logo
Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Can Benefit All Kids

Letting Transgender Kids Play Sports Can Benefit All Kids

Time​ Magazine4 hours ago

President Donald Trump's raft of anti-LGBTQ+ executive orders affects many aspects of the lives of LGBTQ+ people, including their sports participation, access to healthcare, and ability to serve in the military.
One executive order seeking to ban transgender athletes from participating in girls' and women's sports, is surprisingly picking up some Democratic support. Recently, Senator Ruben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona said banning trans students from girls' and women's school sports might be 'legitimate' and argued that trans girls put cisgender girls at risk during sporting events. However, this is a damaging myth that fuels anti-trans stigma, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination and reinforces misogynistic stereotypes that girls are weak and need protection.
It's not the first time a Democrat has capitulated to Republican anti-trans messaging. In Oct. 2024, during his long-shot attempt to unseat Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, Democrat Colin Allred released a campaign ad in which he seemed to oppose the participation of trans girls in sports. And in March 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom, speaking on the first episode of his new podcast 'This Is Gavin Newsom,' said it was 'deeply unfair' for trans athletes to participate in women's sports.
We are not totally naïve—we get why a handful of Democrats are joining Republicans in wanting to ban trans kids from participating in sports teams consistent with their gender identities. These democratic legislators likely think their stance will appeal to 'centrist' voters; recent public polling suggests that about two-thirds of U.S. adults support such bans. But we still firmly believe that such bans are misguided, harmful, and built on falsehoods, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and inequities.
Democrats should not be willing to throw transgender kids under the bus just for electoral considerations. Trans kids face higher rates of multiple physical and mental health difficulties than their cis peers—largely due to how our society treats the transgender community. But when they're allowed to play sports, these rates fall. What's more, states with policies allowing trans girls to play sports have seen increased rates of sports participation by cis girls. In other words, letting trans girls play sports benefits all girls. Shouldn't politicians be championing the benefits of sport for all?
To understand why such bans are damaging, let's back up and consider the lives of trans youth. A study by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law estimates that there are about 300,100 trans kids (ages 13-17) in the U.S., making up just 1.4% of all youth in that age range. The Center for American Progress notes that trans youth face 'high rates of family rejection, violence, discrimination, and suicidality.' Suicidality is shockingly common: the Centers for Disease Control conducts a national survey of high school students every two years to explore health-related behaviors, called the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), and the 2023 survey found that 53.8% of trans youth had seriously considered suicide, compared to 20.4% of the general youth population. Research has shown that trans kids are also at increased risk of depression, anxiety, substance misuse, and impaired quality of life.
The good news is that sports can be a real lifeline. The research is clear: when trans youth are allowed to participate in sports, these mental health risks fall. For example, trans students in states with fully inclusive athletics policies are less likely to have considered suicide than students in states without such policies. Megan Bartlett, founder of the Chicago-based non-profit The Center for Healing and Justice Through Sport, told The Guardian that sports 'can be life-saving—especially for marginalized young people – because it can actually change your brain.' When kids are in sports teams, she said, the positive relationships help make them 'feel safe and practice being stressed but being able to deal with that stress,' which builds lifelong resilience. Trans kids at inclusive schools are also less likely to experience harassment and victimization. For all adolescents, participating in a sports team can reduce anxiety, depression, and feelings of loneliness.
Letting trans kids play sports also improves their physical health. Trans kids have worse physical health than their peers—including higher rates of obesity and of risk factors for cardiovascular disease, like abnormal cholesterol levels—which are thought to be due to the stress of marginalization. But research has shown that playing sports lowers their risk of obesity and improves their cardiovascular health.
The benefits go even further. Trans kids who are allowed to play sports in accordance with their gender identity are more likely to feel like they belong at school and more accepted by their peers. Sports help all kids gain skills in team building, management skills, commitment, and leadership. And there's even evidence that LGBTQ student athletes have higher grade point averages than those who do not play sports.
Unfortunately, several myths about trans student athletes are being promoted by supporters of school sports bans. We believe these need to be challenged.
The first myth, pushed by Senator Gallego, is that anti-trans sports bans are needed to protect cisgender girls. There is no evidence that trans-inclusive policies are harmful to cis girls; indeed, trans boys and girls have been openly participating in high school sports for many years now, with no documented evidence of any harm to cis kids. States that have adopted inclusive policies have seen steady or increasing rates of participation by all youth. For example, California and Connecticut, which have allowed trans kids to play sports on the team of their choice, have seen participation of all girls increase. For instance in California, participation among girls in sports has increased by almost 14% from 2014 to 2020.
The second myth, peddled by Governor Newsom, is that trans kids have an unfair advantage in sports. Trans kids vary enormously in their sporting ability, just like cis kids. Some play well and some play poorly, just like cis kids. Trans kids are all different heights, sizes, and strengths, just like cis kids. Whether any kid excels at sport is most often related to factors like how hard they train and what kind of access they have to good coaches. As the ACLU argues, when a trans kid does well at sport, they should be 'celebrated for their hard work, not demonized because of who they are.'
Other myths abound. For instance, some conservative politicians and organizations push the fiction that massive numbers of trans kids are now 'dominating' high school sports. In reality, one study using CDC data found that only 40.7% of trans kids in grades nine through 12 played on at least one sports team. If we apply this percentage to the 300,100 trans kids aged 13-17 in the U.S., only 122,000 trans kids are playing sports out of a total of about 21 million kids in this age rage. This means that trans kids make up an extremely tiny fraction of those in sport.
Another false narrative claims that inclusive policies change the nature of girls' sports. But as the ACLU notes, that trans girls' 'participation in the girls' category does not change the nature of the category.' Inclusive policies do not undermine Title IX protections, and girls' sports have thrived in states that adopted such policies. This is why many women's rights advocacy groups support inclusion of trans people in sports.
Trans kids just want the same opportunities as their peers. They want to be on sports teams to have fun, get exercise, and hang out with their friends. Just like any other kid. When we deny them that right, we are actively causing harm that could easily be avoided. And, in the end, this discriminatory behavior hurts us all.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate parliamentarian deals blow to GOP plan to gut consumer bureau in tax bill
Senate parliamentarian deals blow to GOP plan to gut consumer bureau in tax bill

