transgender

Olympic Track and Field Protects Women. Why Won’t Other Sports Do the Same?

All women competing in Olympic track and field events will now be required to confirm their gender via a cheek swab or dry blood DNA test.

Sebastian Coe, who heads up World Athletics, the governing body of track, was clear-headed and resolute in announcing the new policy.

“We’re not just talking about the integrity of female women’s sport, but actually guaranteeing it,” Coe said. “And this, we feel, is a really important way of providing confidence and maintaining that absolute focus on the integrity of competition.”

Inexplicably, the International Olympic Committee has elected to leave this issue up to each sport’s international federation.

It’s this leadership vacuum that not only threatens the integrity of individual sports but also jeopardizes the health and safety of the athletes themselves.

Readers will remember Imane Khelif, the Algerian male Olympic boxer who competed against women. Khelif was awarded a gold medal, despite having been disqualified by the International Boxing Association a few years earlier after tests revealed Imane with an XY chromosome.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) went along with Khelif’s charade and allowed the boxer to punch away on female athletes.

Track and Field has been navigating this gender controversy since 2009 when Caster Semenya, a South African athlete with naturally high testosterone levels, first won a gold medal in 800 meters at the World Championships.

Semenya has a condition called 5a-Reductase 2 deficiency, the same condition Khelif reportedly has been diagnosed with. Now 34 years of age, the track and field star was ordered in 2019 to suppress testosterone levels – but refused.

As the Daily Citizen’s Emily Washburn has previously reported:

5-alpha is a terrible, disorienting disorder. It also categorically disqualifies sufferers from participating in female sports … Khelif had XY chromosomes, normal male levels of testosterone and male reproductive organs. That means he has the same chromosomal and hormonal advantages all men have over women athletically, including heavier bones, bulkier muscles, broader shoulder and larger hearts and lungs.

But at the heart of the new track policy isn’t really the exceptions and the outliers but rather those male athletes who seem determined to game the system and by doing so, achieve a competitive advantage.

Be aware that you’ll be reading in the coming days and weeks that World Athletics is banning “transwomen athletes” – but such a claim isn’t true. That’s because there’s no such thing as a “transwoman” – there are just two genders, male and female. Just because a man is pretending to be a woman doesn’t make it so.

Human Rights Watch and other critics have described DNA testing rules of female athletes as abusive, harmful, discriminatory and accusatory.

It’s true that male athletes are not similarly tested, but women masquerading as men provides no competitive advantage. And complaining that such testing portrays women as “cheats” belies the reality of other similar checks such as screenings for performance enhancing drugs.

Trust but verify.

It’s been 125 years since women first appeared in the 1900 Olympics in Paris. There were just 22 of them out of a total of 997 athletes. These commonsense policies being implemented in Track and Field will ensure that the distinctiveness of female competition will be maintained and protected in the upcoming Summer Olympic games in Los Angeles in 2028.

This is a good thing, and every other Olympic sport should race to follow suit.

Denver Summit Focuses on Safeguarding Children From ‘Transgender’ Medical Harms

The Rocky Mountain Summit on Safeguarding Children from Gender-Affirming Treatment will be held April 6 in Denver. The three-hour event focuses on protecting children from the devastating effects of “transgender” social and medical interventions.

Geared for “parents, educators, medical professionals and concerned citizens,” the summit features two panels that explore how gender ideology harms minors and their families.

The Family Impact Perspectives Panel features Erin and Chloe Lee, January Littlejohn, and Matt and Judith Rey, who will offer personal stories of how transgender social and medical interventions harmed their families.

Dr. Miriam Grossman, Leor Sapir, Candice Jackson and Dr. Michelle Stanford are on the Medical, Legal and Policy Perspectives Panel, which will explore scientific, ethical and legal concerns around “gender-affirming treatment.”

The summit is sponsored by parental rights and child health advocacy groups, including Do No Harm, Parents Defending Education, XX-XY Athletics and Colorado Parent Advocacy Network.

Panelist Erin Lee is a Colorado mom whose preteen daughter was targeted by gender activists when she attended what she thought was an art club after school. Since then, Lee has become an advocate for parents rights in education and an opponent of transgender ideology. Her family’s story is told in the documentary film Art Club.

