It's been made pretty clear you have to pass a religious test one way or another to be on this team. Staley preaches at team meals, gives out "gameday devotionals" that include scripture, and on the back the words, "Jesus vs. (insert opponent)" She recently said "if you dont believe in god, something is wrong with you." South Carolina is a public university, and she is in charge of a group of kids she has quite a bit of power over. This is insanity.
Im glad she's right here, but dont ever let these people get away. Ever.
“This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error as long as reason is left free to combat it.”
(Yeah, I know Jefferson’s being “re-assessed.” Rightfully so, too. But thing is—he’d absolutely dig that. He’d literally have it no other way; it was precisely his intention in everything he ever wrote, but especially with regard to his, Dawn Staley’s, and my university.)
Dawn Staley absolutely is everything we hoped to be when we were lucky enough to be at the college that (deeply flawed) man founded. I’m proud to have gone to her university, and his.
South Carolina is lucky to have her, but if they ever feel they aren’t, I sure hope she’ll someday come home.
The RWNJ Faux Outrage Machine crashed and burned when it went up against Dawn Staley. She told them she didn't give a damn what they posted (some poetic license used). Poor little dears were out classed, out maneuvered, and thrown off the court. Outstanding job Coach Staley.
I see a different aspect. Back in the Christine Jorgensen days, when transgender was still called transsexual, the working definition was "a man trapped in a woman's body" or "a woman trapped in a man's body." That is the crux of the argument. Women in men's bodies should not be competing against women in women's bodies. They will always have the advantage of being taller, broader, with greater arm reach, longer stride, and of course way more muscles. It seems so self evident, I don't understand why it is even controversial. Yes, transwomen are women. That also is self evident. But like needs to compete against like. In wrestling or boxing, you don't match a lightweight with a heavyweight regardless of gender for that very reason.
Some sports, being born with a male body could potentially result in advantages. Those are fairly rare. But what you fail to recognise is that a) being trans, even without transitioning, is hugely stressful & for most people, a massive DISadvantage mentally (and physically!). Pro athletes need their heads in the game, which is why sports psychologists make big money. not to mention b) transitioning takes a significant toll on the human body, one that becomes huge when you consider that it's frequently during the peak training & career years for serious & pro athletes & that for trans women it involves losing muscle & bone density & gaining fat- absolutely appropriate for their transition, but a major challenge training-wise. Do note that with better understanding & treatment of trans issues, trans girls who are put on puberty blockers until they're of age to make an informed choice to transition simply do not develop the differences you're thinking of- there is research ongoing to ensure they do reach their full adult female height and growth, in fact.
The stigmatisation of being trans already comes with many health challenges, like all stigmatisation does. Transition, however, is like going through puberty again; you can't be sure where you'll end up, which can make it very difficult to find trainers & coaches willing to go the distance.
A lot of people share misinformation in this arena, but it's important to have your facts on board before you choose sides.
A trans woman *may* have certain "biological advantages"...but so do cis women. Elite sports RELIES on biological and anatomical advantages.
As an example, I just looked up the heights of the Australian women's basketball squad. Of the squad of 12, the SHORTEST is 168cm (5'6"), three inches taller than the average cis woman. 8 are 183cm (6') or taller. The TWO tallest top out at 196cm (almost 6'6").
AFAIK, they're all cis women.
I doubt anyone would argue a 6'6" cis woman doesn't have a "biological advantage" over shorter competitors in a basketball game. So, if we're worried about preventing unfair "biological advantages", we should really start with levelling the playing field (snerk!) among cis women. After all, there's a lot more of them. What height restriction would you suggest on women basketballers?
There IS a place for good faith discussions about how best to integrate trans athletes into sports. Any suggestion of blanket prohibitions is not a good faith discussion, it's transphobia and exclusion. Go have a think about what you've done.
