Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Fairness, Not Stigmatism, for Transgender Athletes

Fairness, Not Stigmatism, for Transgender Athletes

People running.

Getty Images, Pavel1964

President Trump’s campaign and allies spent $21 million of campaign spending on attack ads against transgender people. With that level of spending, I was shocked to find out it was not a top concern for voters of either party, but it continued to prevail as a campaign priority.

Opponents of transgender participation in sports continue to voice their opinions, three months into the Trump presidency. Just last month, the Trump administration suspended $175 million in federal funding to Penn State over a transgender swimmer. $175 million is a bit dramatic over one swimmer, or in the case of the entire NCAA, fewer than 10 athletes. Even Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom was recently under fire for sharing his views on a podcast where the host was clearly trying to get a sound bite to go viral. Others, like Rep. Nancy Mace, have also caught on to the mediagenic nature of transphobia right now. “You want penises in women's bathrooms, and I'm not going to have it,” she said in a U.S. House hearing last month. I had no clue who Nancy Mace was prior to her notorious views on LGBTQ+ rights. Frankly, her flip from being a supporter of LGBTQ+ rights to shouting “Tr**ny” in a hearing seems less like a change of opinion and more of a cry for attention.


Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Just this week, Representative Zooey Zephyr spoke to her colleagues in the State Legislature about a bill that would ban drag performances and pride parades in Montana. Her simple cry for humanity flipped 29 Republicans, ultimately killing the bill. To me, this proves that even the most polarizing topics are not that polarizing when you tune out the noise and look at what is right in front of you for what it is.

Recently, at my cousin’s 12-and-under flag football game, it became clear which team was going to win. Their bigger, bulkier builds gave them a clear advantage. “That kid is huge, he looks fourteen,” I heard a parent say to the person next to her.

Besides the off-handed comment, it seemed that the parents took no issue with the size difference. I even turned to my aunt and asked her about it. Her response, “This league is based on age, not size,” warranted a head tilt.

I was confused that there wasn’t more outrage among the parents about the size discrepancy. This response contradicts the sentiment I see online each morning when reading the news. Whether a public figure, politician, or journalist, people seem to be getting worked up about “fairness” in sports, citing a variety of physical characteristics.

In professional sports, there are strict eligibility guidelines set forth by each sport’s governing body. Some sports, often less physically consequential, use simple means like an athlete’s passport. In other sports, like swimming, eligibility is based on testosterone levels. Setting the morality of these types of tests aside, there are a myriad of ways to keep sports fair for all competitive athletes that are already in place.

Hormone panels, drug testing, and weight classes are all within the norm of competitive sports at the professional and Olympic levels. So, I sit here wondering why the media and politicians are so obsessed with an outright ban on transgender athletes when there are all sorts of other ways to ensure fairness.

So, next time you hear people complain about fairness when discussing transgender inclusion in sports, remind them that sports associations already have measures in place to ensure credible competition. And if they are truly concerned with fairness, they should be advocating for stronger protections for all athletes, not the outright banning of an entire group of people.

There is a day in the future when the transgender identity won’t be used as a mask to disguise people’s ignorance and hate. There is a better future where the small subset of people who overtly hate transgender people are not given a platform to keep ruining the lives of kids everywhere who are just trying to play sports with their friends.

Lennon Torres is a Public Voices Fellow on Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse with The OpEd Project. She is an LGBTQ+ advocate who grew up in the public eye, gaining national recognition as a young dancer on television shows. With a deep passion for storytelling, advocacy, and politics, Lennon now works to center the lived experience of herself and others as she crafts her professional career in online child safety at Heat Initiative.

Read More

Banned Books Damn Our Children's Future

Two children reading in school.

Getty Images, Jim Craigmyle

Banned Books Damn Our Children's Future

April 2nd is International Children's Book Day. It is time to celebrate the transformative power of children's literature and mourn the spaces where stories once lived. The numbers are staggering: there were over 10,000 book bans in U.S. public schools during the 2023-2024 school year alone, affecting more than 4,000 unique titles. Each banned book represents a mirror taken away from a child who might have seen themselves in those pages or a window closed to a child who might have glimpsed a world beyond their own.

I'm a child of the 80s and 90s, back when PBS was basically raising us all. Man, LeVar Burton's voice on Reading Rainbow was like that cool uncle who always knew exactly what book you needed. Remember him saying, "But you don't have to take my word for it"? And Sesame Street—that show was living proof that a kid from the Bronx could learn alongside a kid from rural Kansas, no questions asked. These and other such programs convinced an entire generation that we could "go anywhere" and "be anything.” Also, they were declarations that every child deserves to see themselves in stories, to dream in technicolor, and to imagine futures unlimited by the accidents of birth or circumstance.

Keep ReadingShow less
Storytelling that exposes injustices and inspires equity
- YouTube

Storytelling that exposes injustices and inspires equity

Stephanie R. Toliver is an Assistant Professor of Curriculum and Instruction focusing on English Education and Adolescent/Secondary Literacy.

In her research, Toliver employs creativity and imagination to confront systemic inequities and promote more equitable education environments.

Keep ReadingShow less
Black History Matters Act reintroduced amid debate on education and DEI policies

Students in a classroom.

Getty Images, Solskin

Black History Matters Act reintroduced amid debate on education and DEI policies

A year ago, Karsonya Wise Whitehead helped introduce Freedom Schools, a free program dedicated to helping raise student literacy while providing education on Black History for all ages.

Dr. Whitehead—president of the Association for the Study of African American Life (ASALH), which runs the Freedom Schools—works to advance public knowledge about Black history through various programs. According to Whitehead, at least 12 states have direct mandates to teach Black history in schools, but a recent piece of legislation introduced by Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.) looks to change that.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Diversity," "Equity" and "Inclusion" on wood blocks

"Diversity," "Equity" and "Inclusion" on wood blocks

Nora Carol Photography/Getty Images

Dismantling DEI Reinforces America's Original Sin

When President Trump signed Executive Order 14151, titled "Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing," on January 20, 2025, he didn't just eliminate diversity initiatives from federal agencies—he set in motion a sweeping transformation of the federal workforce.

The order, which terminated all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-related activities across federal departments and rescinded existing affirmative action guidelines, sent shockwaves through government institutions and contractors alike. Universities began scrubbing their websites and canceling diversity events, while federal agencies scrambled to dismantle programs built over decades. The order's immediate impact was so concerning that by February 21, 2025, a federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction, temporarily halting its implementation. But beyond the immediate practical implications, the executive order did something far more insidious: it codified a dangerous myth that America has somehow transcended its need to actively pursue equality.

Keep ReadingShow less