I Watched Minnesota Politicians Debate Trans In Women's Sports; It Was Nauseating
On Monday, a bill (HF 12) came up for a vote in the Minnesota House of Representatives. The bill, aptly titled "Preserving Girls' Sports Act", sought to have the state come into compliance with President Donald Trump's recent executive order that keeps males out of women's sports.
The bill was brought by Rep. Peggy Scott who said, "It’s called common sense. The girls in my school never had to consider the injustice of a male taking our place on the team, or the prospect of serious injury that could come while competing against a stronger, bigger male.
"My generation benefited from the common sense that girls and boys should have their own teams, and I’m so thankful for that."
Scott made those comments during a rally at the state capitol, which was attended by Riley Gaines, prior to the House vote.
But, apparently, it's not common sense to the left-wing Minnesota representatives. The debate on the bill lasted over two hours and I watched all of it. You're welcome.
And, spoiler alert, the bill didn't pass. In order to pass the Minnesota House, a bill needs 68 votes. There are 67 Republicans in the House, but every Democrat voted against it.
Sometimes, I don't think OutKick readers truly understand the things I do for you guys. Watching a two-and-a-half-hour debate in the Minnesota House over whether males should be allowed to compete in women's sports might be the biggest sacrifice I've made for you, because I love you so much.
"Highlights" from the two-and-a-half-hour debate in the Minnesota House over whether males should be allowed to play girls' sports
I put highlights in quotes for obvious reasons. There were many "lowlights" from the Democratic members of the House. Let's dig in.
We have to start at the beginning. The House invited a "two-spirit, indigenous" woman to deliver a prayer prior to the debate. The woman then thanked the buffalo in the west for regulating the seasons and the waters, the bear in the north who gives us "healing" and then the earth and the universe, where "all life comes from."
Look, believe whatever you want. We have Freedom of Religion in the United States for a reason. But remember that the people cheering on an indigenous woman praying to the buffalo, bear and the earth get irrationally angry if someone dares mention Jesus or God. Not to mention a constant refrain about the separation of Church & State. But I digress.
LGBTQ+ activists rally inside the Minnesota State Capitol in 2023.
(Getty Images)
Once the debate began, Republicans came armed with facts about the clear physical and biological advantages that males hold over females in athletics. They cited the many injuries that females have suffered in sports at the hands of males.
They discussed the stolen victories, awards and scholarships. They talked about the psychological damage done to women and girls forced to share locker rooms with males.
Democrats took a different approach.
However, different is probably the wrong word. It was largely the same rhetoric we heard from House Democrats in Washington, D.C. back in January, except worse.
Donald Trump was a favorite target of Democratic Minnesota House members, even when he had nothing to do with the issue at hand
Many of them attacked Donald Trump, mostly for nothing even related to the bill. One Rep. claimed that the bill was a waste of time because the Minnesota government should be focused on the "billionaires in Trump's cabinet."
Not sure the relevance of that, but when you don't have facts, science or common sense on your side, you have to distract the audience. That was a common theme.
Another said that women don't need to worry about males in women's sports because they should be more focused on "predatory males," like Trump. Yes, that was actually said.
One of the first lawmakers who spoke said that the Minnesota House needed to protect "trans, non-binary, and two-spirit" individuals. This is the second time "two-spirit" came up, and I legitimately had to look up what it meant.
It's a term specifically for indigenous people who are "non-binary." I know, I can't keep up either. But there's more.
Apparently, there's a "two-spirit" person in the Minnesota House. This person, Liish Kozlowski, used some of the most ridiculous rhetoric of anyone who spoke during the entire debate. And that's saying something.
Kozlowski spoke a lot about Colonialism, which, again, has nothing to do with the bill. And then it got worse.
"This is just another version of state-sanctioned bullying and genocide," Kozlowski said.
Wow. Keeping males out of women's sports is a version of … genocide? For someone obsessed with Colonialism, you'd think Kozlowski might have a decent grasp of history. Perhaps not, though, based on that commentary.
There was plenty of time for fear-mongering, per usual
The tried-and-true Democratic tactic of fear-mongering was in full effect on Monday afternoon at the Minnesota state capitol. Many Democrats learned from their Washington D.C. counterparts and said girls would have to undergo "invasive" medical examinations from "strangers."
That ridiculous line of attack continued, even after several Republican Representatives said that was not the case. Sex can easily be determined with an official (and original) birth certificate, and if further testing is needed, a simple cheek swap (which is entirely non-invasive) would do the trick. There are no "genital exams" despite Democrat claims.
The Minnesota House of Representatives debated a bill at the State Capitol in St. Paul (pictured) to protect women's sports from males and the left-wing politicians made some outlandish comments.
(Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
One other thing I noticed throughout the proceedings: Democrats love using the word "imagine." Several of them started their pitch with "imagine a scenario" and then followed with some ridiculous POTENTIAL harmful effect of the bill.
Now, we already know that males are stealing trophies and awards from women and invading their locker rooms and bathrooms. We don't have to imagine that; it's already happening.
But the Democrats want people to "imagine" some off-the-wall potential situation where the bill has a negative effect. Classic fear-mongering technique.
Another woman told a story about her lesbian daughter not being able to be married in public because she's gay. Again, even if true (we have no idea), it would be irrelevant to the bill.
One man went with "The bill is just plain weird." Did they learn nothing from the whole "J.D. Vance is weird" debacle that quickly backfired on Minnesota Governor and then-Vice President nominee Tim Walz? Apparently, once the Democrats get their marching orders, they cannot change course. So, they went back to the "weird" well.
You know what's really "weird"? Believing that males competing in women's sports is not only perfectly acceptable, but should be encouraged. That's weird.
Another woman said that the bill would make "eating disorders worse for girls." I have no comment on that one.
One of the final speakers was a transgender member of the Minnesota House. Unsurprisingly, that person – Leigh Finke, born Christopher Finke – took aim at Trump, Republicans, Fox News and basically anyone who isn't radically left.
Transgender member of the Minnesota House Leigh Finke, born Christopher Finke, attacked anyone who disagrees with radical gender ideology and anyone who wants males out of women's sports.
(Getty Images)
That representative also started the speech with this phrase: "To be trans is to be wonderful and magical."
I mean, who wouldn't want to be transgender? I guess that means you are automatically "wonderful and magical" and who doesn't want to be wonderful and magical?
The whole thing was mostly absurd. Democrats went on-and-on about how wrong it is to "exclude trans kids" from sports. Even though, of course, the bill simply sought to have kids playing sports with the correct sex. The one based on biology, not feelings.
A Republican lawmaker made the best point of the entire debate:
"Girls and women actually self-exclude themselves [from sports] for fear of physical violence and injuries [from males]… Women are losing and men are winning in women’s sports… What about those women?"
Exactly. What about them?