From "U.S. Olympic Officials Bar Transgender Women From Women’s Competitions/The U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee changed its eligibility rules on Monday to comply with President Trump’s executive order, taking the decision away from national governing bodies for each sport" (NYT).
Interesting language, especially "tucked under." It seems to evoke the effort of a biological man to pass as a woman. Did the NYT want us to see an analogy there? The U.S. Olympic Committee wants to look like it is what it wants to be. In this analogy, following Trump’s executive order corresponds to the male genitalia that must be "tucked under" and the look of female genitalia is achieved with the words "USOPC Athlete Safety Policy."
If that's not intentional, the editing at the NYT is incompetent/nonexistent. If it is intentional, it's hilarious and very very wrong.
Posts
46 comments:
They are quietly saying, "thank God for Trump, making us quit this nonsense. Now we can just shrug and blame him"
they are not transgender women. they are men.
Is this Olympic unilateral disarmament?
The NYT can kiss collective ass.
Well, it is short, so it is easier to tuck it under.
And, yes, I am paragraph-shaming the NYT.
"Vaguely worded"
Those new rules still allow trans women to compete, but only in the men’s category.
Duh. The woke always tried to make it sound like these men had to participate in women’s sports simply in order to compete rather than dominate the category.
They nipped he word 'transgender' and the title of Trump's E.O.
Yay!
This topic makes me think we should be thankful and appreciative to the trans men community for basically staying out of the limelight and living their lives in dignity.
in Canada, they employ MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying), to ANYONE that shows ANY amount of mental illness, OR, depression (as if That's not a mental illness TOO)..
So, SERIOUS QUESTION:
if a Canadian goes into a clinic, suffering from Gender Dysphoria..
The government tells them that the ONLY solution is MAID..
DON'T THEY?
i mean, when a Canadian military veteran asked for a ramp to be installed at his house; their government said that the ONLY solution was MAID..
What IS the Canadian Government's plan for Gender Dysphoria?
and WHY?
I've heard the thought being expressed now, recently, that Trump has done the Progressive Democrats the huge favor of removing the burden of their luxury beliefs (transgender madness being one of them), so now they can get back to the business of simplified dirty politics.
I guess Joe Biden and his minions had to agree to all this stupidness to get his competition to drop out of the primaries and let him win the candidacy. What a disaster his administration was, from top to bottom, start to finish.
From the USOPC Athlete Safety Policy:
8. Transgender Athlete Policy Update:
• A significant update, effective July 21, 2025, aligns the policy with Executive Order 14201 (“Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports”), signed by President Donald Trump in February 2025. This update prohibits transgender women (biological males) from competing in women’s sports categories, emphasizing “fair and safe competition environments” based on biological sex assigned at birth.
• The policy does not explicitly use the term “transgender” but references compliance with the executive order and the Ted Stevens Olympic & Amateur Sports Act. All NGBs are required to adopt uniform policies based on this directive, impacting competitions from grassroots to elite levels, including the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games.
Ignoring the ridiculous “assigned at birth” phrase, the policy appears to have a ripple effect on precursor competitions. NGB is National Governing Body fyi.
Althouse said…
“If that's not intentional, the editing at the NYT is incompetent/nonexistent. If it is intentional, it's hilarious and very very wrong.”
Intentional. The NYT used at least one other double entendre in the piece.
The rule changes come after the sport was thrust into an uncomfortable spotlight this year when a female fencer declined to compete against her transgender opponent at a midlevel meet.
"Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports" Out of curiosity, why is there no equal clamor to put wo/transmen in, or keep them out of, men's sports? Does it signal, perish the thought, that the sexes are actually real and different?
Just wait until the Griner controversy goes main stream for the WNBA.
Everyone remembers that WNBA player that got put in jail in Russia?
Russia put they/them in a MALE prison.
Have fun with that one WNBA.
Recall the trans-boy who slammed a girl in the face so hard - she has permanent life-altered physical problems. the left stand shoulder to shoulder with that angry male.
If that's not intentional, the editing at the NYT is incompetent/nonexistent.
Editing at the Times has been spotty to nonexistent for years. How are you just now noticing?
Once upon a time female athletes were tested for testosterone, along with other forms of doping. Why isn’t that testing sufficient to eliminate trans athletes from posing as women while still possessing testicles? Did the Olympic Committee drop that testing at the behest of Progs?
Interesting that the IOC policy falls under athlete safety policy. I participate in powerlifting (not an Olympic sport) and the international and country affiliate organizations have transgender fall under medical policies. Particularly around drug/supplement use and therapeutic use exemptions for drug tested substances. And acknowledging the impact of male puberty on overall growth and strength long term.
"Interesting that the IOC policy falls under athlete safety policy."
It didn't fall under. It was tucked under.
Remember back when, long ago, transgender women were just regarded as weirdos who didn't bother anyone if you didn't bother them? Who let them get crazy?
Tucked under, huh?
Interesting thought occurred to me this morning. When William Thomas decided he wanted to become Lia Thomas, was he able to de-register from Selective Service?
The next Summer Olympics are the summer of 2028. Coincidentally the same year as the presidential election.
USO clever, Althouse.
This reminds me of that ridiculous movie, Europa, Europa.
"• The policy does not explicitly use the term “transgender” "
Nor does it use the term three-headed aliens from Charon, but they're not allowed to compete either.
The editing at the NYT is incompetent/nonexistent.
I snipped our host's comment free from context in order to wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment expressed. The clear lack of operating standards in America's premier, iconic daily, one every journalism class held up as the best example*, is an alarm I've been sounding for a long time.
*For clear factful writing, concise and active headlines, how to expeditiously cover the Five Ws while ordering the most important facts first. They did it all correctly at one time. Though their dishonesty spans centuries.
Coincidentally the same year as the presidential election.
Having lived through several of these cycles it's easy to remember that Leap Year, Olympics, Presidential Elections are on the same cycle.
Interesting that the IOC policy falls under athlete safety policy.
Does it really? It should be tied to having too much testosterone in their system — produced naturally because you still possess your testicles or added to your system via injections it’s still doping.
My hypothesis is that the writer put it in there, and the editor missed it completely.
Aggie said...
I've heard the thought being expressed now, recently, that Trump has done the Progressive Democrats the huge favor of removing the burden of their luxury beliefs (transgender madness being one of them), so now they can get back to the business of simplified dirty politics.
**************************************************************
That's a bit like the view that the Democrats unintentionally did Trump (and his supporters) a favor by procuring (however done) a Trump loss in 2020.
How pathetic do you have to be to be a trans athlete in the Special Olympics?
"Interesting that the IOC policy falls under athlete safety policy."
The intent of athlete safety policy is to make sure the athletes, particularly minor athletes, aren’t being emotionally, physically or sexually abused. Seems to fit within that context.
The Times cannot be accused of ethical reporting.
Kirstie Coventry, the first female and first African (Zimbabwean) to head the AOC, made it clear that she would not allow men in women's sports. Having dedicated her stellar Olympics and post-Olympics career to helping disadvantaged children in that violent country (her parents suffered a very traumatic crime), she is a departure from the grabby leaders whose corruptive choices preceded her, leading to the 1968 murder of hundreds of students in Mexico who were protesting the government for using crucial state funds for the poor to bribe and pander to officials; the Salt Lake City bribery scandal, and the murder of Israeli athletes in 1972. Who here even remembers the government murders of hundreds of Mexican students protesting the corruption of the IOC and the Games, I wonder? The despicable Andrew Young, who openly used his civil rights credentials to run cover and grow rich off Middle-Eastern slave states, may be added to this list of scoundrels for his role in the embarassing Atlanta Games.
Coventry is refreshingly unwoke. Her statements may rescue women's sports.
Trans/simulants. Also, transsocials. This policy change doesn't affect homosexuals, bisexuals, and others with purely dysphoric conditions.
Sometimes a banana is just a banana.
For it to be intentional would mean that someone with an irreverent and politically incorrect sense of humor had been hired by the NYT.
The odds are pretty slim.
The goal is two-fold. One, safety based on physiological differences between the sexes. Two, normalize a favorable juxtaposition of the sexes. Equal in rights and complementary in Nature.
“ If it is intentional, it's hilarious and very very wrong.”
So wrong it’s right!
"stutefish said...
My hypothesis is that the writer put it in there, and the editor missed it completely"
I'm gonna go with 2 writers, smoking weed, laughing hysterically.
Tuck off, Times!
It still boggles my mind how this even became a thing.
And yet I know whatever idiocy they're going to come up with next will be worse.
Does this mean that any athlete competing in a women's Olympic sport must now have to pass a genetic test in order to prove she was born female?
The NYTimes is infamous for bending the opinion within any story to allow the claim, "Women, minorities hardest hit!" about any thing and everything, from global warming to immigration to war to peace to famine to flood to ... the Olympics. So with transgender women hardest hit, it is a twofer!
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.