are substantially stronger and faster than females, so we have separate divisions for male and female athletes. A person’s identity as trans (or any other identity) is irrelevant to the sex category they belong in. (See below, I think you’re confused about what “transgender” means.)
Third, you use the term “transgender female.” This is an oxymoron. There are no “transgender females.” Female is one of the two sexes: female and male. The word gender in transgender does not refer to a person’s sex. Transgender refers to gender identity—an internal feeling one has about one’s sex. There are no “transgender females” because humans cannot change sex. A male Identifying as a girl or a woman and taking hormones does not literally change his sex to female. Nor does a male who has surgery literally change sex.
We all need to understand that the word and the idea of “transition” is a social fiction. A trans girl or trans woman is a male who declares a girl or woman “identity” and may or may not take hormones. And very very rarely may have surgery. None of these actions change a male’s sex. Loads of trans people readily acknowledge that their sex has not changed—because it’s impossible for humans to change sex.
When I say transition is a social fiction I mean that when a trans woman (a male who identifies as a woman) is in society we treat this trans woman _as if_ this person is a woman. We use this person’s new name. We use their new pronouns. Because it is respectful and polite to do so. But none of this indicates this trans woman has literally changed sex or is _literally_ a woman.
Moreover, trans girl (male) athletes in high school are not required to undertake any physical interventions to participate in girls’ sport. All that is required is a declaration (self-ID). A boy (male) says he identifies as a girl, and therefore he IS a trans girls. That’s all that is required. Finally, hormone treatment (testosterone suppression and estrogen) barely dents the very substantial strength and speed advantages males have over females. Lia Thomas demonstrated this in NCAA swimming when Lia did hormone therapy before switching to the women’s division and promptly went from being ranked 65th in the men’s division in the 500 yard freestyle to winning the women’s championship in this event. From 65th in men’s to national champion in women’s, _after_ testosterone suppression and estrogen therapy. Clearly Lia Thomas did not change sex or lose the dramatic physical advantages males have over females (denser muscles, more fast twitch muscle fibers, larger heart and lungs, etc etc).
Fourth, you say this is a vanishingly rare problem like voter fraud. This is simply not true. In spring 2025, last year, trans girls (male) athletes won nine high school state championships in five states including in Maine, California, Washington, and Minnesota. In 2024 trans girl (male) athletes won five state championships just in track and field (CT, NH, ME, OR, WA) plus there were three other trans girl (male) finalists in track and field state championships.
That’s 14 girls’ high school state championships won by trans girl (male) athletes in just the last two years, and that’s not a complete count because 2024 only includes track and field.
Do you think this is a vanishingly small issue after learning these results? Does this make you rethink your statement of this issue’s “near non-existence in reality”?
Also forget about (the large number of) state championships won by trans girls recently—a single trans girl (male) athlete in a single event eliminates fair competition for many dozens of female athletes. There are typically six or eight athletes in a single heat of a running event—all the female athletes competing against a trans girl (male) face unfair competition in that single heat. There are six or seven or eight (or more) meets in a season. Do the math, a single trans girl in a single event robs many many dozens of female athletes of their right to fair competition in a season.
Finally—why does the number matter? If only one Black person or gay person was turned away from a restaurant because of their race or sexual orientation, would you say “it was only one of millions of people, it’s a vanishingly small problem, it doesn’t matter.” Of course not, because it’s fundamentally wrong to violate the human and civil rights of a single person. And the same goes for female athletes. In my view the argument that “it’s just a few athletes out of many thousands, who cares” betrays profound sexism—girls’ and women’s civil rights, including the right to fair competition in sport, are not seen as important and equivalent to Black or gay civil rights. And that’s naked sexism.
I wrote a response to your last comment but decided to sit on it for a few days. Upon careful reconsideration, I am choosing to appeal to your better angels.
There are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides of the issue, but I wonder if you realize how devisive—and dangerous—your rhetoric and claims are.
It’s important to realize that your numbers don’t add up. Not only couldn’t I confirm them, but even if they were accurate, they still constitute a miniscule percentage of the total number of state championships. There are many, many individual events that lead to state championships, and those numbers are multiplied by 50 states. The numbers you cite are a drop in the bucket.
You say you see each one as an injustice against some more deserving girl. I have plenty of arguments to counter that, but I’ll concede the point to make a plainer case. Given that by your count the number of transgender state champions is tiny, even vanishingly rare, why is this such a big generalized issue? It’s like using a shotgun to remove a splinter? And what of the transgender athletes you seek to disenfranchise? Do they not count? Where do their rights come into this?
Here's an even clearer perspective on “vanishingly rare.” The number of trans individuals in the U.S. (population 340,000,000) measures in the low to mid hundreds of thousands. Subtract the substantial number who are trans males. Now subtract the number who are adults and not eligible for kids' sports, which would be the majority. Now subtract the number who are not interested in sports. Now subtract the number who cannot make a team. Now subtract the number who make a team but aren't stand-out performers. Shall I keep going?
Which makes me wonder about your brand of “feminism.” It seems in line with J.K. Rowling’s take on transgender females, which is entirely based on a reactionary zero-sum-game view of the world. Every trans female somehow constitutes an affront to women and a deficit. Is that how you see this issue? I just can’t align with a “feminism” that seeks to erase a vulnerable population as though these individuals are interlopers or even aggressors simply for being who they are.
