#Women's Sports before Title IX | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

f1ghtsoftly · 3 months ago

Text

All The Women’s News You Missed This Week

10/14/24-10/21/24

Formal justice systems make headway on holding men accountable for violence against women in Bolivia, Malaysia, and Ivory Coast. An Indian researcher wins a prestigious grant for her work on Dalit (untouchable) women. A female politician heckles King Charles during his visit to Australia and Italy bans traveling abroad for surrogacy in another attempt to limit the ability of same-sex couples to have children.

Want this in your inbox instead? Subscribe here

US Abortion Rights:

Missouri abortion-rights campaign fundraising total at $22M one month before election

3 states renew their effort to reduce access to the abortion drug mifepristone

Male Violence Against Women and Children:

Bolivian ex-leader's looming arrest warrant triggers protests

Ex-Louisville officer who fired shots in Breonna Taylor raid readies for 3rd trial

Woman dies 2 days after co-worker shot her at Santa Monica College, police say

K-pop star gives tearful testimony on harassment

S Korean striker sorry for filming secret sex videos

Arrests Hundreds More Over Child Abuse Claims

Why fight for justice isn't over in India's 'horrific' widow-burning case, 37 years on

Duchess shocked by sexual exploitation of refugees

Murder, rape and torture allegations hit Ivory Coast student union

Buses to become safe spaces for vulnerable women

Women In The News:

Susan Smith is up for parole 30 years after drowning her kids in a South Carolina lake

Bangladesh issues arrest warrant for ex-leader Hasina

The 'genius' Indian who shattered caste barriers

I'm not stupid, I've chosen to speak, says catfish victim duped for nine years

I’ll stand for Russian president when Putin's gone, Navalny’s widow tells BBC

New York Liberty claim first WNBA title with overtime win

WATCH: Moment King Charles is heckled by Australian politician

Women's program aims to combat violence in Chicago: "The police cannot do this alone"

Le Sserafim: The K-pop band who want to change the industry

LGBT:

Missouri now requires proof of surgery or court order for gender changes on IDs

Trans socialite did serve her jail term, Nigerian panel finds

Italy bans couples from travelling abroad for surrogacy

In New York, a constitutional amendment provides election fodder for the left and the right

Arts and Culture:

Harris interview with Fox News showcases a change in strategy for Democrats with network

Movie Review: ‘Smile 2' nicely targets pop star fame with the terrific Naomi Scott

Movie Review: Strippers, oligarchs and a fairy tale gone sideways, ‘Anora’ is a wild ride

For once — a true crime story that isn't focused on the killer

WATCH: Dawn Richard found freedom, clarity while working on new album

Becky G says ‘Encuentros,’ her second album of regional Mexican music, is a celebration of culture

Book Review: 70-year-old psychiatrist takes to the road in Anna Montague’s beguiling new novel

Half a Century After Title IX, Universities Are Still Failing Survivors: The Ms. Q&A With Nicole Bedera

As always, this is global and domestic news from a US perspective covering feminist issues and women in the news more generally. As of right now, I do not cover Women’s Sports. Published each Monday afternoon.

#radblr #radical feminism #radical feminist #radical feminists do touch #char on char #radfem safe #radical feminist theory #radfems #radfem #feminist news #feminism #All The Women’s News You Missed This Week

10 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 6 months ago

Text

Christopher Wiggins at The Advocate:

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre swatted back the false premise by a reporter in Wednesday’s press briefing that recent changes by the Biden administration’s Department of Education to Title IX rules would allow “biological men” to play on women’s sports teams and enter women’s locker rooms. The updated Title IX regulations, which took effect last week, enhance protections for LGBTQ+ students by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. These changes have drawn lawsuits from 26 states, with some governors refusing to implement them. Critics argue that the new rules could undermine women’s sports and invade the privacy of female students, while LGBTQ+ advocates say it is an issue of fairness, allowing young people the dignity to be who they are.

During the briefing, Owen Jensen, a reporter for the Catholic news network EWTN, questioned the implications of the new regulations, framing the matter in transphobic rhetoric. “The new Title IX went into effect last week, last Thursday,” Jensen started. “As you know, it’s faced lots of lawsuits. Many governors say they’re not going to even follow it, so there’s that angle of it. But critics say the new Title IX hurts women and girls. For starters, they say it will destroy women’s sports by allowing biological men to compete directly against women in sports. Does the president share that concern?” Jean-Pierre responded by emphasizing the administration’s commitment to student safety and inclusivity.

“Every student deserves the right to feel safe in schools,” Jean-Pierre said. “That’s what the rule is all about.” She said that the Title IX changes strengthen and restore protections removed under the Trump administration. She added that the rules aim to curb violence against women, “a priority, not just for this president as president, but certainly during his senate years, throughout his career.” She added, “This is an important step in ongoing work to end campus sexual assault. That’s what we want to see, and I cannot speak any further to the litigation.” Jensen tried again and asked her to “address the concerns that the new Title IX rewrite will allow men — biological men — into women’s locker rooms.” Jean-Pierre dismissed the inquiry. “It’s an ongoing litigation. I’m not going to say anything beyond that,” she responded before moving on. Conservatives have pushed the false and transphobic premise that transgender women are just men who want to be in women’s spaces.

Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pushes back at EWTN reporter Owen Jensen’s transphobic question about the Biden Administration’s LGBTQ+-inclusive Title IX rules changes.

#Karine Jean Pierre #Biden Administration #Owen Jensen #EWTN #Eternal Word Television Network #Transphobia #Anti Trans Extremism #Title IX #US Department of Education

8 notes · View notes

isaacsapphire · 10 days ago

Note

Commenting to the ask box because that thread was getting inconveniently long

people on here wildly underestimate the degree to which normies care about college sports, and more importantly, how much upper-middle class suburban women care about title IX and women’s college sports.

Idk if it flipped any states, but I have seen right-leaning centrist women who’d likely have abstained out of a dislike of trump say they specifically voted for him because of title IX, trans sports issues like locker rooms, and “Kamala is for they/them”.

The even bigger effect was the left-leaning centrist women who weren’t necessarily flipped D to R, but just became disillusioned with progressive politics, or politics in general. And this is a demographic of women who’d been very reliable democrats because of women’s rights, abortion, education policy, etc. these women vote consistently, they fundraise, they put up lawn signs, they donate, and there’s definitely a chunk of them being peeled off because of NCAA trans issues. Not necessarily radicalized to the right, just pushed into apathy. And they are no longer delivering those key suburban votes.

Definitely about class mobility in some cases, very frequently about class maintenance, these are multi-generational college families but they aren’t necessarily the “pay out of pocket for multiple 4-5 year degrees” kind of upper middle class. That sports scholarship will absolutely help Kailee become a white collar professional like mom.

The biggest factor I see is just cultural. These are women for whom sports are a big deal, and women’s sports being seen as equal was a big sign that feminism was winning and women were being taken seriously. For a not insignificant number of women, D2 women’s rowing or other obscure sport of choice is hugely symbolic of feminism and progress and anything that jeopardizes that is threatening to very basic principles and values that they hold. I think people who’ve never played sports just don’t get it, tbh. I only competed for a couple months at the collegiate level before I burned out and “retired” but even as an oblivious teenage boy I saw how big of a deal sports were to the women in my subculture.

