AP featured image
Florida State players celebrate with the trophy after defeating Washington 8-3 in the second game of the best-of-three championship series in the NCAA softball Women’s College World Series in Oklahoma City, Tuesday, June 5, 2018. Florida State won the title. (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki)

 

For entertainment and irritation purposes I have repeatedly posed the following question to my wife, and she has yet to formulate a coherent answer.  It may remain one of life’s imponderable mysteries:

Does a lesbian become an anti-transgender bigot if she is uninterested in having a relationship with a woman who has a penis?

That question recurred to me again while reading this story from Vox Media’s “Outsports” website, when I read the following sentence from the story:

We sought these names in the public interest, because those who stand in favor of discrimination ought to be held accountable. And that’s all this is.

The Outsports article concerns a letter sent to the NCAA ahead of its annual meeting this week where one topic on the agenda is how the NCAA should respond to a new law in Idaho which prohibits participation by males in women’s sports contest based on the fact that the male “identifies” as a female — either through sex reassignment surgery or just as a way of living.

Idaho is set to host games during the 2021 NCAA Men’s College Basketball Championship tournament, and groups opposing the Idaho statute are urging the NCAA to move those games to another state.

The letter in question was sent in support of biological female athletes and urged the NCAA to respect the Idaho law on behalf of biological female athletes whose participation numbers would likely decline if male athletes were allowed to compete alongside and in competition with them.  The letter was signed by 309 biologically female athletes from all over the world, many of whom live openly as lesbians.

But in the Orwellian world of “transgender speech codes”, anyone who advocates for women’s rights in the form of support for the opportunity of biologically female athletes to compete only against other biologically female athletes “favors discrimination” and needs to be “held accountable”.

Another sentence in the Outsports story describes those who signed the letter as “expressing their opposition to transgender inclusion.”

Defense of the opportunities of biological female athletes to compete against other biologically female athletes is an “opposition” to “inclusion”.

There must be an entire cottage industry in “Critical Gender Theory” to contrive the necessary verbal legerdemain needed to keep advancing on this front without the benefit of the other side ever being entirely certain what the hell you are talking about.

The letter’s 309 signatories had requested confidentiality from the NCAA based on an expression of fear that public disclosure of their names would result in …. well, being attacked by folks like those at Outsports.

The first person on the list of signors is Martina Navratilova.

Navratilova was one of the first openly gay professional female athletes who made no effort to hide her life and her choices.  Glenn Greenwald, who tried to get a documentary made about Navratilova — only to be blocked by the transgender woke warriors (read the story) — makes some great observations about Navratilova’s bona fides for the LBGTQ community, but they still attack her for having signed the letter and thereby giving cover to others who signed it as well.  Here are some of Greenwald’s comments:

Everything about Navratilova was defiant, individualistic, brave, trailblazing, and orthodoxy-busting: in retrospect, she was a classic existential hero, someone who refused to have her life constrained or identity suppressed by societal dictates.

Not only was she openly gay at a time when very few were, but she traveled the world with her then-wife Judy Nelson, sitting her prominently in her player’s box and forcing male sports network announcers to awkwardly struggle for a vocabulary to describe their relationship when the camera panned to her group of supporters….

In 1981, Navratilova hired as her coach a transgender woman Dr. Renée Richards — a former Navy pilot, eye surgeon, and captain of the Yale tennis team — who had, in the 1970s, successfully sued the Woman’s Tennis Association for the right to complete in professional women’s tournaments. Decades before the world would celebrate or even know about Laverne Cox, Caitlyn Jenner, and Chaz Bono, there, alongside Navratilova’s wife at the planet’s most lucrative corporate televised sporting events was, thanks to Navratilova, one of the only visible trans women in the world. Richards coached Navratilova to two Wimbledon championships.

How does Outsports treat the presence of Navratilova among the women who signed the letter?  They link the reader back to an earlier Outspoken story on Navratilova’s defense of biological females to have a playing field to themselves.  In that story they wrote:

Martina Navratilova, who first came out as lesbian in 1981, came out again Sunday as a transphobe.

In an op-ed for The Sunday Times of London, the tennis icon wrote a clear-cut explanation of her perspective that transgender women athletes should not be allowed to compete as women.

Navratilova states her belief that trans women are men who “decide to be female,” and that to allow them to compete with women is “insane and it’s cheating… it is surely unfair on women who have to compete against people who, biologically, are still men.”

And while she is rightly revered for her 177 career titles, 59 Grand Slam titles, and for being a strong advocate for both the LGBTQ community and human rights, Navratilova is not a scientist. That fact did not stop her from making unsubstantiated claims in her op-ed about hormone levels; she also repeated long-debunked claims that doctors are prescribing hormones to children who identify as trans.

But it appears, the right thing for Navratilova is discrimination against trans athletes who have not undergone sexual reassignment surgery, writing that “unfairness introduced through human action and chemical means should be condemned and outlawed.”

When the letter was first delivered to the NCAA, the version released to the press included only the names of four signatories.  Four additional names were later added to the list, so 301 names remained confidential and in the hands of only the sender and the NCAA.  Outsport was able to obtain the other 301 names and published them in their article.

The NCAA has already gone on record “opposing” laws such as the one in Idaho.  So it is not much of a stretch to imagine that a “wokester” in the NCAA gave the rest of the names to Outsports so they could be “held accountable” for their advocacy of “discrimination.”

Here is the practical reality — Title IX was passed to ensure that equal opportunities to obtain college scholarships existed for male and female high school seniors.  The law has been enforced on the basis of strict numerical equality to the great detriment of many men’s sports due to the fact that there is only men’s college football and not women’s college football.

Aggressive asserting of “transgender” rights in the manner being advocated will reverse the gains won by the advocates of female high school athletes three decades ago.

If there is one lesson to learn from this it is as follows — even the “woke” will eventually be hunted down by the “woke mob”.  They are predatory and they are cannibals.

They are The Borg.

I fully expect in one of the next two Olympic Games, North Korea will enter a women’s soccer team composed entirely of men who “identify” as women under Olympic rules.  That team will then proceed to handily defeat every other country’s women’s team, and take home the Gold Medal.

Wait for it.