House Republicans pass bill to ban transgender women, girls from school sports teams
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
House Republicans on Thursday passed a bill that seeks to prohibit transgender women and girls from participating in female athletic programs, moving to the national stage an issue that has thus far mainly played out in state legislatures and individual sports associations.
The legislation — titled the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act and sponsored by Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) — passed in a party-line 219-203 vote. It is the first standalone bill to restrict the rights of transgender people considered in the House.
The Democratic-controlled Senate, however, is unlikely to take up the measure, and the White House has issued a veto threat.
The bill, which failed to advance during the last three Congresses, would amend Title IX — the federal civil rights law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education — to recognize sex as that which is "based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth."
It specifically calls for prohibiting recipients of federal financial assistance that operate athletic activities from allowing transgender women and girls from participating on female sports teams.
It would not, however, block transgender women and girls from training or practicing with female athletic programs "so long as no female is deprived of a roster spot on a team or sport, opportunity to participate in a practice or competition, scholarship, admission to an educational institution" or other benefits.
"This is about protecting women's sports now and into the future," House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (N.Y.), the highest-ranking Republican woman in the chamber, said at a press conference ahead of the vote Thursday.
"Biological women and girls should only be competing against other biological women and girls," Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-Texas) said. "And I don't care how many surgeries you have, I don't care how many chemicals you put into your body. You're not going to be a biological woman."
The Biden administration announced on Monday the president would veto the bill if it landed on his desk, arguing it discriminates against children.
The administration earlier this month in a set of proposed changes to Title IX criticized policies that broadly ban transgender athletes from competing on sports teams consistent with their gender identity.
The Education Department's proposal, which has yet to undergo a period of public comment, would not prohibit transgender athlete bans in their entirety, however, and local school districts will still be able to enact policies that limit athletic participation based on a set of sex-related eligibility criteria if the rule is finalized into law.
An additional proposal released by the Biden administration in June would amend the definition of sex discrimination in Title IX to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
At least 21 states since 2020 have enacted laws or policies that prevent transgender athletes from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity, and more than 40 such bills have been introduced in state legislatures across the country this year, according to the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest LGBTQ advocacy group.
During Thursday's press conference, Stefanik called the legislation "a winning issue across America, standing up for the future of women and girls."
Democrats have pushed back against arguments that the bill intends to make sports safer and more equitable for women and young girls.
"Don't believe for a minute that this is about protecting women and girls, because if Republicans cared about that they would not be voting against equal pay, against paid sick leave, against universal childcare. The way that this bill targets children in the name of gender equality is insulting," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said during a debate on Wednesday.
Jayapal, one of the co-chairs of the House Equality Caucus and the mother of a transgender daughter, questioned how the proposed law would be enforced and how a child's "reproductive biology" could be verified in a noninvasive manner.
"If a young girl—if your daughter—doesn't look feminine enough, is she subject to an examination?" she said.
Jayapal last month re-introduced the Trans Bill of Rights, a sweeping resolution meant to strengthen civil rights protections for transgender and nonbinary Americans.
Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), a co-chair of the Equality Caucus and one of just 13 openly LGBTQ members of Congress, similarly argued on Wednesday that the measure would open the door to unnecessary and intrusive investigations into female athletes.
He cited an investigation in Utah over the summer, where the gender of a young cisgender female athlete was called into question after she placed first in a competition "by a wide margin."
LGBTQ rights groups have broadly condemned the measure, which they say discriminates against transgender people. The legislation has also been rejected by women's rights organizations including the National Women's Law Center and Women's Sports Foundation.
A coalition of professional, Olympic and Paralympic female athletes in a letter to Congress this month urged lawmakers to vote against the bill and turn their attention to "causes women athletes have been fighting for decades," like equal pay and an end to abuse and mistreatment.
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) the chair of the House Education Committee and one the bill's 93 GOP co-sponsors, during a legislative hearing on Monday refused to acknowledge the existence of transgender women.
"They're males, sorry," she said. Foxx on Monday added that she does not "know what a trans girl is" and argued that it is impossible for a person to live as a sex that is different from their sex assigned at birth.
House Republicans this week similarly denied the existence of transgender identities by repeatedly referring to transgender women as "biological males," a term condemned by LGBTQ rights groups for its implication that transgender women are lying about their identity.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
Tags
Who is online
409 visitors
Democrats put the trans issue over women.