Just being reasonable, are you? But "They will always have the advantage of being taller, broader, with greater arm reach, longer stride, and of course way more muscles" is simply false, stated (as it is) as a universal. Some might have some advantages, at least pre-hormones, but bodies assigned male at birth develop on a spectrum of height, breadth, arm length, stride length, and of course muscular development, just as bodies assigned female at birth do. Those two curves overlap quite a bit, and it is fairly rare for the really ripped specimens to transition (in part because of the disdain and scorn poured upon anyone presenting female in a body not sufficiently conformant to current standards of femininity (including quite a number of extremely tall WNBA players, who get hassled despite being AFAB)).
If the argument were accepted (which it should not be), it suggests that every sport should be potentially infinitely subdivided such that only players who are physically equally developerd as every other player in the league could join the teams (presumably as their careers progressed, and their physiques improved and declined, they would move from micro-league to micro-league). Stating this as a requirement shows how silly it is.
A final point: how many famed (or even less-famed) trans femmes can you name? If they're blowing the leagues apart by their great burly dominant physicality, surely they should be widely recognized not as a theoretical problem, but a *current*, practical problem.
"The WNBA is a league that already had its first out trans player in non-binary all-star guard Layshia Clarendon"
The transphobes would have no problems with an AFAB non-binary person playing women's sport. They get their traction over AMAB people. So that's where I fear the inevitable compromise is going to come, like it already has in the UK.
Why isn't anybody worried about women who transition to men playing men's sports? Why is this a one-way street? And if men are so worried about former men playing women's sports, why aren't they worried about dressing girls like sex workers? I haz a confuz. It's as if their rules only apply to some people.
There was one trans man in Texas a couple years back who wrassled and kicked the shit outta all the men, then they wanted him to compete with women because he was assigned female at birth.
It's all because of the "traditional" gender roles, you see. Men are "stronger", and that means "more capable" in sports. As per usual, Right-wingers won't shut up about this take. And as far as "dressing girls like sex workers", not sure EXACTLY what you mean, but I suspect it jibes with the right-wing philosophy as a whole--it's good if they like it, and ONLY if they like it
It's puzzling, annoying and alarming that so many supposedly "adult" Americans have such absolutely juvenile understanding and attitudes about sex, gender and sexuality. Grow up, already!!
Some day we will come to our senses and try matriarchy. Notwithstanding the Trailer-trashgreenes and HoBerts and KerryFlakes, women seem so much better at dealing with figuring out how to make room for everybody.
The only reason why the right is so worked up about trans people is that they know they’ve lost the debate to keep gays and lesbians marginalized. This is literally their last stand and, hopefully, the hill they will die on.
As a long-time sportsball fan and coach (my ex declared that I am "addicted to sports". Could be worse.), I have high praise for Coach Staley for everything she said, and everything she and her players have accomplished. To know you'll be attacked by some small-minded twits who've probably never played, certainly at any level above junior high benchwarmer, and to respond so forcefully while keeping her and her team's focus on the job at hand, is beyond admirable. Well said. Well done. Congratulations.
Ta, Crip Dyke! This is indeed a Nice Times story, and good on Dawn Staley for her thoughtful responses to questions that were obviously designed to gin up bullshit controversy.
I don’t follow sportsball as much as I used to (when I was in Junior High, I desperately wanted to grow up to be a writer for Sports Illustrated and devoured every issue, which was well before they started using AI “writers”.) But, I have appreciated the growth and excellence in women’s sports, particularly team sports like soccer and basketball. Even though these women don’t make nearly the $$ as men’s players, they excel because guess what? Women actually support each other in an effort to win a team sport, as opposed to soaking in a culture of toxic masculinity like it was Palmolive.
Even though I grew up in Iowa and my entire family was rooting for Clark to win her 1st national championship, Staley’s team deserved the title to cap off their undefeated season.
I honestly felt I couldn't lose. I love Clark, but she didn't have the team around her. As more knowledgeable people than myself have pointed out, Iowa just couldn't rebound against South Carolina, so they could play great defense and then see an SC miss turned into an offensive rebound and another SC opportunity.
Iowa had a very good team this year, but it had a glaring hole in the paint. SC did not have a single generational player like Clark, but they didn't have any holes. All year long that has allowed them to focus their offence on the weaknesses of the opposing team: with Iowa that meant grabbing offensive rebounds, but with other teams it meant exploiting other things.
