Dem Who Scolded Party For Trans Issue Voted Against Protecting Girls’ Sports Last Year
'wrong to single out transgender girls'
Trump’s culture war offensive won the election
Donald Trump has made an impressive political career of proving the D.C. consultant class wrong. In 2016, he won the presidency by running a campaign nearly the opposite of what the infamous RNC “autopsy” report had prescribed four years earlier. In 2020, he came just 42,000 votes short of winning again, despite facing unprecedented obstacles from a global pandemic and its aftermath.
And now, Trump has once again shown his instincts are far better than those who claim to be “professionals.” In an election where most pundits were urging Republicans to hyper-focus on standard issues such as the economy and immigration, Trump instead went on offense on one of Democrats’ greatest vulnerabilities: their far-left stance on transgender issues. That decision has propelled him back to the White House.
If you don’t trust the polling, then you should at least trust the results.
In the final few weeks, exposing Kamala Harris’ transgender radicalism became the closing message of the Trump campaign. According to AdImpact, Republicans spent at least $215 million total on ads highlighting the radical consequences of the Harris-Walz agenda: male athletes in women’s sports, sex-change surgeries and puberty blockers for minor children, ideological indoctrination in public schools, and, most visibly, taxpayer-funded sex-change operations for prisoners and illegal immigrants. One reportsuggests Trump focused his ads more on these issues than on the economy, housing, and immigration combined.
This strategy flew directly in the face of conventional wisdom. In the run-up to the election, politicos from both parties argued that the transgender issue only catered to the GOP base and wouldn’t resonate with the wider electorate. Yet outside their D.C. bubble, the issue was indeed resonating. For anyone with a pulse on the average American voter, this shouldn’t have come as a surprise.
For years, polling has shown that Democrats’ transgender stances are extremely unpopular. For example, a 2023 NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found voters opposed to allowing minors to receive “gender transition-related health care” by 37 points, even if a parent or guardian consents. A Yahoo News survey this month showed Americans believe that the left’s gender-ideology agenda has gone too far by a 24-point margin. And a YouGov poll found voters in swing states agree with the Republican position on gender and bathrooms by margins of 16 points or more.
Such lopsided numbers aren’t just driven by Republican respondents, either. Large numbers of independents, young people, suburban women, black voters, and Latinos all side with conservatives on these issues.
But if you don’t trust the polling, then you should at least trust the results. The first general election cycle focused this heavily and forthrightly on transgender issues was in 2021. There, the transgender debate helped propel Gov. Glenn Youngkin in the final weeks to his shocking upset in Virginia. Meanwhile around the country, dozens of states were beginning to pass laws to prohibit males in girls’ sports and restrict gender transition procedures for minors. When South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) decided to veto a transgender sports bill early in the year, a massive backlash followed. To Noem’s credit, she changed course and signed a similar bill in the following legislative session.
In 2022, opposition to the transgender agenda continued to gain momentum. Yet more states took action, including in Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott declared gender transitioning children to be child abuse. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis won a resounding re-election after a first term defined in large part by his embrace of cultural conservatism. This set him apart from many other GOP candidates nationwide, most of whom barely used gender issues in ads — to their detriment. In a midterm where Republicans largely underperformed, failing to take advantage of one of the Democrats’ biggest vulnerabilities turned out to be a significant mistake.
Of course, that was not the case this year. Beyond Trump’s own campaign, numerous other candidates went on offense on gender issues, spending hundreds of millions of dollars in Senate and House races nationwide. This was a smart strategy, not only to energize the Republican base but also to appeal to persuadable voters. According to data collected by my organization’s political arm, American Principles Project PAC, our own ads on transgender issues we have run in campaigns since 2019 have consistently moved tens of thousands of swing voters from Democratic to GOP candidates.
In this year’s election, one can also trace the potential effect these ads had through polling. For example, in Ohio’s U.S. Senate race, the Senate Leadership Fund began running ads highlighting Democrat Sherrod Brown’s record on transgender issues in early September. Around the same time, Republican Bernie Moreno began to rise in the polls, eventually pulling even with Brown after trailing by six points when the ads first started, according to the FiveThirtyEight average. Similar movement can be seen in many other races where such ads were aired.
In short, there can be little doubt that Republicans’ culture war offensive was a decisive element of their victory. And with Democrats now on the back foot, the GOP should press its advantage. Force Democrats to take votes in Congress on keeping men out of women’s sports and protecting kids from dangerous transgender medical procedures. Take executive action on these issues and dare Democratic leaders in blue states to sue. As long as the left continues to stick to these unpopular positions, they will continue to be a liability for them.
Twice now, Donald Trump has bucked D.C. elites and been rewarded for doing so. Perhaps it’s time for those elites to finally start taking notes.