I also wonder where trans males fit into this worldview. I can only conclude that this “feminism” would consider them traitors.
Which brings me to your rhetoric. I am not sure if you realize how offensive it is to suggest that cis boys are marching onto playing fields, declaring themselves girls, and attempting to participate in sports. You say several such things that register as transphobic dog whistles. Are you aware you are doing this? Again, your language erases the very existence of trans kids, rendering them a bunch of cosplaying fools or, worse, active cheaters. Do you really believe this nonsense? Are you as filled with hate as your rhetoric suggests or just ignorant of the effect?
I said you are playing into Trump’s trap, so let me explain. If you mosey on over to foxnews.com, you are likely to see at least one story about the WNBA. Fox has been focused on the WNBA for some time.
For a while, Fox tried to manufacture outrage about racial animus in the WNBA, but that seems to have simmered down. Lately, partially in reponse to Sophie Cunningham’s recent comments, Fox has been using transgender athletes as a wedge issue. Since there are no transgender women in the WNBA, that seems a bit odd, don’t you think?
Probably in direct response to all that rightwing bullshit, two has-beens from the men’s league have—see if this sounds familiar—declared themselves women in order to qualify for the WNBA. It’s a stunt meant to play well to the MAGA crowd and to confirm all their absurd assumptions. They aren’t doing this as “feminists” protecting women. They are doing it to assert their masculinity and to enforce gender roles. That’s the sandbox you’re playing in.
Your brand of “feminism” explicitly seeks to enforce gender roles. Traditional feminists have argued for decades that feminism frees both women and men from bullshit gender assumptions, but here you are insisting on them.
So why is Fox so focused on the WNBA? The women’s league is finally achieving the success it deserves. While Fox is always happy to truck in racism and transphobia, it has an even broader purpose in mind, one that tracks with the white Christian nationalist movement and MAGA in general.
Fox is seeking to erase women from the public sphere by, like you, enforcing gender roles. The success of the WNBA is anathema to the worldview they want to promote, one where the only prominent women are the “right” women (and eventually no women at all). They want to discredit the league—to make it look silly and divisive as it stumbles over transgender issues and gender roles. For Fox and MAGA, racism and transphobia are both a means to an end and ends in themselves. It’s kind of a perfect storm of outright bigotry.
Your arguments, your rhetoric, and—yes—your dog whistles are indistinguishable from the transphobic garbage that Fox is spewing as they seek to drive wedges to weaken the position of prominent women in society. Simply put, your brand of “feminism” bolsters Fox and the Christo-fascists attacks. Attacks on women! Your brand of “feminism”—being reactionary and intolerant—supports the MAGA war on women.
Think about that.
I am sure you will want to respond. I’m done, though, and will be muting this thread on my end. I hope you rethink your choices in light of their true effect. I can assure you, it isn’t feminist.
The real threat to WOMEN is Republican white men. Never mind sports and which sex plays what when.
Of all the issues the human race faces to make a stand on, and idiots pick trans people. The real problems:
Max Miller. Ken Paxton. Donald Trump. Another Republican man arrested in the last 24 who's name escapes me. Epstein. The list is long and seemingly endless.
The midterms is a nice plausible cover, but the target around “trans athletes” is removing the legal protections women enjoy while in public life. All women. THF has let the cat out of the bag and the Court has paved the way to create “categories” of people to which Title IX does not apply. Bostock’s days are numbered. It’s not an exaggeration.
This administration is haphazard, wasteful, exploitative, vindictive, and cruel, but when it comes to women, they’re *not* ineffective. Between EOs and the Court - and the dismal view of women taken by society at large - every policy goal they’ve set regarding sex and gender has been achieved … why would they stop there? They won’t unless voters kick them to the curb, and new reps stand up to the Court and the Executive with laws that protect individual rights and *punish* violators. (There’s that accountability thing again.)
Look around: women are dying of childbirth complications like it’s 1910. Dying. Who knows what’s happening to women in ICE detention? Or still in the military? Or the girls in Washington state who want to play sports?
Conservatives want women out of the workforce, out of the Dr’s office, and out of public life, 1890’s-style with a dash of Handmaid’s Tale and TPAC Trad-Wifery thrown in; and Vought & Todd Blanche will make sure it happens whether TFG is alive or not. Vance is even worse.
The attack on women by this administration is real and ongoing, but very view people if anyone seem to be upset enough to leverage it against conservatives inside any party.
Its a non issue accept to maybe 5 people..Since when does a democracy legislate for 5 people? Clue- it doesn't- its meant to stir up outrage in those out seeking a reason to be outraged. We never should have given it the air to survive. Authoritarian! Name it. Say it. Repeat it.
This is the most thoughtful, informative, well-written piece on this topic that I've seen. It's difficult to combat with facts and truth such a strategically demagogued issue, but Democrats cannot allow this to go unanswered. Context is everything, but simplicity is required for the American audience.
If Heritage wants to steer women into less demanding activities more aligned with average female interests and tendencies to maximize their fertility and womanliness, then they should know that other women and I want to steer them straight to hell.
A brief parenthetical note: in his novel, Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein says that women are by far the best spaceship pilots— better at maths, better at analyzing spatial relationships, quicker reflexes to deal with emergencies, etc. The Captain of one of the key spaceships—who saved the young protagonist’s life by solving a complex problem in ballistics in seconds in her head—was a woman. I bet that this sort of thing would send Pete Kegsbreath around the bend—if he wasn’t there already.