I think it says a lot that there is one prominent trans woman who’s consistently opposed to trans women in women’s sports; Caitlin Jenner, who was a serious passionate athlete in a previous life, so to speak. She gets the quasi-spiritual importance that people feel for this sort of thing

Thank you. I have a very sporty close family member and a bunch of coworkers who are parents of high school athletes across a range of genders and sports, so I’m constantly hearing about how Kaliee and Noah did in the big game or at the meet over the weekend. Like, this shit really matters to a lot of normies, and there absolutely an equivocation between 2nd/3rd wave feminism and women’s sports. “Girl power” and lacrosse or hockey or whatever are seen as natural combinations.

And I also have a fairly good idea about what some of these parents have for budgets too; they are middle class, but making their children middle class is a huge challenge, and they very explicitly are angling their children towards full or partial scholarships because minimizing student debt is most likely going to be instrumental in getting their kids launched into the middle class.

Your theory that NCAA trans stuff was a big contributor in pushing a lot of key demographic of women away from voting dem into not voting or from not voting into voting for Trump is interesting. The big demographic oddity from 2024 is that Black women specifically didn’t more roughly 10% Republican, while everyone else went about 10% more Republican compared to 2020. And my impression is that Black women definitely get sports scholarships.

#class in the us #oh geez I can tag asks now #college scholarship #college athlete #american politics #trans #ncaa #caitlin jenner #sports #feminism #race in the us #race in america #election 2024

4 notes · View notes

radlymona · 4 months ago

Note

the biden/harris administration added gender identity to sex discrimination in title ix so chappell’s stance is literally just performance and bootlicking entitlement https://web.archive.org/web/20240802033903/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/01/us/politics/biden-title-ix-gender-sex-discrimination.html

You're right, and it's like I said before, I doubt Chappell has any real clue about what's actually going on in the world. This is someone who grew up in a (presumably sheltered) conservative Christian household, and spent her entire adulthood trying to break into the music industry. And since then she's pretty much been touring non-stop. So like, I doubt she's taking the time to research important social-political issues.

But she's a young female celebrity and as such her audience demands that she acts as a quasi activist. For gen zers the celebrities they stan need to be as unproblematic as possible, otherwise it somehow reflects badly on them.

And I'm sure Chappell and her label know exactly what type of online gendie slacktivists she appeals to. So paying lip service to them is exactly the right course of action. And being a "trans ally" embodies the "let people do what they want" activism that requires exactly 0% real effort and thought. Chappell doesn't have to share public spaces with unknown trans women nor is she competing at a disadvantage against them in sports. And I doubt she's ever thought too deeply about whether teenagers are too young to transition, and if the erasure of female-specific language would affect her.

And why would she? She's too busy touring, making music and dealing with a sharp rise in fame to critically examine how trans rights activism affects women and vulnerable minors. Better to pay the lip service, reap the benefits, and continue to perform with the "unproblematic" label now cleanly attached to her.

#this is even that much of a criticism #like i even kinda get where's she coming from #could you argue she has no moral backbone?#absolutely #but again i doubt she has more than a shallow understanding of basic feminist issues anyways

5 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 8 months ago

Text

By: Leor Sapir and Joseph Figliolia

Published: Jun 11, 2024

In its recent Title IX guidance, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights redefines the 1972 law to ban discrimination on the basis of “gender identity” in federally funded education programs. In doing so, it showed willful disregard for scientific research on pediatric gender transition and for the findings of the Cass Review, a 388-page report and the most comprehensive to date on youth gender medicine.

OCR also ignored legal precedent. It said that its Title IX rule was a response to Bostock v. Clayton County, a 2020 Supreme Court decision that involved employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. OCR thus acted without regard for the vast differences between employment (which involves adults) and education (which involves primarily children). And it disregarded entirely the Bostock Court’s explicit statement that it was “proceed[ing] on the assumption that ‘sex’ . . . refer[s] only to biological distinctions between male and female” and consequently that its ruling does “not purport to address bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind.”

The Republican response has been swift. Several red states have publicly condemned the update, and more than 20 have filed lawsuits. Much of the criticism has rightly focused on how creating “gender identity” rules will undermine women’s safety and opportunities by eliminating single-sex spaces and forcing the integration of male athletes into female sports.

The new rule effectively forces schools to facilitate so-called social transitions—recognizing trans-identifying students by their chosen “gender”—regardless of students’ age, familial circumstances, or medical and mental-health background. Schools won’t need to get parental consent; in fact, the rule effectively compels them to secure students’ consent before disclosing information about their social transition to their parents. It does so by recognizing students’ right to privacy from not just their school, but their own parents.

These new changes bring the Department of Education into conflict with the findings and recommendations of the recently published Cass Review. Immediately following the Review’s publication, Kamran Abbasi, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal, acknowledged that the evidence base for gender medicine—“from social transition to hormone treatment”—is “threadbare.” He called the report “an opportunity to pause, recalibrate, and place evidence informed care at the heart of gender medicine.”

The Biden administration has declined that opportunity. Its new Title IX rules implicitly reject the report’s findings and further illustrate Democrats’ indifference to the rising chorus of international skepticism about pediatric gender medicine and early social transition.

Advocates of social transition make two arguments for the practice. First, they insist that social transition improves mental health in “trans kids” and that failing to “affirm” a child’s “gender identity” can be psychologically damaging. Second, and somewhat in tension with the first claim, proponents argue that using students’ preferred names and pronouns, and granting them access to their preferred sex-specific facilities and activities, is no big deal. It’s not a psychological intervention at all, they claim, but merely a show of “respect” and “inclusion.”

Like physical medicine, psychological interventions can be beneficial or harmful. Iatrogenesis—treatment-induced illness—exists in physical and mental-health care alike. For this reason, any intervention requires careful diagnosis, weighing of costs and benefits, consideration of alternatives, and informed consent, which, in the case of minors, comes from those legally responsible for their wellbeing.

In her report, Cass writes that social transition “in an NHS setting” is “an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning and longer-term outcomes.” Cass and her team recommend that, for children, mental-health professionals advise parents “on the risks and benefits of social transition as a planned intervention, referencing best available evidence.” (Keep in mind that Cass’s recommendation assumes mental-health professionals will not automatically “affirm” a child’s feelings about gender.)

While Cass claims that social transition “is within the agency of an adolescent to do for themselves,” this needs to be clarified. A student may request new pronouns, wear clothing typical of the opposite sex, or want to use the other sex’s bathrooms, but a trans-identifying child has not socially transitioned unless adults in positions of authority treat the child as though he were what he claims to be. For very young children who don’t understand what pronouns are or how gender-related behaviors like dress and haircuts relate to one’s status as boy or girl, the “request” for social transition is inferred by adults from the child’s behavioral cues. In other words, by definition, social transition is something done to kids—not something they do to themselves.

If, as established, social transition is an active psychological intervention, the next question is: Does it help? The Biden DOE, which in 2021 encouraged schools to “use the name a student goes by, which may be different from their legal name, and pronouns that reflect a student’s gender identity,” thinks so. The department’s position mirrors that of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, which, in its Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8, says, “Research indicates social transition and congruent gender expression have a significant beneficial effect on the mental health of [trans-identifying] people.”

This isn’t true, according to the Cass report. Cass and her team commissioned seven systematic reviews of evidence and medical guideline quality from experts at the University of York, one of which dealt specifically with the question of social transition. The findings of that review, Cass writes, support “none of the WPATH [SOC] 8 statements in favour of social transition in childhood.”

