Lindsay Crouse calls effort to keep biological men out of women's sports an "excuse for transphobia"

The left likes to spaz in a histerical manner and shove nonsense down peoples throats, then try to alienate or shame anyone thinking ctlritically who correctly disagrees.

I’m mostly on board with Crouse. Except for her strange call for inclusion- competitive sports is literally about excluding everyone who isn’t good enough.

Look, I think allowing trans women to compete in women’s sports is ludicrous. However, as a whole, I’ve never really given a darn about women’s sports. For me to vocally oppose trans athletes under the guise of caring for the sanctity of women’s sports would be wildly disingenuous. So I think the best course of action is to sit back and watch how this all plays out. No fake outrage from me

I've got 3 thoughts on this piece and they are pretty unrelated to each other.

1) I agree with her assertion that many who act like they are into women's sports don't really care about women's sports. When I was working in my 20s, I worked in professional women's tennis. I really liked working in one of the few major sports for women. I then worked in senior pro men's tennis (think legends) and didn't like it as it was just a matter of the rich getting richer. It wasn't a noble job.

At one point, I thought about working in women's basketball. However, once the American Basketball League folded, it lost all of it's appeal to me. Why? I never believed the NBA cared about the WNBA. A women's only league was cool. The NBA starting the WNBA to try to appear woke or stop a women's league from hurting its own revenue had no appeal to me.

2)To me, the trans issue is comical logically. It's great that people in the year 2021 want to be tolerant and open minded but the fact that people think that means we should let people born as biological men (and I agree with the OP, can we stop this nonsense of "assigned male at birth"? Language like that is fine for someone like Semenya but not Caitlyn Jenner) compete in women's sports is really mind-blowing.

A month or two ago, I was listening to Molly Huddle and Alysia Montano's podcast when they had Joanna Harper on. At the start of the podcast, they praised Montano for appearing on tv while breast-feeding her baby. Then they spent like 25 minutes talking about how what they were about to talk about was really complicated and what not.

I was like, "Honestly. It's not that complicated. Do you not see the irony in what you are saying?"

A transgender woman can never breastfeed. A transgender woman can never give birth. Those two facts are why women are not nearly as good at sports as men at the elite level post puberty. If at birth, a doctor takes a look at you and determines there is zero chance you'll ever give birth, then you almost most certainly will belong in the open category of sports. We have a special category for people who are capable of breast-feeding, giving birth, etc and it's called the women's category.

I just find it amazing that people in the name of tolerance can't realize this. If we are truly going to celebrate Montano for her ability to give birth, then we need to marvel at the biology that makes that possible we should draw the line on transgender women in elite sport.

If they need a team to play on, find a recreational team or compete on the 'open' team. It's not that complicated.

3) The weight room for the women's basketball players was absurd.

That being said, I think a better comparison isn't between men's and women's basketball at the NCAA level. It's between the revenue and non-revenue sports. What I'd like to know is women's basketball treated worse than men's or women's track or cross country?

Do I think the NCAA cares much about women's basketball? No. But I don't think they truly care about any of the non-revenue sports. I'm not saying sexism isn't part of it, but the much bigger issue is revenue vs non-revenue.

But here too in this area, the woke is about to eat its own. IF we start paying all of the NCAA men's football and basketball players, then there won't be any money left over for the non-revenue sports and women's sports.

Actually, I think it's possible for trans women to breastfeed. Birth a child? Now, that is probably beyond the scope of (current!) science.

Bio Dome wrote:

Actually, I think it's possible for trans women to breastfeed. Birth a child? Now, that is probably beyond the scope of (current!) science.

Yes. I stand corrected. I can't believe I wrote that as for months I told my wife I was going to breastfeed my own kid and she still gives me a hard time about it. But I think you get what I'm getting at. Just ignore the breastfeed comment and focus on give birth. No uterus = no women's sports.

The Republicans have shown this past year that they have no values (they did embrace the trumpism lies) but some on the far left seem to be doing everything they can to make the democrats lose the next election. This is another example of that.

The Republicans will work to use this as representative of democrat thinking.

Your 3rd point kind of lacks a power analysis. Men's basketball is a billion dollar industry. The money then goes all over the place. Let's not assume it goes to the right places. That's the argument for the players getting a cut. That's the argument for better women's facilities. That's the argument for spending less on travel and having more local/regional competitions.

Anyways, I don't get how this issue affects the men of LRC. I'm not sure how any of the rhetoric is helpful if you truly care about all people and want to find solutions for everyone. The way this issue is handled on here drives more hate towards a group that already faces plenty of that. Food for thought when folks want to dive right in on this topic.