There is no such thing as "average women interest" there are jobs demanded of them. Autonomy is the issue. Leave us alone and we will succeed where our talents lead.
Many, many years ago, when Newsweek was still a real publication, they had a cartoon: to the left was a dinosaur—on its back, four paws in the air, Xs instead of eyes—it was labeled, “Communism.” Next to it were a bunch of cavemen with clubs, dressed in Fred-Flintstone-style costumes—they’d obviously just killed the dinosaur. To the extreme right there was another caveman, identical in appearance to the others. One of the cavemen in the group said something like, “What we do now?” Another replied, pointing to the guy alone on the right-hand side of the cartoon, “Let’s kill Ug—he gay.”
There is a certain type of person who is not happy unless he has someone to hate. And indeed, it was not long after that cartoon appeared that a whole slew of Republican politicians were hollering about the Evil Gay Menace to Everything Americans Hold Dear.
Well, that dog won’t hunt any more—so now it’s those same Republicans who are hollering about the Evil Transgender Menace to Everything Americans Hold Dear—men in women’s sports are “ravaging through our cities,” according to 🐔🌮….
What I want to know is, who are they going to hate when hating transgendered people doesn’t work any more? Jews? There is a historical precedent—but not a good one. Lepers? Another, better, historical precedent—but nowadays there simply aren’t enough lepers to go around. Southpaws? That could actually destroy the Great American Game Of Baseball, and no one wants that ( I think,,, I could be wrong…) Maybe the Republican National Committee should set up a Blue-Ribbon Commission to find a new threat to Everything Americans Hold Dear…. Or maybe not….
Ravaging? Well considering that trump does not exist in the real, connected world he just vomits up what's fed him. Our job is to clean it up over and over and over..
Hell, pushing women out of competitive sports entirely makes us worse than the Soviet Union. Even the Soviet Union allowed women to be mothers and compete in sports. One example was Tatyana Ovechkina, a point guard on the Olympic gold-medal women's basketball team. She had already given birth to her first child before winning either of her Golds. (Her story was even more inspirational then in that she nearly had a leg amputated at the age of 7 after being hit by a car when walking home from school and spent months in the hospital.)
She went on to run the women's basketball program for the Russian Federation and also the women's basketball program at her old club, Moscow Dynamo. And went on to have two more children. Her youngest child even would wear her old number when playing sports.
I'm no fan of the Soviet Union or their government or their politics and can't stand Putin. But love Tatyana's story.
There is so much misinformation and obfuscation in this piece it’s hard to know where to begin.
1. Male advantage in strength and speed precedes puberty due to male hormone exposure in utero and during male mini-puberty in the first months after birth. (Google male mini puberty.) This male advantage is not nearly as large as after puberty, but it is measurable and systematic, and it makes the participation of puberty blocked males in girls’ sport in junior high and high school unfair. These are just scientific facts like the earth is round, evolution occurred, and vaccines are safe and effective.
2. For trans women who have undergone male puberty, hormone therapy barely scratches male advantage in strength and speed over female athletes. You use the example of Lia Thomas but Thomas shows the exact opposite of what you argue. Before identifying as a woman and hormone treatment, Thomas ranked 65th in the NCAA men’s 500 yard freestyle. After 30 months of testosterone suppression and taking estrogen, Thomas _won_ the NCAA women’s 500 yard freestyle championship. From 65th in men’s to the women’s champion, after following the NCAA’s hormone protocol. Thomas dramatically moved up the rankings in all events after the move from men’s to women’s, despite hormone therapy. Studies confirm that extended periods of testosterone suppression and taking estrogen only reduce male strength and speed very marginally, and don’t even come close to erasing the very large athletic advantage males have over females due to denser muscles, more fast twitch muscle fibers, less elastic ligaments and tendons, larger hearts and lungs, etc. Again this is just scientific fact, like the universe is roughly 14 billion years old, vaccines are safe and effective, climate change is real, etc.
3. The number of trans women athletes competing in women’s sport is irrelevant to the question of whether their participation is fair to natal female athletes. Fair competition for natal female athletes’ is a fundamental human and civil right, it is a central pillar of the women’s rights that feminists fought tooth and nail for for centuries. It is a statement that girls and women count as much as and are equal to boys and men in society. You wouldn’t argue that if a single Black person or a single gay person was denied entry to a coffee shop due to their race or sexual orientation that it was fine because it was just a teeny tiny number—“it was only one person out of the entire population of the United States, so it’s ok!” No it would not be ok, it would be totally unacceptable. Furthermore a single trans girl/woman (natal male) athlete in a sport creates unfair competition for dozens and dozens of natal female athletes over the course of an athletic season—in a track meet there are eight competitors in a heat and there are how many meets in a season? Six or seven or eight? Or more? When a natal male participates, every girl in every one of those events in every meet has her right to fair competition denied.
4. Why are elite female athletes entitled to fair competition but junior high and high school female athletes are not? You obfuscate by talking about kindergarten kids—where nobody thinks it’s incredibly important to separate kindergarteners by sex—but totally skip over junior high and high school female athletes. These girls train their hearts out and are fierce competitors, why aren’t they entitled to fair competition? The dismissal of this right for girls aged 12-18 is sexist, there’s no other word for it. Similarly, you argue that girls’ sport is about belonging and inclusion and feeling positive with your friends. This is sexism—boys’ sport is about excelling in fair competition, but girls’ sport is not? Girls sport exists for the exact same reasons boys sport does. Girls’ competitive sport is not a social outing or a social club, those already exist on their own. It’s for girls to train and compete to the absolute best of their ability and they are entitled to _fair_ competition as a human and civil right. When you make female athletes compete against males you are telling female athletes: you matter less, you are not entitled to the same rights as boys/men.
