[This blog will always be free to read, but it’s also how I pay my bills. So, if you like what you read, please consider a paid subscription. And yes, I do speaking engagements. If you need a Pride Month speaker, hit me up.]
This weekend, Lance Armstrong announced a video interview with Caitlyn Jenner regarding trans inclusion in sports, as part of a series which he’ll begin releasing today.
I don't know why Mr. Armstrong woke up one morning recently and decided that trans athletes and "fairness in sports" should be a topic that needs his public exploration, but I do have thoughts on all this and context for those without it.
First, let's get the obvious out of the way: as most folks know, in 2012, Mr. Armstrong received a lifetime ban from basically all competitive sports--not just cycling--after declining to challenge the findings of an investigation by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. The findings were so damning that he was stripped of all his Tour de France victories and dropped by every sponsor.
What did the USADA say about Mr. Armstrong?
That he was the ringleader of "the most sophisticated, professionalized, and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."
Not just in cycling. Not just in an American context. But in the history of sports. Ever.
And hey, look, even now--just as in baseball--there are folks, including Mr. Armstrong, who say this is far more complicated than perceived -- that everyone in the sport was doping, that doping in itself isn't the critical factor for superior athletes, etc.
My personal belief: there are regulations in sports and when you knowingly break those regulations, that's called cheating. That's a controversial take in some quarters, but even so, let's just, for a second, put Mr. Armstrong's historic, all-time #1 doping operation aside.
Forget about that.
I'm far more concerned with Mr. Armstrong's very long history of lying to people, intimidating them, threatening them, and generally engaging in pretty direct sociopathic behavior toward anyone who had the audacity to get in his way. I mean, we're talking YEARS of this behavior.
And that's all to say: I don't know how, after all that, after years and years of Mr. Armstrong publicly destroying his own credibility, anyone could take anything he has to say seriously.
This wasn't a few little goofs. This wasn't a rough patch. This was his entire career.
I'm from Texas, and he was a hero to many of us growing up. I can't emphasize enough that wherever you were during the height of Mr. Armstrong's popularity, it was nowhere bigger than in Texas. There was a solid year where it seemed almost everyone was wearing yellow bracelets.
So, when he denied he was doping and called out his critics, we took his side. Why would he lie? Why would he cheat? And then, as it unraveled, there was just severe heartbreak and the realization that he used our good faith and support to viciously attack innocent people.
Mr. Armstrong probably sees some sort of link between his historic cheating and the inclusion of trans athletes, or in other words: he wants his audience to draw a relationship between the two, which really sucks for trans people who are just trying to exist and play fairly.
I don't know exactly what Mr. Armstrong gets out of this--maybe a big check--but the effect is pretty obvious: a conversation between the greatest doper of all-time and a trans woman who despises other trans people as a rightwing media grift = further anti-trans propaganda.
Before Caitlyn Jenner became the rightwing's favorite anti-trans propagandist, she was firmly on the side of trans inclusion in sports. She played in women's golf tournaments and told journalist Dawn Ennis, in no uncertain terms, that trans kids should be protected in sports.
But then, as Ms. Jenner realized her quasi-advocacy path was too hard and wasn't doing whatever it is she had wanted and that the siren song of the conservative media circus called with promises of money and attention, she suddenly, seemingly overnight, changed her tune.
Suddenly, Ms. Jenner was the go-to mouthpiece for anything the GOP wanted said about trans people but needed a trans person to say it. Someone convinced her that running for Governor of CA while saying this would boost her profile. She was soundly trounced.
And now, having unequivocally burned bridges with the critical mass of reasonable adults, Ms. Jenner takes whatever odd jobs she can get pushing the same bullshit rightwing nonsense -- whatever table scraps that sad world will offer her in exchange for complicity.
It is no mistake or coincidence that Mr. Armstrong isn't interviewing trans athletes currently competing or trans advocates or parents of trans children or supportive medical experts or champions of trans inclusion in women's sports like Meghan Rapinoe or Billie Jean King.
It is no mistake or coincidence that Mr. Armstrong is seeking out an interview with arguably the most famous transgender former athlete in the world who just so happens to be engaged in a multiyear effort to harm the livelihoods and rights of all other trans people.
Mr. Armstrong doesn't appear to want a complicated or nuanced narrative on trans inclusion in sports, which is interesting given how assiduously he has attempted to push for affirmation of complication and nuance in his own story.