Like Lee, January Littlejohn is a mom who found out her 13-year-old daughter was being “socially transitioned” at her Florida middle school – without her parents’ knowledge or consent. An activist for parental rights in education, Littlejohn was recently honored by first lady Melania Trump as a special guest at President Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress.

Littlejohn is a Parent Advocate with Do No Harm, a medical advocacy group “focused on keeping identity politics out of medical education, research and clinical practice.” 

Matt and Judith Rey are activists with Gays Against Groomers, which describes itself as a “nonprofit of gays, lesbians, and others in the community who oppose the sexualization, indoctrination, and mutilation of children under the guise of radical “LGBTQIA+” activism.” Matt was born female but was badly damaged by a double mastectomy and opposite sex hormones that caused “symptoms that resemble Tourette’s and epilepsy.”  

On the medical and legal panel, Dr. Miriam Grossman is a child psychiatrist who has been combatting transgender activism for more than a decade. In her 2009 book You’re Teaching My Child What?: A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Education and How They Harm Your Child, she warned parents about sex education and gender ideology being taught in K-12 classrooms.

More recently, Grossman published Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist’s Guide Out of the Madness and was featured in Matt Walsh’s documentary What Is a Woman?

Leor Sapir is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing writer to City Journal and other outlets, focusing on education, culture and pediatric gender medicine. He’s written widely about the lack of scientific evidence for transgender medical procedures.

Dr. Michelle Stanford is a Colorado pediatrician who completed her Pediatric Residency at The Children’s Hospital, Denver. The hospital recently announced it was suspending transgender interventions for confused minors after President Trump signed an executive order saying the federal government would not fund hospitals and medical schools harming children through transgender drugs and surgeries.

Candice Jackson is the Deputy General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Education, and has consulted in her legal practice “with groups and individuals challenging the harmful effects of the concept of ‘gender identity’ in laws and policies in schools, employment, and public accommodations.”

To learn more about the conference, click on the link below:

Rocky Mountain Summit on Safeguarding Children from Gender-Affirming Treatment: Clinical Perspectives & Family Impacts, Sunday, April 6, 2:30-5:30 p.m., The Inverness Denver, Englewood, Colorado.

Related Articles and Resources:

ACLU Lawyer Admits ‘Trans Them or They Die’ Warning is False

‘Art Club’ Documentary — One Family’s Escape from Gender Ideology, and the Bigger Trend Sweeping the Nation

‘Everyday Americans’ Honored at Address to Congress

Exclusive Interview: Colorado Parents Expose ‘Gender Cult’ at Public School in New Documentary

Florida Parents Sue School for Helping Teen ‘Transition’ – Without Their Knowledge or Consent

Focus on the Family: Homosexuality Resources; Transgender Resources; Understanding Homosexuality

How to Defeat Gender Ideology, Protect Children and End ‘Trans America’

Key Takeaways from Supreme Court Case on ‘Transgender’ Interventions  

President Trump Signs Order Protecting Children From Transgender Medical Interventions

Protect Your Kids from ‘Trans’ Activism — Look for These Red Flags

Girls Just Wanna Have Privacy: Mom Files Complaint About Male in Girls Locker Room

A Chicago mom filed a complaint with the Justice Department after school administrators allegedly tried to force her 13-year-old daughter to change clothes in the locker room – while a male student was present.

Nicole Georgas spoke out against the incident at a Deerfield School District 109 School Board meeting on March 13, 2025, a meeting which was packed with transgender activists and their allies.

Georgas began by explaining what she wanted from the board, saying, “I’m here to demand that the locker rooms at District 109 be designated as biological male and biological female, as there already is a gender neutral option. The girls want their locker rooms and bathrooms back. They want their privacy back.”

Georgas then described the events at Alan B. Shepard Middle School that led her to testify.

My 13-year old daughter’s well-being and mental health and privacy are at stake.

This nightmare began on February 5th when my daughter was using the girl’s bathroom and was stunned that a biological male student was using it as well. She came home frightened and was extremely upset.

I asked her to talk with her teachers and find out more information. She was told by the administration that the [male] student can use the bathroom as well as a female locker room because they now identify as female.