5. Trans people should not be and are not banned from sport—we must and should welcome trans athletes in sport, in the category of their sex. There are already very visible trans men (female) athletes playing on women’s sports teams. (Of course they are, they wouldn’t be competitive in the boy’s/men’s category because they are female.) Similarly we can and should ensure that trans girls / women feel comfortable playing in their sex category (boy’s/men’s). We can even change the boy’s/men’s category to “open” to help make this happen.
5. This is not a right wing / Republican “distraction” and it doesn’t divide by party line. A large majority (or plurality depending on the poll) of Democrats supports excluding natal males from girl’s / women’s sport because they support fair competition for female athletes. I’m a lifelong super progressive Democrat, I’ve voted Democrat for 38 years, you couldn’t pay me $10,000 to vote Republican, I think Trump is an authoritarian monster who is destroying our democracy and MAGA needs to be ripped out and destroyed root and branch. Fair competition for girls and women is a _feminist_ and _women’s rights_ issue. There are loads of people on the left who share this view but we have been completely locked out of the mainstream media and elite Democratic conversation.
It is impossible to change your sex. It can’t be done. It is pure idiocy to pretend it can be done. Cisgender is a slur. There is no such thing as cicgender. It is a made-up, meaningless term.
Male bodies should never be allowed to compete against women. Full stop, end of the story.
Wear your woman costume and enjoy yourself. Just stay out of women's spaces, places, and sports. Self-mutilation and drugs will never change your sex.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO CHANGE YOUR SEX. IT CAN’T BE DONE.
"Men in women's sports came ravaging through our cities"????? Is the old coot so far gone that he can't remember whether he's slamming immigrants, Black people or trans athletes? As for the world not laughing at us, Mr. President, EVERYONE with the possible exception of J.K. Rowling is laughing at you.
So, when did transgender cross country runners start gangs and organized crime syndicates to mug people and shake down local business owners?
Did you miss the attacks on any woman who says she doesn’t want to see a male penis in her locker room? You sound like a true member of the crime-attack syndicate. Your post oozes with mental illness.
Trans caravans, you bet! 🙄
The Republicans are having a ridiculous overreaction to trans women athletes. Plus, they've taken leave of common sense. No guy, because he's disappointed with his performance in sports, is going to go through the trouble of getting gender reassignment surgery and taking hormones to have a permanent change in identity to female just to win in sports. It's too damned much trouble.
Oh, Rowling is laughing, too. With glee.
The Democrats have failed in addressing this nonsense. It's an easy argument to disprove and I don't know why they don't develop a quick, fact filled message. There must be some bright young person who can put together a fact sheet, if they're too lazy to educate themselves. Enough of allowing these Heritage Foundation freaks to write an agenda that targets such a small number of people. Maybe the Democrats and the Republikkkans need a quick biology lesson.
I looked at your headline today and thought it simply self-evidently true… and almost skipped reading the article , which would have been such a mistake.
This essay does an especially good job picking the relevant facts from the bad-faith arguments and sheer NOISE out there, and giving it context.
I support trans women (and trans men) because I support humans and human rights. But even if that weren’t the case, as a feminist I would be a fool not to support trans women… if only because there is no world in which trans women are excluded that doesn’t ultimately harm _all_ women.
Thank you for an exceptionally well-written piece!
Belongs on a bumper sticker and yard sign: “there is no world in which trans women are excluded that doesn’t ultimately harm _all_ women.”
Great piece full of logical reasoning and actual facts. The problem, I think, is that the Dems let MAGA define this nonissue for too long. It has become an unfalsifiable claim, impervious to facts or truth. If we push back with honest numbers, the rightwing just shifts the claim—“Well, what about this bullshit hypothetical?” The Dems will always be on the defensive.
The way to deal with all cowardly bullying is to go on the offense. Don’t ask why the right is obsessed with women’s sports and virtually nonexistent transgender athletes. Don’t hit the with stats and facts.
Instead, ask what their obsession is with people’s, particularly women’s, genitalia. They want to inspect children’s genitalia? Demand to know why. Who will conduct these inspections? Will they take photos? Will they share them with others?
If this all sounds perverse, it’s because it is. MAGA has an unhealthy obsession with children’s sexuality. Call it out. If a Rep candidate tries to campaign on opposing transgender athletes, their Dem opponent should ask them directly if they intend to personally inspect the children. Raise the spectacle of every child being scrutinized. Let parents imagine the implications of their own kids being exposed to MAGA perversions. Put the MAGA weirdos on the defensive by mocking their obsessions.
Doing so would take guts and resolve beyond what most Dems demonstrate, but it’s the only way to neutralize the unfalsifiable claim and (more importantly) take the heat off our transgender citizens who are just trying to live their best lives.