Because of their consistent excellence at every position, no one could stand against them. They truly were the best team and deserved the championship.
That said, if Clark had gone off and hit 15/17 from three or something ridiculous, I would have felt privileged to see a single stellar individual overcome an entire team of excellent players. I didn't think it would happen, but if it did, as a fan I certainly wouldn't have complained.
It's not easy to go undefeated and take the championship, though it certainly has happened in the women's game more often than the men's. That's a function of the greater parity on the men's side as well as the financial incentives to jump to the NBA early, making it difficult to build up a team with maturity and a strong collaborative mindset, which each player knows the tendency of the others, and thus the team has a chance to become stronger than the sum of its parts even as the individual parts themselves become stronger with more experience over the years. But even if it's more difficult on the men's side, it's a huge accomplishment, and I love that Staley and SC got a chance to run the table.
I agree 💯. The bottom line is that this tournament brought a huge number of eyeballs to the women’s game, which is a good thing. And Clark will do fine when it comes to endorsements. Her game against LSU (41 points, 12 assists, 7 rebounds, and 2 steals) was one for the ages.
After becoming aware of their complete incompetence and ineptitude to address any real problems, Republicans decided to create a list of terrible imaginary problems for which they devised wonderful imaginary solutions, Making certain of course that said imaginary problems in some manner violated the "Will Of the Lord" and that said imaginary solutions in some manner restored "Godliness" to the nation. The mere fact that such a plan works so well on so many Americans in the early 21st century is puzzling and alarming.
It's been made pretty clear you have to pass a religious test one way or another to be on this team. Staley preaches at team meals, gives out "gameday devotionals" that include scripture, and on the back the words, "Jesus vs. (insert opponent)" She recently said "if you dont believe in god, something is wrong with you." South Carolina is a public university, and she is in charge of a group of kids she has quite a bit of power over. This is insanity.
Im glad she's right here, but dont ever let these people get away. Ever.
She’s a ‘Hoo.
Like me.
“This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error as long as reason is left free to combat it.”
(Yeah, I know Jefferson’s being “re-assessed.” Rightfully so, too. But thing is—he’d absolutely dig that. He’d literally have it no other way; it was precisely his intention in everything he ever wrote, but especially with regard to his, Dawn Staley’s, and my university.)
Dawn Staley absolutely is everything we hoped to be when we were lucky enough to be at the college that (deeply flawed) man founded. I’m proud to have gone to her university, and his.
South Carolina is lucky to have her, but if they ever feel they aren’t, I sure hope she’ll someday come home.
Trap neatly sidestepped: “I’m okay with that. I really am.”
The RWNJ Faux Outrage Machine crashed and burned when it went up against Dawn Staley. She told them she didn't give a damn what they posted (some poetic license used). Poor little dears were out classed, out maneuvered, and thrown off the court. Outstanding job Coach Staley.
I see a different aspect. Back in the Christine Jorgensen days, when transgender was still called transsexual, the working definition was "a man trapped in a woman's body" or "a woman trapped in a man's body." That is the crux of the argument. Women in men's bodies should not be competing against women in women's bodies. They will always have the advantage of being taller, broader, with greater arm reach, longer stride, and of course way more muscles. It seems so self evident, I don't understand why it is even controversial. Yes, transwomen are women. That also is self evident. But like needs to compete against like. In wrestling or boxing, you don't match a lightweight with a heavyweight regardless of gender for that very reason.
My daughter is 5/5, weighs 125 lbs, and has smaller shoulders than I do. She was born male.
Your broad brush is sloppy and you should reconsider that stance of yours.
