Kamala Harris says women should have sports!

[fromorbit]

The biggest Democrat name to come out openly and say women should have their own sports however clearly she is still very confused.

In her new book, “107 Days,” Harris also expressed frustration, in hindsight, for not pushing back on the Trump campaign’s ad that focused on transgender athletes.
“Why didn’t I punch back harder?” she questioned.
That television ad, which ran during prime time sporting events including football and the World Series last year, claimed “Kamala was for they/them. President Trump is for you.” Harris argued that the pronoun that really mattered was “we,” as in “we the people.” But while she argued that “transgender people are Americans, with the same rights we all have, to liberty, equality, the pursuit of happiness and equal protection under the law,” she said the ad did misconstrue her stance on transgender athletes in women’s sports.
“The ad also said that I supported ‘biological men competing against our girls in their sports.’ That's not my position,” she continued.
“I agree with the concerns expressed by parents and players that we have to take into account biological factors such as muscle mass and unfair athletic advantage when we determine who plays on which teams, especially in contact sports,” Harris clarified. “With goodwill and common sense, I believe we can come up with ways to do this, without vilifying and demonizing children.”
https://mynews13.com/fl/orlando/politics/2025/09/22/harris-reflects--reveals-regrets-of-her--107-days--as-the-democratic-nominee

We know why Harris didn't say anything because she would have been cancelled for saying women were real in any way.

However Harris also said in the book she was right about paying for sex changes for criminals.

Harris concedes that the Trump campaign was right to think they had "landed on a winning message," but she doesn't think the ad was a "knockout punch" that propelled Trump to victory. This was merely the "conventional wisdom" among pundits and "middle-aged men" who "watch a lot of sports," she writes, describing a huge chunk of the American electorate that Democrats have deliberately ignored for years.

"I do not regret my decision to follow my protective instincts," Harris writes. "I do regret not giving even more attention to how we might mitigate Trump's attacks." Her campaign's internal testing found that the most effective rebuttal to the "they/them" ad was to accuse Trump of lying and quickly change the subject to price gouging.

Harris explains that at the time of the interview—several weeks before she dropped out of the Democratic primary in 2019—she was eager to placate liberal activists in California who accused her of being insufficiently pro-trans. That's why she bragged about changing state policy to ensure that "every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access to the medical care that they desired and needed" in the name of "civil rights," "justice," and "humanity."

The failed candidate goes on to say that she feels a "deep connection" with the transgender community and is friends with the parents of "transgender kids." Harris envisions herself as a "protector," which is why she defended the rights of illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded sex changes. "There was no way I was going to go against my very nature and turn on transgender people right when they were being so intensely and intentionally vilified," Harris writes. "I was aware of the weight of my voice and had no intention of adding to their burden."
https://freebeacon.com/democrats/harris-has-no-regrets-about-standing-up-for-transgender-inmates/

Obviously this is inconsistent nonsense. Yet it shows how much things have changed. If Harris said this last year it would have been huge. Now it is hardly discussed very few news articles on it.

I think major Democrats are going to backtrack on sports, while trying to keep rapists in women's prisons and other arguably worse things.

The TAs are losing. Bit by bit the fight back to say women and men both exist is gaining ground. The Terfs were right!

It's interesting to see her back track a little on this topic. It seems like it's finally sinking in that this was such a vote losing topic.

Looks like she's still trying to sit on the fence and 'both sides' it a bit however.

Still that impenetrable 'we are right' core is clearly weakening.

I read this yesterday and I think the sports bit is a bunch of weasel words.

She wants to find a way to do this? Maybe like Newsom did. Allow the athletes to compete but not allow them to be recorded as winners, or to take any place of a female athlete in a final etc. making the competition cumbersome to run (because how many positions are there in a final vs positions on the track- does that mean all girls having to run additional races because there are too many for the track to accommodate?) .

”With goodwill and common sense, I believe we can come up with ways to do this, without vilifying and demonizing children.”

These are not words I trust to protect female sports.

