
Teen girls open up on trans athlete scandal that turned their high school into a culture war battleground
Taylor Starling and Kaitlyn Slavin – student athletes at Martin Luther King High School in Riverside, California – held a live press conference on X Friday hosted California Family Council Outreach Director Sophia Lorey. The two girls shared their perspectives on a recent national controversy that has besieged their community caused by a trans athlete competing on the girls' cross country team.
"It was confusing, this has never happened to me before, like I didn't even think this was going to be happening to me," Starling said. "It was all just like, surprising, that there was going to be a guy running with the girls."
Slavin, who is only a freshman, said the experience of having her first year of high school involve the situation is "kind of crazy."
"Just in high school, having to compete against males when you shouldn't be is something that shocked me right away," Slavin said.
Starling lost her varsity spot to a trans athlete who transferred to the school this past year, and when they wore shirts that read "Save Girls Sports" in protest, they allege school administrators compared the shirts to swastikas. The two girls and their families are now engaged in a lawsuit against the Riverside Unified School District (RUSD) over those allegations.
In response, hundreds of their fellow students and hundreds of other residents in the community began wearing the shirts in protest. The shirts became a local, and then national symbol for the protection of female athletes from biological male inclusion in their sports and locker rooms.
The ensuing controversy and media coverage of the situation has thrust the two teenage girls, their families and the whole town into the spotlight of the national debate over trans inclusion in women's sports, which became a hot-button political issue in the 2024 election year.
And for Starling, Slavin and their classmates, it has come with a wave of attention that they have never experienced, both negative and positive.
"I've had tons of people reach out to me and say 'thank you so much for what you're doing and standing up for these women,'" Starling said. "For my friends, a lot of my friends have been shoulder-checked because they were wearing the shirts and a lot of them have been cursed out and called really bad names, and they posted certain stuff on the internet calling people horrible names for wearing these shirts."
Slavin, who says she's found stress relief in sports throughout her life, has only found more stress from sports because of the situation this year.
"It's scary that that's not something that can always be a stress-relieving place if we're going to have all this going on," Slavin said. "It affects you mentally and emotionally… It's so hard to have this all going on."
Starling says the trans athlete has been using the girls' restroom at the school, however, they haven't seen the athlete much in the locker room due to frequently missing practices.
The two girls, and multiple parents who have spoken to Fox News Digital, allege the trans athlete was allowed to compete on varsity despite missing practice every week.
Starling's father, Ryan Starling, previously told Fox News Digital that when his daughter and other girls approached the administrators about it, they were told "transgenders have more rights than cisgenders." The RUSD previously provided a statement to Fox News Digital insisting that its handling of the situation has been in accordance with California state law.
The two girls then ignited a viral trend in their communities when they showed up to school in November wearing the "Save Girls Sports" shirts.
And despite being scolded by school administrators for it and having to file a lawsuit, more and more students began to show up each week wearing the shirts, as the school had to alter its dress code and start placing students in detention for wearing them. This didn't stop the shirts from spreading and growing. It became a weekly ritual for hundreds of students every Wednesday to show up wearing the shirts support of the girls and their messaging, and many of them created viral social media posts on it.
In early December, the school administrators gave up on their efforts to discipline students for wearing the shirts. Sources told Fox News Digital that more than 400 students have shown up wearing the shirts at a time, and students at other schools in the district have started to wear them to class.
But Slavin, Starling their attorney Julianne Fleischer, said the school administrators have still told the two girls that they aren't allowed to wear the shirts, during the press conference on Friday. However, they also said more than 400 students at their school have continued to show up wearing the shirts every Wednesday.
The situation culminated in a heated and confrontational event on Dec. 19, when the RUSD held a school board meeting to address the issue. Prior to the meeting, outside the district office, there were competing protests between activists and parents wearing the "Save Girls Sports" shirts and LGBTQ activists.
Sources, including Ryan Starling, have told Fox News Digital that the LGBTQ activists at the event were harassing the "Save Girls Sports" protesters, and even disrupted a women's prayer group during a prayer circle prior to the meeting.
"Members of the pro-LGBTQ groups started heckling and harassing the people in line who were speaking in opposition of their values. Some of these adult protesters were even coming up to the young girls that were going to be speaking and were yelling at them close to their face," Young Women for America (YWA)'s Inland Empire chapter President Tori Hitchcock told Fox News Digital.
One anonymous parent told Fox News Digital about witnessing a child being bombarded with vulgar insults by pro-trans protesters after the meeting.
"My 16-year old son and a few others were standing outside after speaking when a group of the LGBTQ community intentionally walked by them pointing at each one of them saying, 'FU FU FU,'" the anonymous parent said.
Then, inside the meeting, parents and opposing activists gave impassioned speeches about their thoughts on the situation, with multiple speakers yelling in hysterical tones. The meeting went on for nearly five hours, and included testimony between individuals who opposed trans inclusion in girls' sports and those who supported it.
Many of the pro-trans speeches were met with high-pitched cheers and the waiving of LGBTQ pride flags by those in attendance.
The RUSD previously provided a statement to Fox News Digital insisting that its handling of the situation has been in accordance with California state law.
"While these rules were not created by RUSD, the District is committed to complying with the law and CIF regulations. California state law prohibits discrimination of students based on gender, gender identity and gender expression, and specifically prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender in physical education and athletics. The protections we provide to all students are not only aligned with the law but also with our core values which include equity and well-being," the statement said.
The RUSD also placed blame for its handling of the situation on officials in Washington D.C., and California's state capital, Sacramento. They made this statement back in early December, prior to President Donald Trump returning to office.
"As these matters play out in our courts and the media, opposition and protests should be directed at those in a position to affect those laws and policies (including officials in Washington D.C. and Sacramento)," their statement read.
Trump has pledged to ban trans athletes from competing in girls' and women's sports, as a federal bill titled The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act is currently progressing through congress. It has already passed in the House of Representatives.
Until that bill is potentially signed into law, Slavin and Starling are asking their supporters to "pray" for them.
Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Maine Senate rejects bill to prohibit transgender athletes in girls sports
Jun. 12—AUGUSTA — Lawmakers in the Maine Senate rejected a bill Thursday that would prohibit transgender athletes from competing in girls sports in schools that receive state funding. The bill, LD 1134, is the first among a handful of proposals aimed at stopping transgender athletes from participating in girls sports to come to a floor vote in the Legislature this session. It was rejected 21-14 with Sen. Rick Bennett, R-Oxford, voting with Democrats against the bill. The measure will now be considered in the House of Representatives, though the Senate's opposition is an indicator that the bill likely won't get final passage. Tensions around the issue of transgender athletes in girls sports have mounted in Maine over the last few months after Rep. Laurel Libby, R-Auburn, posted about the issue on Facebook in February and the Trump administration then accused Maine of violating federal anti-discrimination law by allowing transgender girls to participate in girls high school sports. Conflict with the administration — which is suing Maine over its policy — has added to support and opposition for the bills, which last month drew hundreds of people to the State House for a daylong public hearing. Republicans argued Thursday that transgender athletes should not be allowed to participate in girls sports because of biological differences that give them advantages and because they can end up taking victories and podium spots from girls assigned female at birth. Democrats said the bill would discriminate against transgender students and make them feel like they don't belong. They also cited court precedent and the Maine Human Rights Act in arguing that transgender students should be able to compete in a way that affirms their gender identity. Sen. Sue Bernard, R-Caribou, the bill's sponsor, said her intent was not to disrespect transgender people by introducing the bill. "I'm merely recognizing the biological strengths and differences that exist," Bernard said. "I put forward this commonsense bill not to hurt anyone — and for anyone to think I could have a bad bone in my body against any child ... that is not it at all," she added. "I want to carve out a space — one space — where girls can have an actual chance to be winners. If we continue with this I'm afraid that's going to disappear." Sen. Stacey Guerin, R-Glenburn, talked about how she used to be able to easily keep up with and even help her five sons with athletic activities like backpacking and bicycling. But once their teenage hormones kicked in, Guerin said it became clear to her the physical advantages that boys have. "When I look at boys competing against girls in girls sports, I am astounded at what is clearly a genetic disadvantage for the girls," Guerin said. "I see this bill as a way of righting that wrong." Democrats opposed to the bill said they could not support it because it would have the effect of making transgender students feel like they don't belong. Sen. Stacy Brenner, D-Scarborough, said that prohibiting transgender girls in girls sports would also be harmful to all girls, because such rules could lead to greater criticism and scrutiny of girls' bodies. "The effects would stretch far beyond just the young athletes this bill seeks to exclude," Brenner said. "Imagine us putting our children in a position where they're constantly questioning if they're feminine enough, if their hair is long enough and if their height is average enough to avoid suspicion that they're violating the law when they're participating in everyday activities like playing soccer or using the bathroom." Democrats also pointed to the Maine Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination in school activities based on gender identity, and legal precedent in arguing against prohibiting transgender students from participating in girls sports or using facilities designated for girls. The inclusion of gender identity in the Maine Human Rights Act was the basis of a landmark 2014 Maine Supreme Judicial Court decision on bathroom access in which the court ruled that the town of Orono discriminated against Nicole Maines, a transgender student, by prohibiting her from using the female restroom. LD 1134 would prohibit schools that receive state funding from allowing transgender students to use facilities like bathrooms and locker rooms that have been designated for female-only use, in addition to prohibiting them from participating in girls sports. "Maine's highest court firmly ruled that denying a student access to the restroom consistent with her identity was a violation of the