#title ix

Biology: Biologically fucking what? I've been on HRT for a while and I can promise you that the human body is a dumb machine and will follow whatever instructions you provide. I've lost muscle mass, grown boobs, lost height, my emotions have changed. Biology is not static and I have taken control of mine.

Fairness: This is both rank misogyny and magical thinking. Are you really going to sit there and argue that women are inherently so weak that they can't fairly compete with cis men in any arena? And do you think that testosterone is so magically powerful that a trans woman who, however briefly, developed under it has a magical fucking man ability to dominate women in any activity? Fuck off with that condescending shit.

Men: The idea that men are inherently dangerous is both fucking untrue and permissive. The way men move through society is nurture not nature. They take a bunch of children and tell them that they are predators and those ones over there are prey, and you're not supposed to hurt them, but we already kind of expect that you will. Also, when you do you'll probably get away with it, examples provided daily on the evening news. This is before you even arrive at the fact that trans women are women.

Trans Women: Trans women are women, jot that down. We didn't "become women" in the same way that gays or lesbians weren't somehow straight before they came out. Living closeted and trans does not give you a cis male experience in any way. You grow up pretending to be something that seems to come naturally to your peers. You suppress your natural reactions as much as possible and still get called a girl or gay. And the fucking thing is, they were right, I am a girl and gay. Perhaps if you'd stated your observations in a more constructive way I wouldn't have cried.

Women in general: Policing gender harms all women. These dipshits who think "We can always tell" fire off false positives left and right. All this amounts to is control over women's bodies and presentation. To enforce these things you'll need to give authority to a collection of gender busy-bodies to poke, prod, and ogle women with few restrictions or recourse. It is just a license to sexually assault women at whim.

Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:

On June 30—the last day of the term and the final day of Pride Month—the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling that states may ban transgender athletes from women's and girls' sports, holding that Title IX permits schools to determine eligibility based on “biological sex.” The ruling, authored by Justice Kavanaugh, was narrower than some of the worst-case scenarios: it preserved Bostock, did not overtly strip transgender people of equal protection, and explicitly declined to decide whether states must exclude trans athletes. But its most consequential holding still has vast consequences. The Court declared that "sex" in Title IX "cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex"—a definitional ruling about the statute itself, not merely about sports. And though the majority deliberately avoided saying that blue states must discriminate against transgender people under Title IX, its holding leaves wide lanes for the Trump administration to pressure schools and colleges through funding threats and investigations, and for far-right organizations like the Alliance Defending Freedom to file lawsuits targeting trans-inclusive policies in every state in the country.

The decision split along ideological lines, with all six conservative justices in the majority and the three liberal justices dissenting on equal protection. The majority declared directly, "The term 'sex' in Title IX, the Javits Amendment, and the Title IX regulations cannot plausibly be interpreted to refer to anything other than biological sex." This ruling overturns years of lower court precedent. The Fourth Circuit, in Grimm v. Gloucester County, had held that Title IX's prohibition on sex discrimination protects transgender students' right to use bathrooms and play sports matching their gender identity. The Seventh Circuit, in Whitaker v. Kenosha Unified School District, reached the same conclusion. Those rulings—and the logic underlying them—were foundational to school policies across the country protecting transgender students in both red and blue states.

The ruling was not as sweeping as it could have been. The Court specified two important limiting principles. First, the majority explicitly stated that it was not deciding whether states that choose to allow transgender athletes to participate are in violation of Title IX—noting that "that question is currently the subject of litigation in some lower courts" and that "nothing in this opinion is intended to decide that question." This preserves, at least for now, the legal space for inclusive states to maintain their own policies. Second, the Court declined to resolve whether transgender people as a class are entitled to heightened constitutional protection under the Equal Protection Clause. This was one of the potential worst-case scenarios—a ruling on those grounds could have greenlit virtually any law targeting transgender people by declaring them undeserving of equal protection. Instead, the Court analyzed the sports bans as sex-based classifications subject to intermediate scrutiny, and found they satisfied that standard.

Ultimately, though, the impact of this ruling will likely be severe. The most immediate consequence is that states across the country now have clear Supreme Court authorization to enact education-based bathroom and sports bans targeting transgender students, with Title IX posing no barrier. But the damage will not be confined to red states. The Court gave a wide lane for lawsuits against schools and colleges in blue states that allow transgender athletes to participate. Though the majority deliberately avoided ruling on whether inclusive states are violating Title IX, it heavily endorsed the theory that even a single transgender athlete on a girls' team "displaces" cisgender athletes—devoting an entire passage to the zero-sum nature of sports, writing that "every athlete who makes a team takes a roster spot from another athlete" and "every competitor who wins a race or competition deprives another athlete of that victory, or medal, or prize."

In West Virginia v. B.P.J., the radical right-wing 6 SCOTUS judicial tyrants ruled in favor of permitting states to ban trans girls and women from girls' and women's sports under the Equal Protection Clause and the court ruled 9-0 that such trans sports ban laws are kosher on Title IX grounds. Bans on trans sports participation are NOT about "fairness" or "protecting women's/girls' sports", but raw anti-trans bigotry.

See Also:

The Advocate: States can ban transgender women and girls from sports, according to U.S. Supreme Court

LGBTQ Nation: Supreme Court rules states can exclude trans students from sports

So interesting learning that the person who got away with assaulting me and many others on my uni campus would've been expelled from uni if it weren't for president trump directly... Of course a pedophile and rapist would find it necessary to attack Title IX on universities. I don't know any other group of people who would've fond that necessary. This site is Project 2025 Tracker

a broke clock is right twice a day.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR’S DISSENT

B. P. J., however, contends that neither of the State’s asserted justifications apply to transgender girls like her, who have never experienced an endogenous male puberty, who receive gender-affirming treatment, and who, as a result of both, B. P. J. says, lack any athletic advantage that is inherent to their sex identified at birth.

Greg Owen at LGBTQ Nation (06.24.2026):

The Trump administration’s zealous pursuit to remove transgender athletes from girls’ sports teams has snared an embarrassing catch in Colorado: boy mascots. Last June, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) launched an investigation of Colorado public schools, wielding the Trump administration’s trans-exclusionary interpretation of Title IX to purge trans student-athletes from school sports in the state under threat of losing federal funding. In March, the OCR announced its findings: a remarkable 61 boys were playing on girls teams in the Jeffco Public Schools district outside Denver. But these boys weren’t playing sports at all, Chalkbeat Colorado reports.

In a letter published last week, Jeffco Public Schools, Colorado’s second-largest school district, shared details of the investigation with the school community, as well as its absurd result. “Some teams had male managers, trainers, or mascots — not athletes,” the letter explained. “Because the OCR never asked us to clarify the role of any individual listed on those rosters, we did not learn of this confusion until the OCR issued a press release. Since that moment, we have repeatedly and respectfully asked the OCR to address this factual error. They have declined to do so,” the school district noted.

The false finding is either a clear embarrassment for the Trump administration and the mostly dismantled Department of Education — it’s also a convenient lie. The weaponized Office for Civil Rights is now at the center of the department’s mission to attack civil rights protections in schools across the country.