The funding freeze relates to University of Pennsylvania policies on allowing trans women to compete in women's sports.

Summary

The Trump administration has frozen $175 million in federal funding to the University of Pennsylvania over its policies allowing trans women to compete in women’s sports.

A senior official said this is “just a taste” of further action, with UPenn at risk of losing all federal funding due to a Title IX investigation.

Trump signed an executive order on February 5 banning trans women from women’s sports, citing fairness and safety concerns.

Advocacy groups are challenging the move, arguing it discriminates against trans athletes.

  • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    131·
    1 day ago

    Schools offer services to students and while making the statement (that trans people are still people) is important denying services to hundreds if not thousands of students (due to lack of funding) who may or may not agree with that position just to make the statement isn’t responsible as an institution.

    I understand your rationale. And in fact, in 99% of circumstances I begrudgingly agree with it. Sometimes, you have to do what’s right for the greater good even if you know it might hurt a few people in the process. But this is not one of those times. And it’s not even because of the specific issues being raised (Protests at Columbia, trans athletes at UPenn, etc.).

    The reason I’m against it is because by so quickly bending the knee for Trump on these issues is that you’re telling your students, community, and alumni that the principles you claim to stand for are up for bid. You’re in favor of trans rights – until trans rights start actually costing you money. You’re in favor of the rights of students to protest – until it effects your funding. What happens when a school promotes support of LGBT issues and then comes in the crosshairs of the Trump Hate Machine? “Sorry guys, but we’ve gotta kick all the gays out. Trump threatened to pull $100 million in funding if we don’t.”? Where do you draw the line?

    It’s one thing to expect that of a regular business. Neither your local mom & pop store nor Wal-Mart are expected to be champions of our freedoms and hold such an important place in our society. Even if I strongly disagree with their decisions, I can understand if they follow where the political and financial winds are blowing. But universities are a completely different beast and play a completely different role in our society.

    • Xanza@lemm.eeEnglish
      28·
      1 day ago

      Sometimes, you have to do what’s right for the greater good even if you know it might hurt a few people in the process.

      I also agree, however, you can’t unilaterally hurt he student body regardless of their beliefs. They also have rights which need and deserve to be protected. Some students might not agree with the official stance of the University and that’s a problem. In the end you’re playing with their future too.

      It would be different if the entirety of the student body stood up and said “We support this!” no one would have any ground to stand on. But this isn’t a “majority rules” type of situation. The school cannot unilaterally make a political stance at the detriment of all students regardless of the student bodies political beliefs. It’s just not appropriate for a public institution to do. They have every right and absolutely should support all of their students. And they should do that by making a non-gendered league for their trans students or any other students who want to participate, to participate in. Then no one would be able to bitch.

      But you have transgender females who were born male, who had the benefit of a decade or more of testosterone to build lean muscle mass that other female athletes don’t have. It’s literally the same affect as doping and they don’t see it as fair–and if you take the argument at face value, it’s not so crack pot as to not merit discussion.

      Everyone has the right to participate in sports. Male, female, lemur, panda, whatever. The question is, is do genetic men have the right to participate in female sports.

      • tree_frog@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        4 hours ago

        Define genetic male and I swear to God I will find some holes in your argument because you have not examined this issue.

        This is a human rights violation, trans women are women. Segregating people for political gain is fucking evil.

        And your argument is that the university should do some evil so the bully doesn’t hit them harder with the stick?

        You don’t stop bullies by giving them what they want. That just encourages them.

        Anyway, your comments in this thread seriously did not land well.

        You’re either somebody that thinks they’re an ally when they’re not, or your entire argument is disingenuous and you really don’t care about trans people at all.

        My suspicion is that it’s the later

        • Xanza@lemm.eeEnglish
          11·
          4 hours ago

          Segregating people for political gain is fucking evil.

          I totally agree. But not everyone feels the same.

          You don’t stop bullies by giving them what they want.

          You also don’t stop them by saying “your disgusting and your opinion doesn’t matter.”

          Everything you’re saying here is an emotional response to this issue. You’re not helping anyone, you’re not objectively looking at the problem. You just want to curtail the rights of those you don’t agree with and bolster those that you do. And that’s dangerous because it’s exactly what the trans hating people want to do too, but somehow it’s right for you to do but bad for them to do it in your eyes when in fact its wrong for both of you to do…

          • tree_frog@lemm.eeEnglish
            21·
            4 hours ago

            Paradox of tolerance. If white people are uncomfortable sitting in a diner with black folks, they can go somewhere else.

            And again, this isn’t the student’s body making this demand. It’s the US president.

            So your whole argument is disingenuous to begin with. And my emotional response is for you. For your ignorance that you are spreading here.

            Do some research and do some reading.

            • Xanza@lemm.eeEnglish
              11·
              4 hours ago

              The paradox of tolerance is tolerating intolerance can lead to the erosion of tolerance itself. I’m perfectly cognizant of what you’re trying to say, and what your meaning is and I can tell by your replies that you’ve not only not read what I’ve said (or don’t understand it), but you’re entirely misrepresenting what I have said.

              You’re under the entirely mistaken impression that I’m being tolerant of those who are being intolerant because I’m not calling for their heads on pikes. Being anti-trans is intolerant and I believe that pushing back against them is worth doing and necessary for a society. But acknowledging that, according to the US constitution, these intolerant people have the right to be intolerant in the same way that trans people have the right to be trans, isn’t being tolerant of the intolerant. It’s pointing out that our most supreme law of the land affords these people this right and attempting to curtail that right is in violation of those rights and is unconstitutional in the same way its unconstitutional to attempt to curtail the rights of trans.

              I’ve said exactly two things in the entirety of all my replies here;

              1. All people have rights, not just trans students, which must all be respected whether you think their opinion is repugnant or not
              2. Universities shouldn’t have the right to set the social zeitgeist for students, that needs to be left up to the students themselves and if that means the students agree that trans athletes shouldn’t compete then that needs to be respected too

              Personally I would hope that wouldn’t be the case. I would think that the younger generation have a good head on their shoulders and would see that trans rights are human rights. But you can’t force that ideology onto people. Recognizing people have a right to be intolerant isn’t siding with them, nor is it feeding into a tolerance paradox. I can still call them assholes and bigots while simultaneously recognizing their right to be repugnant.