Former Division 1 NCAA athlete Linnea Saltz explains her own experience with why this is such a bad idea in the X post below:
According to ed.gov, "Title IX applies to schools, local and state educational agencies, and other institutions that receive federal financial assistance from the Department. These recipients include approximately 17,600 local school districts, over 5,000 postsecondary institutions, charter schools, for-profit schools, libraries, and museums. Also included are vocational rehabilitation agencies and education agencies of 50 states, the District of Columbia, and territories of the United States."
The implications of this revised Omnibus rule are far-reaching. It revises and undermines women's rights, free speech, and due process for women and young men in institutions K-12 and higher that receive federal funding. These extra-statutory regulations will also affect due process for young men who face accusations of sexual harassment when they go into effect on August 1.
The Biden administration removed many of the due process protections established by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who worked under the Trump administration. DeVos advocated for the proper handling of "dating violence as a sexual misconduct category that must be addressed and mandating supportive measures for alleged victims of assault." More importantly, she bolstered "due-process protections for accused students while relieving schools of some legal liabilities."
Biden and others in his administration have stated the new rule will not affect women's sports, but his reassurances are feeble at best. Almost daily, there are new instances of males participating in women's sports at all levels. Even though it does not directly stipulate male participation in women's sports, the revised rule will most likely open even more doors to men because of the current environment.
Male participation in women's sports has already wreaked havoc on women's lives, including endangering and injuring girls and women in some cases. Sadly and increasingly, young women find themselves fighting for the original Title lX protections, whether it be privacy in women's spaces, women's prisons, bathrooms, and locker rooms or the creeping infringement on the opportunities that were foundational to the law.
The focus of these reimagined regulations demonstrates a shift from protections for sex discrimination that are based on the biological, binary reality of male and female to protections for sex discrimination that will be based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity. In sum, women and their biological reality all but disappear. Oddly, no one on the feminist Left seems to take notice. It is truly astonishing.
The Independent Women's Forum (IWF) believes the new regulations will meaningfully reverse protections for women and will deny women equal opportunity. Jennifer C. Braceras, vice president for legal affairs at IWF explained, "Taking opportunities from women and giving them to men doesn't enforce Title lX, it violates it." She rightly states the administration "re[wrote] the statute by administrative fiat" and believes the courts will eventually strike down "this unlawful rule." However, Braceras' prediction that the regulations will be overturned does little to soothe the women and girls whose lives will change.
Megyn Kelly invited May Mailman, the Director of IWF and a former legal advisor in the Trump administration, to speak about the changes to Title lX. The original Title lX regulations were a game changer for women in academics and athletics. While now taken for granted, the original regulations meaningfully changed the lives of countless females. Sex-specific dorms, sex-specific bathrooms, sex-specific programming, and a whole range of sex-specific opportunities were put into law as a result of the 1972 Title lX to expressly protect opportunities for women and to protect their safety and privacy. Title lX allowed for the recognition of two sexes to ensure equal opportunities for both males and females. Mailman believes the new regulations will be devastating for young girls and women.
"Each one of the changes is a massive legal change, often one that affects a core constitutional right. Women will not be able to keep locker rooms separate by sex. They won't be able to keep bathrooms separate by sex. There are changes to due process that reinstate kangaroo courts for young men on college campuses. And there are massive First Amendment incursions as well. The definition of harassment here is being stretched to encompass speech that ought to be protected. That the Supreme Court says is protected. The 1577-page document is essentially an assault on women's rights, on men's rights, and on all of our constitutional rights."
For example, using improper pronouns ("misgendering") will be legitimized as harassment under the new regulations. As a consequence of these massive changes, women will no longer be protected based on their biological sex. The new regulations will, instead, protect "based on gender identity, meaning that women must allow men into their spaces, allow men to take their scholarships, allow men in every single private area based on gender identity [if] a man says that he is entitled to be there," said Mailman. Notably, even before the new regulations, there have been significant changes in how girls and women are treated.
Many have already been harmed and stripped of opportunities because men and boys are now in the mix. The press release for the 2024 reimagined regulations is below:
While absurd to think we'd have to point the differences out, Mailman highlights the biological realities of males and females the Biden administration blatantly ignores. Instead, the new regulations contemplate a more "equitable" and inclusive worldview—a worldview that has already exposed women and girls to very real harm.
"That's the thing about letting men into locker rooms, letting men into sports. It's not the same for men. Women are not stronger than them. They're not more powerful than them. Men are not threatened [by women] in the way that letting men into women's areas does. The entire point of Title lX protecting women is now flipped on its head, and the Biden administration wants you to believe that this has nothing to do with athletics, that women can continue on their own in athletics, and the rule has nothing to say about that. This is their promise, trying to win some votes. But they're lying. And we know they're lying because they say locker rooms must incorporate gender identity. So if it doesn't affect sports, how does it affect locker rooms?"
12-time All-American swimmer Riley Gaines, a vocal advocate for the original Title lX regulations for women, experienced the struggle firsthand. During her senior year in college, Gaines was forced to compete against transgender athlete Lia Thomas. Despite her years of training, nothing would prepare Gaines to compete against a man in a sport whose wins are determined by mere seconds. At the time, Thomas was the NCAA champion in the 500 free and expected to win the 200 free. Remarkably, Gaines tied with Thomas in fifth place. However, it was Thomas who would receive the trophy that day. Gaines' trophy came later in the mail because "they only had one trophy."
Gaines testified about her experience in front of GOP Oversight in December 2023 in the excerpt below:
"We watched as this male swam to a women's national title, beating out the most impressive and accomplished female swimmers in the country, including Olympians and American record holders. Despite tying down to the hundredth with Thomas, I was denied the trophy because the NCAA claimed it was necessary Thomas was holding it when pictures were being taken. But that's not all. In addition to losing competitions to Thomas, we also had to share a locker room and change in front of this 6'4", fully intact, naked male. As I have testified previously, we were not forewarned. We were not asked for our consent. And we did not give our consent to this exposure and exploitation."
During her testimony, Gaines provided several examples of males who shared women's locker rooms and were allowed to compete in women's sports. Gaines also gave examples of women who had suffered bodily harm because males were allowed to compete alongside women. Gaines continued:
"In September of last year, North Carolina high school volleyball player Payton McNabb suffered serious injury after a trans-identified male player spiked a ball at her head, estimated to be at approximately 76 miles per hour. Payton experienced trauma to her head and neck and long-term concussion symptoms. Just a few weeks ago in Massachusetts, a male player on the Swampscott High School Field Hockey team injured an opposing player with a shot to the face, sending the female athlete to the hospital with significant facial and dental injuries."
Gaines begged committee members to stop the new regulations before they inflict harm on girls and women. They went into place anyway. "Let me be perfectly clear: a school that knowingly allows a male athlete to take a spot on a women's team or allows a male athlete to take the field in a woman's game is denying a female student an athletic opportunity. That is sex discrimination, and it violates Title IX—regardless of what new regulations might say."
