Fairness First: The Penn Title IX Case Is a Turning Point for Women’s Sports

Lia Thomas ‘winner’ and the women he competed against.


The U.S. Department of Education just ruled that the University of Pennsylvania violated Title IX — the landmark civil rights law that’s supposed to ensure equal opportunities for women in education and athletics.

Why? Because Penn allowed Lia Thomas, a male athlete who identifies as female, to compete on the women’s swim team. And according to the federal government’s own Office for Civil Rights (OCR), that decision denied actual women their legal rights under Title IX.

This is not a small thing. Title IX was put in place to make sure girls and women had the same opportunities as men in schools — especially in sports. For decades, it has leveled the playing field. But this case is a stark reminder that fairness is under attack, and female athletes are paying the price.

A Line in the Sand

Lia Thomas competed for three years on Penn’s men’s swim team, without much distinction. Then, after a gender transition, Thomas joined the women’s team — and started dominating. It was an immediate, obvious, and predictable outcome. Male bodies, even post-transition, retain biological advantages: greater lung capacity, muscle mass, bone density, and more. That’s just physiology. It doesn’t make someone a bad person — but it does make it unfair.

The OCR’s ruling affirms what so many people have been saying for years but have been afraid to say out loud: letting males compete in female sports isn’t inclusive — it’s unjust.

What Did the Government Find?

The Trump administration’s own Department of Education found that Penn’s actions violated Title IX by denying women “equal athletic opportunity” and “equal access to athletic benefits.” In plain English: women lost out. Whether it was roster spots, scholarships, facilities, or competitive success — they were pushed aside.

It took a federal investigation to confirm what every swimmer on that pool deck already knew.

What Happens Next?

Penn has been told to fix the mess. That means:

  • Acknowledging the violation.
  • Revisiting records and awards.
  • Issuing a public apology to the female athletes who were wronged.
  • Making sure it doesn’t happen again.

If the university doesn’t comply? The federal government could pull funding or take further legal action. The Trump administration has suspended approximately $175 million in federal funding to Penn and gave the university ten days to comply with a proposed resolution agreement. This agreement includes actions such as revoking Thomas’s Division I awards and issuing a public apology to affected female athletes.

This Is Bigger Than One School

This isn’t just about Penn. It’s about a nationwide trend where the rights of female athletes are being sacrificed on the altar of ideology. We’re told that inclusion means erasing the biological distinctions that make women’s sports necessary in the first place. That’s not inclusion — it’s erasure.

And here’s the thing: it’s not ‘transphobic’ to say women deserve a fair shot. It’s not hate to say that biology matters in sports. It’s just reality. If we can’t say that, then we’ve officially left the realm of reason.

Time to Reclaim Title IX

This case is a wake-up call. Title IX was designed to protect women — not to accommodate male athletes who identify as female. We don’t need to rewrite civil rights law. We need to enforce it.

So, hats off to the brave women who stood up and spoke out. And credit to the Office for Civil Rights for finally doing the right thing.

Now it’s time for schools across the country to pay attention. Because fairness in women’s sports isn’t negotiable — it’s the whole point.


Do we have eyes to see? And minds and hearts to know?

Lia Thomas

+++

Stay Human

Vermont Snowboarding Coach Fired For Affirming Male Athletic Advantage

Dave Bloch, a snowboarding coach at Woodstock Union High School (WUHS) who was terminated from his position due to a conversation he had with some of his team members regarding gender and sports participation.


“snowboard” by ffo-sesp is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

Bloch, a Roman Catholic, believes in the biological distinction between males and females, which is consistent with his faith and scientific evidence. Bloch shared his belief about the biological differences between men and women and how it can potentially give men an athletic advantage.

The conversation was respectful and lasted about three minutes.

The next day, Bloch received a notice of “immediate termination” from the school district superintendent, accusing him of violating policies related to hazing, harassment, and bullying.

Despite an incomplete investigation, Bloch was fired and barred from future coaching positions within the district.

In July 2023, the Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit to protect Bloch’s First and 14th Amendment rights. They say public schools should not terminate employees for respectfully expressing their opinions on matters of public concern.

I agree.

You can read all of the details here.

+++

Parental Rights and Gender Identity Policies in California

Protect Kids California

Let me address a political issue in California that touches on parental rights, gender identity, and the democratic process.


California’s Stance on Gender Identity

Under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom, California has been at the forefront of policies that endorse transgender identity. Critics like myself argue that these policies infringe upon parental rights, compromise fairness in women’s sports, and harm the long-term health of children.


Direct Democracy in Action: Ballot Initiatives

In response to these policies, a coalition named “Protect Kids California” has taken a direct approach to challenge them. They’ve filed three ballot initiatives for the November 2024 ballot. These initiatives aim to:

  • Ensure schools notify parents if their children identify as transgender.
  • Prevent biological males from participating in women’s sports and accessing women’s spaces.
  • Prohibit medical professionals from administering experimental drugs or surgeries to minors to affirm a gender identity different from their biological sex.

‘The Advocates’ Perspective

Jonathan Zachreson, a spokesperson for Protect Kids California, emphasizes the importance of parental involvement in children’s lives. He argues that the current legislative approach does not adequately represent the people’s wishes.

Polls suggest that a significant majority of Californians support parental notification in schools and restrictions on medical interventions for minors.


We have legislators and institutions taking advantage of vulnerable children and busy parents. 

Jonathan Zachreson

The Legal Landscape

Recent laws and bills in California have further ignited this debate. For instance:

  • In 2022, Newsom signed SB 107, declaring California a “trans refuge state.” This law allows California courts to reassign custody of children seeking gender-affirming care from other states.
  • The California Senate is considering AB 957, which could label parents as abusive if they don’t affirm their child’s preferred gender identity.
  • The state’s education code allows students to access facilities and programs consistent with their gender identity.

You can read more about AB 957 in this post.


The Ballot Initiatives in Detail

  • Protect Children from Reproductive Harm Act: This initiative aims to protect children from experimental medical interventions related to gender transition. It cites concerns about the FDA’s stance and practices in other countries.
  • School Transparency and Partnership Act: This initiative emphasizes the importance of parental rights, arguing that parents should be informed about significant changes related to their child’s gender identity at school.
  • Protect Girls’ Sports and Spaces Act: This initiative seeks to ensure fairness in women’s sports and maintain the privacy and safety of students in sex-segregated spaces.

The Road Ahead

While these ballot initiatives offer a direct way for Californians to voice their opinions, they face challenges. They need over half a million certified signatures to even appear on the ballot. Additionally, the state’s Democratic attorney general, Rob Bonta, who will draft the title and summary for these initiatives, might oppose them.

This issue underscores the complexities of balancing individual rights, parental rights, and societal norms. Remember, the essence of democracy lies in informed discussions and the active participation of its citizens.

I encourage you all to think critically about these issues, engage in respectful discussions, and always stay informed.


California Senator Scott Wiener, a member of the LGBTQ Caucus, weighs in on Parent’s Rights.

Colin Wright responds.

Most parents agree with Wright.

+++