Chicago Tribune

time6 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Senate parliamentarian deals blow to GOP plan to gut consumer bureau in tax bill

WASHINGTON — Republicans suffered a sizable setback Friday on one key aspect of President Donald Trump's big bill after their plans to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other provisions from the Senate Banking Committee ran into procedural violations with the Senate parliamentarian. Republicans in the Senate proposed zeroing-out funding for the CFPB, the landmark agency set up in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, to save $6.4 billion. The bureau had been designed as a way to better protect Americans from financial fraud, but has been opposed by many GOP lawmakers since its inception. The Trump administration has targeted the CFPB as an example of government over-regulation and overreach. The findings by the Senate parliamentarian's office, which is working overtime scrubbing Trump's overall bill to ensure it aligns with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule' processes, signal a tough road ahead. The most daunting questions are still to come, as GOP leadership rushes to muscle Trump's signature package to floor for votes by his Fourth of July deadline. Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Banking Committee that drafted the provisions in question, said in a statement, 'My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee's provisions.' For Democrats, who have been fighting Trump's 1,000-page package at every step, the parliamentarian's advisory amounted to a significant win. 'Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill,' said Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Banking Committee, who engineered the creation of the CFPB before she was elected to Congress. Warren said that GOP proposals 'are a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk–all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires.' The parliamentarian's rulings, while advisory, are rarely, if ever ignored. With the majority in Congress, Republicans have been drafting a sweeping package that extends some $4.5 trillion tax cuts Trump approved during his first term, in 2017, that otherwise expire at the end of the year. It adds $350 billion to national security, including billions for Trump's mass deportation agenda. And it slashes some $1 trillion from Medicaid, food stamps and other government programs. All told, the package is estimated to add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over the decade, and leave 10.9 million more people without health care coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's review of the House-passed package, which is now undergoing revisions in the Senate. The parliamentarian's office is responsible for determining if the package adheres to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who was considered one of the masters of Senate procedure. The rule essentially bars policy matters from being addressed in the budget reconciliation process. Senate GOP leaders are using the budget reconciliation process, which is increasingly how big bills move through the Congress, because it allows passage on a simple majority vote, rather than face a filibuster with the higher 60-vote threshold. But if any of the bill's provisions violate the Byrd Rule, that means they can be challenged at the tougher 60-vote threshold, which is a tall order in the 53-47 Senate. Leaders are often forced to strip those proposals from the package, even though doing so risks losing support from lawmakers who championed those provisions. One of the biggest questions ahead for the parliamentarian will be over the Senate GOP's proposal to use 'current policy' as opposed to 'current law' to determine the baseline budget and whether the overall package adds significantly to deficits. Already the Senate parliamentarian's office has waded through several titles of Trump's big bill, including those from the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Energy & Public Works Committee. The Banking panel offered a modest bill, just eight pages, and much of it was deemed out of compliance. The parliamentarian found that in addition to gutting the CFPB, other provisions aimed at rolling back entities put in place after the 2008 financial crisis would violate the Byrd Rule. Those include a GOP provision to limit the Financial Research Fund, which was set up to conduct analysis, saving nearly $300 million; and another to shift the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which conducts oversight of accounting firms, to the Securities and Exchange Commission and terminate positions, saving $773 million. The GOP plan to change the pay schedule for employees at the Federal Reserve, saving $1.4 billion, was also determined to be in violation of the Byrd Rule. The parliamentarian's office also raised Byrd Rule violations over GOP proposals to repeal certain aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act, including on emission standards for some model year 2027 light-duty and medium-duty vehicles.

