It’s Not about Sports

SPORTS, 15 Jun 2026

Michael J. Talmo | The Real Facts - TRANSCEND Media Service

Cisgender (not trans) basketball player Margo Dydek (7’2.”). There was never an attempt to ban her from playing nor other very tall cisgender women like basketball player Zhang Ziyu (7’3”) and volleyball player Dana Rettke (6’8”) because they had an unfair advantage.

10 Jun 2026 – For almost a decade, right-wing groups and the Republican Party have engineered a moral panic over the existence of transgender people, which, as explained here and here, has also spread to other countries via social media and funding by religious organizations and billionaires. An avalanche of bills has been introduced and passed in numerous states throughout the US, along with executive orders signed by President Donald Trump since retaking office in 2025 that are designed to invalidate the existence of transgender people and erase them from public life. Prominent among these oppressive measures are bans on trans females competing in women’s sports, which includes trans children participating in sports at their schools.

More: Top 10 Tallest Athletes in the World of All Time 2025 Update

In a 2022 Time Magazine article, Republican strategist Sarah Longwell explained that outlandish claims about trans female athletes being a threat to women’s sports are “PR campaigns.” Their purpose is to play on people’s fears, prejudices, and sexual inhibitions so that they will vote Republican and support far-right causes. The passage of such draconian laws will also set legal precedents that will lead to further discrimination against trans people, such as denying them gender-affirming care. The fact that right-wing groups and Republican politicians keep disrespectfully referring to trans females as biological males shows the underlying bigotry that’s behind the attacks on them.

Nevertheless, a comprehensive February 2026 survey conducted by SSRS (Social Science Research Solutions) found that “85% of Americans believe ‘Transgender people should have the same rights and protection as everyone else.’ That includes 92% of Democrats, 76% of Republicans, and 87% of Independents.” However, according to an April 2025 NBC News poll, 75% of American adults now support bans on trans women competing in women’s sports. The Pew Research Center reported that since 2022, a growing number of “Americans have become more supportive of laws that limit protections for trans people.” A big reason for this backlash is repetition propaganda.

As explained here and here, right-wing TV shows like Fox News, podcasters like Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Michael Knowles, and social media groups constantly bombard the public with anti-trans rhetoric, which feeds into a cognitive bias known as the illusory truth effect. Meaning that the more people hear something, the more they tend to believe it’s true. This applies even when they know what they’re being told isn’t true. It’s just the way our flawed human brains work. The Nazis used this tactic very effectively. As reported in the Jewish Virtual Library, Hitler’s use of the “big lie” was that “people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough, people will sooner or later believe it.”

This 2019 Psychology Today article further pointed out that by constantly bombarding viewers with lies, news shows can manipulate people into thinking that trivial matters are of major importance, that people who are different from the majority are a danger to children and even civilization itself, and that things that rarely happen are happening all the time. The BBC in this 2020 article reported that viewing the news “just a few hours each day can have an impact far beyond what you might expect” and that it “can even affect our physical health—increasing our chances of having a heart attack or developing health problems years later.” And as reported in this 2024 Psychology Today article, “repeated exposure to negative news can dull emotions and moral judgments,” which reduces one’s capacity to feel empathy.

So, if you have become convinced that trans women have an athletic advantage, ask yourself the following: “What if what I believe isn’t true? Would it matter? Or does it have to be true?” If it has to be true, ask yourself why it has to be true. You just might discover that if something has to be true, it just about always isn’t.

The real scientific facts

Sex reassignment is defined in this medical dictionary as “a process whereby the sex of a patient is changed by a combination of psychiatric, psychological, pharmacologic, and surgical procedures.” Also defined in Medical News Today: “The process of changing from one sex to the other.” Can it be any plainer? Transsexual females are not biological males, as ignorant bigots claim—they are women. I’m aware that the word “transsexual” is now considered offensive to many, but not all, trans people. But when it comes to college and professional athletes, we’re talking about transsexuals, so I’m using it for clarification. However, there may be some trans female athletes who had partial or no medical sex reassignment. Some trans women, whether they’re athletes or not, are naturally highly passable. I’ve lived most of my life in the New York City area and met more than a few of them.

But regardless of whether they are highly passable or not, trans females don’t have an athletic advantage over non-trans (cisgender) females. It’s a myth spun by the well-funded right-wing noise machine. There is no debate. Any newscaster or writer stating that there is a debate is either lying or didn’t properly research the topic. This is not my opinion. The scientific data is crystal clear.

Sports Illustrated reported that transsexual females have been in women’s sports at least since the 1970s. Numerous scientific studies have been conducted. A huge, comprehensive study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Sports Medicine in 2016. But it wasn’t just a study. It was a systematic review, which is the highest level of evidence in science. It’s a painstaking, thorough analysis of all the literature, which selects the best quality studies and synthesizes the results. Thus, it looks at the big picture, which eliminates bias. Under “Conclusion,” it states:

“Currently, there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition.”

A 2025 study, also a systematic review combined with meta-analysis, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, got the same results. Under “Conclusion,” it states:

“physical fitness was comparable” between “transgender women” and “cisgender women” and that “current evidence” to date “does not support theories of inherent athletic advantages for transgender women over cisgender.”

These are the highest level studies ever done. An obvious way to tell they’re correct is to look at who holds the world’s records in various women’s sports. Who is the best of the best? In every case, including weightlifting, it’s cisgender women. Trans female athletes have broken some state, regional, and institutional records, but not world records. In other words, any time a trans female athlete won a particular sports competition, it was always well within the norms of female athletics.

Example: University of Pennsylvania transgender swimmer Lia Thomas of the NCAA (NationalCollegiate Athletic Association). Thomas originally competed as a man. In 2021, after her transition, she was allowed to compete on the women’s team. Her biggest achievement was winning the 500-yard freestyle in 2022. She was the only transgender woman in that race. She beat Emma Weyant, who won a bronze and a silver medal in the Olympics, by 1.75 seconds. But cisgender swimmer Katie Ledecky, widely regarded as the greatest female swimmer of all time, holds the world record for the 500-yard freestyle—9 seconds faster than Lia Thomas, who doesn’t even make the top ten fastest swimmers in that race.

But since Lia Thomas is 6’1” and, in my opinion, not very passable, showing pictures of her towering over other female swimmers, featuring a minority of sore losers who whine about losing to her and sharing a locker room with her, as well as depicting her as an object of ridicule all over social media, created the illusion that allowing her to compete was a travesty of justice.

A prominent example of this anti-trans group of athletes is Riley Gaines, who raced against Lia Thomas only once in the 200-yard freestyle in 2022. Both women tied for fifth place. They only had one fifth place trophy on hand, so they gave it to Lia Thomas and mailed Gaines her trophy, which she has been whining about ever since. And since Lia Thomas was the only trans woman in that race, if she had such an athletic advantage, why didn’t she win?

Riley Gaines had planned to go to dental school and become an endodontist. But as Fox News had her on numerous times, along with other right-wing media, she likely discovered that becoming a prominent media personality for the anti-trans mob was a much quicker and easier way to make lots of money. MSN reported that in 2025, she and her husband had a “combined net worth at around $2 to 3 million,” most of it from Gaines. This 2026 article in Mother Jones explained that in her initial interview Gaines was very respectful of Lia Thomas, saying, “I am in full support of her.” But as Gaines’ power and influence grew, her anti-trans rhetoric became increasingly vicious.

What especially irritates me about extremists like Riley Gaines is that they try to pass themselves off as defenders of women’s rights. Fox News reported that Gaines considers herself “a modern-day feminist.” What a joke. In addition to being against the rights of transgender people, Gaines is also anti-choice regarding abortion. All major feminist organizations, which include NOW (National Organization for Women, the largest feminist organization in the US), the National Women’s Law Center, and the League of Women Voters, are pro-choice on abortion and fully support the rights of all LGBTQ people. They recognize that “Trans Women Are Women,” that any attacks on them are an attack on all women, and fully support their participation in women’s sports. NOW brilliantly called out “anti-trans bigots disguised as feminists” in this 2025 article:

“If we are to find true equality for people of all genders, it will not be on the terms of bad-faith actors like Gaines and the people who platform, endorse, and repeat such rhetoric. There will never be this equality so long as we indulge petty attempts to divide our movement, misinform people, and provoke bigotry.”

What about bone density, size, hemoglobin, muscle mass, and testosterone levels, cackles the Gender Gestapo? As explained in this 2023 paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Science, this 2019 article in Popular Science, and this 2019 report in Science Daily, none of the aforementioned factors prove that trans female athletes can run faster, jump higher, throw farther, or lift heavier weights than cis female athletes. In fact, this 2024 study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that cis female athletes had physical advantages over trans female athletes, such as greater lower body strength, superior lung capacity, and better cardiovascular fitness. But when it came to bone density, hemoglobin, and testosterone levels, trans and cis women were about the same.

