Women’s basketball seems to be the locus of our stupid national controversies of late, and I’m going to surmise that is part and parcel of the legacy media push to force the game into the cultural mainstream. You’ve seen countless articles and hot takes by woke radio and TV sports talkers claiming the women’s game is somehow better than that of the men, a view that — without insulting the women, who have a perfectly defensible and entertaining brand of basketball in their own right — is absurd.
And the same people pushing this politicized line of discussion are hard at work trying to use controversy to get attention for the game.
Last week it was the dumb narrative, spread on the right and then fueled as a “conservatives pounce” story in left-wing media, about Louisiana State University’s women’s team missing the National Anthem at its Elite Eight game against Iowa. This column handled that already.
But this week the controversy rages over what the University of South Carolina’s Dawn Staley, whose team just completed an undefeated season with a title-game win over Iowa (the Hawkeyes are now the Buffalo Bills of women’s basketball, having lost the championship game two years in a row), said about a Lia Thomas–style infiltration of women’s hoops.
“Damn, you got deep on me, didn’t you?” Staley said. “I’m on the opinion of, if you’re a woman, you should play. If you consider yourself a woman and you want to play sports or vice versa, you should be able to play. That’s my opinion. You want me to go deeper?[“]
When asked directly if transgender women should be able to participate in women’s sports, Staley was emphatic and acknowledged the backlash she would receive.
“Yes, yes,” Staley said. “So now the barnstormer people are going to flood my timeline and be a distraction to me on one of the biggest days of our game, and I’m OK with that. I really am.”
There are two probably accurate interpretations of this.
The first is that Staley provided the answer she thought would avoid the most possible trouble. Either way she answered would antagonize a large segment of people; the more ferocious of the opposing tribes is the trans crowd, so if she sided with them, she’d catch less of a beating.
The second interpretation is that Dawn Staley thinks this is what’s next, and if recruiting men for women’s basketball is going to become a thing, she’s going to recruit men so that she can keep winning.
Like Nick Saban used to say, if you ain’t cheatin’, you ain’t tryin’.
Nobody seems to want to recognize that putting men on your women’s team is cheating, just as putting college kids on your high school team is cheating.
But given the prevailing girl-boss ethic of women’s basketball, you aren’t allowed to recognize this. You’re supposed to pretend that real life is just like all those box-office-failure movies where the 120-pound female action hero beats the tar out of the male villains twice her size. So, if a sexually confused, insane male wants to call himself a woman, instead of a polar bear or Napoleon, and you can use that as an excuse to bring in a ringer who might help you win another championship, then … you go, girl.
Staley was criticized for this stance, of course, because it was absurd even if it wasn’t totally sincere. For example, black Democrat South Carolina Rep. Bakari Sellers did this to OutKick founder Clay Travis on Xwitter:
Bakari, do you believe that men should be able to play women’s sports and win women’s championships? Yes or no? It’s a simple question, don’t dodge it. You can personally attack me all you want, but that’s just an attempt to change the subject. Yes or no, answer it. https://t.co/kwlWeWhVNJ
So you attack me for believing men & women’s sports should be separate, but when I ask you should men be able to play women’s sports, you won’t answer. The difference between us is I say what I think no matter what. You agree with me here, but pretend not to. That’s cowardice. https://t.co/v4ccVZ5jua
Jason Whitlock is a “pariah?” Really? For a pariah, he certainly seems to be a lot more prominent than Bakari Sellers is.
In any event, this is indeed a stupid controversy. But stupid controversies seem to be the stock-in-trade of the alphabet-people lobby.
And by alphabet people, I’m referring to Dave Chappelle’s term for the LGBTQIA++ mob so determined to control reality in America. Chappelle seems to be the only figure of prominence in America willing to stick pins in that bubble, and the introduction of his analysis stands as one of the funniest bits in American comedy over the past two decades (though it’s not quite safe for work):
And let’s do something else very quickly: Note that the vast majority of the alphabet people, and especially gays and lesbians, are not invested in the promotion of stupid alphabet-people controversies. The problem is that the active ingredient in their “movement” — which, as Chappelle notes, isn’t one movement but a host of them tied loosely together, despite the fact that there are sizable differences and conflicts between them — is a group of activists whose main desire is to use that special-interest status as a cudgel with which to smash the racist/sexist/homophobic Western white capitalist patriarchy.
And until that cultural Marxist elite is deposed as the representative of the alphabet people, you’ll see no end to stupid, divisive controversies.
For example, regular America has for the past several years stood by with mouths agape over the corruption of the American Library Association as it has turned school and public libraries into alphabet-people indoctrination factories with drag queen story hours, and, far more pernicious, the introduction of gay porn in kids’ sections of the stacks.
That isn’t how you commonly see this issue described in the legacy media, of course. The way you see it is how the cultural Marxist alphabet-people lobby demands it be described: that the coalition of parents and conservative activists and politicians objecting to gay porn being presented to kids in those libraries are “book-burners” and “censors.”
Crusade against straight porn in libraries, and you’ll find practically no opposition at all. That battle was decided in favor of the Normals a long time ago. There might be some risqué material at the library, but it’s shown in the adult stacks. Nobody has much of a problem with that consensus.
But gay porn is not porn. It’s magical porn, and so the sodomy, oral sex, and other exotic sexual acts depicted in gay indoctrination books for young adolescents cannot be described as inappropriate for the intended audience by the “bigots” and “book-burners.”
It’s all so very bizarre. The precise same acts that everyone agrees should consign a book depicting them to the adult section of the library if the participants are straight people must be shown to kids, or else it’s bigotry.
But this is the demand of the alphabet people.
Who also demand that confused men be allowed to do to women’s sports what’s being done to the libraries.
And the churches.
Christianity, and Judaism, for that matter, is not very friendly to gay sex. The Bible even says it’s a sin.
The Bible also says that the use of sex for purposes of entertainment is a sin. Sex, it turns out, is for procreation, as enjoyable as it may be.
But this is bigotry. And so is the Christian cultural impulse that perhaps leading every conversation with a depiction of one’s sex life — the who, the how, and so on — is a bit lacking in class and judgment.
In other words, I’m a bigot because I’m not interested in knowing who you’re having sex with, and I’d rather you not volunteer that information. It turns out that I have the same lack of interest in discussions of straight people’s sex lives as I do the alphabet people, but that’s no longer an option.
Chappelle finds a rich vein of material for his act in this. He’s not wrong to do so. The problem is that the division and destruction wrought by these idiotic controversies — division and destruction whose only productive purpose is to gain prominence for the activists among the alphabet people who don’t even represent the majority of those they claim to represent — are helping to tear our society apart.
But they like that.
They like it because the LGBTQIA++ agenda has never been about helping the alphabet people. It’s always been about blasting away at civilization. And the more misery and animus they can spread, the better.
By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact
