DEBATE NIGHT

I recently debated the issue of trans-identified men in women's sports at CU Boulder. According to before and after audience polling data, I won.

I recently took part in a debate about the inclusion of trans-identified males in women’s sports.

The name of the debate was not one I supported. It was called “Should transgender athletes be allowed to compete in women’s sports?” A more accurate title would be “Should men be allowed to compete in women’s sports?” Or barring that from being acceptable or clear about what it is we’re discussing, “Should men who think they are women be allowed to compete in women’s sports?”

But my opponent was not ok with either of those so Steamboat Institute, the sponsors of the event, asked me if I was ok with the title we ultimately went with. I agreed because I thought it was important to have the debate.

My debate partner was Kevin Bolling, the Executive Director of the Secular Student Alliance. All I really knew about him going in was what a I could glean from this piece he wrote in Newsweek in February. His main arguments from this seem to be: banning males from competing in women’s sports is a maneuver by Christian conservatives to ban LGBTQ people from public life; and it isn’t nice or inclusive.

I’m not a Christian conservative so that argument wasn’t going to work. I don’t think he expected a Jewish atheist opponent.

And competitive sports are not about inclusion. Not everyone gets to play. Not everyone makes the team. Not everyone gets a medal. So that argument, to my mind, wasn’t going to work either.

The debate took place at University of Colorado, Boulder. Which is a little like Berkeley but in Colorado. But there were no disruptions, no protesters, pleasantly enough. And I had the majority of the supporters in the audience. Just like the majority of Americans — and that includes 67% of Democrats — agree that women’s sports are for women only.

I’m not a debater. So I probably over-prepared out of nervous-ness. I was at my best when I just talked, and didn’t read my own script. Good learning for next time.

I know the facts, I know their arguments (it’s not happening; ok it’s happening but it’s a good thing, a triumph of civil rights; trans women are women; trans women don’t have an advantage; some women are taller, stronger, faster so what? Trans women are just another kind of women; inclusion matters more than fairness; you’re mean), and I have truth on my side. So the fact that I “won” — based on before and after audience polling data — should not be considered that big of a triumph. I’d have had to really have blown it to “lose” the debate.

The pre-debate poll found that 85% of attendees disagreed with allowing trans-identified men in women's sports, while 9% did agree with it, and 6% were undecided. In the post-debate poll, the percentage of those who disagreed with trans-identified males inclusion in women’s sports jumped to 90%, while those who agreed with it dropped to 6%, and the undecided dropped to 3%.

His nastiest comment came in his opener, when he said that he was the only one on the stage not profiting off of a stance in defense of women. He didn’t say it that way, that’s my generous interpretation. He suggested that I was a grifter, profiting off of bigotry. I ignored it. Maybe I shouldn’t have.

Some of my supporters suggested I should not have let it slide. But I addressed it by simply stating that I am a feminist, I have stood up for women and girls for decades and by the way, I make a fraction of what I used to make as the President of Levi’s. If I’m a grifter, I’m really bad at it. And it’s compassionate to stand up for women and girls.

I don’t need to take digs to win an argument. I won’t stoop to their level. I’m sticking with “when they go low, I go high.”

Here’s a brief little taste of the debate and my point of view, if you don’t have the time or patience to watch the whole thing (I don’t either):

Here’s the full debate. You have to jump to about minute 11:00 for the start (I hope I didn’t say anything unfortunate while mic-ed before it started) and introductions. My opener starts at 20:00 minutes and the actual debate starts at 25:00 minutes.

I’m mostly alright with how I did. Mostly. I’m hard on myself. I learned that from sports. I definitely could have been stronger if I’d have put my damn papers down and just talked. But I had some strong moments!

Enjoy!