Rapinoe has been a staunch advocate of males competing in girls' and women's sports, so long as those males simply claim to be girls and women, so it's no surprise what Rapinoe thought of the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the protection of women's sports.In an article for Marie Claire, Rapinoe trotted out several common left-wing talking points aimed at scaring rational-thinking people into believing that keeping males out of women's sports is somehow bad for girls and women.RILEY GAINES: SUPREME COURT HANDS WOMEN AN IMPORTANT WIN, BUT THE FIGHT ISN’T OVERMegan Rapinoe argues in Marie Claire that banning males from women's sports harms all women, citing reproductive rights and pay gap concerns but her arguments are nonsensical.(Photo by Kimberly White/Getty Images for Vox Media))Let's take a look at her arguments one-by-one.The headline of the piece is, "Anti-Trans Legislation Isn't About 'Protecting Girls'—It's About Distracting Us From What Matters."First, Rapinoe calls it "anti-trans" legislation which is, of course, inaccurate.
It's pro-woman legislation.It's ironic that she says the legislation is a distraction while using purposefully misleading language that is meant to distract the reader from the truth.Rapinoe begins by saying she was set to film a World Cup commercial but claims the brand decided to cut her from the ad because of her radical left-wing stance on males competing in women's sports.She then criticizes the unnamed brand for lacking "moral clarity" because it doesn't want to be associated with someone like Rapinoe.
Of course, the exact opposite is true.It's Rapinoe that clearly lacks moral clarity.
This is what psychologists like to call "projection."TRANS ATHLETES DROP LAWSUIT TO GAIN ACCESS TO GIRLS' SPORTS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AFTER SCOTUS RULINGRapinoe then moves to her first argument.Sorry, calling it "her" argument is disingenuous.
It's the same argument used over and over again by left-wing activists and politicians, includi...