Transgender-identified activists and their allies filled the room, booing and heckling this brave mom, shouting about “children” and their “genitals.”

The activists, who oppose privacy and safety for girls, also spoke to the board. One radical glared threateningly at Georgas, claiming that “trans students” were targeted “by an organization that weaponizes religion to push the white supremacist agenda of their cis white husbands.”

“Cisgender” is a nonsense term, made up by trans activists, to signify healthy people who accept their God-given male or female bodies.

Chicago’s Morning Answer radio show broke the story, and posted Georgas’ testimony.

The school’s transgender policy follows guidance from the Illinois Department of Human Rights, based on The Illinois Human Rights Act, passed in 1979, “providing for broad civil rights coverage for the people of Illinois.” The Act was expanded in 2006 “to include ‘sexual orientation’ as a distinct protected class and ‘gender-related identity’ within the definition of ‘sexual orientation.’”

According to the guidance,

Use of restrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms may not be restricted based upon a student’s physical anatomy or chromosomal sex. A student must be permitted to access restrooms or bathrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms that align with their gender-related identity and without having to provide documentation or other proof of gender.

Basically, any male student can claim to identify as female and use the girls restrooms, locker rooms and showers, regardless of a girl’s feelings, as the Department of Human Rights goes on to explain,

Under the [Human Rights] Act, the discomfort or privacy concerns of other students, teachers, or parents are not valid reasons to deny or limit the full and equal use of facilities based on a student’s gender-related identity. …

[T]here is no right that insulates a student from coming in contact with others who are different than them or a Bathroom Privacy Act, unless the behavior violates a school policy or is criminal.

Georgas went on to say that the school emailed her and the principal phoned her. The school’s legal counsel advised that “the [male] student could use both the [girls] locker room and bathroom.”

She then explained that the school was violating federal policy, pointing to the Trump administration’s executive order “restricting biological males from participating in girls sports and accessing female locker rooms.”

That same day, Georgas said, “I filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of my daughter with the Department of Justice. It has now been referred to the Department of Education.”

The situation then went “from bad to worse,” Georgas explained that, “A few days later, the male student was present in the girls locker room. Feeling violated, the girls made the choice to not change into their PE clothes with a biological male student present.”

The next day, the assistant principal pulled the girls into her office to question them, and then the superintendent, the assistant principle, and “multiple teachers all came into the girls locker room, making them change into uniform.”

“This went on all week,” she said.

Her daughter would not comply.

“She is not changing for the remainder of the year, and she is not changing into another [P.E.] class,” her mom stated, adding,

“The girls just want their privacy, and they want their locker room back. …”

“This is my daughter’s story and the story of many other young girls who have been forced at the difficult age to do something they know – and most adults know – is wrong.”

We are thankful for women like Nicole Georgas who speak out – and take action – on behalf of girls’ privacy and safety. May she prevail in her complaint.

Related Articles and Resources

Equipping Parents for Back to School

‘Detransition Awareness Day’ Spotlights Those Who Left Transgenderism

Don’t Let the Media Deceive You About Trump’s Order Protecting Female Athletes

President Trump: ‘There are Only Two Genders: Male and Female’

Senate Democrats Block Bill to Save Women’s Sports

Trump Signs Executive Order Protecting Women’s Sports and Spaces

Judge Disregards Vital Testimony in Case of Gender-Confused Felon — Again

To read more about Jonathan Richardson’s case, check out the stories linked at the bottom of this article.

A federal district judge has disregarded yet another evaluation showing Jonathan Richardson, a mentally-ill man incarcerated for murder, should not get transgender surgery — especially on taxpayers’ dime.

On March 5, Judge Richard Young of the Southern District Court of Indiana extended his preliminary injunction against a state law preventing tax dollars from funding transgender surgeries.

Young first issued the injunction in September when he ordered the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC), a tax-funded institution, to pay for Richardson’s “gender-affirming” vaginoplasty (the construction of a fake vagina) and orchiectomy (castration).

Refusing Richardson surgery would constitute cruel and unusual punishment, Young wrote in his September ruling.

The IDOC opposed this month’s extension, submitting yet another psychiatric evaluation of Richardson finding he shouldn’t get transgender surgery.