Cass also notes that “social transition in childhood may change the trajectory of gender identity development for children with early gender incongruence.” In other words, if all adults in positions of authority in a boy’s life consistently treat him as if he is a girl, he will be more likely to believe that he really is a girl. While data on the relationship between social transition and gender-identity outcomes is limited, the possibility that social transition solidifies a cross-sex identity is supported by desistance literature. A 2018 paper by University of Toronto psychologist Kenneth J. Zucker suggests that 67 percent of children who meet the diagnostic threshold of gender dysphoria outgrow those feelings by adulthood, typically during puberty. Of those below the diagnostic threshold, 93 percent desisted.

Crucially, the kids in those studies had not been socially transitioned in the way gender transition advocates now recommend. Compare these high rates of desistence to those from a 2022 study of a group of socially transitioned children, which found that 97.5 percent had not come to terms with their sex at the end of a five-year follow-up period. Though this study did not follow the kids all the way through adolescence, it suggests that social transition can lock in a child’s cross-gender beliefs and feelings that otherwise are likely to remit. Most of the children in this study were receiving medical interventions, including puberty blockers, by its end.

Cass and her team thus recommend caution. They instruct parents to socially transition a young child, if at all, only after consulting a clinician, and they counsel clinicians to prefer partial social transition (e.g., letting the child wear cross-sex clothes while maintaining his name and pronouns) to full social transition. For adolescents, they argue that “exploration” of identity “is a normal process” and “rigid binary gender stereotypes can be unhelpful.” (Of course, trans identities often rely on such stereotypes.)

While gender ideology critics may find it disappointing that Cass allows for social transition in some cases, it’s important to remember that her approach is pragmatic. She acknowledges the reality that parents, teachers, and clinicians only have so much control over a teen’s life. Whatever parents do, they should never make it harder for their kids to “return” to their sex (i.e., desist) after having declared themselves trans. The important thing is “keeping options open.”

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Cass emphasizes that there is no way of knowing which gender non-conforming or trans-identified kids, if any, will experience a lifetime of suffering if they are denied social or medical interventions. By contrast, getting it wrong means severe and potentially permanent iatrogenic harm. Clinicians have no diagnostic tool that can distinguish a child or adolescent who is destined to endure a lifetime of agony from one going through a phase. Normal distress over puberty, inability to accept oneself as gay, ongoing mental health challenges, and (in young children) simple confusion can all manifest symptoms consistent with the current definition of “gender dysphoria.” For this reason, Cass has warned of “diagnostic overshadowing.”

But even if a diagnostic test for “true trans” existed, there is no good evidence that the long-term benefits of early intervention outweigh the risks. And even if they did, it is doubtful that a young teen could understand the tradeoffs and give informed consent.

It is a mark of arrogance that the Office of Civil Rights took none of these facts—many well-known prior to the publication of Cass’s final report—into account when formulating its new Title IX rules. The agency couches its rules in absolutist “rights talk” and imposes highly inflexible requirements on schools.

The new regulations will force schools to accommodate a student who requests social transition, regardless of the student’s age, level of cognitive and emotional maturity, family circumstances, or mental-health challenges, and with or without a mental-health professional’s diagnosis or input from parents. Notably, the rules favorably cite two policy documents—an advisory from the California DOE and an administrative regulation from Nevada’s Washoe County School District—that endorse blanket social transition policies at school without requiring parental notification.

As one of us (Sapir) has pointed out in the past, legal rules like the new Title IX regulation generate considerable legal uncertainty for school districts. In their desire to avoid expensive and embarrassing civil rights lawsuits and OCR investigations, and on the advice of their risk-averse lawyers, school officials and boards find it in their interest to defer to the very advocacy organizations that, either on their own or through allies in their network, can initiate legal proceedings against the school. A self-interested administrator will thus adopt, say, GLSEN’s model policy on transgender accommodation, in the expectation that doing so will send a signal of compliance to the powerful ACLU. Unlike the Biden administration, neither GLSEN nor the ACLU are accountable to voters. Both can adopt radical policies far afield from what even an ideologically driven Department of Education can hope to achieve. This is essentially a racket underwritten by the federal government.

Following OCR’s logic to its conclusion, a school with a parental-notification policy could be guilty of “hostile environment harassment,” as defined in the new Title IX regulations. After all, some would argue, such a policy could be “subjectively and objectively offensive and . . . so severe or pervasive that it limits or denies a person’s ability to participate in or benefit from the recipient’s education program or activity.” Indeed, though the regulatory update goes into effect in August, the Office for Civil Rights has already cited this rationale to launch an investigation against a school district for its parental-notification policy.

The Biden administration, in its Title IX guidance and elsewhere, has stretched the term “abuse” beyond its obvious connotation to include failing to “affirm” a child’s gender identity. Proponents of the administration’s position claim that trans-identified students are at high risk of rejection and could face abuse at home if they are “outed” to their families, but we’ve noted serious problems with this argument. In effect, so has England’s National Health Service, which recommended last September that fit parents should always be involved in the decision-making process regarding social transition in school.

Indeed, mental-health outcomes for gender-distressed youth are better when they have supportive relationships with their family. “Outcomes for children and adolescents are best,” Cass writes, “if they are in a supportive relationship with their family. For this reason parents should be actively involved in decision making unless there are strong grounds to believe that this may put the child or young person at risk.” Secret social-transition policies—which Parents Defending Education estimates are in effect in 18,878 schools in the United States, affecting close to 11 million students—establish an adversarial dynamic between parents and children.

The Cass Review contrasts an “evidence-based” approach to managing gender-related confusion and distress with a “social justice model,” in which considerations of evidence are secondary to political goals. The Biden administration’s Title IX rules, which subordinate the interests of vulnerable children to those of powerful interest groups in the Democratic coalition, clearly belong in the second category.

When they can't define a thing or even agree that it exists, it's unethical to insert language protecting it. Otherwise, it's just a covert blasphemy law, and no better than inserting Title IX protections for "god."

#Leor Sapir #Joseph Figliolia #Title IX #Cass review #Cass report #social transition #gender identity #gender ideology #gender identity ideology #Office for Civil Rights #Department of Education #ideological corruption #corruption of education #religion is a mental illness

3 notes · View notes

gayfranzkafka · 2 years ago

Text

The Atlantic fucking published what is essentially a pro-conversion-therapy argument in their "Up For Debate" column today. I just wrote a letter to the editor, but if anyone wants to join me in that, that would be great. I'm copy + pasting the full text of the article below the cut because it's behind a paywall/that way we don't give it more views. I'd read it for yourself before writing in--the context is that this guy choses one topic a week & then publishes a variety of reader responses without commentary. But I think it's a) reprehensible to choose the "transgender issue" as a topic of debate and b) to include the "question" from James that is essentially a pro-conversion-therapy argument. Obviously CW for transphobia below. You can write a letter either by emailing [email protected] or by going to this page & selecting "Letter to the Editor" from the dropdown menu at the bottom of the page.

"What Readers Really Think About Gender"

Welcome to Up for Debate. Each week, Conor Friedersdorf rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies.

I recently asked readers for their thoughts and questions on transgender issues. What follows is a first batch of responses; more are to come.

Kate favors trans rights but has two concerns:

Any American should agree with your quotation “Trans people have rights to liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and equality under the law, same as anyone else, and ought to be treated with respect and dignity.” And despite social-media storms, most of them do.

I do.