"Feminists" fall in line behind them.
[deleted]
Nonsense...and you know better.
The Dems seem to hate real biological women in favor of some emotionally messed up dudes.
But they are bound and determined to ride this latest lie into the desert of defeat come election time.
Democrats obviously think it is easier to prey on these poor damaged souls, now that Epstein isn't providing them with baby prey.
[deleted]
Like the President who takes showers with his teenage daughter - and brags about it?? Guess he missed the "Being an Adult 101" class.
According to the Constitution "all men are created equal".
In an ideal America, everyone has the same exact rights.
Welcome to America.
And just what rights are being denied. Trans "women" can compete in any male sport they wish. After all they were, are, and always will be men.
Regardless of your personal beliefs, there should be no discrimination
based on anything per the Constitution.
Trans men successfully compete against "normal" men and I see no complaints.
That isn't equal treatment under the law.
Are There No Athletes Assigned Female at Birth Who Transitioned and Competed in Men’s Sports? | Snopes.com
Welcome to America.
Title Nine .... landmark legislation in 1972 insuring equality of women’s rights in all educational activities. Protecting the rights of about 51% of the US population
50 years later some would have it completely negated by Trans rights. About 1% of the population.
Welcome to 2023 America.
Trans "men" do not have a physical advantage over normal men. Males are stronger than women. William Thomas is a good example. Competing against other men he was ranked around 465. After he competes against women and becomes number one and also becomes the sports "woman" of the year. He would never have become the sports man of the year.
You are aware that there are differences between men and women aren't you?
Excellent. We'll just have one competition and let everyone compete. No gender discrimination possibility.
Like the Boston Marathon?
That seems to work doesn't it?
Legislation that would seem to be unnecessary under the Constitution. Why were we discriminating against our women for 200 years?
The legislation forces all schools to spend the same amount of money on men's and women's sports, that will not change.
Actually about half of that number but can you point out what the percentage point is where the Constitution no longer applies to a minority?
Welcome to a nation still going through growing pains.
There is still mens division and winner and à women's division and winner. Men and women don't compete against each other only their own sex. It is that way in all marathons.
The only race I know of where men and women race against one another is the Hood to Coast race here in Oregon and that one is because they race in teams that have members that are of both sexes. They do not race in direct competition.
There are too many Boston Marathon divisions to list them all
Men's, Women's, Vision Impaired, Oldest, youngest and of course
this years Non Binary winner Kae Ravichandren...
But none where normal women compete head to head against normal men. There should be no non. Binary division since there is no such thing as a non binary person.
Pete Buttigieg and all of his "knowledge" stated the other day that there are differences between men and women, hence the need for female crash test dummies.
This idiot single handedly destroyed the argument loony leftists make when defending dudes competing in women's sports.
Irrelevant. The issue was fixed under the Constitution. No more gnashing of teeth or wailing required on that topic
Irrelevant, since some support biological men, competing against biological women. A clear infringement of biological women’s equal treatment rights. The separation of men’s and women’s sports is a natural and righteous one. Arguing that it is not, is not logical.
It does. All biological men are welcome to participate in men’s sports. You’re welcome.
See above ......
A no woman has ever won it
No woman will probably ever win it, they are smarter than men./s
However, the fastest man and woman each get A cash prize of $150,000.
$879,500 will be divided between winners of the open, wheelchair, masters and para divisions. Other division winners get medals or certificates, like the non binary winner mentioned above.
Most people are just competing with themselves and trying to add to the 600,000 people who have finished the marathon so far
The International Olympics has also developed extensive rules for trans participation.
There are non binary solutions and some day, maybe when more binary thinkers have passed on, those solutions will be commonplace
but rarely needed.
Btw, they passed legislation which can be modified again and again. There is no guarantee that Title IX won't be erased by some future Congress or SCOTUS when it is deemed unnecessary.
Sure.
We run the race, give out medals for the first 3 across the line...regardless of gender.... and move on.
In basketball or soccer, we take the best players and let them compete. No need for a separate women's only league that nobody really wants to watch anyway.
If women can make the team, great. If not, gtfo.