There are no genital inspections, this is a red herring, a hysterical lie. Athletes’ sex is verified via (a) their original birth certificate, (b) a one time cheek swab, less invasive than a Covid test, which shows whether the athlete has the SRY gene, or (c) their family doctor who conducts the _required_ annual physical every single athlete is required to have before playing, who attests to the athletes’ sex on the form they must bring to the school
There is a difference between what is done and what is being called for, as the article indicates. No one has claimed that genital inspections are taking place, only that they have been proposed.
Who is proposing genital inspections? In Washington state there is a ballot measure before the voters this November that mandates girls’ and women’s sport be only for natal females. The measure specifies verification of female athletes’ sex by the routes I explained above—if it passes no one at a school will be inspecting anyone’s genitals.
Protection of the female category in sport (and prisons and changing rooms) is very important to many many citizens on the political left. A majority (or large plurality) of Democrats in polls over the past three years favors reserving girls’ and women’s sport for females.
These Dems who feel this way (I’m one of them) don’t hate trans people. They (and I) strongly support protecting trans people from discrimination in housing, employment, and public-serving businesses, and we want trans people to live with dignity and safety.
But in a certain limited set of spheres we separate people by sex for very good reason, and sport is one of them. Just as trans people have the right not to be discriminated against in the areas I outlined above, female athletes have a fundamental civil right to fair competition in sport, which means males must not be included in girls’ and women’s sport irrespective of someone’s gender identity.
Athletes compete with their bodies, not their identities, and natal males have substantial strength and speed advantages over females, even after hormone treatment and even if they have had their puberty blocked. (Google “male mini puberty”) This is a girls’ and women’s fundamental human and civil rights issue and many many people on the left feel this way.
I despise Trump and loathe MAGA, they are destroying our democracy and the way they are talking about this issue is ugly and nasty.
But on the issue itself, girls’ and women have a right to female only competition. And all this talk about “genital inspections,” trying to stoke hysteria with something totally false is itself an ugly way to demagogue a girls’ and women’s rights issue.
I’m not going to address everything you claim here. Let this stand as an example of the whole. You state that we divide the sexes in sport “for very good reason.” You also state, “Athletes compete with their bodies, not their identities.” I’m curious how you rationalize that contradiction.
The fact is that transgender females in women’s sports is a shrinkingly rare occurrence. All those on the left who make an issue of this nonissue have fallen into Trump’s trap. It’s like railing against noncitizens voting when we know that they just don’t. I’ll bet you don’t fall for that Trump lie. Why does the lie about transgender women in sports have such traction? And why do you refer to transgender females as “males” as in “males must not be included in girls’ and women’s sport.”
You seem very passionate about this matter, but I wonder why given its near non-existence in reality.
First, I am very passionate about this issue because I am a feminist. I strongly support girls’ and women’s fundamental human and civil rights, which include the right to fair competition in sport, the same right that boys and men enjoy that was enacted into U.S. civil rights law in 1972. This right is a central pillar of enacting female equality with boys/men in the United States.
Second, what is the contradiction between saying we separate athletes by sex for a very good reason and saying athletes compete with their bodies not their identities? These statements are complementary not contra doctor. Males (male bodies) are substantially stronger and faster than females, so we have separate divisions for male and female athletes. A person’s identity as trans (or any other identity) is irrelevant to the sex category they belong in. (See below, I think you’re confused about what “transgender” means.)
Third, you use the term “transgender female.” This is an oxymoron. There are no “transgender females.” Female is one of the two sexes: female and male. The word gender in transgender does not refer to a person’s sex. Transgender refers to gender identity—an internal feeling one has about one’s sex. There are no “transgender females” because humans cannot change sex. A male Identifying as a girl or a woman and taking hormones does not literally change his sex to female. Nor does a male who has surgery literally change sex.
We all need to understand that the word and the idea of “transition” is a social fiction. A trans girl or trans woman is a male who declares a girl or woman “identity” and may or may not take hormones. And very very rarely may have surgery. None of these actions change a male’s sex. Loads of trans people readily acknowledge that their sex has not changed—because it’s impossible for humans to change sex.
When I say transition is a social fiction I mean that when a trans woman (a male who identifies as a woman) is in society we treat this trans woman _as if_ this person is a woman. We use this person’s new name. We use their new pronouns. Because it is respectful and polite to do so. But none of this indicates this trans woman has literally changed sex or is _literally_ a woman.
Moreover, trans girl (male) athletes in high school are not required to undertake any physical interventions to participate in girls’ sport. All that is required is a declaration (self-ID). A boy (male) says he identifies as a girl, and therefore he IS a trans girls. That’s all that is required. Finally, hormone treatment (testosterone suppression and estrogen) barely dents the very substantial strength and speed advantages males have over females. Lia Thomas demonstrated this in NCAA swimming when Lia did hormone therapy before switching to the women’s division and promptly went from being ranked 65th in the men’s division in the 500 yard freestyle to winning the women’s championship in this event. From 65th in men’s to national champion in women’s, _after_ testosterone suppression and estrogen therapy. Clearly Lia Thomas did not change sex or lose the dramatic physical advantages males have over females (denser muscles, more fast twitch muscle fibers, larger heart and lungs, etc etc).
Fourth, you say this is a vanishingly rare problem like voter fraud. This is simply not true. In spring 2025, last year, trans girls (male) athletes won nine high school state championships in five states including in Maine, California, Washington, and Minnesota. In 2024 trans girl (male) athletes won five state championships just in track and field (CT, NH, ME, OR, WA) plus there were three other trans girl (male) finalists in track and field state championships.