Dr. Kelsey Beers, the lead psychologist at New Castle Correctional Facility, conducted an assessment of Richardson at the request of Richardson’s would-be surgeon. According to Young’s nine-page order, Beers concluded:

Richardson’s purported distress is actually a manifestation of [his] Antisocial Personality Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder and that he “displays an established pattern of attention-seeking behavior.”

Beers expressed discomfort at evaluating Richardson without specializing in gender dysphoria. But her conclusions mirror that of Drs. Steven Levine and Michael Farjellah, who evaluated Richardson ahead of the hearing in September.

Farjellah claimed Richardson’s borderline personality disorder made him unable to consent to such drastic surgery.

Levine, a former member of WPATH’s predecessor, the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association, concluded Richardson’s gender confusion was sufficiently managed by opposite-sex hormones and therapy.

He suggested more therapy be dedicated, in part, to Richardson’s “…. willingness to manipulate and mislead doctors.”

Young found Farjellah and Levine’s arguments “unpersuasive.” Last week, he found Beers’ qualifications “questionable” and her revelations about Richardson’s personality disorders “nothing new.”

The judge’s decision is flabbergasting, but also predictable. As the Daily Citizen previously reported, Young’s adjudication of the case is hopelessly skewed by his reliance on the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).

WPATH bills itself as an objective, scientific body dedicated to caring for those with gender dysphoria. In reality, its members, affiliates and researchers are ideologically and financially invested in transgender medical interventions.

Judge Young hasn’t clocked this conflict of interest. Instead, he disregards the testimony of every doctor that disagrees with WPATH’s “surgery at all costs” orientation.

Case in point: the judge found Dr. Randi Ettner’s testimony “credible and persuasive.”

Ettner, a WPATH contributor and employee at the Weiss Memorial Hospital Center for Gender Confirmation Surgery, painted Young two categorically opposed pictures of Richardson’s mental state in September.

The surgeries were “medically necessary,” Ettner argued, because Richardson could commit suicide if he didn’t go under the knife — a common refrain among gender idealogues. She simultaneously claimed he was mentally well enough to consent to surgery because his depression and personality disorders were under control.

Ettner even portrayed Richardson’s attempt to castrate himself as evidence of his healthy mind. She told Judge Young:

[These actions] should not be considered a sign of “uncontrolled mental illness”: on the contrary, such behavior represents a rational intention to eliminate testosterone by removal of the androgen-producing target organ.

I’m no expert, but I’m 200% sure self-castration isn’t a sign of rationality. That statement alone should have disqualified Ettner’s testimony — and maybe barred her from courtrooms altogether.

But even overlooking the castration kerfuffle, Ettner’s larger argument is coconuts. Richardson cannot simultaneously be mentally ill enough to commit suicide if he doesn’t receive “gender affirming” surgery and mentally well enough to consent to such interventions.

Interestingly, Beers’ wrote of a December 2024 counseling session in which Richardson was “clinically stable…with no remarkable symptoms of depression or anxiety.”

Judge Young did not take this testimony as evidence Richardson is doing perfectly well without a faux vagina. Instead, he doubled down on Ettner’s perspective — that Richardson’s stability simply confirms he can consent to transgender surgery.

I’m not the only one concerned about Young’s decision making. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita appealed the ruling in October.

“[The Eighth Amendment doesn’t require] the state to provide experimental treatments generally, and it certainly doesn’t here, when multiple doctors have said this inmate is a poor candidate for surgery,” he argues.

Rokita doubled down on his stance this week, telling Fox:

Convicted murderers don’t get to demand that taxpayers foot the bill for expensive and controversial sex-change operations. It lacks all common sense. We won’t stop defending our state’s ban on using taxpayer funds to provide sex-change surgeries to prisoners.

In his order, Young writes he will extend the preliminary injunction until Richardson gets his surgery. That means taxpayers are still on the hook, unless the Indiana Court of Appeals overturns Young’s ruling first.

Please pray common sense — and speed — will have their day in Indiana soon.