We have people getting gold medals in the 100m who can't break 10.5 seconds. Get em outta there. That's not fast enough to win the Texas High School championship.
Everything gets a lot simpler when we treat everyone the same.
What is the actual point of school team sports?
Teaching life lessons/values or culling the herd for the NFL, NBA and MLB?
Maybe it’s a twofer.
... sacrilege, blaspheme.
She denies writing that and Biden never bragged about it. The 'diary' was forged by the National File, a far right wing disinformation blog along the lines of project veritas.
Yet ignorant Biden haters just lapped it up.
You are spreading disinformation , please stop.
i
Fantastic question, and the second is like unto it.
What is the actual point of women's sports?
Whataboutism 101 .... by SP
Actually, that question speaks for itself considering who asked it.
Really,
The 2023 running had a male and female winner.
They may all run together; but they are still separated out results wise by sex.
And age, disabilities, previous participation etc. There are too many Divisions to list.
If you had actually followed the thread and read the comments, those two people "earned" $150,000 each. The Binary winner was mentioned but earned no $$.
$875,00 were split between the winners of the Masters Division, Wheel Chair Division, Vision Impaired and Para Division.
Winners of other Divisions got medals or certificates, like the Binary winner, Kae Ravichandran.
Right. And if you're a 30 year old, you don't compete in the Over 70 division, no matter how you "identify."
But they did recognize the "binary winner".
It's in the records now.
And the testing for the Olympics will have footnotes too.
Who is it hurting, the cavemen among us?
Such fucking ignorance and he also said that we were spewing a lot of hate over Fucker Carlson getting the axe.
OK. Fine. The "binary winner" did not eliminate the women's winner. Do you see how this works?
When you're on the podium with a silver medal that should have been gold if people had enough sense not to let men compete in women's sports, you don't really give a shit about "footnotes".
Women. Women are hurting. I'm not sure how a rational person even asks that question.
When a man... with a cock and balls that he shows in the locker room prior to the race... wins the NCAA championship in women's swimming, that means that a woman... who has made enormous sacrifices to become an elite athlete, is now denied the place she rightfully earned.
When a man makes the Olympic women's weightlifting team, that means a woman .....who has worked for years to pursue her dream.... loses that spot and doesn't get to go.
Let's be clear, there is no such thing as "men's" sports. We have "women's" sports and we have open sports. Every "men's" sport is, in fact, open to women. Manchester United could move Ella Toone to the men's team at any time. They cannot move Scott McTominay to the women's team.
So why do we have women's sports in the first place? Why do we set aside separate competitions for athletes who are slower and weaker? Somewhere along the way, we as a society decided that it wasn't right to deny girls and women the same opportunities to compete in sports that men have. We acknowledged that women would never be able to compete with men physically, so we created separate divisions for them to compete against each other. Allowing men into those leagues makes them completely worthless.
If we want to have a separate division for "non-binary" or WTF ever, then fine. Do that.
But that's not what we're doing now. Right now, we're telling women who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of their dreams that the countless sacrifices they've made don't matter in the face of fuckwit leftist politics. Anybody with any respect for the integrity of sports is objecting to that, but almost none of those people are true believers in the Religion of Leftism, so they don't count.
You need to look up who can and who cannot compete in the Olympics before getting all dramatic.
More drama.
I believe I asked that first.
Not here...
Ok, progress...
Some are, some aren't. We over react.
You lost me at fuckwit...
Have a great evening, enjoy this weather.
That was actually the Declaration of Independence not the Constitution.
Yet we do know that he likes to touch preteen girls breasts and sniff their hair. There are several videos of him doing just that.
You've not heard of Laurel Hubbard, then.
For those who don't know, there is no over-arching Olympic policy. It's left up to the organizers of each sport.
I'm pretty sure there was a female weightlifter in New Zealand who didn't get to go to the Olympics because she lost her place to that man. I don't know the young woman personally, but I suspect she was gutted. That's only "drama" if you care more about the politics than the sports.
If you re-read, I think you'll find you didn't. Your lack of answer was a bit conspicuous, BTW.
Where is "here", exactly?
If you say so. But good luck with that. I suspect it will go about as well as the whole "what about a separate bathroom" suggestions did.
We also over-accept. The idea that Will Thomas should be able to compete in women's swimming was always utterly asinine, but was accepted by people who absolutely knew better because they needed to appear inclusive and accepting, no matter how stupid the idea in question.
