In a ruling that sent shockwaves through the judicial system and the nation's collective sense of decency, the US Supreme Court yesterday upheld state bans on transgender athletes participating in female school sports. The decision, delivered from a bench that has apparently mistaken itself for a nightclub bouncer at a gender reveal party, has left trans girls effectively benched for anything beyond sweaty palms and hurt feelings.
Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, argued that the bans are 'a reasonable step to protect the integrity of women's sports' from the perceived threat of, one assumes, a particularly coordinated sequence of hormone therapies and third-grade PE classes. The logic, as tight as a budget deficit, suggests that allowing trans girls to compete would somehow turn the olympic high jump into a spectacle of pubescent pandemonium.
Across the pond, British politicians have begun furiously scribbling notes, no doubt preparing to copy the homework of their transatlantic cousins. The UK, never one to miss a chance for a good moral panic, now faces its own moment of governmental handwringing. Tory MPs have already begun muttering about 'biological realities' while conveniently forgetting that reality is a spectrum, not a binary click-through. Meanwhile, activists point out that the only thing being 'protected' is the fragile ego of a ruling class terrified of losing a football match to a girl who happened to be assigned male at birth.
The ruling has been met with predictable howls of outrage from the liberal peanut gallery, who argue that barring trans athletes from sports is like banning left-handed people from using scissors: it solves a problem that doesn't exist while creating a new one. The American Civil Liberties Union has already denounced the decision as 'a dark day for equality', while the trans community has responded with a collective sigh that could power a small wind farm.
But let's not ignore the absurdity of the situation. We live in a world where a government can spend millions debating the intricacies of which genes are allowed to chase a ball around a field, yet can't seem to agree on whether healthcare is a human right. The court has effectively ruled that the only acceptable form of gender diversity in sport is the kind that doesn't make the cisgender kids uncomfortable. Because nothing says 'fair play' like putting a sign on the locker room door saying 'No Girls Who Used to Be Boys Allowed'.
And so the circus continues. The US Supreme Court has once again shown that it operates on a timeline where the moon landing was faked but the threat of a trans girl winning a middle school track meet is somehow existential. The UK looks on, clipboard in hand, ready to implement the same nonsense with a British stiff upper lip and a jolly good cup of transphobic tea.
In the meantime, trans athletes will keep getting changed in the car park, and the rest of us will continue to watch the slow-motion train wreck of a society that has decided that the biggest problem facing young people today is not poverty, climate change, or a pandemic, but the terrifying possibility that a girl might be a bit taller than her peers. Hats off to the Supreme Court for finally solving the truly urgent issues of our time.
