Several years ago, I worked as a freelance opinion columnist for a Gannett-owned newspaper in my home state. I always nursed a sense of unease that perhaps I only landed the gig because they needed some inexperienced schmo they could throw out as their token conservative voice. My impression then is not much different than it is now: Gannett has an obvious corporate commitment to promote a progressive agenda, and those whom they employ will be complicit or they will find other work.
As a freelance writer I didn't really get fired; they just phased me out over time. But I watched the lone, moderately conservative editor be dispatched and replaced with a left-wing diversity hire. DEI before it was cool.
So with that kind of corporate reputation, I am never surprised when I see illogic pour from the minds of Gannett-owned authors. Even those employed by the company's flagship publication, the USA Today.
In case you missed it, Gannett has two of their female columnists at USA Today dutifully pushing an anti-woman agenda in the name of transgender rights. As other high-profile females like ESPN's Samantha Ponder are risking their careers to defend women against the encroachment of the cross-dressing patriarchy, Gannett's Nancy Armour and Lindsay Schnell are gunning to take them out.
What would have been a helpful contribution to the public dialogue over the issue would have been for Armour to author a piece explaining why she believes male athletes with greater bone density and length, a fuller muscular structure, and a higher ratio of muscle mass to body weight do not have an inherent competitive advantage against female athletes. Instead, she lazily resorted to petty name-calling and pejorative othering of a fellow female sportswriter.
Does Armour have any proof that Ponder is a "bigot"? Is the totality of her evidence simply that the ESPN personality believes it is unfair that in the name of politics, those with male physiology are suddenly being invited to compete against those with female physiology? If so, is it Armour's contention that the vast majority of the Americans (and citizens of the world for that matter) are also "bigots"?
I read her article hoping to find some moral justification for such an unnecessarily aggressive insult of Ponder. Ironically, she apparently saw this as a smoking gun of sorts:
"Did (Ponder) publicly participate in any of the many excellent documentaries, videos and commentary ESPN did to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Title IX last year? Or even Tweet about them? No, she did not."
Ignore the glaring appeal to ignorance logical fallacy that responsible editors should have caught. It was ironic that Armour cited Title IX given that it was enacted due to the very distinctions between male and female athletes that Ponder now defends. Males claiming transgender status in order to participate in female athletics undermines the legitimacy of Title IX. Yet Armour suggests that opposing it, that defending Title IX, is akin to bigotry?
She's not alone. Gannett dispatched one of Armour's coworkers, USA Today enterprise reporter and Sports Illustrated alum Lindsay Schnell, to further the attacks on Ponder.
I'm assuming (and hoping) that Schnell just hasn't taken the time to think through the implications of what she's saying. After all, while she mocks others for making a "really dumb argument," Schnell has just managed to undercut the entire justification for female athletics. If "nothing is fair" and we should just get over it, then…
- There should be no LPGA Tour. Let the women golfers attempt to make the men's tour. Not fair? "It's sports! Nothing is fair."
- There should be no WNBA. Let the women basketball players attempt to make the NBA. Not fair? "It's sports! Nothing is fair."
- There should be no Women's World Cup Soccer. Let the women soccer players attempt to make the men's team. Not fair? "It's sports! Nothing is fair."
- There should be no Women's Tennis Association. Let the women tennis players attempt to make ATP tour. Not fair? "It's sports! Nothing is fair."
And while we're at it, boys should be able to play high school girls softball, no women's swimming, and the next generation of Florence Griffith Joyners will need to compete with the Usain Bolts. Not fair? "It's sports! Nothing is fair."
This just isn't good thinking. It's ideologically driven propaganda, and in a previous era it would have been properly identified as misogynistic. Kudos to Sam Ponder for calling it out, even in the face of callous slander from those who know better, but have chosen expediency and politics over fairness and common sense.