The brutal truth: Why women ditched Democrats for Trump
Americans are tired of being told their intellect is limited by race or sex — especially women. Like other groups, women have long been taken for granted by the Democratic Party, as if pro-choice talking points alone are enough to secure their blind loyalty to the rest of the party’s platform.
“The View”co-host Sunny Hostin certainly thinks this is the case, calling Trump’s victory a “a referendum of cultural resentment” merely because Americans overwhelmingly refused the policy platform of “a mixed-race woman married to a Jewish guy.”
No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are 'so severe upon their own sex.'
The Sunny Hostins of the Democratic establishment refuse to engage in serious self-reflection that could explain the surge of women and other traditionally Democratic groups voting Republican in this election. Are women simply suffering from a mass self-hatred that enticed them to vote for Donald Trump? Or have Democrats made a critical mistake in assuming that abortion is the only issue women care about politically?
Kamala Harris bet on winning the women’s vote by making reproductive rights the center of her campaign. This strategy isn’t new — Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and other Democrats have used it before. However, this approach has arguably become one of the Democrats’ gravest miscalculations, and Harris paid the price.
Over the past four years, women have faced the same economic pressures as men — buying groceries, filling gas tanks, and dealing with higher interest rates. Men aren’t the only ones who care about the economy, and no matter how often politicians chant, “My body, my choice,” it can’t drown out the financial strain of Bidenomics. Women, like men, wanted economic solutions and found them with Trump. For them, Kamala Harris and “my body, my choice” were not nearly enough.
Women’s bodies seem to matter to Democrats only when it comes to abortion. After the COVID pandemic, women have led the push for greater medical autonomy, nutritional transparency, and broader access to holistic, cycle-based health care. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promised to address these issues by holding Big Pharma and Big Food accountable, and women rallied around him in droves. But instead of supporting RFK Jr. and the women’s issues he represented, the Democratic Party labeled him an “anti-vax conspiracy theorist,” dismissing both him and the women he galvanized. Is it any wonder they followed Kennedy across the aisle to Trump?
Democrats also seem indifferent to women’s health care standards beyond abortion access. Women are continually overprescribed birth control as a blanket treatment for almost any ailment, wreaking havoc on their bodies. When outlets like Evie magazine highlighted how Big Pharma profits from pumping women full of synthetic estrogens, the Washington Post labeled the writers “conspiracy theorists.” But don’t worry — if birth control fails, Democrats will ensure you still have access to abortion.
Yet the “my body, my choice” mantra doesn’t seem to apply to women’s sports, bathrooms, or sororities. Kamala Harris might have played Beyoncé’s “Girls Run the World” at her rallies, but when her party cheers for an Algerian man beating elite female athletes or celebrates Lia Thomas while dismissing Riley Gaines as a “right-wing extremist,” the pretense of “women’s empowerment” becomes hard to believe.
Women are also tired of being told by the “woke elite” that they’re “fatphobic” if they don’t laud Lizzo as a health and beauty icon while Adele and Rebel Wilson are criticized for promoting “unhealthy” beauty standards through their weight loss. According to MSNBC, fitness is a sign of “right-wing extremism,” so it’s supposedly better to sit on the couch and pop birth control.
When Democrats celebrate being an overweight, unhealthy, androgynous “menstruating person” over a mom who works out, wears dresses, and drinks raw milk, they risk alienating a significant portion of their base.
The Democrats assume women have an obligatory, blind allegiance requiring them to support any woman running for office regardless of her policies. Such an assumption that a woman’s political capacities are limited to a candidate’s sex is not only an insult to women’s intelligence — it’s frankly anti-feminist.
In response to Sunny Hostin: No, women didn’t vote for Trump because they are “so severe upon their own sex.” Like birth control, your party prescribed “my body, my choice” as a cure-all for any political ailment afflicting women over the past four years of Biden and Harris’ policy failures. Trump’s platform actually listened to women. You took them for granted.
Girl with suspected autism punished by UK 'Serious Case Panel' for asking trans soccer opponent with beard, 'Are you a man?'
A girl with suspected autism was punished by a so-called National Serious Case Panel in the United Kingdom for asking a bearded transgender soccer opponent, "Are you a man?" the Telegraph reported.
The 17-year-old cried when the panel found her guilty of “discrimination” for her remarks during a match against a trans-inclusive team, the Telegraph added.
'The FA has declared open season on women and girls in football with its disastrous policy, which means that no one can question a male player participating in a women’s game.'
The outlet — citing a previous report in Telegraph Sport — said it was the "latest case to cause outrage over the Football Association’s policy of allowing those born male to play in the women’s game."
The girl's county Football Association charged her with saying, “Are you a man?” as well as, “That’s a man," and “Don’t come here again,” or similar comments, the Telegraph said.