I have mixed feelings about politicians skirting round issues. On the one hand I can understand because they're damned if they support one side and damned if they support the other. And on the other hand, I don't know why they aren't just honest about what they think. If they're asked "do you think trans women should compete in female sports" and you aren't sure, just say it. More voters would appreciate their honesty.
But of course we then have the ones who backtrack, when they realise which way the wind's blowing.

"some of my friends children are trans"

This lie will eventually haunt some of these people forever, in how they didn't challenge it and instead encouraged it when the bottom drops out of the fashion and all they are left with is evidence of a massive safeguarding fail.

Once again we are seeing the influence of key high status individuals being enormous and everyone being too polite to ask the difficult questions.

Safeguarding 101: you treat everyone as potentially being a risk - no one is above suspicion just because you know them, they are high status or 'trusted'. You actually based on evidence and behaviour not because you are mates.

I don't think she does, I read it as wanting to allow people after a period of time, testosterone suppression maybe, some sort of parallel work around with multiple prizes....

If you want women's sports female only, there are really easy ways to say that. "Finding a way to do that," is right in "it's oh so complicated," territory.

I think you’ve nailed it. She’s just window dressing. If she really supported women’s rights she’d want rapists out of women’s prisons but she doesn’t.

I noticed too that she doesn’t acknowledge the issues around providing medical treatments that are extreme body modifications to make a body match a person’s philosophical belief about themselves that may be life limiting or life shortening.

If Harris really was a ‘protector’ she would have acknowledged the significant issues of the medical treatments she was funding in the name of this protection.

And she would not have allowed any male prisoner to be placed in a female prison estate.

Harris has looked at the polling results of surveys and has voiced a ‘there has to be a way’ statement of nothingness in answer to the sub-issue that scored the highest pushback from the USA population. Sports. Because it is the one the population feel confident about not getting cancelled for expressing. They feel confident because the world sports organisations have stated there are issues and have or are making changes.

Sports is has been considered the ‘safe’ argument to express concerns about. Remember the communications strategy documents that warned activist speakers to avoid sports, to immediately change topic to distract from sports. That is because it is sports that the harm of this inclusion strategy becomes very obvious. Of course, if inclusion in sports is an issue- where else is an issue if people start researching?

Sports became the weak point in the overall strategy. Because if a male person cannot be a female person for sport, it proves the lie in the mantra of TWAW. If they cannot be female for sport, then they never were and never can be female for anything else.

Harris is playing to the polling with her words. If she gives weasel words that appeal to the ‘there is a way to do this’ person who really hasn’t done the fucking work to understand there is no real way to do this, she appeases those minds.

x posted with Bundle.

It seems to me that the Democrats are headed for the same sort of oblivion as the Tories are currently experiencing here, because they just don’t listen to voters. People are so tired of weasel words from these people.

I loathe the likes of Trump and Farage but if the Democrats can’t or won’t see how they have gained so much traction then they are idiots. Everyone knows men can’t be women, everyone knows that Kamala Harris knows that, yet she continues to obfuscate, which is highly insulting to voters. I say it again, this ideology rots people’s brains.

I really hope you are right Red, and that this insanity is eventually recognized as such.

I’m finding it incredibly difficult that the whole trans train is so deeply embedded and that the medical cases, including the transitioning of children, are still piling up.

I had hoped to see some sign that the lie that physically harming bodies somehow heals a broken mind might have started to be more widely questioned or criticised. It seems so mad to me that it’s like a constant scream in my mind. It has torn my family apart and I still cannot see any resolution in sight.

I believe gender ideology is a poison (I believe it was designed to be a poison).

What Harris, and, in my view, anyone who claims to be moderate and not an ultra, don't seem to get is this. Society is like a big stew, bubbling away on the hob. It is extremist to add poison to stew, whether you're going the whole hog and adding every last bit of poison you can get your hands on (full on TWAW in every context), or whether you find a non-lethal poison and only use it in small quantities so as to give everyone the runs (draw a line at rapists in women's prisons and men in elite women's sport, but otherwise try to #bekind.)

The only way to not be an extremist is to say "men are not women, ever, in any way at all. I know it, you know it, we all know it".

