Connect with us

International

Multiple women’s college volleyball teams forfeit matches rather than face male opponent

Published

5 hours ago

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Sarah Holliday

Southern Utah, Boise State, and Wyoming universities forfeited women’s volleyball matches against San José State over the inclusion of a male on the female team, sparking Christian non-profit Concerned Women for America to launch a lawsuit against San José State.

Both Southern Utah University (SUU) and Boise State University’s (BSU) female volleyball teams made the decision to refuse competing against a team with a male-born player.

San José State University’s (SJSU) Blaire Fleming (born Brayden Fleming) is the 6’1 biological male competing on the SJSU female volleyball team – the individual various outlets have attributed to the school’s undefeated winning streak. However, after reassessing their initial decision, the University of Wyoming (UW) has added itself to the list of schools demanding fairness and safety in women’s sports.

When UW first learned of the transgender-identifying opponent, they first decided to move forward  with their October 5 game. But not long after BSU chose to forfeit, “It appears [UW] … had a change-of-heart,” wrote OutKick’s Dan Zaksheske in response to the team announcing they would, in fact, not compete.

SUU was the first school to opt out of play against SJSU in a preseason matchup and BSU was the first to cancel conference play. Both teams did not explicitly state their reason for forfeiting, and UW also kept their public statement vague. They shared in a statement from Tuesday:

After a lengthy discussion, the University of Wyoming will not play its scheduled conference match against San Jose State University. Per Mountain West Conference policy, the conference will record the match as a forfeit and a loss for Wyoming.

But as Zaksheske added, “While Wyoming is the latest school to cancel a match against San Jose State, don’t be surprised if more schools follow suit.”

It turns out SJSU chose to initially hide the fact that Fleming is a biological male – from both his own teammates and other competitors. This reality, alongside an increasing number of colleges refusing to compete, has not merely sparked controversy, but action as well.

The conservative Christian non-profit Concerned Women for America (CWA) has filed a complaint against SJSU. “We want to protect the integrity of women’s sports but also the safety of these female athletes,” said Macy Petty, a CWA legislative assistant and a NCAA volleyball athlete.

According to Petty, the issue is rooted in the fact that “many of these schools were unaware that there was a male athlete on” the female team. “We just want to make sure that these schools know exactly what is going on in this athletic program because the NCAA and SJSU had not previously given them the decency to even let them know what was happening.”

In a comment to The Washington Stand, Doreen Denny, CWA senior advisor, stated, “What is happening in NCAA women’s volleyball is a game changer.” As she went on to say, this is the first time we’re seeing “NCAA member institutions … taking a stand against the NCAA’s trans athlete policy that directly discriminates against female athletes and are upholding the integrity of women’s sports.”

CWA CEO Penny Nance also praised UW’s decision in a statement, emphasizing her gratitude that the university “has taken seriously the issues of unfairness and discrimination against female athletes when males compete in women’s sports.” She added, “No NCAA member institution should have to be making this choice.”

In addition to CWA’s complaint, former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines has filed a lawsuit against SJSU. Included as a plaintiff in this lawsuit is Brooke Slusser, a player on the SJSU volleyball team. The document reads:

Due to the NCAA’s Transgender Eligibility Policies which permit Fleming to play on the SJSU women’s volleyball team and which led to SJSU recruiting Fleming, giving Fleming a scholarship, and allowing Fleming to be in positions to violate Brooke’s right to bodily privacy, Brooke has suffered physical and emotional injuries, embarrassment, humiliation, emotional distress, mental anguish and suffering.

In comments shared with OutKick, Slusser said, “It’s crazy to say, but it was an easy decision for me to join because it’s something I truly believe in.… This is something that so many people do care about. It’s just that so many people are scared to talk about it.”

“While these schools have not given a full explanation for their decisions to forfeit matches against San Jose State University,” concluded Denny, “their actions are speaking louder than words.”

This article is reprinted with permission from the Family Research Council, publishers of The Washington Stand at washingtonstand.com.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Automotive / 52 seconds ago

Two thirds of Canadians say banning conventional vehicles by 2035 is “unrealistic”

Aristotle Foundation / 3 hours ago

Criminalizing residential school ‘denialism’ would silence indigenous voices, too

Economy / 3 hours ago

Ottawa’s proposed ‘electricity’ regulations may leave Canadians out in the cold

DEI

CA school taught 5th graders gender identity, had them teach it to kindergartners

Published on October 3, 2024

By

From The Center Square

By 

Plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

A California school district allegedly had a teacher teach a lesson and read a gender identity book to fifth graders, then have those fifth graders watch a video version of the book with their kindergarten mentees and teach them the lesson they just learned.

Outraged Encinitas parents are now suing the school district and demanding a notification and opt-out program for all objectionable content; currently, content notifications and opt-outs are only available for the health unit.

The fifth grade students’ parents had first asked to review a health unit with lessons on “puberty, health reproduction, media influences on health habits and body image, hygiene, boundaries and bullying and diseases and their transmission, including information about HIV/AIDS.”

After finding the unit’s  “instruction on gender identity and transgenderism” was “affront to their religious beliefs,” the parents tried to opt out of just the gender section, but were told they would have to opt out of the entire unit, which they did.

But this opt out did not cover the school’s buddy program that pairs older students with the same younger students every week for one class.

The lawsuit says “with the buddy relationships in place and well established, [school district staff] planned a unique event for May 1, 2024. During this “buddy” program, the District would use fifth graders to help kindergarteners learn about gender identity.”

The school district used My Shadow is Pink, a picture book for young children in which a boy “wonders about his gender and how he believes it differentiates from his father’s gender” and says he “loves wearing dresses and dancing around.” The boy wears a dress to school, making the father “anxious and stressed” until he too wears a dress after his son has a difficult day. The father then tells his child, “pick up that dress! Your shadow is pink. I see now it’s true. It’s not just a shadow, it’s your inner-most you.”

Before the buddy session, one staff member said to another, “We might just inspire some sweet things to fly toward their shadow tomorrow,” suggesting the lesson had a desired outcome, according to the lawsuit.

At the start of the session one teacher allegedly read the book to the fifth grade class, which students found unusual because “It was rare for [him] to read any book to them, and he had never read a book to them for the ‘buddy’ program.”

Immediately after, the fifth graders each sat next to their kindergarten mentees, and shown a read-along video version of the book, leading one 5th grade plaintiff to allegedly say “[he] wanted to cover his buddy’s eyes and ears to protect him.”

Next, 5th graders were allegedly told to have their buddies choose a color representing their buddies’ gender, and draw their buddies’ outlines in chalk in that color to communicate “gender was determined by an internal feeling.”

Both plaintiffs “were especially bothered that they had to push the idea that individuals can select their own gender to a kindergartener, knowing this kindergarten buddy looks up to them as role models and trusts their opinions.”

“The blatant promotion of gender identity in the My Shadow is Pink book is self-evident and obvious,” says the lawsuit. “The book is marketed as “a rhyming story that touches on the subjects of gender identity, equality, and diversity.”

A petition to require parental notification for controversial curriculum items at Encinitas Union School District, but the school did not respond to the petition or its concerns, aside from sending a template letter describing the district’s opt-out policy.

The lawsuit is claiming the students’ First Amendment  rights were violated by compelling them to speak messages to kindergarteners that violate their religious beliefs and consciences, and that the school districts’ policy of allowing opt-outs only in some parts of schooling but not in others is a violation of the 14th Amendment. Among other demands, the plaintiffs seek opt out and parental notification policies for “curriculum, activities, or any other instruction related to gender identity or other LGBTQ topics.”

“You have the absolute right to opt your child out of any program out there,” said Lance Christensen, Vice President of the California Policy Center, to The Center Square. Last month, the CPC issued an “opt-out toolkit” explaining to parents how they can protect and expand opt-out policies.

“These parents have the right to not have their children subjected to a radical ideology,” continued Christensen. “We’re talking about elementary school kids. What’s wrong with these teachers, and these schools?”

Continue Reading

illegal immigration

Bombshell report: ‘High risk noncitizens’ without IDs flying across U.S.

Published on October 3, 2024

By

From The Center Square

By Bethany Blankley 

Feds don’t know how many noncitizens were released into US without identification

Twenty-three years after Islamic terrorists used airplanes to conduct the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, the federal agency created to protect Americans from national security threats “cannot ensure they are keeping high-risk noncitizens without identification from entering the country.”

The potentially high-risk noncitizens are being flown on domestic flights without identification, creating a public safety risk, according to the latest Office of Inspector General report assessing several federal agencies within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The OIG has repeatedly published reports identifying potential national security risks created by Biden-Harris policies identified within DHS and its subagencies.

In the latest redacted report that has “sensitive security information,” the OIG expressed concerns about Americans’ public safety to the administrators of the Transportation Security Administration, US Customs and Border Protection, and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“Under current processes, CBP and ICE cannot ensure they are keeping high-risk noncitizens without identification from entering the country. Additionally, TSA cannot ensure its vetting and screening procedures prevent high-risk noncitizens who may pose a threat to the flying public from boarding domestic flights.”

The report states the agencies didn’t assess risks to public safety by releasing non-citizens into the United States without identification and putting them on domestic flights.

The OIG requested data on the number of noncitizens without identification who were released into the United States from fiscal years 2021 through 2023. “Because immigration officers are not required to document whether a noncitizen presented identification in the databases,” the data the OIG obtained “may be incomplete.”

“Therefore, neither CBP nor ICE could determine how many of the millions of noncitizens seeking entry in the United States each year entered without identification and whose self-reported biographic information was accepted,” the report states. CBP and ICE officers interviewed by the OIG “acknowledged the risks of allowing noncitizens without identification into the country, yet neither CBP nor ICE conducted a comprehensive risk assessment for these noncitizens to assess the level of risk these individuals present and developed corresponding mitigation measures,” the report states.

One of the primary responsibilities of CBP and ICE is to verify noncitizens’ identities prior to seeking entry; TSA is responsible for screening everyone who boards domestic flights. The OIG audited them to determine to what extent CBP and ICE policies and procedures confirmed individual’s identities “for the documents TSA accepts for domestic travel and whether TSA ensures noncitizens traveling on domestic flights provide proof of identification consistent with all other domestic travelers.”

As Border Patrol officials have explained, the majority of illegal border crossers are not vetted and released with DHS papers. The OIG confirms this, stating CBP and ICE officers accept “self-reported biographical information, which they use to issue various immigration forms. Once in the United States, noncitizens can travel on domestic flights.”

The OIG also notes that noncitizens do not have TSA-acceptable identification but “are allowed to board domestic flights.” TSA requires them “to undergo vetting and additional screening,” which involves running their information through systems to validate information on DHS–issued immigration forms and conducting additional screening procedures like pat downs.

“TSA’s vetting and screening procedures do not eliminate the risk that noncitizens who may pose a threat to fellow passengers could board domestic flights,” the OIG report says.

It gets worse, the OIG says.

“Under current processes, CBP and ICE cannot ensure they are keeping high-risk noncitizens without identification from entering the country. Additionally, TSA cannot ensure its vetting and screening procedures prevent high-risk noncitizens who may pose a threat to the flying public from boarding domestic flights.”

The 37-page redacted report details the procedures that must be followed according to federal law and notes in bold: “CBP and ICE have policies and procedures for screening noncitizens, but neither component knows how many noncitizens without identification documents are released into the country.”

Security issues also exist with the CBP One app, which has been used to fast track over 813,000 inadmissible illegal foreign nationals into the country, The Center Square reported.

These issues are redacted. “Because of CBP’s and ICE’s process for inspecting and releasing noncitizens, TSA’s methods to screen for individuals who pose a threat would not necessarily prevent these individuals from boarding flights,” the OIG warns.

It also points out that it has released previous reports where its office “documented similar weaknesses in CBP’s screening processes that allowed high-risk individuals into the country,” including those on the terrorist watchlist.

It concludes, “If CBP and ICE continue to allow noncitizens – whose identities immigration officers cannot confirm – to enter the country, they may inadvertently increase national security risks.”

The agencies did not concur with the OIG’s findings. In response, the OIG, as prescribed by a DHS directive, gave them 90 days to respond and provide corrective action that would be taken as well as a target completion date for each recommendation.

Continue Reading

Trending

X