Governor of California Changes His Tune: He Agrees Men and Boys Don't Belong In Women's Sports

[Delphinium20]

I always believed it would be sports that would peak the U.S. Terf Island has your women's rights activists (love them!) and non-profit medicine (Cass Report). Americans have their sense of fairness for all, especially in sports. If the governor of the largest state in the country ( $4.2 trillion GDP, an economy larger than most countries including the UK), has just said he thinks it's grossly unfair for boys to be in girls' sports, well, that's a pretty big deal.

Newsom can be critiqued for a lot (he put men in women's prisons and supported keeping secret children's transitions from their parents) but his change indicates a massive shift for the Democrats. He, obviously, wants to be president, so he's staking his "I was here first" claim on a topic that he's fully aware shows Americans are 70-80% against transwomen in women's sports. Yes, feminists said it first, but I'll take this win if it means Democrats can stop pretending men can be women. It's obnoxious we had to lose to Trump to get here, but I'm celebrating today.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20250306183716/www.nytimes.com/2025/03/06/us/politics/gavin-newsom-transgender-sports-democrats.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20250306183716/www.nytimes.com/2025/03/06/us/politics/gavin-newsom-transgender-sports-democrats.html

Strategically one might say that Americans should encourage him if he's going in this direction, but personally, as I find some of the practices so inhumane and abhorrent to women, I'm not sure how this man could be trusted with women's rights in the future.

He always reminds me of the sociopathic Dennis in It's Always Sunny saying in an early episode "I don't really have any principles." I think it's the episode about abortion, where Dennis quite literally crosses from one side of a protest to the other to get what he wants.

I'm not too concerned with whether or not he's being sincere, any more than I was about whether Trump signed those Executive Orders because he cares about women. I was still pleased for women in federal prisons and for girls trying to play sport and likewise, I'm pleased for US women who are Democrat supporters who might now find it easier to initiate conversations.

I agree, @Floisme.

So is it just the men in women's sports thing that he has an issue with or puberty blockers/ men in all women's spaces -everything else he's ok with?
Perhaps he's trying it out as it's an 80/20 issue in favour of a ban on male atheletes and so some politicians --especially the more opportunistic and unprincipled one's like Newsom must be desperate to dump it but worried about the backlash from their trans 'friends'.

The interesting thing about this is once they concede on one thing, the whole house of cards falls down,

He may think he's conceding the most high profile / unpopular aspect for the 'middle ground', but once you admit that transwomen are men, it's game over.

I think Mark Halperin gave a good rundown of this on his show. It wasn't just that Harris had an unpopular position, it's that voters perceived her as being too fixated on niche cultural issues. Whereas Trump was banging on constantly about inflation, jobs and immigration - the top three issues in almost every poll.

Someone also said - I think this was Halperin, who's extremely well connected - that when the ads started dropping quoting Harris on trans surgeries for prisoners, Bill Clinton said "We need to get right out there and say we don't agree with that and won't do it." Harris, either honourably or stupidly, take your pick, wouldn't row back on her position.

I object to Bill Clinton on principle, because the man has the morals of an alley cat, but he's also the nearest thing to a political genius the Democrats have. It seems his punishment for his sins is for all his sensible advice to be ignored.

Similarly Tony Blair, I suppose. We keep hearing about the Dark Lord bending the ears of influential Labour MPs. I don't know if he's mentioned genderwoo as a losing issue, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I'm really trying to be gracious when people change their minds and accept it with open arms as a good thing but Starmers volte-face as soon as Blair made a comment still makes me so angry. Whatever about the US the issue hasn't been as prominent there but Starmer ignoring it for so long and ignoring women about the issue and then as soon as a man he respected said something of course a discussion is needed and of course a women doesn't have a penis etc.

I seem to recall he did weigh in with something vaguely terf adjacent.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/17/tony-blair-labour-trans-views-gender-general-election/

It would take Blair speaking up to make Rimmer take notice. He doesn't seem to be able to hear our high pitched voices.

That was utterly infuriating

But ultimately it shows clearly how little the left respect women.

When people show you who they are, believe them. 🫠