That’s 14 girls’ high school state championships won by trans girl (male) athletes in just the last two years, and that’s not a complete count because 2024 only includes track and field.
Do you think this is a vanishingly small issue after learning these results? Does this make you rethink your statement of this issue’s “near non-existence in reality”?
Also forget about (the large number of) state championships won by trans girls recently—a single trans girl (male) athlete in a single event eliminates fair competition for many dozens of female athletes. There are typically six or eight athletes in a single heat of a running event—all the female athletes competing against a trans girl (male) face unfair competition in that single heat. There are six or seven or eight (or more) meets in a season. Do the math, a single trans girl in a single event robs many many dozens of female athletes of their right to fair competition in a season.
Finally—why does the number matter? If only one Black person or gay person was turned away from a restaurant because of their race or sexual orientation, would you say “it was only one of millions of people, it’s a vanishingly small problem, it doesn’t matter.” Of course not, because it’s fundamentally wrong to violate the human and civil rights of a single person. And the same goes for female athletes. In my view the argument that “it’s just a few athletes out of many thousands, who cares” betrays profound sexism—girls’ and women’s civil rights, including the right to fair competition in sport, are not seen as important and equivalent to Black or gay civil rights. And that’s naked sexism.
I wrote a response to your last comment but decided to sit on it for a few days. Upon careful reconsideration, I am choosing to appeal to your better angels.
There are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides of the issue, but I wonder if you realize how devisive—and dangerous—your rhetoric and claims are.
It’s important to realize that your numbers don’t add up. Not only couldn’t I confirm them, but even if they were accurate, they still constitute a miniscule percentage of the total number of state championships. There are many, many individual events that lead to state championships, and those numbers are multiplied by 50 states. The numbers you cite are a drop in the bucket.
You say you see each one as an injustice against some more deserving girl. I have plenty of arguments to counter that, but I’ll concede the point to make a plainer case. Given that by your count the number of transgender state champions is tiny, even vanishingly rare, why is this such a big generalized issue? It’s like using a shotgun to remove a splinter? And what of the transgender athletes you seek to disenfranchise? Do they not count? Where do their rights come into this?
Here's an even clearer perspective on “vanishingly rare.” The number of trans individuals in the U.S. (population 340,000,000) measures in the low to mid hundreds of thousands. Subtract the substantial number who are trans males. Now subtract the number who are adults and not eligible for kids' sports, which would be the majority. Now subtract the number who are not interested in sports. Now subtract the number who cannot make a team. Now subtract the number who make a team but aren't stand-out performers. Shall I keep going?
Which makes me wonder about your brand of “feminism.” It seems in line with J.K. Rowling’s take on transgender females, which is entirely based on a reactionary zero-sum-game view of the world. Every trans female somehow constitutes an affront to women and a deficit. Is that how you see this issue? I just can’t align with a “feminism” that seeks to erase a vulnerable population as though these individuals are interlopers or even aggressors simply for being who they are.
I also wonder where trans males fit into this worldview. I can only conclude that this “feminism” would consider them traitors.
Which brings me to your rhetoric. I am not sure if you realize how offensive it is to suggest that cis boys are marching onto playing fields, declaring themselves girls, and attempting to participate in sports. You say several such things that register as transphobic dog whistles. Are you aware you are doing this? Again, your language erases the very existence of trans kids, rendering them a bunch of cosplaying fools or, worse, active cheaters. Do you really believe this nonsense? Are you as filled with hate as your rhetoric suggests or just ignorant of the effect?
I said you are playing into Trump’s trap, so let me explain. If you mosey on over to foxnews.com, you are likely to see at least one story about the WNBA. Fox has been focused on the WNBA for some time.
For a while, Fox tried to manufacture outrage about racial animus in the WNBA, but that seems to have simmered down. Lately, partially in reponse to Sophie Cunningham’s recent comments, Fox has been using transgender athletes as a wedge issue. Since there are no transgender women in the WNBA, that seems a bit odd, don’t you think?
Probably in direct response to all that rightwing bullshit, two has-beens from the men’s league have—see if this sounds familiar—declared themselves women in order to qualify for the WNBA. It’s a stunt meant to play well to the MAGA crowd and to confirm all their absurd assumptions. They aren’t doing this as “feminists” protecting women. They are doing it to assert their masculinity and to enforce gender roles. That’s the sandbox you’re playing in.
Your brand of “feminism” explicitly seeks to enforce gender roles. Traditional feminists have argued for decades that feminism frees both women and men from bullshit gender assumptions, but here you are insisting on them.
So why is Fox so focused on the WNBA? The women’s league is finally achieving the success it deserves. While Fox is always happy to truck in racism and transphobia, it has an even broader purpose in mind, one that tracks with the white Christian nationalist movement and MAGA in general.
Fox is seeking to erase women from the public sphere by, like you, enforcing gender roles. The success of the WNBA is anathema to the worldview they want to promote, one where the only prominent women are the “right” women (and eventually no women at all). They want to discredit the league—to make it look silly and divisive as it stumbles over transgender issues and gender roles. For Fox and MAGA, racism and transphobia are both a means to an end and ends in themselves. It’s kind of a perfect storm of outright bigotry.
