At some point, we must quit pretending that most journalists and major news media companies care about free speech or the exchange of ideas.
USA Today helps explain why.
For the last few years, the sport of track at high schools in Connecticut has been a frontline in the culture war over gender identity. That’s because Connecticut education officials chose to be stylish, and allow transgender girls to compete with biological girls.
The outcome was about what you’d expect: the trans girls have mopped up the floor with track championships.
Last week USA Today published an editorial by Chelsea Mitchell, one of the biological girls adversely affected by the state’s decision.
Mitchell explained why she and some other female track stars enlisted the help of the Alliance Defending Freedom to challenge the state’s rule in court.
“It’s February 2020. I’m crouched at the starting line of the high school girls’ 55-meter indoor race. This should be one of the best days of my life. I’m running in the state championship, and I’m ranked the fastest high school female in the 55-meter dash in the state. I should be feeling confident. I should know that I have a strong shot at winning,” Mitchell wrote.
“Instead, all I can think about is how all my training, everything I’ve done to maximize my performance, might not be enough, simply because there’s a transgender runner on the line with an enormous physical advantage.”
The “enormous physical advantage” is not explained.
And that’s not what she wrote.
The latter sentence above originally said, “Instead, all I can think about is how all my training, everything I’ve done to maximize my performance, might not be enough, simply because there’s a runner on the line with an enormous physical advantage: a male body.”
Throughout her piece, Mitchell attacked the idea of allowing biological boys to compete in girls’ sports.
In another section, Mitchell noted, The CIAC allows biological males to compete in girls’ and women’s sports. As a result, two males began racing in girls’ track in 2017. In the 2017, 2018, and 2019 seasons alone, these males took 15 women’s state track championship titles (titles held in 2016 by nine different girls) and more than 85 opportunities to participate in higher-level competitions that belonged to female track athletes.
That’s because males have massive physical advantages. Their bodies are simply bigger and stronger on average than female bodies. It’s obvious to every single girl on the track.
In USA Today’s version, that turned into:
“The CIAC allows transgender athletes to compete in girls’ and women’s sports. As a result, two transgender athletes began racing in girls’ track in 2017. In the 2017, 2018, and 2019 seasons alone, these runners took 15 women’s state track championship titles (titles held in 2016 by nine different girls) and more than 85 opportunities to participate in higher-level competitions that belonged to female track athletes.”
“Their bodies are simply bigger and stronger on average. It’s obvious to other girls on the track.”
USA Today changed Mitchell’s wording three days after it was originally published, according to the ADF. And then it added a note.
An editor’s note now appears with Mitchell’s piece, saying, “This column has been updated to reflect USA TODAY’s standards and style guidelines. We regret that hurtful language was used.”
So to USA Today, the word “male” is apparently “hurtful.”
Support journalism by clicking here to our gofundme or sign up for our free newsletter by clicking here
Android Users, Click Here To Download The Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. It’s Free And Coming To Apple Users Soon.