As if.
You as well.
You are kidding, right?
She was the poster child for Olympic and international rules changes.
She also lost spectacularly....in the Olympics at least.
Not at all.
Which still allow people with male frames and muscles to compete in women's sports, despite a growing number of women who are showing the courage to speak up against such idiocy.
And? She should never have been there. That place belonged to Tracey Lambrechs, an actual woman with a female skeletal system, female muscularity, and female nervous system.
I realize leftists see Tracey as collateral damage in their holy crusade, but thankfully people with some sanity are starting to push back.
I thought the holy crusade was to treat girls and women like boys and men?
Hence, Title IX.
Now it's time for some reasonable accommodations,
not discrimination.
It was not intended to treat boys and men like girls and women.
The purpose of Title IX was not to get them to compete together but to have access to the same funding for comparable sports
That was yesterday's holy crusade. Now it's trans people
Keeping women's sports exclusive to actual women is reasonable. In no universe does it constitute discrimination.
The Boston Marathon already does it.
Some schools have chosen to do it.
Basically they train, travel and compete with the team and are automatically disqualified unless there is someone else "like them" to compete against on their team or another team.
The chances of winning anything could diminish participation altogether
making the need for discriminatory federal or state laws moot.
Exactly how is the law discriminatory?
Just one word for this piece of legislation.
GOOD!
Unfortunately, the Dems in the Senate or the dim bulb in the White House will cave in to the lgbtq crowd and kill this excellent and needed piece of legislation.
Every Democrat in the House thinks men should be able to participate in women's sports.
Who could have imagined we'd be here 10 years ago?
That's right and people might not know it from that deceptive title up there. That's the Hill.
Not me.
It’s nuts.
On the plus side this is a way to decrease the 900% increase in testicular injuries in women's sports.
Seems to me the better approach would be to eliminate the division between men's and women's sports. Sports would just be sports. Let liberals make the argument that women would be at a disadvantage.
That’s a terrible idea.
Why is eliminating the division between men's and women's sports a terrible idea? Democrats are telling us that being a man or woman is a matter of personal choice. Democrats are telling us that the distinctions between men and women are arbitrary and artificial. Democrats have told us for decades that maintaining gender roles and stereotypes is wrong.
How does the division between men's and women's sports fit into what Democrats have been telling us?
I’m not concerned with trying to make it relevant to anything you’re getting from Democrats. It’s a terrible idea all on its own. If you meant it sarcastically, use a sarc tag.
The separation of men’s and women’s sport is a natural one for most sports. Arguing that it isn’t, is just not logical.
How can that be true when being man or woman is a personal choice? Medical science provides transformations according to personal choice. The limitations of nature have been removed.
True, while some biological realities can be modified. Genetically, a man is still a man. And It shows. Look no further than Penn swimmer Ali Thomas for proof of that.
Interestingly, we don’t see as many Trans women competing at a high level in men’s sports. Wonder why that is?
I am hoping you weren't serious with that comment.
From reading their other comments- really don't think they are.
Just being heavily sarcastic pointing out Democrat's stupidity on the issue.
The point of women’s sports was to create opportunities for women - the kind of opportunities previously only available to men. Though this happens rarely, a trans woman can radically undermine this purpose, depending on the degree of transition and the sport at issue.
Any surgery - even though it seems like the most extreme component of a transition - is likely to have near zero impact on sport. The reconstruction of sexual organs isn’t nearly as impactful on performance as hormone treatments, which will affect bone and muscle.
But hormone treatments are not some kind of magic bullet that instantly transforms a man into a woman. Any grown, or nearly grown person, who has developed as a man will have physical advantages over a woman. Some of these advantages will fade over time, but it will likely take much longer than the year or so that many jurisdictions currently allow. Other advantages will never fade.
This is why the introduction of trans women into women’s sports - most particularly competitive women’s sports - can be so unfair. The trans community and the politics of the Left may not like this, but their unwillingness to even address the issue, but instead treat this only as a trans rights issue is dishonest.
Does this require sweeping federal legislation? I don’t know. Because these situations are both rare and unique, my preference would be to handle them on a case by case basis, with a priority on maintaining fair opportunities for the women who are supposed to benefit from the programs. If a trans woman can take part without unbalancing the playing field - or if it’s a casual, recreational program - then I don’t have a problem with it.