Some sports, being born with a male body could potentially result in advantages. Those are fairly rare. But what you fail to recognise is that a) being trans, even without transitioning, is hugely stressful & for most people, a massive DISadvantage mentally (and physically!). Pro athletes need their heads in the game, which is why sports psychologists make big money. not to mention b) transitioning takes a significant toll on the human body, one that becomes huge when you consider that it's frequently during the peak training & career years for serious & pro athletes & that for trans women it involves losing muscle & bone density & gaining fat- absolutely appropriate for their transition, but a major challenge training-wise. Do note that with better understanding & treatment of trans issues, trans girls who are put on puberty blockers until they're of age to make an informed choice to transition simply do not develop the differences you're thinking of- there is research ongoing to ensure they do reach their full adult female height and growth, in fact.
The stigmatisation of being trans already comes with many health challenges, like all stigmatisation does. Transition, however, is like going through puberty again; you can't be sure where you'll end up, which can make it very difficult to find trainers & coaches willing to go the distance.
A lot of people share misinformation in this arena, but it's important to have your facts on board before you choose sides.
A trans woman *may* have certain "biological advantages"...but so do cis women. Elite sports RELIES on biological and anatomical advantages.
As an example, I just looked up the heights of the Australian women's basketball squad. Of the squad of 12, the SHORTEST is 168cm (5'6"), three inches taller than the average cis woman. 8 are 183cm (6') or taller. The TWO tallest top out at 196cm (almost 6'6").
AFAIK, they're all cis women.
I doubt anyone would argue a 6'6" cis woman doesn't have a "biological advantage" over shorter competitors in a basketball game. So, if we're worried about preventing unfair "biological advantages", we should really start with levelling the playing field (snerk!) among cis women. After all, there's a lot more of them. What height restriction would you suggest on women basketballers?
There IS a place for good faith discussions about how best to integrate trans athletes into sports. Any suggestion of blanket prohibitions is not a good faith discussion, it's transphobia and exclusion. Go have a think about what you've done.
Just being reasonable, are you? But "They will always have the advantage of being taller, broader, with greater arm reach, longer stride, and of course way more muscles" is simply false, stated (as it is) as a universal. Some might have some advantages, at least pre-hormones, but bodies assigned male at birth develop on a spectrum of height, breadth, arm length, stride length, and of course muscular development, just as bodies assigned female at birth do. Those two curves overlap quite a bit, and it is fairly rare for the really ripped specimens to transition (in part because of the disdain and scorn poured upon anyone presenting female in a body not sufficiently conformant to current standards of femininity (including quite a number of extremely tall WNBA players, who get hassled despite being AFAB)).
If the argument were accepted (which it should not be), it suggests that every sport should be potentially infinitely subdivided such that only players who are physically equally developerd as every other player in the league could join the teams (presumably as their careers progressed, and their physiques improved and declined, they would move from micro-league to micro-league). Stating this as a requirement shows how silly it is.
A final point: how many famed (or even less-famed) trans femmes can you name? If they're blowing the leagues apart by their great burly dominant physicality, surely they should be widely recognized not as a theoretical problem, but a *current*, practical problem.
Ta, Crip Dyke. This is wonderful news.
But you see, this is the problem:
"The WNBA is a league that already had its first out trans player in non-binary all-star guard Layshia Clarendon"
The transphobes would have no problems with an AFAB non-binary person playing women's sport. They get their traction over AMAB people. So that's where I fear the inevitable compromise is going to come, like it already has in the UK.
I had no idea who Dawn Staley was, and now I respect and admire her. She's pretty awesome
Why isn't anybody worried about women who transition to men playing men's sports? Why is this a one-way street? And if men are so worried about former men playing women's sports, why aren't they worried about dressing girls like sex workers? I haz a confuz. It's as if their rules only apply to some people.
There was one trans man in Texas a couple years back who wrassled and kicked the shit outta all the men, then they wanted him to compete with women because he was assigned female at birth.
Won there too
It's all because of the "traditional" gender roles, you see. Men are "stronger", and that means "more capable" in sports. As per usual, Right-wingers won't shut up about this take. And as far as "dressing girls like sex workers", not sure EXACTLY what you mean, but I suspect it jibes with the right-wing philosophy as a whole--it's good if they like it, and ONLY if they like it
It's puzzling, annoying and alarming that so many supposedly "adult" Americans have such absolutely juvenile understanding and attitudes about sex, gender and sexuality. Grow up, already!!
