I sure don’t.
In the debut episode of the California governor’s new podcast “This Is Gavin Newsom,” Newsom invited Turning Point USA founder and conservative activist Charlie Kirk to banter about politics and public policy. To Kirk’s amazement (the New York Times assumes), Newsom concurred with the political right’s position regarding biological men participating in women’s sports. “I think it’s an issue of fairness, I completely agree with you on that,” Newsom told Kirk. “It is an issue of fairness. It’s deeply unfair.”
The Times was shocked—shocked!—that Newsom would break from the official party line on the issue. In the Senate last week, not a single Democrat supported the House-passed bill banning such cross-gender competitors, despite polls showing that this is an issue in which about 80% of the public agree with conservatives. “The comments by Mr. Newsom, who has backed LGPTQ causes for decades and was one of the first American elected officials to officiate same-sex weddings,” the Times said, “represented a remarkable break from other top Democrats on the issue, and signaled a newly defensive position on transgender rights among many in his party.”
Oh come on. What’s “remarkable” about it? Newsom’s party just humiliated itself during the State of the Union. Everyone is saying that Democrats are in crisis and have no apparent leaders. Bizarre 2028 Presidential candidates for the Donkeys are being floated, like ESPN hysteric Stephen A. Smith, Frankenstein’s Monster impressionist John Fetterman, and, amazingly, even Knucklehead Tim Waltz. So Newsom is positioning himself as a relative moderate in comparison to AOC or some of the other Far Left bomb-throwers likely to be in the race.
I don’t know what Newsom believes, and I doubt anyone else does either, including the Governor. He wants to be President and he’ll say, promise or announce whatever he deems necessary to achieve that goal. Going along with the polls and rejecting some of the more absurd metaphorical hills the Democrats have been choosing to die on is a no-brainer, and even siding with Orange Hitler is worth the risk.
Trump’s recent success has made “authenticity” a political asset, so the most plastic of the Democrats has decided that bucking the party, especially when it so obviously has its head in an anatomically impossible position, is an easy way to feign sincerity, open-mindedness and flexibility. Newsom is not afraid to oppose his party’s cant, see, especially when its members are emulating Disney’s lemmings. Courage! Yes, declining the opportunity to discredit yourself with ruinous woke choices may be seen as courageous in this crazy political environment.
Ethics Alarms 
No I do not believe he has a change of heart.
He is like the majority of politicians rather Democrat or Republican who know how to play the game, playing on the mass majority’s emotions, knowing the masses of voters can be induced into almost anything as long as they are given a dream to fix whatever the voter feels is wrong. Politicians know the majority of the people will not research their past actions to the present time; they know the majority will not look at the scope of the world events to put the wider scope of how the politician’s promises being made even has a chance of working.
No, he’s smart enough to know that a moderate will have to be the Democratic Party’s pick for next time so he’s repackaging himself as a Centrist until he gets in office.
Exactly. The number of specific individuals he’s really and TRULY alienating by verbally flip-flopping for Charlie Kirk is miniscule: a smattering of transgender athletes and several handfuls of far left people. Should there be a bigger backlash – and right now, there won’t be given how wildly unpopular the Democrats have become, particularly on this issue – he’ll just offer up a clarification of his words, indicating he really didn’t mean things how they were interpreted.
Still, let’s see Newsom interview Ben Shapiro with regards to Israel/Hamas/Gaza/anti-semitism, or Tom Homan on illegal immigration, or Francis Menton on climate and net-zero emissions. All of these have far bigger – and just as radical – constituencies in the Democratic party. Then we’ll see how “centrist” he is.
Ah, such a shame that it will have to be a black, female moderate…
Kamala Harris is still considered a contender for the Dem presidential nomination in 2028. Go figure.
She can be “considered” all she wants, but her chances of being nominated again after losing a losing like an idiot are approximately zero.
Kamala Harris reveals when she plans to re-enter politics after disastrous loss to Trump | Daily Mail Online
She’s evidently angling for Newsom’s soon to be former job. Can you imagine her as governor of California? Hilarious. I doubt the poohbahs in Hollywood and San Francisco will allow it.
Latest studies financed by the IOC and published over a year ago in the British Journal of Sports Medicine strongly suggest that the participation of trans women in most women’s competitions is unfair.
They are significantly disadvantaged.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2024/04/10/bjsports-2023-108029.full.pdf
There is some nuance here. First, this is all statistical. Second, sports involving grip show trans women are not disadvantaged, and may be slightly advantaged (shot put , hammer etc). Decisions should therefore be made on an individual basis, what may be fair in one sport might be unfair in another.