Of course, high-level champion athletes, regardless of sex or gender, have natural physical gifts that give them an athletic advantage. Some athletes were literally built for the sport they participate in. This, combined with hard work and determination, makes them champions. Two immediate examples come to mind: champion swimmer Michael Phelps, the most decorated athlete in Olympic history, and former three-time Heavyweight Boxing Champion of the World, Muhammad Ali (1942-2016).

In Phelps’ case, “a wingspan longer than his standing height, a longer torso, and shorter legs” gives him “more propelling power,” allowing him to swim faster. He also has “unusually large palms and feet,” which also increases his swimming speed. And since his body “produces only half the amount of lactic acid than an average human body,” he has “more endurance while swimming longer distances.” In Ali’s case, his tremendous speed, reflexes, and ability to take heavy punches allowed him to make even good fighters look bad. But in spite of what I just wrote, Ali wasn’t undefeated—he lost a few fights. And Phelps, gifted as he was, lost a few swimming contests.

Bottom line: Athletic advantages are to be celebrated. Without them, sports would be boring. So, as long as fictitious super beings like Wonder Woman and Spider-Man aren’t competing, why worry about it? And any athlete who wins is going to deprive other athletes who didn’t win. That’s how competition in sports works. But in the case of trans women, there are no athletic advantages to just being trans.

Chess? Really?????

In spite of all the data that clearly shows transgender females have no athletic advantages, 27 states have enacted various sports bans on them from kindergarten through college. Many national and international sports organizations have also banned, or just about totally banned, trans female athletes from competing in numerous women-only sporting events, such as track and field, swimming, cycling, weightlifting, boxing, and golf, just to name some. Yet, as reported in this 2025 article in Teen Vogue, here in the US, out of “more than 8 million student athletes,” there are probably 160 or fewer teen trans athletes nationwide.

Example: AP News reported that in the more than 20 states that introduced anti-trans sports bills on school kids in 2021, state legislators in “almost every case” couldn’t “cite a single instance” where the participation of trans girls caused any problems. Some supporters of these bills didn’t even know if there were any transgender student athletes in their state.

Example: In December 2024, NCAA president Charlie Baker, a Republican and former governor of Massachusetts, appeared before a US Senate committee. He testified that out of over 530,000 NCAA college athletes nationwide, “less than 10” were transgender. Nevertheless, in February 2025, the NCAA banned trans women from competing against other women. Only “student athletes assigned female at birth” are permitted to compete against each other. This was the day after Donald Trump signed a Draconian executive order entitled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports.” It decrees that “every school receiving taxpayer dollars” will “jeopardize any federal funding they receive” if they allow transgender women and girls to compete in female-only sporting events. As explained here, here, and here, it is blatantly illegal to freeze/withhold federal funds approved by Congress.

Example: Last March, the IOC (International Olympic Committee) banned transsexual females from competing in the Olympics. The ban will go into effect in the 2028 Summer Games that will be held in Los Angeles. The ban will not apply to transgender males (female-to-male transsexuals). Cisgender female athletes will also be forced to take a genetic test to make sure they don’t have any male traits that might give them an athletic advantage. Only the pure of gender will be allowed to vie for the gold. Did a massive influx of trans women beating all the cis women warrant this ban? Nah! Transsexual females have been allowed to compete in the Olympics since 2004. Guess how many qualified to compete in that 22-year span of time? One! Weightlifter Laurel Hubbard. She competed in the 2021 Tokyo Olympics and lost without achieving a single lift.

But wait, the goofiest is yet to come. International sports organizations have also banned trans women from competing against other women in billiards (pool), table tennis (ping pong), darts, and, now get this, chess. Why do we need to have men’s and women’s divisions for any of these activities? As reported here, here, and here, the rationalizations for these utterly numskull policies are lame and pathetic.

In the case of billiards and table tennis, men are supposed to have greater power, reach, and twitch muscles; in the case of darts, it’s superior concentration; in the case of chess, men can just sit longer than women. Yet, as reported here, here, and here, elite cisgender female billiards, table tennis, and dart players routinely beat elite male players. In mixed chess tournaments, cisgender female Grandmasters defeated male Grandmasters, including a 10-year-old girl, the youngest female Grandmaster, who defeated a 60-year-old male Grandmaster in 2025 (the International Chess Federation, FIDE, still allows transsexual women in mixed competitions).

Many of these idiotic sports bans are largely due to Trump’s return to the White House and a 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling “that trans women are not legally female under the Equality Act.” The BBC reported that the court’s ruling “could have far-reaching implications for who can access single-sex services and spaces.”

Professor Yannis Pitsiladis, PhD, is one of the scientists who conducted the study that I cited previously, which the IOC partially funded, that showed cisgender female athletes have some advantages over transgender female athletes. He’s also a member of the IOC Medical and Scientific Commission. Yet, he, along with the other scientists who conducted the study, weren’t invited to be part of the so-called panel of experts created by the IOC whose recommendations were used to justify banning trans women.

Not surprising since Kristy Coventry, the IOC’s new president as of March 2025, is an anti-trans bigot who calls trans women biological men. She openly stated while campaigning that she supported banning trans women from competing in women’s events while at the same time claiming that she wants to “restore the Olympics as a beacon of inclusivity and unity, ensuring that the Games are truly for everyone” and that she “plans to empower athletes and promote social equity to focus on feminism and gender equality.”

In reality, under Coventry, the IOC Executive Board reversed the progressive policies that made the Olympics a real beacon of inclusivity and unity by bringing back genetic testing that was abandoned in 1999 because it was “deemed arbitrary, inaccurate, expensive and discriminatory.” And by reversing the 2003 recommendations of the “Stockholm consensus on sex reassignment in sports” that the IOC adopted, allowing transgender people to compete in the Olympics since 2004. If we weren’t in this era of collective insanity, someone like Kristy Coventry, in my opinion, never would have been elected IOC president. As for the panel that made the recommendations to justify unnecessarily discriminating against trans female athletes, the IOC refuses to reveal the names of these so-called experts nor the scientific evidence that they claim proves trans women have an athletic advantage over non-trans women.

In this Outsports article,Professor Pitsiladis made it clear that large sports federations are banning trans female athletes “in the absence of scientific data to support such a position” and that “it’s unlikely that those large federations will change their position as they are now too invested and they don’t really look at the science or evidence. Their wish is mainly to appease their membership and the decisions being taken are mainly justified by politics and dictates, rather than science.”

Still not convinced? Consider this: Fallon Fox became the first transsexual female to compete in the featherweight division of MMA (mixed martial arts) from 2012-2014. You don’t get more up close and physical than in MMA. Fox stands 5’7 and weighed between 135-145 lbs. She never competed as a man and was forced to retire due to a knee injury. The only other trans woman ever to compete in MMA was Alana McLaughlin, who had only one pro fight in 2021, which she won. But she was never able to obtain another fight due to the current wave of anti-trans hysteria, which Fox didn’t have to deal with. But once the trans hate campaign started, Fox was still brutally maligned. Anti-trans bigots referred to her as a biological man beating up on women and told lies about her that were refuted by Reuters, Outsports, and Politifact.

Fox’s professional record is 5 wins, 1 loss, which was to cisgender female Ashlee Evans-Smith, who beat the snot out of her. Smith has an unimpressive record of 6 wins, 6 losses and only had one pro fight before defeating Fox, who had three pro fights. Watch the fight here and see if you still think trans women have an athletic advantage. Incidentally, Smith is the taller of the two.

What is a woman?

Have you ever noticed that the anti-trans brigade never asks what a man is? It’s really a stupid question, but since it keeps being used as a rhetorical gotcha, I’m going to answer it. Now, I could get cute and say a woman is an adult human female. I’ve encountered lots of reactionaries who are happy with that superficial answer. I could also say that a woman is exactly and precisely what each individual thinks it means and what anyone else thinks doesn’t matter at all. They aren’t too happy with that answer. Instead, I’m going to give the real and obvious answer:

A collection of physical characteristics and social behaviors to which we attach the word woman, including female, lady, girl, gal, chick, fox, hottie, along with a whole lot of other slang terms, some nice, some not so nice, and some that are downright terrible, such as the four letter c word. The same applies to what a man is.

However, while there are only two reproductive cells, egg (ova) and sperm, biological sex, like gender and sexual orientation, don’t fit into the same tidy little boxes. Instead, they are a spectrum with lots of variations, which are called intersex. In fact, there is no biological characteristic that is unique to a man or a woman, which is why using terms like “biological male,” “biological female,” or asking what a woman is are pointless and downright dumb.