As far as I’m concerned, Kamala Harris had an opportunity to make a stand and didn’t take it. It no longer matters to me what she thinks. Sorry if that’s harsh but right now, my patience with the Democrats is all used up.

Exactly this, you cannot have a halfway house with this issue, men are never women in any scenario. The end.

Yes and I think deep down everyone knows that. Which is why they've been clinging to extreme, nonsensical positions that TWAW, always, despite the glaring logic gaps.

And for that reason, I think this is progress of a sort. Once you concede that women deserve fair sport, you can't remain impervious to the logic and the facts around the advantage men have, forever.

We've seen various sporting bodies work through this process before and the trajectory is generally only one way (though the speed varies a great deal).

So not that I'm trusting her an inch to follow through, just yet, but this is a crucial first step I think.

I do wonder if she talked about this with Gavin Newsome. And we have seen how he speaks the words but doesn’t deliver as well.

Agree with everyone else. Weasel words.

I do wonder what will happen when all the young women & men who've been so physically and mentally harmed by all this, start speaking out in massive numbers. Obviously their generally poor mental health prevents much of this now but as their rage grows when they fully appreciate how their futures have been compromised in terms of fertility, relationships and health, I suspect a majority of them will let that rage show. I guess their targets will be parents who (for a range of reasons) were unable to safeguard them and all politicians / leaders who funded and enabled the charlatans in the groups that targeted children.

Harris envisions herself as a "protector,"

I read that and immediately thought of Lisa Nandy's T-shirt display of "protect the dolls"

I'm not sure her statement is a reversal however, just a softening of the pro trans message and a way to get her agenda through without the outrage. The Democrats are still not aligning themselves with majority views which is sad for the USA as credible opposition is desperately needed.

Btw, it shows their focus groups were not representative if they believed the issue was able to be batted away.

What a disappointment Kamala Harris turned out to be.

She still doesn't get it about transgenderism, does she? She is still fuelled by #bekind instead of #bereal - she continues to describe trans people as some kind of oppressed minority, like there weren't enough real oppressed minorities in the US for her to 'protect' from 'vilification'.

Until politicians acknowledge that facts matter, e.g. the fact is that human sex is binary and immutable, they are still on the wrong track - maybe the odd concession about women's sport, but overall still following the 'most marginalised and vilified minority' line on people who claim they can change sex, and demand that the structures of state and society facilitate them.

I think reminding people just how their political parties manipulate voters by using distraction tactics is a mistake in this era of lowering trust in governments. Reminding the voters that the Democrats use distraction to avoid discussing topics that people want to actually discuss is not going to restore the lack of trust in that party.

I’m not in the US so happy to be corrected by more knowledgeable posters but I’d have thought Kamala Harris would be viewed as an irrelevance now within the Democrat Party?

Maybe in 20 years time she’ll be able to reinvent herself as a ‘wise old stateswoman’ but I’d be surprised if any Democrat with any influence would take her seriously right now, however unfair that might be on KH.

Somebody that muddled in their thinking isn't fit to be president. Not that Trump is either, but still. A higher calibre candidate was required.

There's a review of her memoirs in the Times today:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/dd40f467-14df-4e15-a9e2-37d4f5fec77d?shareToken=a295fda4f8de9ea62ff75e0e9b89c4a8

The Democrats are still not understanding that losing the blue collar vote has caused irreversible damage. Similar to Labour in this country.

Protectively ushering a rapist into a woman's prison cell where she'll be alone with him. For hours. To happen again the next day, and again.

I don't think they'll ever understand. They only see this demographic as numbers on a spreadsheet that they have to pretend to care about once every 4 years or so. They don't view them as actual people who they'd chat to on public transport or invite round for a cuppa.

I always thought that for all his many and obvious flaws, Johnson was very good at turning his poshness to affable charm when needed, and probably saw a room full of tradies as an interesting challenge, involving rude jokes and taking the piss out of himself. Most politicians can't hide their horror at having to interact with the type of people who watch football, put flags up for the World Cup and have a china plate of Princess Diana on their sideboard.