Excluding trans women on the basis that their statistical disadvantage is so great they may be risking their health might also be justifiable.
Guvvy Gavvy’s already gotten his lyin’ bony @$$ handed to him by the LGBTQEIEIO Industrial Complex for slobbering that:
If Men Could Get Pregnant, This Wouldn’t Even Be A Conversation.
Hilarity ensued because of just one small problem; his pandering website clearly claimed that Y-Chromosomal Units can menstruate, lactate, get pregnant, AND give birth.
It’ll be Must See T.V. watching him try to weasel out of this one.
PWS
Any mention of the Schloussen Cutoff…?
PWS
Ah, remember it well. Along with the “fork in the road.” “Get out of the car, pick up the fork…”
Newsome in that interview backpedaled after stating such competitions were unfair by saying we must not hurt their feelings and that they -trans people- need to feel included.
So my take is yeah it’s unfair but think of the children.
Because this issue is so obvious, I doubt many Democrats really believe that trans men should be allowed to compete in women’s sports (though they are legitimate crazies). They are just afraid of the political backlash.
So, it’s possible he really thinks there is a fairness issue and is just finally saying it because he knows the political winds are now shifting. Democrats are losing badly on this issue, and they will have to stop.
Newsom has presidential aspirations, and he is also the governor of a far left state. If he really did feel comfortable enough to say something like this, I suspect more Democrats may start to follow.
My position is that trans men shouldn’t be in women’s sports at all unless it’s something more intellectual, then gender doesn’t matter because the physical differences aren’t relevant.
No sex changes for kids under 18. Let adults be weird if they wish.
No sex changes for kids under their parents insurance, actual equipment should determine the bathroom used. Pronouns are adjudicated under free speech. Illegal is illegal, punish employers for hiring illegals, unless E-verify failed to identify them.
No sex changes for kids under 18?
So how are you to prevent those who change sex naturally, due to 5ARD, 17BHSD, 3BHSD etc syndromes?
Or don’t you believe in biology?
What do you think of Trump’s decision to ignore court orders when it comes to transferring trans and intersex women into male jails for “V coding”?
It certainly makes running prisons with violent sex offending troublemakers in easier, by providing them with female victims to rape. It is however, explicitly illegal under the federal inmate rape prevention act, presidential executive orders notwithstanding.
Deliberately violating court orders is another matter, one of perhaps greater import than a few dozen torture/rape/murders of an unpopular minority. There is a strain of legal thought that the Administration can not by definition perform an illegal act. “The King can do no wrong” as Charles I said shortly before his execution. “It’s not illegal when the President does it” as Richard M Nixon said before impeachment.
I assume you are referring to this current story:https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/trans-women-federal-prisons-b2711335.html and https://truthout.org/articles/incarcerated-trans-woman-sues-trump-over-anti-trans-order-redefining-sex/. I haven’t researched it sufficiently (or thought about it) to have an opinion. I had never before heard the term “V coding,” but the practice of deliberately endangering inmates by setting them up to be raped is certainly unethical, though the whole prison system may be justly accused of doing that in general. EA hasn’t looked at the prison rape issue for quite a while, and it is past time for me to catch up.
A couple reports I have looked over quickly as a result of your comment have quoted “experts” as saying the actions of the President in this sphere are “likely” illegal. That doubt is usually enough for the Executive to set up a showdown in court. There is a strain in the Presidency generally, not just this one, that a President can decide that a particular exercise of executive power is necessary and just in the interest of the nation and public to justify challenging court precedent or court orders and setting up a definitive legal showdown.
Thank-you for bringing this issue to my attention. I’m going to have to make time to dig into it.
In the meantime, if you want to send me a Guest Post explaining the situation and making the ethics call, I’ll publish it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_people_in_prison#V-coding
It’s not exactly a secret! Post op trans women are now being transferred from female federal prisons where they’ve been held for years. According to court testimony by prison officials, they fetch the highest prices at auction.
See also https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/1giazkx/what_is_vcoding/
Two complications; it genuinely reduces prison violence in toto, only a few victims suffer instead of many. The alternative, administrative segregation in solitary for years, has an even worse psychological effect than being a sex slave.
The fact that it hadn’t crossed my ethics radar until you (thankfully) pointed to it doesn’t mean I consider it “a secret.”