My only problems with the current push, if you will, are twofold. First, as an older woman who has lived both sides of before and after Title IX, to have biological men competing in women’s sports is the very definition of unfair. Second, I am concerned that a female child who is a “tomboy” is perhaps being told by activists (in schools or online) that she is probably a boy. I am concerned that a boy who enjoys ballet might be told, in the same way, that he is probably a girl. Will we lose the Mikhail Baryshnikovs of the world? Will we lose the Billie Jean Kings of the world? The list of such people could go on and on. It’s okay to be a boyish kind of girl or a girlish kind of boy. But with the very loud voices that the activists of today’s world have, my biggest concern is that we are not letting men and women, boys and girls, just BE, just be who they are. It’s all okay. It’s okay to just be who you are; you probably are not born the wrong gender.

That is very rare.

Sally describes her experiences in early-childhood education:

I work with young children at a preschool that works very hard at being inclusive of all genders. I’m a nascent senior. I’m often known to use the term guys in mixed-gender settings, and I think that guys (in the plural sense only) is morphing into something useful and inclusive. I’m working on switching to using folks as a sign of solidarity, though.

Sometimes our gender-sensitivity training does make me want to roll my eyes. Explaining to a toddler working at toileting that some boys have vaginas and some girls have penises is not something they are focused on––learning how to manage one’s own plumbing to avoid making a mess is challenging enough. The struggles of a transgender boy to access the appropriate bathroom don’t yet resonate for those who are still sitting side by side in an all-gender bathroom. That said, the parents who are using they/them pronouns for their young child might be giving them a respite from conforming to gender rules. And having kind and attentive teachers who aren’t cis gives them additional positive role models to look up to. All toddlers I’ve been privileged to teach have loved sequins, sparkles, tutus, and firefighter hats, and all those young humans ought to be able to explore every aspect of themselves without judgment.

. . .Can humans learn to value the diversity that is probably our greatest strength as a social species before we create our own demise? I hope so!

Lois is confused:

If gender is only true if it is self-defined, and societal norms are constraining, why should anyone aspire to transition from one undefinable and nonexistent gender category to a different one? How do they know the identity they are wanting to take on is real? Doesn’t transitioning simply affirm the male-female binary from the other direction?

Dave asks that you believe his account of his child:

I figured it was just a matter of time before this topic came up, so I have kept my trans dad hat ready. I am the father of a 10-year-old transgender son. He has identified as a boy since he was 4 or 5. In many ways, he’s the prototypical example of a gender-incongruent kid. To quote from some in the medical community, he has been “persistent, insistent, and consistent” in this identification. Before he even knew what the word transgender was, he would describe himself in one way or another as having “a boy brain and girl body.” In no time in the past five to six years has this wavered in even the slightest.

I think there is a feeling in some circles that parents of trans kids see their biologically female child play with a truck three times and rush to change pronouns, throw away dresses, and cover all pink paint with blue. For us, this was not even remotely the case. As our son’s identity began to express itself, we were confused, uncertain, and, to be perfectly honest, a little frightened. Our son began refusing anything remotely “girly” about the time he was 4-and-a-half. He began demanding short haircuts, boyish clothes, and mostly boyish toys.

Of course, my wife and I rushed to change his name and pronouns, began wearing we’re proud of our trans boy! T-shirts, secured spots for him on Pride parade floats, and booked his medical-intervention appointments––at least that’s what many people in America seem to think, as if we’re all quick to fast-track our gender-curious kids to trans identities. How do people who believe such things operate in the world being so divorced from reality? We had no idea what to do. Somewhat guiltily, I will admit that we didn’t fully accept (or maybe want to accept) the reality of our son. We weren’t cruel or entirely unsupportive. But we clung to the idea that it was merely a phase. That he was just playing with roles.

In pre-K, he was starting to ask for male pronouns. We nodded and brushed it off. In parent-teacher conferences during the autumn of kindergarten, his teachers again told us this, as well as about him asking to use the boys’ restroom. We replied that we were fine with that in school if that’s what he preferred but we still used she/her at home and planned to continue doing so. “We just want to see where it goes,” we said.

At the request for short haircuts, we avoided “boy” cuts, trying first a bob, and then a shorter bob. Our son would come home from those appointments sullen and sometimes angry, because he had been pretty clear on his desire (a short, boy-style cut) and we had opted for a short, girl-style cut. We were hoping it might be enough, and frankly hoping he would get over it and everything would go back to “normal.” We did roughly the same thing with clothes. He’d want to shop in the boys’ section at Target; we would keep trying to steer him to the girls’. Books too; we were always sneaking in empowered-girl books, thinking maybe he just had developed some weird, bad impressions of women and girls. He would dutifully put them on his shelf and never take them out.

We persisted in using female pronouns at home and referring to him as our daughter and our other son’s sister �� even when he was referring to himself as a brother. In short, we did loads of non-gender-affirming things. If you would have asked us then if we thought it was a phase and that he’d “change back,” we would have dutifully done what liberals in a progressive city do: assured you that wasn’t true and that we loved and supported our child. And we would have been lying; while we of course loved and supported our child, we hoped this whole “I’m a boy in a girl’s body” thing would fade away.

We feared telling our families and potentially facing their rejection and judgment, their possible assumptions that our time in “liberal Madison” had something to do with our child being transgender. We feared we would cause harm by labeling our child too soon. We let our fears hinder us from being the parents our child needed. We were wrong.

I share this to underscore how complex this process is. Because there does seem to be the idea that parents of trans kids aren’t making an effort to “make” their kid conform their gender to their biological sex, that we are just rushing headlong into embracing our child’s trans identity. That there aren’t transgender kids, just over-indulgent progressive parents using their child as a political totem. Or, from the other political extreme, that if we have any doubts or fears or missteps, that we are anti-trans bigots pushing our children toward certain suicide. None of those ideas are true. That this is a deeply difficult thing to process doesn’t seem to occur to some people.

My wife and I finally came to terms with our son's gender identity three years ago when he was seven-and-a-half. Our son was getting increasingly sullen, angry, and defiant. He was unhappy in general, but also angry with us. Even through that winter, we still danced around his gender identity as the cause, as we didn’t want to accept that it was true. We still wanted to believe we had a daughter, not another son. To let go of that idea felt like the equivalent of losing a child. But by that spring it was simply impossible to ignore. We had a conversation and made an appointment with his pediatrician, telling her all we had seen and heard. She confirmed what we had tried to avoid accepting: Our son exhibited all the signs of being transgender.

That was the day we changed our perspective. We went home and told him we were going to start using his preferred pronouns. We compromised on a nickname. He had been named after my wife’s grandmother, and we explained that it was important to carry that on in some capacity, and he accepted a shortened, gender-neutral (and pretty coolly unique) name to go by that used his birth name as a jumping off point. His brother struggled a little with the change, but quickly adapted. And what happened? The sullenness, defiance, and anger disappeared. Our beautiful, buoyant, zany child sprang back out, bigger and better than ever. He switched from Girl to Boy Scouts and thrived.

In the three years since, he has given us not even a tiny glimpse of any of this not being utterly and totally true. He has thrived at his public school—kids are incredibly accepting of things when allowed to be—and at home. His extended family has embraced his identity (some more easily than others). He is as great a kid as anyone could ask for.

I know that there will be people who, were they to read this, would say or think Yeah, sure … he’s only that way because you indulged it and his teachers and school indoctrinated him. To which I’d reply, it could possibly look that way from the outside, if all the evidence you have is one dad’s personal account. But what the people who say those sorts of things don’t see is the daily, lived experience of my kid. A lived experience that reaffirms constantly the truth of who he is. My son is a boy with a girl’s body. I don't understand how that happened, I don’t know how that works, but I know it’s true.