You're not going to get illumination in the interview between Mr. Armstrong and Ms. Jenner, of course. You'll get Mr. Armstrong's calculated attempt at empathy for trans people and Ms. Jenner's sincere feelings of hostility toward trans people.
Mr. Armstrong—who is officially independent but thrown out various hints that he's more Democratic than not (for example, he endorsed Beto over Ted Cruz in 2018)—will probably tell you he doesn't hate LGBTQ people, including trans folks.
I don't think Mr. Armstrong hates trans people. I also think he doesn't give a shit about us, one way or the other. For the vast majority of folks holding this view, it's fine with me. But now that he's found a way we can be useful to him, he intends to fully take advantage.
Mr. Armstrong still has a large platform and plenty of clout to gain access to folks willing to pay him to utilize that platform. There are many millions of people who still probably think he was wronged and still trust him to a large extent.
So, even though he doesn't care about trans rights either way, our utility to him is now being leveraged in the typically cynical manner he approaches the world. It seems the conversation on trans equality is paying dividends to those willing to mollify anti-trans sentiment.
Here are some things you will not learn in that interview:
1. No trans woman in high school has ever been awarded a college athletic scholarship in the United States. Ever. It's never happened.
2. No trans woman has ever medaled at the Olympics, despite erroneous reporting.
3. Trans student-athletes are so rare that on multiple occasions, when GOP lawmakers were asked to cite examples in their own states, they couldn't answer.
4. Lia Thomas has never broken a national or NCAA record and has had many races in which she didn't even place.
Now, do I think that any young trans woman in high school should be able to come out on Monday and start competing on any sports team she wants on Tuesday?
No, I don't. I think it's common sense to have fair regulations in place that protect the safety of all involved.
That looks different depending on the sport. We should be having that conversation in good faith. Any young trans woman should be permitted to compete provided she has followed through on regulations that ensure safety and fairness. That may mean waiting to compete! That's fine.
At the same time, I think it's utterly absurd to suggest there weren't unfair advantages in sport until this conversation on trans inclusion. When it's a cisgender male student athlete involved, these unfair advantages are praised and sometimes take on mythological importance.
Boys and young men who are significantly larger, taller, faster, and stronger than their peers are deemed to be great for sports.
Girls and young women who are similarly outliers are most often said to be bad for women's sports, and that was true long before trans inclusion.
The history of women's sports has seen rather disgusting policing of women's and girls' bodies. Girls and women who are not transgender but have atypical bodies have been attacked as being supposedly transgender long before now. There's a history of this.
The real war on women's sports is the lack of funding, lack of respect, and lack of overall support that has been true before and after Title IX. Even now, women athletes in the NCAA are given bare bones facilities compared to male counterparts. It's ridiculous.
All of these rightwing anti-trans clowns didn't really seem to care about women's sports before now. They're the same ones who claim no one watches women's sports (false), no one will pay for women's sports (false), and that women's sports aren't fun as hell (very false).
This is all the more absurd when you consider that most of the trans girls and women who compete in women's sports are average in ability. When a young trans woman is bad at sports, no one cares. But when she's good? Everyone suddenly has an opinion.
The same week that the parents of three young women who are not transgender filed a lawsuit against Connecticut to bar the inclusion of young trans women in track and field events, one of the young trans women was beaten by one of the young cisgender women in a state final.
Did any of y'all see that news?
No, because it undermines the narrative that has driven this absurd moral panic against trans student-athletes. If reasonable adults are made to sit down talk calmly through this in good faith, it suddenly lacks its clickbait value. God forbid.
I don't think this is a topic that has easy answers, but it has been so completely one-sided and so absolutely vicious against trans children that even children in sports who are not transgender are being harassed on suspicion of being transgender, such as the nine year-old girl who was shouted at by transphobic grandparents at a track meet.
So, yeah, when Mr. Armstrong and Ms. Jenner decided to further weaponize this complicated issue for their own benefit, I get a little angry over that. I think anger is warranted in a situation in which the lives of children are being directly affected by rightwing narcissism.
When your friends and family inevitably cite this interview as something to watch, I hope you'll take the time to gently inform them of the ways in which this is all a massive grift being built on the backs of trans kids who just wanna play sports with their friends.
Hi, I’m Charlotte Clymer, and this is Charlotte’s Web Thoughts, my Substack. It’s completely free to access and read, but it’s also how my bills! So, please do kindly consider upgrading to a paid subscription: just $7/month or save money with the $70/annual sub. You can also go way above and beyond by becoming a Lifetime Member at $250.
Share this post