58

California Gov. Gavin Newsom does not like being on Donald Trump's side on any issue.

But when it comes to transgender girls and women in sports, particularly at the school level, the Democrat said he largely agrees with the Republican president. Newsom, one of his party's leading White House prospects, believes it's "deeply unfair" for people who are assigned male at birth to compete against girls.

"I don't want to be on that side of it, but I'm being honest — I'd be lying to you if I said differently," Newsom told The Associated Press as he was campaigning recently in South Carolina. "I haven't been able to figure out how to make it fair from my perspective."

Newsom is not alone.

While most Democratic officials remain steadfast supporters of the transgender community, an increasing number in red and blue states are distancing themselves from their party's unflinching support for the transgender community's policy priorities, such as allowing athletes to compete on teams that match their gender identity. The shift follows years of conservative attacks against Democrats on the divisive issue, which affects a relatively small number of transgender people and their families, but has emerged as one of Republicans' most potent political weapons in the Trump era.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

The way California handled it at women's state track this past season I think is a fair balance. There was a MTF gal that took second in some race, and she and another each got credit for second place. At least until a better solution comes up, I don't see why that would be an issue.

I can see an argument why that's not fair to a trans individual for singling them out, but in that same vein there's an argument about how a MTF may have biological advantages over the competition.

If the above can't be achieved, I think allowing trans in sports is the right call. As someone that was a competitive athlete, I have to admit that I didn't just jump to this opinion and did have to reason with myself. I was never against it, but still had instinctive doubts.

That's not to defend Newsome at all, he's a snake. Even if these are is true beliefs, that he doesn't want to be on that side and perhaps it's a moral dilemma he knows is wrong, he can absolutely do better than this.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Its dumb that politicians are even involved in this non-issue, its the same with trans medical stuff, in what other areas would a sleazy politician ever be invited to dictate what happens between a person and their dr/medical care?

There's a parallel in these things that I feel gets missed in all the hubbub. Why are their opinions or attention warranted, much less demanded on either matter? Why so quick to praise one and condemn the other with the same hand.

This is exactly the idiocy that led to Trump getting that dude's yellow card yanked, apparently the President has executive discretion over international sporting events and bodies

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 1 week ago

Reproductive care.

[-] ryannathans@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago

Parallel placing systems? Damn maybe everyone can come first now

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Not how that works. Assuming 3 MTF trans athletes took the top three spots, they would also place 3 females at birth as the top 3. In this case, the trans girl took second overall, so she shared second. Nobody got displaced, everyone was able to compete. In the way, a trans athlete would share the same position of the closest competition that they bested and behind anyone else they didn't.

this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
58 points (96.8% liked)

politics

31167 readers
2469 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS