The NCAA has reacted to the angry backlash by female athletes and their parents against allowing “transgender” athletes to compete in women’s sports. This has long been a serious issue that’s destroying women’s sports, but because the media and certain politicians are so afraid of the trans lobby, anyone who dares state obvious biological facts is smeared as a transphobic hater. But it finally broke through thanks to collegiate swimmer “Lia Thomas,” who was a male swimmer through three years of college, then “transitioned” and is now mowing down all of Penn’s women’s swimming records.
The obvious, ridiculous unfairness of this finally emboldened parents and athletes to speak up, and the NCAA has responded by changing its policy on transgender athletes.
After the usual PC boilerplate about being " steadfast in our support of transgender student-athletes and the fostering of fairness across college sports" (which is blatantly untrue, since there’s nothing fair about a biological male competing against females half “her” size and strength), the NCAA announced that from now on, they will follow a sport-by-sport model similar to the US and international Olympic Committees.
The IOC’s rules state, "Trans female athletes must demonstrate a total testosterone level in serum below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 consecutive months prior to competition and must remain below this threshold throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category in any event."
Again, this is not fairness or equality or even biological science. The fact that testosterone levels have been artificially suppressed does nothing to reverse the size and upper body strength advantages that a male athlete who’s gone through puberty has before “transitioning.” Real fairness would mean either having everyone compete under their biological sex, or if you want to recognize trans athletes, giving them their own competitions.
All this does is sprinkle a thin veneer of “fairness” rhetoric over the problem. But it does nothing to ensure fairness for female athletes whose rights are being shattered just as surely as their hard-won athletic records are.
I think the real reason why Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire is always getting banned by social media may be because he’s too good at dropping truth bombs that the language torturers and common-sense molesters of the left cannot refute and look ridiculous trying.
Megan Fox at PJ Media has a great write-up of his recent appearance on “Dr. Phil” with some transgender activists who were blindsided when he asked them to define the word “woman.” Walsh defined it easily and correctly, pointed out the fatal flaw in their “it’s a subjective concept” claim, and then in one lethal sentence, summed up how they’re trying to appropriate “womanhood” from women.
As Ms. Fox goes on to discuss, the left insists that “appropriating” someone else’s culture, truth or lived experience is one of the worst crimes you can commit. So why is it okay when this group does it to women? Why is appropriating someone’s race bad but appropriating their gender is courageous and praiseworthy? Why is putting on blackface makeup offensive but putting on Maybelline is to be celebrated?
By the way, I also loved Walsh’s point that if you’re allowed to choose your own pronouns and demand that other people use them, why can’t we force people to use our own preferred adjectives, his being “handsome” and “brilliant”?