Maine Human Rights Act," said Sen. Anne Carney, D-Cape Elizabeth. "Numerous cases around the country have held that schools may not deny a transgender student access to the bathroom." Carney also cited a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, saying it offered evidence that excluding transgender students from sports would also likely be found in violation of federal law. "As Mainers, we all strive to recognize the dignity and rights of our neighbors, regardless of whether we agree with them or understand them," she said. "This legislation would be a departure from that commitment." AT ODDS WITH WHITE HOUSE Maine is in the Trump administration's crosshairs because the state allows transgender athletes to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity — a stand state officials say is consistent with Title IX, which grants equal opportunity to females in education and sports, and with the Maine Human Rights Act. That dynamic led to a high-profile confrontation between Gov. Janet Mills and President Donald Trump at the White House in February, efforts by the Trump administration to cut Maine's federal funding, the censure of Libby for her Facebook post identifying a transgender high school athlete and a hotly contested debate in the State House, where Republicans have offered a slate of bills to restrict participation by transgender athletes and students. Maine is one of 22 states that explicitly prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and one of 23 states that has laws or policies allowing transgender athletes to participate in sports consistent with their gender identities, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Twenty-five states have laws preventing transgender participation in sports consistent with their gender identities, while two others have policies for the same. Over the next week, Maine lawmakers are also expected to debate LD 233, which also would prohibit any school or school district that receives state funding from allowing transgender girls to participate in girls sports, and LD 868, which would require sports to be designated male, female or coed and would require students to use restrooms and changing rooms consistent with their gender assigned at birth. Lawmakers will also take up LD 1432, which was written to remove gender identity from the Maine Human Rights Act, though the bill's sponsor, Rep. Mike Soboleski, R-Phillips, later said that he instead wanted to change the law's definition of sexual orientation to include gender identity, in keeping with previous iterations of the law, rather than keep the current separate provisions for gender identity. That bill was defeated 11-2 in the Judiciary Committee by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, while the other three bills were all voted out of committee 6-6 with Rep. Dani O'Halloran, D-Brewer, joining Republicans in support. Copy the Story Link We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others. We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion. You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs. Show less


Fox News
2 days ago
- Fox News
Oklahoma is leading the fight to save girls' sports – and they're winning
Let me say it plainly: boys don't belong in girls' sports. That used to be common sense. Now it's a fight we have to win in every school, every courtroom, and every community in America. The radical Left is pushing the lie that gender is a choice, that biology doesn't matter, and that feelings trump facts. And they expect the rest of us to nod along and stay quiet while they bulldoze fairness, safety, and truth. Not in Oklahoma. Riley Gaines didn't stay quiet. She spoke up when a biological male tied her in a major collegiate swimming championship—stripped of her rightful place on the podium. And for that, the Left has tried to smear her ever since. The most recent insult came from Olympic gymnast Simone Biles, who decided to take cheap shots at Riley on social media, not for anything hateful—but for daring to say that girls deserve fair competition. It wasn't just petty. It was cowardly. Let me be very clear: As a father of two young girls, a former high school teacher, and the head of Oklahoma schools, I stand with Riley Gaines. The people of Oklahoma stand with her. And millions of Americans do too, whether the media admits it or not. This is not a hypothetical debate. This is happening in our schools. In one Oklahoma high school, a fight broke out after a biological male was allowed to use the girls' bathroom. We've seen female athletes lose to boys in track meets, then be told to "be more inclusive." Parents are told to sit down and shut up. Teachers are afraid to speak. Girls are being pushed aside—sometimes literally—to make room for a political agenda that has nothing to do with education and everything to do with control. I've spoken directly with superintendents, coaches, and parents across the state. They all say the same thing: we're done. We're done pretending. We're done letting boys dominate girls' sports. And we're done allowing activists in Washington, D.C. or on TikTok to tell us how to raise our kids. That's why Oklahoma passed the Save Women's Sports Act—to make it illegal for biological males to compete in girls' sports. We didn't ask for permission. We didn't wait for D.C. We acted. And as State Superintendent, I'm enforcing it. You violate the law, you lose funding. It's that simple. Of course, the Biden administration was threatening states like ours. They proposed new Title IX rules that would force schools to allow boys in girls' locker rooms and athletic programs. I put them on notice: Oklahoma will not comply. With President Trump in office, we are now seeing a return to normalcy. We will not be bullied into abandoning reality, faith, or parental rights. Because here's the truth the media won't say: we're winning. States across the country—red, purple, and even a few blue—are rejecting this nonsense. Twenty-six states now have laws protecting girls' sports. More are on the way. Poll after poll shows that everyday Americans—regardless of party—oppose letting boys compete against girls. This is not a 50/50 issue. This is an 80/20 issue, and the radicals are losing. The Left thought they could shame us into silence. Instead, they've woken up a movement. Parents are fighting back. Coaches are declaring enough is enough. Leaders are drawing the line. They say this is a culture war. Fine. Then let's be clear about who's winning. This isn't the end of the fight—it's the beginning of the rollback. Common sense isn't just surviving. It's making a comeback. And in Oklahoma, we're leading the charge.