This acceptance doesn’t make the coming years any easier or less terrifying. We can see puberty on the horizon, getting closer every day. We know the huge, terrifying decisions that are coming. We are terrified of making the wrong decision, of doing something that might irreversibly alter or hurt our child. We know that the science, while not as in doubt as opponents want people to believe, has areas of uncertainty. But we need the ability to make the best choices for our kid based on the best medical understanding that exists. And to have the ability to do that suddenly cast into doubt, alongside the possibility of being accused of abuse on top of things, is terrifying and infuriating.

The idea of medical intervention is frightening. But it’s not simply thrown around, at least not in our case. We’ve already had a preliminary meeting with a pediatrician specializing in gender care. Did we leave with a bag of puberty blockers and testosterone vials? Of course not. There is a process we will have to go through to get our insurance company to even cover puberty blockers. As for hormones, that can’t happen until he’s at least 15. And it’s important to remember something else: None of these interventions are required. Many trans kids and adults opt for a range of options, from no medical interventions at all to a full package of interventions. Some start, then stop. It’s all a choice, one parents and kids and doctors need to have the freedom to make.

You may have noticed that earlier I referred to my son as gender incongruent rather than gender dysphoric. That’s not just me being cute with language. I didn’t refer to him as dysphoric, because he isn’t. He’s a super-happy, well-adjusted kid. Why? Because of the support he receives from his family, his friends, and others in his life. There is no dissonance for him because he’s allowed to be who he is. But dysphoria is always lurking out there, whether in the creeping specter of puberty or just the often-unaccepting outside world, and with it the potential for crippling anxiety, depression, and even suicide.

Are there risks to medical interventions? Of course. But the health risks of dysphoria are real too. Given that, it’s still in our best interests as parents to trust the opinions of major medical organizations like the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the AMA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the various doctors and therapists our child has seen. We don’t have the luxury of latching on to individual critical voices. The stakes for us are just too high. That doesn’t mean research shouldn’t continue and that critical voices shouldn’t provide a dose of healthy skepticism; that is a critical part of the scientific process. But until it becomes clear that the consensus on gender-affirming care has changed, we will trust the current consensus.

A lot of people struggle with accepting that being transgender is real. It’s counterintuitive. I really do get that. As I said, I don’t understand why my son is who he is. But it’s true. Be skeptical and ask questions. But also know that this is not a fantasy. It is not something made up. Not a phase. It’s real, and the kids and adults experiencing it are real too. They are not making it up. They are not deluded. They are not freaks.

They are human beings. And so are their families.

James has a question:

If there is a recognized incongruity between what a trans person’s brain feels and what sex their body is, there would seem to be at least two logical responses: Either modify the person’s brain to accept the body that they have or modify the body to conform to what the person’s brain thinks they are. Why, then, is there opposition to any suggestion that you can treat the brain to “correct” gender dysphoria?

A reader with the initials P.S. worries that educators will become gender enforcers, and wishes that schools would focus on collective rather than individual identity:

Creating new gender categories, with divergent lists of characteristics and atomized response requirements, is onerous. I don’t think schools should be enforcing strict gender stereotypes or that they should be guiding kids to identify with new categories, and certainly not secretly or against the desires of the parents. Especially at the lower grades, kids need to be learning about what makes us a collective and the rules that make us a cohesive and functioning society. Focusing on gender conformity/expression elevates and centralizes it—it reinforces “me” over “us,” prioritizes adopting an identity group over belonging to a society, and suggests forcing society to conform to individual preferences over conforming one’s behavior to societal mores.

#also i don't have many followers so if anyone wants to reblog #i'm soooo fucking tired of this shit and maybe i shouldn't be surprised with what the nytimes has been doing #but like i want to at least TRY to make a point to someone somewhere to stop publishing this shit!#so just putting this here if anyone wants to join me in that

9 notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 8 months ago

Text

The TQ+ is ok with censorship if its biological women being censored

Whitney Munro | June 21, 2024

In what has become a signature move of social media companies looking to censor viewpoints that don’t fit their politics, TikTok permanently suspended the woman-owned, woman-led, and woman-designed sportswear company, XX-XY Athletics, for violating advertising policies – without naming any of the specific ads or policies in question.

XX-XY Athletics launched in March 2024, and is the leading athletic brand that stands up for girl’s and women’s sports in a culture oversaturated with gender ideology. The brand, founded by former USA champion gymnast Jennifer Sey, had only been running ads on TikTok for two days before it was banned on June 18, 2024.

youtube

“If you think girls’ and women’s equality matter, stand up,” the ad said. “If girls’ and women’s sports matter, and you want your daughters to have the same opportunity you had, stand up. If you know that it isn’t fair, or safe, to allow males to compete in girls’ sports, because it’s, well, obvious, stand up.”

“…we deserve our own sports, privacy, fairness, safety. We deserve a chance to compete, and win. So don’t be ‘nice.’ Don’t be ‘careful.’ Be honest. Be brave. Fight for women. We’ve come too far to give up now.”

Sey told Independent Women’s Forum:

“TikTok permanently banning our ads, indicating that they are offensive in some way, is why people are afraid to stand up and defend women’s sports and space. The ad is uplifting. It lifts up women’s voices. Being told our ad is too offensive to run is exactly why we need this brand. To normalize saying we deserve our own sports, and to inspire others to stand up for women. When we all stand together we can’t be canceled. Common sense will prevail.”

This is not the first time that XX-XY Athletics founder and CEO Sey had been targeted by the cancel mob, and true to her brand’s ethical guideposts, she’s not backing down.

Sey wrote in an op-ed in the Washington Examiner:

We are unapologetic about our goal of protecting women’s sports and spaces and standing up for truth. And the truth is male biological advantage is the single biggest determinant of athletic performance.

To allow males who say they are women to compete in women’s sports when they are stronger and faster than females is an affront to women, an erasure of the original intent of Title IX, and astonishingly misogynistic, which is why, in the ad, we say, “Don’t let men tell us how to be good girls.”

Let’s face it: It is male bullies who identify as female who are telling us to sit this one out. My answer to that is an unequivocal no.

According to TikTok, the athletic company can still access its account, but its ads will not be delivered because they may feature “offensive content.”

IWF reached out to a spokesperson at TikTok. At the time of publication, TikTok had not yet responded to our request.

Sey suspected the content TikTok didn’t like was two short video clips, one of a male athlete ripping a basketball out of a female athlete’s hands as she falls to the ground and another of a male athlete spiking a volleyball directly into a girl’s face.

Both clips are real. TikTok didn’t appear offended that athletic associations are putting young female athletes in danger due to their woke politics –– the social media platform’s censorious decision demonstrates it’s instead concerned with women speaking up and advocating for their own safety.

It’s hard to imagine something more offensive than a male-owned foreign company telling American women to quiet down, but here we are.

For those interested in supporting the brand, XX-XY Athletics is offering a discount code of 15% off through the end of July. Use code IWF15 at XX-XY Athletics.

#XX XY Athletics #Tiktok and censorship #Youtube #USA champion gymnast Jennifer Sey #Stating biological facts is not offensive content #Title IX

13 notes · View notes

epacer · 16 days ago

Text

Education

New California bill would block trans females from playing in girls’ sports

Days before a Kentucky judge blocked federal rules protecting LGBTQ students last week, California Assemblymember Kate Sanchez proposed similar changes to California law. On Jan. 6 she introduced a bill that would ban transgender females from playing on girls’ sports teams with the California Interscholastic Federation.