For example, a man’s sex chromosomes are supposed to be XY and a woman’s XX. But there are plenty of men who have XX chromosomes, which is called de la Chapelle syndrome; there are plenty of women who have XY chromosomes, which is called Swyer syndrome. Some women have only one X chromosome or a partial or altered other chromosome, which is called Turner syndrome; some men have XXY chromosomes, which is called Klinefelter syndrome. Other chromosomal combinations can occur as well. We have no way of knowing what percentage of the human race have these various chromosomal arrangements because we don’t test everyone for them, which is why estimates that have been made vary—we don’t really know—we can only guess. The same applies to other intersex variations. Here are some examples:

Persistent Mullerian duct syndrome: Cisgender men with this condition can have a uterus and fallopian tubes, but externally and genetically are male in every way. This peer-reviewed journal reported the case of a 70-year-old man who, while being operated on to remove a hernia, found that he had a uterus and fallopian tubes. He was also the father of four children even though we are told that guys with this condition usually can’t father children. However, in many cases, men find out they have this condition accidentally, like the guy who got operated on—we really don’t know for sure what percentage of guys are walking around with a uterus.

Congenital adrenal hyperplasia: A common bigoted talking point is telling trans women to make sure to get their prostate gland checked for cancer. In other words, only men have a prostate gland, so if you have one, you’re a man. Thus, trans women are men. Wrong! This peer-reviewed journal reported (see “Background”) that in cases of congenital adrenal hyperplasia, “There have been several reports of prostate tissue or even whole prostate glands in the female genital tract.”

5-alpha reductase deficiency: Another common anti-trans talking point is that you can’t change your sex. If you were born male you will always be male; if you were born female you will always be female. This rare genetic condition, also referred to as “Guevedoces,” refutes that assertion. People with this intersex variation are born female and at puberty grow a penis and testicles, along with other male characteristics. No medical intervention—it just happens naturally. Guevedoces means “penis at 12.” Cases of Guevedoces have been found in New Guinea, Turkey, Egypt, and the Dominican Republic.

Many Intersex variations are called syndromes, which are derived from the Greek words “syn” and “dromos,” which means “running together.” As explained in VeryWell Health, a syndrome “is a group of symptoms that often appear together without a clear cause,” which “has no bearing on whether they’re real illnesses or how serious they are.” But a syndrome is not a disease, which, in contrast, “usually has a known cause and clear symptoms with established treatments.”

Intersex variations are often referred to as DSD, which is an acronym for either “disorders in sexual development” or “differences in sexual development.” As explained in this clinical handbook, since intersex “conditions result from a broad spectrum of naturally occurring developmental variations and do not always need medical actions, many prefer to use the umbrella term ‘Differences’ rather than ‘Disorders’ of Sex Development, indeed, many of the terms previously used are now considered potentially derogative and imprecise.” In other words, “Differences” implies acceptance, “Disorders,” when there is no illness or impairment, imply a moral judgment.

And that’s what the anti-trans mob are doing, making moral judgments. They don’t care about what is true. Facts bounce off of them like bullets bounce off of Superman. They will cruelly label intersex people as an insignificant minority or as freaks of nature when confronted with their existence in order to invalidate that they prove biological sex isn’t binary. But this is exactly what intersex people prove even if they were a tiny minority, which, as explained on this Australian Government website, we can’t be sure of, because “people may not know that they have intersex variation” and because “many types of intersex variation do not need any medical care…Most people with intersex variations are healthy.”

Labeling someone trans based on how they look is another example of making a moral judgment because, as explained here, not all women who look like men are intersex or trans. And many trans women and trans men are so passable that no bigot would ever question their sex.

Another example of making ignorant moral judgments is the genetic test mentioned previously that the IOC will require only female athletes to take. The IOC’s website decrees that any women-only events “at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females, determined on the basis of a one-time SRY gene screening.” In other words, any woman, no matter how soft and feminine she appears will be considered a biological male based on this test and in single sex events must compete with men, while any female no matter how masculine she looks will be considered a biological female and can compete in women only events. This test is based on the false belief that the presence of the SRY gene imparts higher levels of testosterone, which creates an unfair athletic advantage.

Professor Andrew Sinclair is the scientist who discovered the SRY gene, which “is a critical factor in male sex determination.” As reported here and here, Professor Sinclair explained why the test “should not be used to exclude women athletes from competition.” He pointed out that even if women have high testosterone levels for whatever reason, SRY tests can’t determine “whether it can be used by the body;” in 1996, at the Olympics in Atlanta, Professor Sinclair discovered that out of 3,387 female athletes, eight “tested positive” for SRY, but “seven were resistant to testosterone;” IOC “policy is based on the overly simplistic idea that the presence of the SRY gene alone is equivalent to being male;” Another problem with SRY tests is that false positives can easily happen.