Trump says Harvard has acted ‘appropriately' and deal could soon be announced
Trump says Harvard has acted ‘appropriately' and deal could soon be announced

CNN

time9 minutes ago

  • CNN

Trump says Harvard has acted ‘appropriately' and deal could soon be announced

President Donald Trump said Friday that Harvard has 'acted extremely appropriately' during negotiations that could soon result in a deal, signaling a possible major shift in his administration's efforts to target the university. 'Many people have been asking what is going on with Harvard University and their largescale improprieties that we have been addressing, looking for a solution. We have been working closely with Harvard, and it is very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so,' Trump said in a late afternoon post to social media. 'They have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right. If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country,' he added. The White House, the Department of Education and Harvard did not immediately respond to CNN's requests for comment. CNN has reported that the White House has remained open to negotiation with Harvard, with which it is embroiled in multiple lawsuits. A federal judge on Friday indefinitely blocked the Trump administration from revoking Harvard's ability to host international students and scholars while legal challenges continue. Harvard also sued the Trump administration in April over its decision to freeze federal funding and asked for an expedited final decision in the case. Oral arguments are scheduled for July 21. The Trump administration has launched multiple investigations into the school. Efforts to target Harvard began even before Trump returned to office, with his allies arguing they were cracking down on antisemitism on campus amid the Israel-Hamas war. Education Secretary Linda McMahon said last week that the administration believes Harvard has taken steps to combat antisemitism on campus and that some progress has been made. 'We are, I think, making progress in some of the discussion, where even though they have taken a hard line, they have, for instance, replaced their head of Middle East Studies,' McMahon said during a moderated conversation with Bloomberg in Washington, DC. Asked whether Harvard should expect additional actions from the administration, she said, 'At this particular time, we're continuing with the things we've already talked about.' This is a developing story and will be updated.

Stephen Colbert floats masked ICE agents possibly getting shot in states with ‘Stand Your Ground' laws
Stephen Colbert floats masked ICE agents possibly getting shot in states with ‘Stand Your Ground' laws

New York Post

time10 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Stephen Colbert floats masked ICE agents possibly getting shot in states with ‘Stand Your Ground' laws

'The Late Show' host Stephen Colbert questioned whether 'Stand Your Ground' laws put masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at risk of being shot during an interview with Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., on Thursday. As Democrats across the country continue to criticize the federal agency's use of masks and civilian clothing, the liberal host questioned whether officers are being put in danger in 'Stand Your Ground' states like Florida. Advertisement Colbert said he was alarmed because, 'it does feel like kidnapping, because, as you said, unmarked windowless vans will show up. Men will get out wearing masks… no identifying patches, do not identify themselves. They don't have badges.' 'They grab people and put them in a van, in a state like Florida that has a 'Stand Your Ground' law and people can open carry,' he went on. 'It's dangerous for those officers, not just for the people, because why wouldn't you think that you were being attacked?' Despite Colbert's claim, open carry is not legal in Florida. It is allowed under certain, limited circumstances, such as hunting or fishing. In February 2025, however, Governor Ron DeSantis urged the legislature to support open carry. Advertisement Earlier in the interview, Colbert asked Frost to clarify what he meant when he called the Trump administration's last round of deportations a 'taxpayer-funded kidnapping operation.' The Florida congressman argued that the 'mass deportations' promised by President Donald Trump during his 2024 campaign could hardly be classified as deportations due to a lack of legal due process for those being deported. 3 Colbert questioned whether officers are being put in danger in 'Stand Your Ground' states like Florida. Fox News 3 Border Patrol partners arrested a Mexican national wanted for murder in Mexico. @HSILosAngeles/X Advertisement 'There is no legal process for people,' he claimed. 'We have ICE federal agents pulling up, terrorizing our communities, hopping out of unmarked vans, stealing — and yes, kidnapping people. Not giving them their day in court and yes — human trafficking them to other nations, other countries around the entire world.' Frost also questioned why agents felt the need to conceal their identities in the first place. 'My other thing is, if you are proud of what you're doing, why do you have to wear a mask to do it?' he asked. 'If you are operating within the bounds of the law, you should not have to cover your face. That is the problem with ICE and with the administration right now is this whole thing is happening in the shadows.' 3 Los Angeles Police Department and protestors and ICE agents were gathered at an entrance to Dodger Stadium as ICE attempted to use the stadium parking lot as a staging area. Jonathan Alcorn/ZUMA / Advertisement Earlier this month, Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director Todd Lyons slammed Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., on 'Fox & Friends' for their 'disgusting' rhetoric about agents masking up, which he felt put him and his officers in danger. Wu compared ICE agents wearing masks to members of the neo-Nazi group the Nationalist Social Club-131 (NSC-131) during a press conference on June 5, amid government claims that ICE agents have faced a 413% increase in assaults. Jeffries has called for the identification of ICE agents who perpetrate 'aggressive overreach.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store