In the can
Updating to add: apologies for the abrupt beginning plus lack of source. I’d been going back and forth between video and a transcript so maybe I thought I’d done a previous post with the sources. US Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre did a briefing June 14 at which a reporter asked:
“Does the White House worry about the physical safety of females directly competing against males in sports?”
It’s a complicated issue, says Jean-Pierre. She cites giving schools “flexibility to establish their own athletic policies while establishing guardrails to prevent discrimination against transgender kids.”
That is not what he asked. She carefully ignored what he asked. Why did she do that? Why is it more urgent for schools to have “flexibility” than it is for girls to be safe from boys crashing into them in their sports? Why is it more urgent for the White House Press Secretary to make soothing generalizations while not answering the question about girls’ safety?
She talks about a period for public comment and sums up with “But we do understand this is a complicated issue.” Actually it isn’t, or it shouldn’t be. Just go on having separate sports for girls, for their safety and for their opportunities to win. It’s not complicated.
The question asker responds by pressing the point about the girls’ safety.
“So look,” Jean-Pierre says with a sigh, “what you’re alluding to is basically saying that trans kids are dangerous.”
There it is again, right there – The Big Lie. No he’s not “alluding to” that, he’s saying boys‘ playing against girls is dangerous for the girls for the reasons we’ve all known all our lives.
The question-asker protests and Jean-Pierre says “Well you’re saying that their safety is at risk. You’re laying out a kind of broad example or explanation of what could potentially happen, a broad a broad of what could take place; that is dangerous, that is a dangerous thing to say, that essentially transgender kids we’re talking about are dangerous.”
STOP THAT. Not transgender kids; boys in girls’ sports. Stop lying about it!
“and so that’s something I have to call out,” she says smugly. “That is irresponsible.” He protests and she says she just laid out “how complicated it is” and then cuts him off.
It’s fucking outrageous.
Not complicated at all. I knew it before I went to first grade. BOYS ARE NOT GIRLS. BOYS ARE LARGER THAN GIRLS.
People are insane. Hardly anybody imagines themselves as a serial liar or the villain in their life’s story. This Jean-Pierre’s brain has obviously snapped and she’s throwing up all sorts of dirt to convince herself that the plight of “trans-kids” is the most important thing in the world, and anyone who disagrees with her is a bigot.
I’d wager that the vast majority of drunk driving incidences don’t result in injury. So why do we assume that drunk driving is dangerous? Why make laws that discriminate against drunk people? It’s a much more complicated issue than just saying “drunk driving is dangerous.”
Surely there are smart people who know how to combat internalized bias in individuals who are convinced of their own righteousness. We’ve been dealing with this on the race front and others for ages. Is there a playbook that applies this to internal and institutional sexism? It’s obviously a torturously steep and tall climb given the level of indoctrination we’re looking at, but this isn’t a new problem. We’ve made progress on this type of thing for racism.
I am dumbfounded and dismayed that this is the hill that the Democrats have decided they are going to die on.
They could lose the house, the senate and the presidency over this one issue.
Correction: they deserve to lose the House, Senate, and presidency over this one issue. Problem is, the Republicans also deserve to lose, so …