Congressional Republicans were on the same page; on Tuesday they passed a bill to ban transgender athletes from women’s sports at the elementary through college level, which would jeopardize federal funding for schools that don’t comply.

Sanchez says her bill and other legislation like it would assure a safe, fair playing field for girls.

“There is a definite difference between biological boys and females in sports, especially at this age,” said Sanchez, a Rancho Santa Margarita Republican who represents Temecula and Murrieta. “This is the intent of the bill, to protect the integrity and fairness of girls’ sports.”

Civil rights and LGBTQ advocates argue that the bill would turn civil rights protections against vulnerable students. Kel O’Hara, an attorney with Equal Rights Advocates, a San Francisco-based gender justice organization, said more than half the states have passed restrictions on transgender students’ participation in sports. Those bills target “a problem that doesn’t exist,” they said.

Sanchez’s bill likely faces steep odds in the California Legislature, which is dominated by Democrats who often vote to the left of Congress. “It strikes me as exceptionally unlikely that such a bill would pass” in California, said Morgan Polikoff, a University of Southern California education professor, said in an email.

California in recent years has passed legislation supporting trans students and athletes, including several measures that protect people from discrimination regardless of gender status.

About 3.3% of high school students identified as transgender in 2023, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Only a small number of students of any gender are elite athletes.

“It’s a dog whistle from our perspective,” O’Hara said. “There’s no evidence that trans students, particularly trans girls, are dominating girls’ sports.”

Sanchez pointed to a lawsuit that two female students in Riverside Unified School District filed in November, alleging that a trans girl had displaced them from the cross-country team. The lawsuit argued that the transgender teammate received a top spot in competitions because of faster times, knocking the plaintiffs out of key parts of a cross-country meet. Sanchez said that’s evidence that transgender girls hold an edge over their teammates.

“I think when you look at it from the perspective and lens of biology, males have a very clear and undeniable advantage, so that plays into part of the legislation we’re trying to advance now,” she said.

O’Hara disputed that transgender girls outperform their teammates. They said that benefits of high school sports extend beyond athletic competition, so trans girls who are banned from teams also lose opportunities to develop teamwork, leadership skills and a sense of community.

“These bills try to convince queer and trans young people that they don’t belong and they’re not safe,” they said. “They want students to give up hope and go home.”

Pushback against transgender rights, particularly in schools, has become a conservative call to arms. More than a dozen red states have sued the Biden administration over changes to the federal education rights law, Title IX, which extended its discrimination protections to LGBTQ students. On Thursday a federal judge in Kentucky ruled in the states’ favor, striking down the new rules.

In the fall, several college teams garnered national attention when they forfeited their games against a San José State University women’s volleyball team because of its transgender athlete.

President-elect Donald Trump suggested at campaign rallies that he would “keep men out of women’s sports” using executive power to implement a ban.

Sanchez thinks the American public is moving in that direction. She pointed to a 2023 Gallup poll showing that 69% of Americans think transgender athletes should not be allowed to play on teams that match their gender identity, up 7 percentage points from Americans’ views on the matter in 2021.

Not surprisingly, opinions varied along party lines. The poll found 86% of Republicans opposed transgender athletes playing on teams aligned with their identity, while Democrats were split nearly evenly.

About 40% of voters in Sanchez’ district are Republican, 30% Democratic, with the rest registered with third parties or citing no party preference. Sanchez said her office has received calls in support of the bill.

Last year Sanchez passed other successful education bills, including one to protect student athletes from severe heat conditions and another to make epinephrine injectors available at schools. Both passed with nearly unanimous bipartisan support.

This bill will likely be different. Assemblymember Chris Ward, a San Diego Democrat and chair of the Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, said members “will not stand by as anyone attempts to use kids as political pawns.

“Participating in sports leads to better outcomes in academics and mental health,” he said in a statement, “and transgender kids — like any student — deserve the chance to benefit from all that sports have to offer, in an environment that both affirms and validates their gender identity.”

Carl DeMaio, a freshman Republican Assembly member from San Diego, said he’s co-sponsoring the bill, which he thinks maintains “dignity, respect and fairness” for all players. DeMaio, who is gay, said other members of the LGBTQ community have told him they don’t believe transgender females should compete on girls’ teams, and he compared the policy to the use of performance-enhancing drugs.

“If you allow biological males to compete in girls’ sports, you are not maintaining fairness and you are robbing these girls of their dreams,” DeMaio said.

Sanchez said she’s committed to her legislation and expects that it will align with upcoming federal policies on transgender rights, including Tuesday’s House bill.

O’Hara argued that protecting female athletes doesn’t have to come at the expense of transgender girls.

“Why does protecting some students have to mean discriminating against others?” they asked. “Why are we approaching civil rights laws as a zero-sum game?” *Reposted from Cal Matters by Deborah Brennan on January 15, 2025

0 notes

ivankahasbeentreatedsounfairly · 2 months ago

Text

President-elect Donald J. Trump said in a new interview that he will use the opening hours of his presidency to pardon people convicted of participating in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol assault, begin deportations of undocumented immigrants and increase oil production.

He also said during the interview, which Time magazine publishedon Thursday, that he might support getting rid of some childhood vaccines if data shows links to autism. He declined to answer a question about whether he had talked with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia since the November election but said Ukraine should not have been allowed to fire U.S.-made missiles into Russia.

Speaking of pardons in Jan. 6 cases, he said: “We’re going to do it very quickly, and it’s going to start in the first hour that I get into office.” He said the pardons would go to “nonviolent” people who were at the Capitol, which was overrun by Trump supporters after he lost the 2020 election. “A vast majority should not be in jail, and they’ve suffered gravely,” he said.

The president-elect’s comments came during a wide-ranging interview conducted on Nov. 25 as part of the magazine’s choice of Mr. Trump to be its person of the year. In the interview, which the magazine said lasted more than an hour, the president-elect bragged that he had run a “flawless” campaign and that Democrats were out of touch with Americans.

He also said he planned a “virtual closure of Department of Education in Washington,” though he did not explain what that meant. And he said that he might reverse President Biden’s expansion of Title IX protections, which includes prohibitions against harassment of transgender students.

Americans “don’t want to see, you know, men playing in women’s sports. They don’t,” Mr. Trump said. “They don’t want to see all of this transgender, which is, it’s just taken over.”

On foreign policy, the president-elect lashed out against Mr. Biden’s decision to allow Ukraine to use U.S.-made missiles against some targets in Russia, calling it an escalation of the fighting that began with Moscow’s full-scale invasion in 2022. He hinted that efforts to reach an end to the war might gain momentum once he is back in office.

“But I would imagine people are waiting until I get in before anything happens. I would imagine,” he told Time. “I think that would be very smart to do that.”

Mr. Trump declined to say whether he had received assurances from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel that he would end the war in Gaza. But the president-elect dismissed concerns about a protracted war that could further destabilize the Middle East.

He said “some very productive things” were happening in the Middle East, but refused to say what they were.

“I think that the Middle East is an easier problem to handle than what’s happening with Russia and Ukraine. OK, I just want to say that up front. The Middle East is going to get solved,” he said, adding: “I think it’s more complicated than the Russia-Ukraine, but I think it’s, it’s, it’s easier to solve.”