This is analogous to republicans being against masks or vaccines. There's just no reason any person properly educated on the facts of these issues should support these viewpoints. It's all about being partisan sheep at the cost of hurting innocent people.

Is this writer an athlete?? Does she spend all her days working out, running, lifting weights, eating only healthy food. Sacrificing everything just for a chance just to compete at this one event that’s held every four years. Just to have men out there smoking everyone? It’s ridiculous and this will happen unless real women stand up and say heck no and this isn’t ok.

No this is some stupid ass stooge trying to virtue signal hard.

Jesus you can’t be serious can you? Lol. Turn off cnn for one minute if you’re life and just comment on the subject. Smh.

Crouse's article falsely conflates two unrelated issues; the promotion of women's sport and its status as a protected category. To be concerned about the effect that transgender participation has in respect of the latter issue does not require having a view of the former - as real as that issue is. There is certainly no logic in her view that the inclusion of transgender athletes enhances the promotion of women's sport generally. It would be easier to argue the reverse would apply. Then to label as "transphobic" those who believe women's sport should continue to be a protected category is a cheap rhetorical jibe that does not deal with the issues that arise from the participation of biological males in women's sport. Crouse sounds like those who complain about JK Rowling - but it is a poor argument in respect of women's sport.

whatlolno wrote:

Is this writer an athlete?? Does she spend all her days working out, running, lifting weights, eating only healthy food. Sacrificing everything just for a chance just to compete at this one event that’s held every four years. Just to have men out there smoking everyone? It’s ridiculous and this will happen unless real women stand up and say heck no and this isn’t ok.

No this is some stupid ass stooge trying to virtue signal hard.

If you read the piece, I actually think this is the exact point the author is making. Women training for their shot every 4 years are already competing for crumbs. Attacking transgender women from competing in sports has become a talking point to deflect scrutiny of real policy. Local state houses are passes Inclusivity Bills & riling you up about this stuff so you don't question why corporations pay very little in taxes and pay their workers even less.

The point is that all of the women's rights activists that come out in defense of women's sports do nothing to try to elevate women's sports. How many people came on here to bash transgender women but didn't say a lick about facilities for women in the tournament? How many bash transgender women but can't see why college athletes in revenue generating sports should see a cut of that money? Ya'll are taking the bait while the rich get richer and while men dominate sports at every level. It isn't about equality -- it's about preserving power.

Rojo has strong feelings on this, yet LRC posts their men's previews and recaps first and their women's second. Yet this site leans heavily male and horrible threads pop up all the time bashing women. Yet a lot of female runners avoid this place because of its reputation. It's laughable to think that this group is committed to women's equality. If it were, women would come here more. No -- the rhetoric around transgender athletes being pushed down your throats appeals to you because it encourages you to preserve your culture, your idea of what things should look like.

So, for you, encouraging transgender participation in women's sport is a way of challenging male attitudes about culture - by endorsing biological male participation in women's sport?

truth of it wrote:

The Republicans have shown this past year that they have no values.

This is the lefty version of calling people “libtards.”

Yes, because women are defined by their ability to give birth aren't they? Forget any other ideas ladies - your job is to have children. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so profoundly anti-feminist.

Yes.

Look at this website and look at this thread. And look at you zeroing in on that defensively & ignoring everything else. It's clear what part struck a nerve and what part you want to focus on.

How does transgender participation in women's sports really change things? Men's sports are still dominant. It's just an argument for who you think deserves the crumbs.

I agree with a previous poster that maybe the two don't have to be mutually exclusive -- you can talk about transgender women in sport and still raise up women in sports. Most, if not all, however, stop caring about women's sports after "saving" them from transgender women. Is that really it? Does fighting tooth & nail against transgender inclusion really help women's sports? Power dynamics haven't changed. Let's not act like people know how to talk about this issue. LRC shouldn't be facilitating a conversation where focus is going to go away from the issue and towards bashing transgender women. Whipping insults at transgender women does not elevate women's sports.

NERunner00053 wrote:

The point is that all of the women's rights activists that come out in defense of women's sports do nothing to try to elevate women's sports. How many people came on here to bash transgender women but didn't say a lick about facilities for women in the tournament? How many bash transgender women but can't see why college athletes in revenue generating sports should see a cut of that money? Ya'll are taking the bait while the rich get richer and while men dominate sports at every level. It isn't about equality -- it's about preserving power.

No one is obligated to advocate for women. It would be nice if some people did, and many do, and then you end up with all the extremists like the author who turn it into a woke virtue signaling exercise.

I’ll say it again. No one is obligated to advocate for women. No one certainly advocated for men basketball players back in th3 day. The NBA used to be bush league on the verge of bankruptcy up until the early 80s