I think a good beginning in order to normalize the debate, is to quit calling trans males "women".
A better and correct definition would be "trans person".
Least important possible choice. All you are trying to do is impose your own point of view on someone else’s life. What they choose to call themselves is irrelevant. It doesn’t hurt anyone. Most things trans people do don’t hurt anyone. Competitive sports is a unique example where they could directly impact someone else’s life in a potentially negative way.
If you want to improve a conversation, you can start by respecting basic things like addressing them the way they want to be addressed. That costs you nothing.
Lying always costs you something. That was a major theme of the soviet dissidents, that participating in what you know is a lie is a corruption of your spirit and what permits such a repressive system of government to survive. Just go along. . Chant Stalin is merciful with everyone else. Doesn't cost you anything.
You get communism out of that? I can recommend a good anxiety pill.
Quick question: If you ever met Muhammad Ali, are you one of those people who would insist on calling him Cassius Clay?
Most sane Americans would prefer to call them "dudes with wigs and makeup"
So you are comparing a name/religion change with changing genders?
Call him Muhammad Ali or Cassius Clay it doesn't matter. He is still one of the best pound for pound fighters ever. Changing his name/religion did not affect that in the slightest. He was defeating male opponents before; and he was defeating male opponents after in the ring.
Lia Thomas was a lowly ranked male swimmer at the collegiate level. Since declaring himself female (and starting transition process)- he is now a highly ranked male swimmer dominating women in several events he couldn't dream of competing against men in.
That is completely the same thing.
You’re either too young or too old to remember, but it mattered a GREAT deal to a lot of people. There were people who insisted an calling him Cassius Clay, and that shit went on for years. His peers did it. Sports media did it. Public figures did it. It was obnoxious.
I don’t support Lia Thomas being on the swim team. Her biology makes that unfair. But we can still address her or refer to her in the way that she is asking. Her being on the swim team is damaging to the other competitors. Addressing her as Lia and using female pronouns when talking about her doesn’t hurt anyone.
But nothing in the bill on mitigating rampant sexual assaults in women's sports or the pay disparity women face in pro sports. These fuckers don't give a rats ass about women. They only want to play culture warrior to gin up votes and campaign cash. The also know they don't have a snowball's chance in Hell of passing this bill. It's dead on arrival in the Senate. What a waste of time...
Because the worthless fucking democrats in the Senate hate women, [deleted]
That kind of talk appeals to about 20-25% of voters. So, do keep spreading the word!
Deleted
creating and solving wedge issue non-problems is a lot easier than actually solving the real problems they've created. guns, groceries and the price of gas.
What is the gop's final solution to LGBTQ?
How very Third Reich, nice choice of words in that comment.
I see you completely avoided answering...
[deleted]
Imagine trying to argue the GOP created this wedge issue with a straight face.
It is the gop passing the anti-LGBTQ laws...
No chance to get this crap signed into law.
Lol.
Dem: we are going to overturn centuries of norms and allow men to compete with women in women's sports.
Republican: That's wrong. Women's sports are for women.
Dem: You are starting a culture war by refusing to go along with our radical changes to our culture!
It truly astounds me anyone can ignorant enough to claim Republicans are waging a culture war by simply trying to maintain the status quo that Americans have agreed (and still agree by a 2 to 1 margin) with their entire lives.
"No chance to get this crap signed into law."
Perhaps not, but the issue is rapidly gaining the voting publics attention, the majority of whom do not agree with the left's position of enabling emotionally disturbed men.
“…but the issue…”
I’ll see your transgender athlete issue, and raise you the abortion rights issue, the voter rights issue, and the gun issue.
Which ones are those?
This
Which party is responsible for inflation, the price of gas, and is soft on crime?
You should retreat back to retreat back to your safe space with stuffed animals and coloring books. Reality is simply too much for you.
Also, if Democrats wouldn't have created this wedge issue of men competing in women's sports; there would be nothing to solve. Democrats, creating problems where none existed before.
Ah, the hill we choose to die on and which station of the Cross next to. The slopes are lined with petards ready with self hoisting winches for the suicidal disciples of misguided angst.