Some day we will come to our senses and try matriarchy. Notwithstanding the Trailer-trashgreenes and HoBerts and KerryFlakes, women seem so much better at dealing with figuring out how to make room for everybody.
Women do seem to be more adroit at multi-tasking, which is why I've recently taken to referring to the Almighty with the feminine pronoun
And patriarchal religions make absolutely no sense to me. Give me that old time religion.
The only reason why the right is so worked up about trans people is that they know they’ve lost the debate to keep gays and lesbians marginalized. This is literally their last stand and, hopefully, the hill they will die on.
I wish they’d get to the inevitable end game already. With votes.
As a long-time sportsball fan and coach (my ex declared that I am "addicted to sports". Could be worse.), I have high praise for Coach Staley for everything she said, and everything she and her players have accomplished. To know you'll be attacked by some small-minded twits who've probably never played, certainly at any level above junior high benchwarmer, and to respond so forcefully while keeping her and her team's focus on the job at hand, is beyond admirable. Well said. Well done. Congratulations.
Ta, Crip Dyke! This is indeed a Nice Times story, and good on Dawn Staley for her thoughtful responses to questions that were obviously designed to gin up bullshit controversy.
I don’t follow sportsball as much as I used to (when I was in Junior High, I desperately wanted to grow up to be a writer for Sports Illustrated and devoured every issue, which was well before they started using AI “writers”.) But, I have appreciated the growth and excellence in women’s sports, particularly team sports like soccer and basketball. Even though these women don’t make nearly the $$ as men’s players, they excel because guess what? Women actually support each other in an effort to win a team sport, as opposed to soaking in a culture of toxic masculinity like it was Palmolive.
Even though I grew up in Iowa and my entire family was rooting for Clark to win her 1st national championship, Staley’s team deserved the title to cap off their undefeated season.
I honestly felt I couldn't lose. I love Clark, but she didn't have the team around her. As more knowledgeable people than myself have pointed out, Iowa just couldn't rebound against South Carolina, so they could play great defense and then see an SC miss turned into an offensive rebound and another SC opportunity.
Iowa had a very good team this year, but it had a glaring hole in the paint. SC did not have a single generational player like Clark, but they didn't have any holes. All year long that has allowed them to focus their offence on the weaknesses of the opposing team: with Iowa that meant grabbing offensive rebounds, but with other teams it meant exploiting other things.
Because of their consistent excellence at every position, no one could stand against them. They truly were the best team and deserved the championship.
That said, if Clark had gone off and hit 15/17 from three or something ridiculous, I would have felt privileged to see a single stellar individual overcome an entire team of excellent players. I didn't think it would happen, but if it did, as a fan I certainly wouldn't have complained.
It's not easy to go undefeated and take the championship, though it certainly has happened in the women's game more often than the men's. That's a function of the greater parity on the men's side as well as the financial incentives to jump to the NBA early, making it difficult to build up a team with maturity and a strong collaborative mindset, which each player knows the tendency of the others, and thus the team has a chance to become stronger than the sum of its parts even as the individual parts themselves become stronger with more experience over the years. But even if it's more difficult on the men's side, it's a huge accomplishment, and I love that Staley and SC got a chance to run the table.
I agree 💯. The bottom line is that this tournament brought a huge number of eyeballs to the women’s game, which is a good thing. And Clark will do fine when it comes to endorsements. Her game against LSU (41 points, 12 assists, 7 rebounds, and 2 steals) was one for the ages.
Fellow Iowa native, same sentiment about the outcome.
After becoming aware of their complete incompetence and ineptitude to address any real problems, Republicans decided to create a list of terrible imaginary problems for which they devised wonderful imaginary solutions, Making certain of course that said imaginary problems in some manner violated the "Will Of the Lord" and that said imaginary solutions in some manner restored "Godliness" to the nation. The mere fact that such a plan works so well on so many Americans in the early 21st century is puzzling and alarming.
I actually have tears in my eyes while reading this. Yayyayyay!!!