Remember how the left not long ago went on and on and on about the supposed “war on women” from the right? The irony is that according to current leftist dogma, women no longer exist. After all, the Biden Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services is insisting in referring to mothers (once understood as a significant subset of beings known as “women”) as “birthing persons,” because current leftist dogma says men can have babies, too. Which means women no long have anything naturally distinctive about them.
Christine Rosen dilates this problem wonderfully in the current issue of Commentary in “The New Misogyny.” Key bit:
The misogynistic nature of this revolution has escaped proper scrutiny precisely because it is understood as progressive—as literally better than everything that has come before. And it casts everything that has come before as suspect: All forms of social organization and every idea that denies this movement’s claims have been deemed retrogressive and actively harmful to the forward march of greater rights for all.
This is an audacious form of woman-hatred, especially since it comes in the guise of opening up womanhood, of extending its benefits to all. But by doing so, it becomes nothing less than an assault on what it means to be a woman. And it is not being understood as such by its advocates and their fellow travelers because of a potent combination of two factors: First, people’s fears of being labeled bigots, and second, a genuine and commendable effort to extend compassion and care to a very small minority.
Which brings me back to the story I’ve commented on before of Lia Thomas, the “woman” swimmer at the University of Pennsylvania who is shattering women’s swim records after having competed for three years as an average male swimmer for Penn. This video shows Thomas’s enormous margin of victory in a recent 1,500 meter swim. It is just over two minutes, but you can scroll to about the 1:15 mark and you’ll see the absurd margin of Thomas’s farcical “win” (Thomas marked helpfully with a red arrow in lane 5)—notice especially long it takes for the second-place finisher to come in:
As previously reported, several members of the Penn women’s swim team are deeply upset at this travesty, but are afraid to speak out for the reason Rosen notes: they will be called bigots, and perhaps even face disciplinary action by the UPenn campus Stasi.
But some of their parents have written to the NCAA to complain directly, as reported by OutKick:
The parents of University of Pennsylvania swimmers, who are frustrated over the dominance of transgender swimmer Lia Thomas, have sent a letter to the NCAA demanding changes to ensure an equal playing field — or, in this case, pool — for their daughters.
Thomas, who spent three seasons swimming as a male on the men’s team, spent November and early December smashing school records in several women’s freestyle events and is positioned to win NCAA national titles in March.
The Penn parents say enough is enough and that the NCAA needs to think about the biological women who are losing their equitable space in athletics.
“At stake here is the integrity of women’s sports,” the letter obtained by The DailyMail states. “The precedent being set – one in which women do not have a protected and equitable space to compete – is a direct threat to female athletes in every sport. What are the boundaries? How is this in line with the NCAA’s commitment to providing a fair environment for student-athletes?
“It is the responsibility of the NCAA to address the matter with an official statement. As the governing body, it is unfair and irresponsible to leave the onus on Lia, Lia’s teammates, Lia’s coaches, UPenn athletics and the Ivy League. And it is unfair and irresponsible to Lia to allow the media to dictate the narrative without the participation of the NCAA.”
I’m guessing the NCAA will either ignore this letter, or respond that the parents are bigots, etc.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.