Additional Articles and Resources

Indiana AG Appeals Ruling in Case of Gender-Confused Felon

Taxpayers Will Fund Violent Inmate’s Transgender Surgery, Judge Rules

Activist Group WPATH Influences Judgement in Case of Prisoner Receiving Trans Surgery

Suicidal or Stable? WPATH Activist’s Contradictory Evaluation Secures Felon Transgender Surgery

The WPATH Files Exposes ‘Surgical and Hormonal Experiments on Children’

The WPATH Files – Transgender Interventions Are ‘Unethical Medical Experiments’

An Essential Primer on Defending the Reality of Male and Female

A revolution for truth and common-sense is breaking out in the United States Congress and it should be supported by all citizen of goodwill. We must all help it spread to our workplaces, classrooms, the public square and even our own families.

Earlier this week, Daily Citizen reported that Illinois Representative Mary Miller introduced the first openly “transgender” member of Congress as the man that he clearly is. Rep. Miller announced to the world, “Today on the House Floor, I refused to deny biological reality [because] I refuse to perpetuate the lie that gender is open to our interpretation. It is not.

On Tuesday, Rep. Keith Self of Texas referred to this same colleague as a male as he chaired a congressional hearing, and it blew up. Rep. Self chose to adjourn the hearing as things got out of control.

You can see the exchange here:

Representative McBride, the member being referred to, responded to Rep. Keith Self by saying, “Thank you Madam Chair” and began to give his remarks. Rep. Bill Keating of Massachusetts interrupted abruptly and asked Rep. Self, “Mr. Chairman, could you repeat your introduction again?”

Rep. Self took the bait and endeavored, a bit unsteadily, to explain why he chose the truthful wording he did: “We have set the standard on the floor of the House…” Rep. Keating then proceeded to bombastically moralize before the committee, asking Self if “he had no decency.” It was then that Chairman Self gaveled the hearing adjourned.

There are several important points worth addressing here, as we seize this cultural moment to publicly refute the lie that male and female are defined and determined by self-perception.

  1. Rep. Self, like Rep. Miller before him, was right to publicly refuse to participate in the confusion of what a man and woman are, particularly as members of the U.S. Congress.

  2. It is important to point out that Rep. Self was not offended in the least by being “misgendered” by McBride when he referred to him as “Madam Chair.” Healthy men know what they are. Call them anything you want. They are secure in the truth. When others get offended at being “misgendered” it is a clear sign one is wrestling with his or her “new” adopted self.

  3. Rep. Self should not have taken the bait. No one should. When you are put in a situation of needing to speak the truth about the objectivity of male and female, always stick to your guns. Self should have confidently responded, “I was crystal clear in what I said. Let’s continue.” Rule of thumb there: Never engage others who want to redefine biological reality on their terms. Doing so is a recipe for crazy-making.

  4. When others challenge your adherence to reality, simply state in a determined voice, “You and I seem to have a very different definition of what a woman (or man) is. Can you give me your working definition as we seek to establish exactly what we are talking about here?” Gender activists cannot answer that simple question which is why it must be asked.

  5. Always remember, anyone can identify anyway they want. That is their freedom. But it is irrational to expect everyone else to play along with one’s subjective gender identity. It is also a violation of basic self-determination and freedom of conscience to demand any of us to speak words we know to be untrue. Compelled speech is never compassionate nor democratic.

  6. Finally, never let anyone weaponize your compassion against you. Do not ever feel shamed or pressured into thinking going along with the lie of false language is compassionate. It is not.

We are in an extremely critical cultural moment where the gender ideology movement is rightly being put back on its heels as more people realize the belief system is logically incoherent. All citizens of goodwill must continue to press in and demonstrate their conscientious objection to an a-scientific redefinition of humanity that male and female are not biological realities.

Additional Articles and Resources

How to Respond to “Trans” and Gender Ideology? Simple: Live Not by Lies

‘Transgender Means Many Different Things’ — And Nothing

Transgenderism and Minors: What Does the Research Really Show?

Parents Fight Back Against California School District’s Secret LGBT Clubs

What Does it Mean to Be Trans, Anyway?

The Shifting Ground of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’

Do Not Fall for the ‘Affirm Them or They Will Die’ Lie

How the “Trans” and Gender Redefinition Issue Attacks the Family

Image credit: U.S. House of Representatives