She was banned for six matches, four of which were suspended, after a three-hour hearing last week during which she denied expressing transphobia at the "friendly" game in July, the outlet noted.
The girl also wept during a 30-minute grilling conducted via video conference, the Telegraph said, adding that she had been facing a ban of up to 12 games.
An individual on the call said the hearing was “farcical” and added that panel members repeatedly “misgendered” the alleged victim as “he," the outlet reported, adding that the girl also was said to have been repeatedly asked, “How many LGBQT+ players do you have in your team?”
More from the Telegraph:
Her parents were outraged both by the hearing and the outcome, with her mother telling Telegraph Sport: “We’ve always taught our daughter to ask questions, and if she doesn’t feel comfortable or she doesn’t feel safe then she should go to somebody in charge and ask the question. In safeguarding training at places of work, you’re always told that you should question everything but she’s been told and effectively sanctioned by the FA for doing so. She asked, ‘Are you a man?’, and she admitted to that. The FA is essentially saying that no woman, when faced with what appears to be a male on the pitch, is entitled to ask a question.”
The girl’s plight had previously been cited by former FA chairman Lord Triesman, who wrote to the governing body’s current chair and chief executive last month to complain about its trans policy. The FA has continued to permit players born male to compete in female-only events, despite being urged in May by then-Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer to adopt the “unambiguous position” of a ban.
The outlet noted that Fiona McAnena — director of campaigns at Sex Matters — told Telegraph Sport: “The FA has declared open season on women and girls in football with its disastrous policy, which means that no one can question a male player participating in a women’s game. Anyone who does could find themselves suspended just for asking. Disciplining women and girls for saying what they see plainly in front of them makes a mockery of the game. The FA’s new strategy for women’s and girls’ football is worthless as long as this transgender inclusion policy is in place. How can the FA talk about a commitment to true equality in community football while undermining the rights and safety of the very players it claims to be supporting?”
The girl was brought up on charges after the opposing team lodged a complaint through Kick It Out, which is English football’s anti-discrimination watchdog, the Telegraph said, adding that the trans player and the opposing team’s captain testified that the girl was persistently transphobic.
The outlet noted it has concealed the accused girl's identity due to her age and because she's "on the assessment pathway for autism."
'I raised a concern about the risk of serious injury as a 17-year-old girl playing against a biological male who was much larger than me and a very physical player, which was possibly a safety issue as I did not want to get dangerously injured right before the start of the new season.'
The girl admitted in a written statement submitted in her defense that she asked, “Are you a man?” to a player she described as having “a beard," the Telegraph reported. She also admitted asking the referee for guidance about the player’s eligibility to participate in women’s football “given my concern for my safety after already suffering a number of overly physical challenges," the outlet added.
However, the girl repeatedly denied her words constituted transphobia, the outlet said, adding that it is understood that the game's referee heard nothing he deemed discriminatory.
More from the Telegraph:
The girl said in her written statement she had become “confused” about the participation of the trans player during the match in question as the latter “wore jewelry and sunglasses” and was not in opposition kit.
She added: “The moment the player clarified they were transgender (which I previously hadn’t considered), I respected their answer fully, dropped the situation and immediately shifted my focus back to the game before seeking guidance from the referee. At no point was my question meant to be hurtful or malicious as I only intended to seek clarity in an unfamiliar situation. Knowing now that the player was transgender, I understand that there were better ways to approach this question.”
The girl also said the opposing team's captain accosted her during a water break, telling her that she shouldn't have an issue with playing against a transgender opponent, the outlet added.
“I raised a concern about the risk of serious injury as a 17-year-old girl playing against a biological male who was much larger than me and a very physical player, which was possibly a safety issue as I did not want to get dangerously injured right before the start of the new season," the girl said, according to the Telegraph. "Despite this, I made it clear that if the player met the eligibility criteria of the FA I would respect the rules and accept the risk involved in continuing to play the match. My safeguarding officer and the referee were both present for this conversation.”
The girl added that she was “truly disheartened that these allegations have been made against me," the outlet reported, adding that she also said "I have always supported and respected the diversity within my team, including members who are in the LGBTQIA+ community.”
The Telegraph added that the girl’s mother said none of her daughter’s teammates had been approached to make statements ahead of an upcoming hearing but that they were “100 percent behind her."
According to the outlet, the Football Association decided against publishing written reasons for the case.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Over 600 female athletes have lost medals to transgender competitors, shocking UN report reveals
A United Nations report reveals that a staggering number of female athletes have lost medals to transgender competitors.
The report states that as of March 2024, more than 600 female athletes have been pushed off podiums in 29 sporting categories.
'Male athletes have specific attributes considered advantageous in certain sports, such as strength and testosterone levels that are higher than those of the average range for females, even before puberty, thereby resulting in the loss of fair opportunity.'