USA Today
3 days ago
- USA Today
Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law
Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law A 71-page bill released by Senate Republicans would cut down on repayment plans and deem certain college programs ineligible for federal financial aid. Show Caption Hide Caption Senators grill Education Secretary Linda McMahon over proposed cuts Education Secretary Linda McMahon testified to Congress over proposed budget cuts. WASHINGTON – Congress is closer than it's been in a long time to massively reforming college financial aid. On June 10, GOP lawmakers in the U.S. Senate proposed their version of the higher education section of President Trump's tax and spending megabill. The 71-page portion of the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would set new caps on student loan borrowing while drastically cutting the number of repayment plans. Read more: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants The Senate's version of the legislation is less aggressive than the bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced in late April. While it will likely be further watered down due to congressional budget rules, the scope of the legislation indicates big changes will be enacted soon to how Americans pay for college. Student loan caps proposed When President Donald Trump asked Republicans to find billions of dollars in federal spending cuts, GOP lawmakers in the House drew up measures to eliminate or dramatically curb many student loan programs. In April, they proposed cutting subsidized loans altogether for undergraduates. When students take out a federal direct subsidized loan, the government pays the interest while they're in school (and for a short grace period after the students complete their studies). That idea didn't survive in the Senate version of the bill, which was expected to be slightly more moderate than the House proposal. Read more: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Other elements of the House version remain, however. Like the House bill, the Senate measure proposes cutting the number of student loan repayment plans to just two. That change would kill President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, program, which former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona repeatedly called the "most affordable repayment plan ever." SAVE has been stalled in court for months, placing roughly 8 million people in forbearance. The Senate bill would also dramatically curb lending for graduate students and parents (though at lower caps than House Republicans wanted). Ben Cecil, a senior education policy advisor at Third Way, a center-left think tank, said he was pleased to see the bill appeared to make compromises. "These loan limits are much more reasonable," he said. Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said she was "relieved" some of the "most harmful" provisions of the House bill had been nixed. "Still, there are several concerning aspects of this bill that would ultimately make college less affordable for students," she said, including changes that "may drive borrowers to riskier private loans, which are not available to all borrowers." Less concern over Pell Grants One of college access groups' biggest criticisms of the initial bill was a significant change to Pell Grants, federal subsidies that help lower-income students pay for college. House Republicans wanted to increase the number of credits students would need to take each semester to be eligible for Pell Grants. The Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, estimated that two out of three Pell recipients could've lost their grants or received smaller ones if that requirement were enacted. The Senate version takes a softer approach, codifying a provision to more fully exclude higher-income students qualify for Pell funds. At the same time, the bill expands Pell Grants in ways that could waste money, according to critics such as Sameer Gadkaree, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, a college affordability group. 'While the Senate nixed most of the House's proposed cuts to the Pell Grant program and averts a looming funding shortfall, it regrettably threatens the program's long-term stability by extending Pell eligibility to unaccredited programs that are unlikely to pay off for students," Gadkaree said in a statement. New accountability rules One of the biggest distinctions between the House and Senate versions of the bill is that they lay out two entirely different sets of new accountability rules for colleges. The House proposal would fine colleges for leaving students on the hook for unpaid student loan debt. The Senate's framework suggests taking federal financial aid away from college programs if they can't prove that students who graduate are earning more than they would have without a degree. Mike Itzkowitz, who served in the Education Department under President Barack Obama, said that concept has bipartisan support. "I don't know anyone who would be willing to fork over their time to take on loans to earn less than a high school graduate," he said. But it's possible that particular provision won't survive special Senate rules. To avoid needing the support of Democrats, Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" using the budget process. That strategy comes with challenges. However, the bill must only make changes that spend money or save money. Significant reforms to college oversight might go too far, said Jon Fansmith, the senior vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, the main association for colleges and universities. "This process isn't designed to do complicated policymaking," he said. "I really do worry about rushing something through without understanding what we're doing." Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @