• World News
  • Politics
  • Stock
  • Investing
  • Editor’s Pick
Time And Sales Reporter
Editor's PickInvesting

On Transgender Athletes and the Federal Government

by February 6, 2025
February 6, 2025

Neal McCluskey

“But even if they can, should they?”

I asked that question last week in response to President Trump’s executive order on “indoctrination” in public schools. The question asked specifically: Even if federal officials have the constitutional and legal authority to take sides on values-laden education decisions, is it wise to do so? 

The question is fully applicable to the president’s new executive order, “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports,” which weighs in on the question of whether transgender girls should be able to participate in women’s interscholastic sports.

High school volleyball - K.M. Klemencik

The executive order says they should not and calls on the secretary of education, in coordination with the attorney general, to “take all appropriate action” to ensure that “women’s sports are reserved for women.” It also says that all departments and agencies should, “where appropriate, rescind funding to programs that fail to comply with the policy established by this order.” Finally, at least regarding domestic sports (there is also language about international athletics), the executive order calls for a meeting of “representatives of major athletic organizations and governing bodies, and female athletes harmed by such policies, to promote policies that are fair and safe, in the best interests of female athletes, and consistent with the requirements of Title IX,” as well as a convening of “State Attorneys General to identify best practices in defining and enforcing equal opportunities for women to participate in sports and educate them about stories of women and girls who have been harmed by male participation in women’s sports.”

The concerns of many biologically female athletes are understandable. Biological males tend to have greater size and strength than women, which would give them a significant advantage in many sports. And while there are treatments that can reduce these advantages, it is not clear that they eliminate them. Meanwhile, bathrooms and locker rooms are places of limited privacy in which people may be especially uncomfortable being in the vicinity of someone born of the opposite sex.

The concerns of transgender athletes and allies are also understandable. If you have powerful feelings that your gender is at odds with your biological sex, transitioning might be key to your well-being. Should the government get to override that when it comes to the sports you play?

If you look at this objectively, you can sympathize with both sides and see that this is not a clear case of right and wrong. This ambiguity is reflected in executive action, with Trump taking essentially the opposite approach of the Biden administration, moving from transgender integration being required to prohibit discrimination to its being banned to prohibit discrimination.

With a problem so wicked, as most values-based disputes are, the right federal answer might be to do nothing — let lower levels of government and society make their own policies. This would allow decisions to be made more consistent with the unique problems and character of specific communities and provide a multiplicity of approaches that might reveal solutions no central authority has thought of. It would also help us get closer to a sustainable social equilibrium.

Of course, any level of government imposing one group’s values on others violates liberty, so no government choice of moral “winners” will be ideal. To reach the ideal, we need to ground systems such as education in choice: individual families or students freely deciding what schools they will use, including, for those to whom it matters, based on interscholastic athletics policies. Then, the government does not impose “solutions” to values clashes on anyone; different people can make different athletic arrangements, and a social equilibrium can emerge.

previous post
A US Sovereign Wealth Fund Is a Bad Idea
next post
Trump must dump ‘One China’ policy and recognize ‘free’ Taiwan, House Republicans say

Related Posts

Trump’s tariffs on Brazil could make your coffee...

July 12, 2025

Crypto Market Recap: Bitcoin Hits All-Time High as...

July 12, 2025

Blue Lagoon Resources Officially Opens Dome Mountain Gold...

July 12, 2025

Top 5 Canadian Mining Stocks This Week: Avanti...

July 12, 2025

JZR Gold Inc. Announces Private Placement Offering of...

July 12, 2025

DoD Invests US$400 Million in Rare Earth Firm...

July 12, 2025







    Stay updated with the latest news, exclusive offers, and special promotions. Sign up now and be the first to know! As a member, you'll receive curated content, insider tips, and invitations to exclusive events. Don't miss out on being part of something special.


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.




    Recent Posts

    • Trump’s tariffs on Brazil could make your coffee even more expensive

      July 12, 2025
    • The Small Cap ‘Early Warning’ System: Use StockCharts to Time Pullbacks and Protect Profits

      July 12, 2025
    • The CappThesis Market Strength Indicator: What It’s Telling Us Now

      July 12, 2025
    • These 25 Stocks Drive the Market: Are You Watching Them?

      July 12, 2025
    • What Happens Next for the S&P 500? Pick Your Path!

      July 12, 2025
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Copyright © 2025 timeandsalesreporter.com | All Rights Reserved

    Time And Sales Reporter
    • World News
    • Politics
    • Stock
    • Investing
    • Editor’s Pick

    Read alsox

    Juggernaut Closes $1,100,000 from Institutions and Accredited Investors

    July 9, 2025

    A Prelude to New FTC Scrutiny of Occupational...

    March 4, 2025

    Mark O’Byrne: Gold, Silver Prices Going Much Higher...

    July 10, 2025