Your arguments, your rhetoric, and—yes—your dog whistles are indistinguishable from the transphobic garbage that Fox is spewing as they seek to drive wedges to weaken the position of prominent women in society. Simply put, your brand of “feminism” bolsters Fox and the Christo-fascists attacks. Attacks on women! Your brand of “feminism”—being reactionary and intolerant—supports the MAGA war on women.
Think about that.
I am sure you will want to respond. I’m done, though, and will be muting this thread on my end. I hope you rethink your choices in light of their true effect. I can assure you, it isn’t feminist.
The real threat to WOMEN is Republican white men. Never mind sports and which sex plays what when.
Of all the issues the human race faces to make a stand on, and idiots pick trans people. The real problems:
Max Miller. Ken Paxton. Donald Trump. Another Republican man arrested in the last 24 who's name escapes me. Epstein. The list is long and seemingly endless.
The midterms is a nice plausible cover, but the target around “trans athletes” is removing the legal protections women enjoy while in public life. All women. THF has let the cat out of the bag and the Court has paved the way to create “categories” of people to which Title IX does not apply. Bostock’s days are numbered. It’s not an exaggeration.
This administration is haphazard, wasteful, exploitative, vindictive, and cruel, but when it comes to women, they’re *not* ineffective. Between EOs and the Court - and the dismal view of women taken by society at large - every policy goal they’ve set regarding sex and gender has been achieved … why would they stop there? They won’t unless voters kick them to the curb, and new reps stand up to the Court and the Executive with laws that protect individual rights and *punish* violators. (There’s that accountability thing again.)
Look around: women are dying of childbirth complications like it’s 1910. Dying. Who knows what’s happening to women in ICE detention? Or still in the military? Or the girls in Washington state who want to play sports?
Conservatives want women out of the workforce, out of the Dr’s office, and out of public life, 1890’s-style with a dash of Handmaid’s Tale and TPAC Trad-Wifery thrown in; and Vought & Todd Blanche will make sure it happens whether TFG is alive or not. Vance is even worse.
The attack on women by this administration is real and ongoing, but very view people if anyone seem to be upset enough to leverage it against conservatives inside any party.
Good article here: https://www.clasp.org/blog/the-dangerous-and-violent-reality-of-controlling-women/.
Thanks for the link to the article.
Yes it's a war on women. Or rather another wave in the war on women. It's relentless and exhausting.
Its a non issue accept to maybe 5 people..Since when does a democracy legislate for 5 people? Clue- it doesn't- its meant to stir up outrage in those out seeking a reason to be outraged. We never should have given it the air to survive. Authoritarian! Name it. Say it. Repeat it.
This is the most thoughtful, informative, well-written piece on this topic that I've seen. It's difficult to combat with facts and truth such a strategically demagogued issue, but Democrats cannot allow this to go unanswered. Context is everything, but simplicity is required for the American audience.
If Heritage wants to steer women into less demanding activities more aligned with average female interests and tendencies to maximize their fertility and womanliness, then they should know that other women and I want to steer them straight to hell.
A brief parenthetical note: in his novel, Starship Troopers, Robert A. Heinlein says that women are by far the best spaceship pilots— better at maths, better at analyzing spatial relationships, quicker reflexes to deal with emergencies, etc. The Captain of one of the key spaceships—who saved the young protagonist’s life by solving a complex problem in ballistics in seconds in her head—was a woman. I bet that this sort of thing would send Pete Kegsbreath around the bend—if he wasn’t there already.
In that case, can we send that copy to Kegsbreath even though he is far past the bend?
There is no such thing as "average women interest" there are jobs demanded of them. Autonomy is the issue. Leave us alone and we will succeed where our talents lead.
I need to keep this one.
Many, many years ago, when Newsweek was still a real publication, they had a cartoon: to the left was a dinosaur—on its back, four paws in the air, Xs instead of eyes—it was labeled, “Communism.” Next to it were a bunch of cavemen with clubs, dressed in Fred-Flintstone-style costumes—they’d obviously just killed the dinosaur. To the extreme right there was another caveman, identical in appearance to the others. One of the cavemen in the group said something like, “What we do now?” Another replied, pointing to the guy alone on the right-hand side of the cartoon, “Let’s kill Ug—he gay.”
There is a certain type of person who is not happy unless he has someone to hate. And indeed, it was not long after that cartoon appeared that a whole slew of Republican politicians were hollering about the Evil Gay Menace to Everything Americans Hold Dear.
Well, that dog won’t hunt any more—so now it’s those same Republicans who are hollering about the Evil Transgender Menace to Everything Americans Hold Dear—men in women’s sports are “ravaging through our cities,” according to 🐔🌮….
What I want to know is, who are they going to hate when hating transgendered people doesn’t work any more? Jews? There is a historical precedent—but not a good one. Lepers? Another, better, historical precedent—but nowadays there simply aren’t enough lepers to go around. Southpaws? That could actually destroy the Great American Game Of Baseball, and no one wants that ( I think,,, I could be wrong…) Maybe the Republican National Committee should set up a Blue-Ribbon Commission to find a new threat to Everything Americans Hold Dear…. Or maybe not….
Ravaging? Well considering that trump does not exist in the real, connected world he just vomits up what's fed him. Our job is to clean it up over and over and over..
Keep fighting the good fight, Brynn! Love your writing!
Hell, pushing women out of competitive sports entirely makes us worse than the Soviet Union. Even the Soviet Union allowed women to be mothers and compete in sports. One example was Tatyana Ovechkina, a point guard on the Olympic gold-medal women's basketball team. She had already given birth to her first child before winning either of her Golds. (Her story was even more inspirational then in that she nearly had a leg amputated at the age of 7 after being hit by a car when walking home from school and spent months in the hospital.)
She went on to run the women's basketball program for the Russian Federation and also the women's basketball program at her old club, Moscow Dynamo. And went on to have two more children. Her youngest child even would wear her old number when playing sports.
I'm no fan of the Soviet Union or their government or their politics and can't stand Putin. But love Tatyana's story.
There is so much misinformation and obfuscation in this piece it’s hard to know where to begin.
1. Male advantage in strength and speed precedes puberty due to male hormone exposure in utero and during male mini-puberty in the first months after birth. (Google male mini puberty.) This male advantage is not nearly as large as after puberty, but it is measurable and systematic, and it makes the participation of puberty blocked males in girls’ sport in junior high and high school unfair. These are just scientific facts like the earth is round, evolution occurred, and vaccines are safe and effective.
2. For trans women who have undergone male puberty, hormone therapy barely scratches male advantage in strength and speed over female athletes. You use the example of Lia Thomas but Thomas shows the exact opposite of what you argue. Before identifying as a woman and hormone treatment, Thomas ranked 65th in the NCAA men’s 500 yard freestyle. After 30 months of testosterone suppression and taking estrogen, Thomas _won_ the NCAA women’s 500 yard freestyle championship. From 65th in men’s to the women’s champion, after following the NCAA’s hormone protocol. Thomas dramatically moved up the rankings in all events after the move from men’s to women’s, despite hormone therapy. Studies confirm that extended periods of testosterone suppression and taking estrogen only reduce male strength and speed very marginally, and don’t even come close to erasing the very large athletic advantage males have over females due to denser muscles, more fast twitch muscle fibers, less elastic ligaments and tendons, larger hearts and lungs, etc. Again this is just scientific fact, like the universe is roughly 14 billion years old, vaccines are safe and effective, climate change is real, etc.
3. The number of trans women athletes competing in women’s sport is irrelevant to the question of whether their participation is fair to natal female athletes. Fair competition for natal female athletes’ is a fundamental human and civil right, it is a central pillar of the women’s rights that feminists fought tooth and nail for for centuries. It is a statement that girls and women count as much as and are equal to boys and men in society. You wouldn’t argue that if a single Black person or a single gay person was denied entry to a coffee shop due to their race or sexual orientation that it was fine because it was just a teeny tiny number—“it was only one person out of the entire population of the United States, so it’s ok!” No it would not be ok, it would be totally unacceptable. Furthermore a single trans girl/woman (natal male) athlete in a sport creates unfair competition for dozens and dozens of natal female athletes over the course of an athletic season—in a track meet there are eight competitors in a heat and there are how many meets in a season? Six or seven or eight? Or more? When a natal male participates, every girl in every one of those events in every meet has her right to fair competition denied.
4. Why are elite female athletes entitled to fair competition but junior high and high school female athletes are not? You obfuscate by talking about kindergarten kids—where nobody thinks it’s incredibly important to separate kindergarteners by sex—but totally skip over junior high and high school female athletes. These girls train their hearts out and are fierce competitors, why aren’t they entitled to fair competition? The dismissal of this right for girls aged 12-18 is sexist, there’s no other word for it. Similarly, you argue that girls’ sport is about belonging and inclusion and feeling positive with your friends. This is sexism—boys’ sport is about excelling in fair competition, but girls’ sport is not? Girls sport exists for the exact same reasons boys sport does. Girls’ competitive sport is not a social outing or a social club, those already exist on their own. It’s for girls to train and compete to the absolute best of their ability and they are entitled to _fair_ competition as a human and civil right. When you make female athletes compete against males you are telling female athletes: you matter less, you are not entitled to the same rights as boys/men.
5. Trans people should not be and are not banned from sport—we must and should welcome trans athletes in sport, in the category of their sex. There are already very visible trans men (female) athletes playing on women’s sports teams. (Of course they are, they wouldn’t be competitive in the boy’s/men’s category because they are female.) Similarly we can and should ensure that trans girls / women feel comfortable playing in their sex category (boy’s/men’s). We can even change the boy’s/men’s category to “open” to help make this happen.
5. This is not a right wing / Republican “distraction” and it doesn’t divide by party line. A large majority (or plurality depending on the poll) of Democrats supports excluding natal males from girl’s / women’s sport because they support fair competition for female athletes. I’m a lifelong super progressive Democrat, I’ve voted Democrat for 38 years, you couldn’t pay me $10,000 to vote Republican, I think Trump is an authoritarian monster who is destroying our democracy and MAGA needs to be ripped out and destroyed root and branch. Fair competition for girls and women is a _feminist_ and _women’s rights_ issue. There are loads of people on the left who share this view but we have been completely locked out of the mainstream media and elite Democratic conversation.
It is impossible to change your sex. It can’t be done. It is pure idiocy to pretend it can be done. Cisgender is a slur. There is no such thing as cicgender. It is a made-up, meaningless term.
Male bodies should never be allowed to compete against women. Full stop, end of the story.
Wear your woman costume and enjoy yourself. Just stay out of women's spaces, places, and sports. Self-mutilation and drugs will never change your sex.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO CHANGE YOUR SEX. IT CAN’T BE DONE.
But hey, that's a cool costume.