There’s a species of Southern man who’s spent so long being more enlightened than his southern kin that his superiority became his entire personality and he can’t tell the difference between having an opinion and having an audience. Slim’s piece on “Saving Women’s Sports” was arrogant and unhelpful in a debate that matters. “We should be tolerant of trans people” and “there should be a sex-based rule for eligibility in women’s sports” are not contradictory claims; similarly, “be tolerant of your neighbor” doesn’t tell you where the property line runs. Slim skips the hard work of answering the second claim; instead, he accuses anyone who raises it of failing at the first. Why write an ‘opinion’ that never addresses why sex-linked categories are the right or wrong frame for competitive fairness?
This debate is really about what a game is and why rules make it fair. Games without rules are not games worth playing because rules establish fair play. For centuries, biological sex has been the rule, and for most of that time it prohibited women from participating in sports at all. In this opinion piece, the ‘opinion’ on a sex-based rule is unclear. Slim appears to argue for ambiguity (it is not important because few trans athletes compete in women’s sports), which is essentially an argument for no rules at all. Perhaps we do away with age divisions, as well, and my 14 year old son can swim in the 10 & Under category when he feels inclined. Sex-based divisions are currently the rule, so the discussion is about whether to enforce or eliminate that rule.
It’s evident that Slim wants this (and everything, actually) to be about bigotry because the verdict on bigotry is a foregone conclusion. But if the Dispatch readership’s reaction to Blossom Brown in 2014 was a “shrug”, what has changed in 2026 is not the character of this town or this state, but the arrival of an actual policy question: ‘who competes in the women’s category?’
Last weekend, my 10 year old daughter competed in the MSI Long Course State Championship. She placed in the top 5 in all seven of her events. She ages up to 11/12 in 2027 Long Course, so this was her meet to shine before she moves to the bottom of the next age group- and she did shine! She took 2nd in the 10&U 200 Free with a personal best of 2:53.08. At this age, the boys aren’t too far ahead of the girls. My little state champ could have placed 5th in the boys’ 10&U 200 Free. But what if the 4th place boys’ finisher, with a time of 2:52.93, had been permitted to compete in the girls’ division, and bumped her to 3rd? Slim sneers at the fact that state legislatures, ours included, established a sex-based rule in female sports; I’m thankful that their preemptive action means that my daughter will never have a meet or a season’s hard work wasted by unfair play or rule-bending.
Coincidentally, the big race Riley Gaines tied with Will Thomas was also a 200 Free at the NCAA 2022 Championship meet. Riley, who swam for the University of Kentucky, is a 12x All American. In 2022, she won the SEC 100-yard freestyle (UofK record), 200-yard freestyle (UofK record), and 200-yard butterfly events (SEC & UofK record), and the SEC named her a Women’s Swimming and Diving Scholar-Athlete of the Year in 2022, the same year that she tied for 5th place in the NCAA 200 Free with Will Thomas. That is 5th place in the entire country. Have you ever been 5th in the country at anything, Slim? I haven’t, but I can compare that to how I feel about my little girl being Top 5 in Female 10U in the state of MS. A significant detail you omitted about this race is that Will Thomas, swimming the 200 Free in the men’s division in the 2018-2019 season, was ranked 554th in the country. In a single season, 2021-2022, Will Thomas, competing in the female division, set U Penn program record times in the 100, 200, and 500 Freestyle, replacing program records of female athletes. He took UVA’s Emma Weyant’s first place finish in the 2022 NCAA Championship 500 Free, an event where he had previously ranked 65th in the men’s division. We usually laud people who face injustice and stand up for themselves and others. I am grateful to Riley Gaines for being willing to speak about an experience that was confusing, humiliating, and unjust, and for encouraging other young females to stand up for themselves, as well.
I hope that I have offered a compelling case that the rule regarding sex-based eligibility matters, and it should be resolved quickly and firmly so that the millions of girls competing and expecting fair play do not waste their time and talent. I don’t hear Slim or anyone else making a coherent case that there should not be sex-based divisions, however there is much obfuscating about the fundamental question: if we are going to redefine sex, what is the alternative to the biological definitions of ‘man’ and ‘woman’. I am waiting for an alternative definition that is neither circular nor too complicated to hand to a swimming official.
Becky Scott
Columbus
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 31 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 31 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