And as explained in this 2024 peer-reviewed journal, testing positive for the SRY gene doesn’t mean a cisgender woman has XY chromosomes. And as explained here, even if higher testosterone levels can be used by the body, the idea that it translates into an athletic advantage “flies in the face of scientific evidence.”

As explained here and here, sex and gender are not the same. Gender, unlike biological sex, is a social construct. Various cultures set down norms as to how men and women are supposed to be and behave. But those norms now, and in the past, change over time. But like biological sex, gender is also a spectrum with many variations that don’t fit artificial cultural standards. Many cultures now and throughout history recognize the existence of multiple genders and trans people as documented here, here, and here. Even the Jewish Talmud recognizes seven different genders.

For example, this article on the history of women in sports explained that, in the late 1800s, women were considered too feeble and delicate to compete in sports and that doing so could prevent them from getting pregnant. When the Olympic Games were reinstated in 1896, women weren’t allowed to compete (The Games were banned by Roman Emperor Theodosius I (347-395) in 393 because they honored the God Zeus. It was Theodosius who made Christianity the official religion of the Empire in 380). But women soon demanded a place in the Olympics and in 1900 began competing alongside men in some sports. In 1922, the first Women’s Olympic Games were held in Paris.

But as explained by the National Women’s Law Center here and here, female athletes are paid less, get less media coverage, and get fewer opportunities than male athletes. Their equipment and facilities are second-class, and they have been sexually harassed and abused by coaches, doctors, etc. And women who were deemed too good were sometimes accused of being men and were subjected to invasive examinations and later genetic tests—especially women of color. Anti-trans sports bans only make this worse and will subject more women to harassment and exclusion if they don’t seem feminine enough.

Understand this People: Anti-trans talking points that there are only two sexes or two genders aren’t scientific statements—they’re religious decrees. Marjorie Taylor Greene made that very clear in a speech when she was still in Congress and declared: “God made all of us, male and female. In His image He made us.” She made that statement while, now get this, standing next to a sign that said: “There are TWO Genders: MALE & FEMALE ‘Trust The Science.”

And here’s the cherry on the sundae: Newsweek reported on how Riley Gaines views opposition to trans women in sports and in women’s spaces during a 2023 Turning Point USA speech: “Myself, being a Christian, I entirely see this as spiritual warfare. It’s no longer good versus bad, or right versus wrong, this is moral versus evil.”

Get the picture? It’s not about sports. It was never about sports.

The real agenda

The purpose of this anti-trans charade is to distract people from how billionaires and mega corporations are throwing them under the bus by depriving them of affordable healthcare, a clean environment, and a decent standard of living by getting them to obsess over, get angry at, and blame minority groups for their social ills. But all of this anti-trans hysteria has a much darker side.

On May 6 of this year, the White House released its new “United States Counterterrorism Strategy,” that will target “violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist” (see page 7). Two problems here: there are no violent extremist transgender political groups and most acts of violence are committed by far-right/right-wing political groups and individuals, as reported in Mother Jones and GLAAD.

On March 11, 2026, the Lemkin Institute, in a comprehensive analysis, issued this warning:

“The United States is squarely within the early to middle stages of a genocidal process against trans people, the goal of which is to completely erase transgender people not only from public life but also from existence in the U.S. and globally.”

The institute, named after Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959), who coined the word genocide, also cited Kevin Roberts, president of The Heritage Foundation, the right-wing organization that created Project 2025,that the “plan for the transgender community was to ‘outlaw it’ through a strategy of “radical incrementalism.” This is exactly what happened in Nazi Germany. In the 1930s, over 400 decrees regulating every aspect of the lives of Jewish people were enacted. It wasn’t until the early 1940s that the mass killings in gas chambers began. Genocide is also listed as a federal crime under Title 18 U.S. Code 1091. Violators of this law can be fined a million dollars and get 20 years in prison.

Freedom, democracy, and the protection of human rights are fragile things, which is why history teaches us that mass murder and genocide perpetrated by governments can happen anywhere. We cannot, we must not, let it happen here.

____________________________________________

Michael J. Talmo has been a professional writer for over 40 years and is strongly committed to the protection of civil liberties. He also did three music videos on COVID-19: The Masker Mash, COVID Vaccine Man, and The Corona Globalists. He can be reached at michaeltalmo@aol.com.

Go to Original – gettingtherealfacts.com

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There are no comments so far.