“Thomas, as the first transgender athlete to win a Division I NCAA championship, deserves to be placed among the other firsts [like Jackie Robinson],” Purdue University’s Cheryl Cooky argued.
On the issue of allowing men who identify as women to participate in women’s sports, there are a lot of dangerously foolish commentators out there trying to justify their inclusion. Unfortunately, the most self-defeating commentary is coming from “woke” women who are either unable or unwilling to acknowledge how the increased acceptance of biologically superior athletes like Penn University transgender swimmer Lia Thomas will eventually lead to the extinction of women’s sports altogether.
Thomas has been crushing records at women’s swimming events since “she” began identifying as a woman last year. Thomas recently won the 500-yard freestyle with another record-setting time, making Thomas an NCAA Division I champion.
While the Usual Suspects in the mainstream media and on the left dutifully clapped and cheered in the aftermath of the spectacle, some took it a step further. Purdue University Professor Cheryl Cooky wrote an op/ed celebrating Thomas’ “firsts” for NBC News’ “Think” section that demonstrated she most definitely wasn’t thinking when she wrote it.
Cooky, who is listed in the piece as an “American studies and women’s, gender and sexuality studies” professor, boiled down the justifiable bias against Thomas’ inclusion in women’s sports as being no different than the bigotry and racism displayed in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s as black athletes broke color barriers in major league sports, starting with the Brooklyn Dodgers’ Jackie Robinson in 1947.
Thomas is a similar barrier breaker, Cooky opined, in part because “her” so-called successes weren’t any different than the “firsts” who came before “her”:
There remains though a cultural investment in celebrating sports’ “firsts,” whether that be Robinson as the first Black MLB player, the first openly gay active player in the NBA, the first nonbinary U.S. athlete to participate in the Winter Olympics or the first woman to score in a Power Five college football game. Many of the athletes who become the “first” encounter resistance, backlash and opposition, especially from those who have historically benefited from the status quo in sports.
“…especially from those who have historically benefited from the status quo in sports”? There were many lines Cooky wrote in her piece (like in essence arguing that her critics were giving Thomas the “separate but equal” treatment) that should disqualify her from the privilege of being taken seriously on this topic afforded to her by the type of professor she is, but that one was probably the biggest.
I mean, think about it. She’s seriously arguing that women have “historically benefited from the status quo in sports” because they’ve … supposedly oppressed men from being allowed to compete alongside them. The original crafters of Title IX would like a word.
As to Cooky’s equating of Thomas to Robinson, the reasons why that’s an inapt comparison should be obvious. Still, Ryan Anderson, who has frequently written about this issue, noted them for the record anyway:
If the analogy to Jackie Robinson was accurate, the logical conclusion would be getting rid of separate male-female sporting events the way we rightly got rid of separate black-white sporting events. Skin color is irrelevant to athletics, sex is not. https://t.co/tuMJxqpU6D
— Ryan T. Anderson (@RyanTAnd) March 21, 2022
The same goes for her comparisons the first openly gay NBA player and the first nonbinary U.S. athlete (whatever that means). The comparison to Sarah Fuller – the first woman to “score in a Power Five college football game” – is not apt, either.
Not to minimize her accomplishments, but Fuller’s contribution to scoring in that game consisted of kicking two extra points after the male players scored touchdowns. She wasn’t running against and having to dodge male players who were twice (or three times) her size to get to the endzone or anything like that. Other “firsts” for women who have scored in college football games tell similar stories.
Others who strongly objected to the Jackie Robinson analogy included black conservatives who have had enough:
What we’re not going to do is compare Lia Thomas to Jackie Robinson and frankly I’m tired of other movements trying to latch themselves onto the struggle of Black Americans for their own political gainhttps://t.co/oYeXpUbWR0
— Javon A. Price 🇺🇸 (@JavonAPrice) March 24, 2022
NBC is comparing Lia Thomas to Jackie Robinson for breaking barriers in sports.
I guess even white men can make the cut now as an oppressed class as long as they simply say they’re a woman?
— Errol Webber (@ErrolWebber) March 24, 2022
With all due respect @ProfCooky, this is ridiculously atrocious. First, the disrespect of Jackie Robinson, next, the celebration of a mediocre, pathetic, & weak man who couldn’t even compete with his own, so he decided to bully women. NBC is disgraceful. https://t.co/akIhpJDFub
— Barrington Martin II (@_BarringtonII) March 22, 2022
Those are fair points, especially when you consider that Jackie Robinson was righting undeniable societal wrongs when he signed with the Dodgers and stepped out onto the field. Jackie Robinson also did not change who he was to be able to compete in the sport of his choosing.
What “wrong” is Thomas “righting” with identifying as a woman after three years of a mostly mediocre career as a male swimmer? What “oppression” is Thomas overcoming? Perhaps the next gushing “reporter” to interview Thomas can ask “her,” since, according to teammates, Thomas has made the same comparison.
As for Professor Cooky herself, she had such confidence in the strength of her argument that when she posted the link to her article on Twitter, she limited replies to the people she follows:
— Cheryl Cooky (@ProfCooky) March 21, 2022
As of this writing, there are no replies. At all.
— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.