In the interview, Mr. Trump spent a significant amount of time on immigration. He repeatedly said that he would begin a crackdown on people who are in the United States illegally. He said federal law does not prohibit the use of the military in that effort.

“Well, it doesn’t, it doesn’t stop the military if it’s an invasion of our country, and I consider it an invasion of our country,” the president-elect said. “I’ll only do what the law allows, but I will go up to the maximum level of what the law allows.”

On vaccines, Mr. Trump said he plans to listen to the arguments made by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine skeptic who is Mr. Trump’s choice to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Both men have promoted the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism.

“We’re going to have a big discussion. The autism rate is at a level that nobody ever believed possible. If you look at things that are happening, there’s something causing it,” Mr. Trump said in the interview.

The president-elect said that the discussion could lead to some childhood vaccinations being banned.

“It could if I think it’s dangerous, if I think they are not beneficial, but I don’t think it’s going to be very controversial in the end,” he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/12/12/us/trump-news

0 notes

correcthorsebatterystaple121 · 10 months ago

Text

this is really big for us actually

Title IX is a cornerstone of protection for women, girls, and gender/sex minorities in schools, I saw it used so many times in the 17 years I was in school to enact real consequences for sexual harassment. The Obama administration added "guidelines" to include gender identity but they were more like suggestions. This is REAL. All those states and school districts that have passed anti-trans policies in the last few years will HAVE to abide by this. Coming in the wake of things like Nex Benedict's case, this might actually force schools to pay attention to harassment of LGBT kids. And they're working on an addendum protecting trans kids' right to play on the correct sports teams.

I'm... this feels like a tide changing. We'll see how it plays out on the local level, but I have seen Title IX work in my own life. I know people who have been removed from sports teams or classes, even removed from an entire school because they harassed or assaulted someone. It's not perfect and I've also seen the process fail to fully protect victims. But it's incredible to me that future queer kids could see their rights considered important like that. Queer rights are intertwined with women's rights, trans rights are feminism, and it's actually a big deal that the government is acknowledging that!!

Also, though, if Trump is elected he will try to walk this back. Part of this change is just undoing damage that his education secretary did 6 years ago (including forcing victims trying to invoke Title IX to testify in a live hearing rather than private meetings... about their experience of SEXUAL HARASSMENT... Biden's changes just removed that part) So I hope we can make progress before that happens, if it does.

"School districts that don’t respect transgender and nonbinary students’ pronouns or force them to use restrooms that don’t align with their gender identity could be committing federal civil rights violations beginning this fall.

Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced the issuance of a final rule under Title IX to protect people in public schools from sex-based discrimination and harassment. The announcement marks a significant update in federal efforts to combat sex discrimination in federally funded educational institutions. During a call with reporters, Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona emphasized the administration’s dedication to ensuring that Title IX effectively serves all students by providing safe, welcoming, and rights-respecting educational environments."

Read the full piece here

#Title ix #Usamerican news #trans issues #Thoughts

7K notes · View notes

bllsbailey · 3 months ago

Text

Melania Trump Introduces Her Husband At Historic N.Y. Rally, Numerous Guests Including Musk Speak

Former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump joins former First Lady Melania Trump on stage during a campaign at Madison Square Garden in New York, October 27, 2024.

Melania Trump took the Madison Square Garden (MSG) stage front and center to introduce former President Donald Trump at his sold-out New York Rally.

On Sunday, the 45th president held a rally at MSG with multiple guests who joined him and spoke before his appearance.

Biotechnology entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy took to the stage railing against “genital mutilation” on children.

“Our message to gay Americans tonight is this: you’re free to marry who you want … without the government standing in your way. But that doesn’t mean that boys get to compete with girls in girls’ sports or [that] you do genital mutilation and chemical castration on our children.”

He went on to praise Trump as the man to unify the country.

“Donald Trump is actually the president who will unite this country. Actually, we don’t talk about that enough,” he said. “America First includes all Americans, regardless of their race, their gender, or their sexual orientation.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also made an appearance, stating that the Democrat Party is not what it used to be and said that he did not “leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left [him].”

“A lot of people ask me why I left the Democratic Party, and I say, ‘I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me. This is not the party anymore of Martin Luther King, of Robert Kennedy or John Kennedy. That was the party of peace,” he said.

He discussed women in men’s sports and noted that his relative, former Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), was the driving force behind Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or education program receiving federal funds.

One of Trump’s guests was SpaceX CEO Elon Musk who encouraged everyone in the room to vote for Trump and make this victory big.

He also introduced the former First Lady to the stage who went on to introduce her husband.

Other appearances of the night included Hulk Hogan, UFC CEO Dana White, Eric and Lara Trump, vice presidential candidate JD Vance, TV show host Dr. Phil McGraw, former Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard, Tucker Carlson, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Representative Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Representative Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), Former Trump adviser Stephen Miller, David Rem, Sergio Gor, Tony Hinchcliffe, Scott LoBaido, Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sid Rosenberg, and Trump lawyer Alina Habba.

Trump filled Madison Square Garden to capacity with cops having to turn away people outside the 19,500-person venue.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

0 notes

womenathletesinmedia · 4 months ago

Text

A Rough Start To Success Part 1

To talk about today's highly decorative USWNT in 2024 & the community and longevity that has been created by their triumphs, you have to go all the way back to the passing of Title IX in 1972. Before that, the idea of female athletes was a confusing subject across the globe. Soccer, or football, had been played across Europe for centuries & women had been captured playing the sport as early as 1881, and organized matches that drew thousands of fans in England during the first world war. Despite the England Football Association ban on women's soccer, The FA, stating “the game of football is quite unsuitable for females and ought not to be encouraged,” women continued to play with any resources they could throw together. The passing of Title IX in the United States came soon after England hosted the first ever Women's FA Cup in 1971. Before the historic act, “most of the first six decades of the 20th century, women’s soccer was confined to gym class, informal pickup games and college intramural competition.” The new era of women’s sports was finally able to see opportunities for women to play at the collegiate level. The AIAW was established in the early 1970s to sponsor varsity women's sports at colleges across the country. The NCAA eventually began to also sponsor womens varsity sport in 1982, a move causing backlash on both sides of the coin. Because the NCAA had long sponsored men's college sports, the idea that more exposure to the women's game & more funding would come with the new allegiance was hopeful, however this meant the women's teams now shared the same executive as the men, taking away the women administration who had been apart of the AIAW, replacing them with the formally established patriarchal structures of the NCAA. Nonetheless, popularity in female sports grew across the nation, and at the collegiate level coach Aaron Dorrance was starting a dynasty program of women's soccer at UNC. When reading about the legacy of Coach Dorrance, you might find him dubbed as the mastermind behind the USWNT coming to fruition. Dorrance was the head coach of UNC women's soccer program from 1974-2024, nearly its entire existence, & USWNT head coach from 1986-1994. The credit of the first coach of the USWNT goes to Mike Ryan, who was the first to select from the talent pool of female soccer players from colleges all over the country. Ryan played an important role of instilling a sense of national pride when playing international soccer for your home country. Before this first meeting, women's soccer had never been taken seriously by the public & therefore had to learn a new attitude of playing soccer on the world stage. From there they understood the importance of the role they had just been given & the legacy of that message carries on to the team today. Before the creation of a Women's World Cup, there was the The International Ladies Football Festival better known as Mundialito. This was the USWNT’s first real exposure of international soccer, and proved to point out the flaws thus far on the team with little to show of victory. The team would go back & forth winning some,& losing others, until the first World Championship in 1991. When doing research for the first and most influential players on the USWNT such as Mia Hamm, I was shocked at how many sources I found praising Coach Dorrance as the mastermind behind the team. I don’t want to diminish his accomplishments, however I expected to find much more on the individual players that got the team on the global stage. Even in such a revolutionary time for female athletes, the man appointed to be in charge at the time receives a lot of the credit. It could be argued that the team would never have become what it is today without him. If female athletes were hard to come by at the time, then I have to assume that female coaches were also sparse. Even if the team were to only have women coaches, perhaps they wouldn’t have been taken so seriously by the sports world, or it could have been even longer until the team was able to accomplish international tournament wins.