As such, women have lost almost 900 medals to men who identify as women in over 400 competitions, the report says.
The report, titled "Violence against women and girls in sports," was published by the U.N.'s special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem.
In the document, Alsalem explains that various national federations and governing bodies have allowed males who identify as females to compete in female sports categories.
Alsalem goes on to say that no matter the age at which transgender males compete against females, inherent athletic advantages for trans competitors will persist: "Male athletes have specific attributes considered advantageous in certain sports, such as strength and testosterone levels that are higher than those of the average range for females, even before puberty, thereby resulting in the loss of fair opportunity."
Alsalem also cited the 2024 Paris Olympics, during which "female boxers had to compete against two boxers whose sex as females was seriously contested" and noted that "the International Olympic Committee refused to carry out a sex screening."
Controversial boxers Lin Yu‑ting of Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) and Imane Khelif of Algeria both won gold medals in women's boxing this past summer.
Both the International Boxing Association and the World Boxing Organization found that Khelif was biologically a man, but the International Olympic Committee decided to allow Khelif to box in the women's category anyway.
Khelif has since filed criminal hate speech complaints in France over alleged abuse during the Olympics.
The U.N. report claimed that reliable sex screening procedures can be provided through a simple cheek swab and that female Olympians were in favor of its use in the past.
"A 1996 survey of female Olympians found that an overwhelming number (82 percent of the 928 surveyed) supported sex tests," the report noted.
Last week a group of female activists and former athletes urged the U.N. to push for limitations on men who wish to compete against women in their events.
Olympic silver medalist Sharron Davies and former West Virginia athlete Lainey Armistead were among those who spoke at the United Nations General Assembly meeting, alongside Alsalem and lawyers such as Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom.
The group of women called for the international sports community to ensure that women can participate in athletics without being at risk of harm from men.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Exclusive: Nevada women's volleyball captain doubles down on team's refusal to play transgender opponent
The captain of the University of Nevada women's volleyball team told Blaze News in an exclusive interview that she's disappointed her school decided not to support the team's decision to forfeit a game against a squad with a transgender player.
"Unfortunately our university decided not to back us, and they decided they're going to have the match as scheduled," Nevada Wolf Pack captain Sia Liilii said.
'No student athlete should ever be pressured to play a game where they don’t feel safe — period.'
As Blaze News previously reported, San Jose State University's women's volleyball team features a 6'1" male athlete named Blaire Fleming, born Brayden.
Fleming's presence on the SJSU squad has been the unofficial reason behind four forfeitures by teams at Boise State, Southern Utah, Utah State, and Wyoming.
Even Fleming's own teammate has spoken out about the unfair advantage the male athlete has over female players.
Nevada was next in line to withdraw from a match against SJSU after the Wolf Pack players released a statement announcing their refusal to participate in a match that would jeopardize their safety.
However, school officials decided to override the will of the players and declare that the match against SJSU would proceed as scheduled.
The University of Nevada claimed the players made their decision and statement "independently" and "without consultation with the University or the athletic department."
However, Liilii said she and her teammates tried to go through the proper channels and inform school administrators how they felt, but the university still decided to push forward with the scheduled match.
"The vast majority of us decided that this isn't right, [that] we need to protect women's sports, and we're going to forfeit," the team captain explained.
She added, "To know that the university didn't acknowledge the fact that we're the team that is going to play against [Fleming] was really frustrating, and the way they went about it was not OK."
Liilii said administrators later scheduled a meeting with the team to apologize and let players know the school would not be punishing them if they choose to sit out against SJSU on Oct. 26.
When asked about the contradiction between the school not punishing players while publicly refusing to back their decision to forfeit, Liilii told Blaze News she felt the school was finding a way to distance itself from the players' stance while still following state and NCAA rules surrounding gender diversity.
But Liilii added that she's received a lot of support, particularly from politicians such as Tulsi Gabbard and U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), both of whom recently attended a Nevada women's volleyball game.
"Thank you Sam Brown, Tulsi Gabbard, and Mark Wayne Mullin [sic] for showing your support at our match against Utah State tonight!" Liilii wrote on X.
— (@)
"Although our university hasn't supported us in this decision, our governor ... [Joe] Lombardo came out with a statement which was really reassuring, too," LiiLiii noted.
Lombardo issued a statement on X about the ordeal, saying in part, "No student athlete should ever be pressured to play a game where they don’t feel safe — period."
"I wholeheartedly respect the decision of the players," the governor added.
— (@)
"We do have people behind us that are supporting us, and that is really important," Liilii said.
The Nevada captain added that she hopes she will soon "see the light at the end of the tunnel" regarding this controversy.
Regarding whether or not the Nevada volleyball players will protest, participate, or sit out during the SJSU match, Liilii said, "you'll just have to see."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Today's top stories
freebeacon.com
www.theblaze.com