1 note · View note

cordycepsfem · 2 years ago

Text

I'm sure that by no longer allowing leagues separated by sex to exist, the sports that reward Being Tall and Having Muscle Mass will continue to have a great many male individuals on them, and very few female individuals will be receiving the payments and prominence you speak of.

Also? Women's sports weren't invented in the 1970s, it was just codified into law that they were required to have a team and funding alongside male sports. Women were part of the creation of sporting leagues and organizations for themselves since Roman times. In the 1800's women fought for the right to be included, to be thought of as strong and athletic, rather than the dainty ideal society held them up to. Men and much of society didn't support female athletes, so they made it happen for themselves.

They didn't split up women's sports because women were "frail and delicate," they did it so that women could have things to themselves, could better their athletic prowess and compete with women whose skills and abilities were similar to theirs, rather than always coming in last in men's sports. Or close to last, I guess, considering you think there are many men and women who are "close" in their athletic ability at the professional level. Sure, I guess.

It's definitely not true that elite male competitors do between 10 and 12% better than elite female competitors. Or that non-elite boys and men regularly outperform elite female athletes. Definitely not true.

Female athletes should be paid better, and leagues should continue being separated by sex, to have the fairest competitions possible and to give the money to those who rightly deserve it. Sports leagues were not created to validate individual identities, they were created to give each player an equal playing field. Before laws like Title IX, women weren't even on the field legally. Now they're being asked to accept non-elite males into the leagues our foremothers fought for, despite evidence that these competitors will still outperform them the majority of the time, taking away the opportunities the leagues and teams and organizations were created to give to them.

Apparently 50-ish years was a good run for women's sports, and now it's cool to just minimalize the amazing legal victory of Title IX as creating "ghettoized leagues" and forgetting the entire history of feminists in sports. Glad we're so easily going to toss it all.

crazy that in the 1970s they were like, "fine, women can play sports. but because they're innately less athletic than men, only in a special ghettoized League For The Frail And Delicate where they get paid less 😊". And not only is that still the system in 2023, but viciously lashing out at the smallest challenges to that system gets framed as Feminist Praxis

111K notes · View notes

cksmart-world · 7 months ago

Text

SMART BOMB

The Completely Unnecessary News Analysis

By Christopher Smart

June 25, 2024

TOP 10 WAYS TO STAY COOL IN SUMMER

1 – Run sprinklers under your trampoline.

2 – Put ice cubes in your money belt.

3 – Eat lots of spicy-hot brazed pork belly.

4 – Get a neck fan or a pair of pet hummingbirds.

5 – Keep your deodorant in the refrigerator for cool pits.

6 – Fill your iPhone spritzer with mint tea and gin.

7 – Stop cooking pot stickers and hush puppies.

8 – Take a jar of pimento olives from the frig and put one up each nostril.

9 – Soak your feet while reading “The Zen Monkey and the Lotus Flower.”

10 – And the #1 way to beat the heat: Pick a fight with your spouse right before bedtime — to keep from sleeping next to a hot body.

STATE TO FEDS: 'UP YOURS'

Washington is always passing laws and implementing regulations and here in Utah we've had a gutful. It's government overreach pure and simple. We're into God and Jesus and beehives and we know how to discriminate. Take Title IX for example. A long, long time ago Nixon came up with Title IX so young women could get a fair shake in school sports and other programs — it says no to discrimination on the basis of sex — or states lose federal funding for education. Now the fairies in the Biden Administration have extended Title IX to protect transgender students from discrimination, as though they deserve freedom and liberty, too. Well, those people need to read The Bible because God made every person a certain way on purpose and they should stay that way. If not, everyone gets all mixed up on which restroom to use and it really screws up fashion. Utah lawmakers want to avoid, at all costs, a revival of the kilt. With the new Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act, affectionately known by lawmakers as the 'Up Yours' law, the Legislature can declare a federal law or regulation stupid and unconstitutional and pretend it doesn't exist. It's called “Freedom,” you liberal, communist whiners. We can eat our cake and have federal funding too, no matter what Marie Antoinette said.

THE 10 COMMANDMENTS ARE TRUMP'S FAVORITE ONES

Hey Wilson, did you ever hear this American thing about separation of church and state. So apparently they don't teach that in school any more. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Yes Wilson, that's the First Amendment to The Constitution. But down in Louisiana the governor just signed into law a regulation requiring the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school classroom on account of lots of “Christians” are saying this is a Christian nation and to hell with Jews and Muslims and atheists and everyone else. And what a coincidence, Donald Trump agrees. “I love the 10 Commandments,” he said to a group of influential evangelical Christians last week. “Has anyone read the ‘Thou shalt not steal’? I mean, has anybody read this incredible stuff?” Funny he chose that one instead of, “Thou shall not commit adultery.” But hey, no one's perfect. At least that's what Christian Trumpers say. Move over Moses, a lot of those evangelicals believe Trump was heaven sent. Apparently a lot of Mormons do to. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Post script — That's going to do it for another sizzling week here at Smart Bomb where we keep track of polygamy so you don't have to. Hold on to your jeans Wilson 'cause this could make you jump: Joseph Smith, the founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was not a polygamist. We warned you. The earth-shattering news comes from noted religiologist Matthew Bowman in The Salt Lake Tribune. “In the past few years, popular YouTube channels, podcasts and documentaries have been spreading the story among Latter-day Saints,” he says. But hold on to your “Pearls of Great Price,” because most of the evidence points to something different — between 1839 and 1844 in Nauvoo, Illinois, Smith secretly married some three dozen women — although he lived only with Emma Hale Smith. His secret leaked and he was soon killed in the summer of 1844, Bowman says. In 2014, church leaders confirmed Smith's polygamy. Smith's successor, Brigham Young, made no secret of the practice taking 56 wives. You heard right Wilson, fifty six! Fun Fact — Some converts to Mormonism in other countries weren't told by missionaries that Smith was a polygamist. Oops, slight oversight. Well, you know, it's hard to remember every little detail.

OK Wilson, do you and the guys know any Mormon hymns? You know, like “Give Said The Little Stream” or “Put Your Shoulder To The Wheel?” No? Well it seems like we ought to come up with something to fit in with or polygamy and 10 Commandments motif. So wake up the band and give us your best shot:

To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time to every purpose under heaven A time to be born, a time to die A time to plant, a time to reap A time to kill, a time to heal A time to laugh, a time to weep To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time to every purpose under heaven

A time to build up, a time to break down A time to dance, a time to mourn A time to cast away stones A time to gather stones together To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time to every purpose under heaven A time of love, a time of hate A time of war, a time of peace A time you may embrace A time to refrain from embracing To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time to every purpose under heaven A time to gain, a time to lose A time to rend, a time to sew A time for love, a time for hate A time for peace, I swear it's not too late!

(Turn! Turn! Turn! — The Byrds)

0 notes