in ,

All That and a Bag of Mail

Friday is here and I have some good news for those of you who have been fans of our Wins and Losses podcast series, I’m going to start it back up.

Just a few minutes ago a long form conversation with Senator Marco Rubio of Florida went up. Then we’ll continue to add more of these in the weeks and months ahead. I’ve been so busy with the new radio show and with all the travel during the fall for the college football show that I just haven’t had time for these.

But now that I’m back home for a little while I’ll have an opportunity to crank some out.

So those are always fun. Let me know who you you’d suggest I interview going forward.

Okay, here we go:

Andy writes:

“Clay, can you believe this situation at Penn with the trans swimmer! Where are the Me Too women, where is the NCAA, where is the Ivy League, where is Penn, where are the athletes to support these Penn swimmers?”

Yes, I can believe it. This is the logical extension of woke culture intersecting with sports.

Woke politics is predicated on the idea of a victimization pyramid. That is, instead of judging issues on the merits, we create a default oppression Olympics and that determines who the hero and the villain is in any given story. This works well when the villain is a white man — or, less often, a white woman — and the hero is a minority who is being “victimized” in some way by someone who is white.

This oppression Olympics has taken over sports and is now the prevailing narrative in almost any sports story that has any element of controversy. An easy example of this is former Miami Dolphins coach Brian Flores. Look at the way his lawsuit alleging racial discrimination was covered. Virtually no one in all of the sports media pointed out that Flores had failed to allege any actual racial discrimination in his lawsuit. Or even bothered to point out that he’d filed his lawsuit alleging racial discrimination while there were still five open jobs. (Indeed, one of those jobs, the Houston Texans job, appeared likely to go to him if he’d just avoided filing the lawsuit). Most in the sports media covered his lawsuit as if it was a foregone conclusion that he was a victim and the (mostly) white owners were all horrible racists for not hiring him. That’s not because of the legitimacy of his suit, it’s because of the victimization pyramid hierarchy.

But the victimization hierarchy breaks down when two identity groups collide. You saw this with Deshaun Watson’s sexual assault accusers. Who is the victim here, the black man accused of sexually assaulting 24 women or the 24 women, the majority of whom are minorities? The victimization pyramid short circuits in such a way that no action is taken at all. Watson, amazingly, simply sat out for the entire year and neither the Houston Texans or the NFL undertook any action at all. They simply pretended the story didn’t exist.

Is there any way that a white quarterback accused of sexually assaulting 24 different minority women would have ever escaped suspension? Of course not. (He’d probably also have already been charged with crimes too.)

The same thing recently happened in the entertainment culture with Dave Chappelle allied against the transgender people claiming to be offended by his comedy special. Who is the victim, the black man who is being attacked for his comedy or the transgender people offended by his comedy? The media didn’t really know how to cover this. So the story, unlike, for instance, the Joe Rogan Spotify contretemps, just died, effectively with no resolution whatsoever.

Well, that’s certainly the case with the transgender swimmer. Who is the victim here? Is it the transgender swimmer who is being attacked for competing against women or is it the women who are losing their records and their ability to compete against other women? You have to pick a side. (I’m clearly on the side of the biological women.) But the ESPN’s of the world aren’t willing to pick a side. In fact, they mostly pretend this story doesn’t exist and refuse to cover it because if they pick a side they risk alienating one of the core groups of the Democratic party — women or transgender activists. It’s a collision of the base of the Democratic party so most in the media simply pretend it doesn’t exist.

To me, this is a very simple case to analyze. We don’t need to get involved in religious beliefs or larger societal issues, we just have to analyze this case based on traditional notions of fair play in sports. We have weight classes for combat sports, Mike Tyson didn’t get to box against Floyd Mayweather. He would have killed one of the smaller boxers, potentially, if he had been able to ignore weight classes. Teenage boys don’t get to play against five year old’s in little league baseball. And, put simply, men don’t get to compete against women because men, on average, are bigger, stronger and faster than women. That’s true even if those men later decide to identify as women. If there was no division of men’s and women’s sports then women would never win. That’s why we have different sport classes.

Now I don’t see this opinion as remotely political. I think Democrats, Republicans and independents, men and women, black, white, Asian and Hispanic people, gay and straight, the overwhelming majority of sports fans, likely exceeding 90% of the overall population, disagree with a transgender woman being able to dominate women’s sports by crushing biological women.

But since you have to pick sides here and there isn’t an easy white villain, the mainstream sports media, and the mainstream media overall, has no idea how to cover this story. So it mostly disappears from discourse. The same thing happens in other cases where identities collide outside the world of sports as well.

Look at what’s happening in Louisville right now. You had a BLM supporter attempt to assassinate a Jewish man running for mayor of the city. A BLM supporter fired a gun at the candidate and narrowly missed killing him. That man, Quintez Brown, has been charged with attempted murder. But his bail was only set at $100,000. And two days later he was bailed out by BLM Louisville after they crowd sourced bail money for the attempted murderer. Think about this for a moment — BLM activists BAILED OUT a man accused of attempting to assassinate a Jewish man running for mayor and many of you may not have even heard of this story until now.

Can you imagine if a Trump supporter had attempted to kill a Jewish mayoral candidate and then a Trump organization had raised money to bail him out of jail? Remember, they wouldn’t even let Kyle Rittenhouse raise money to defend himself online and they tracked down everyone who had donated to Rittenhouse’s defense fund. (The same thing, by the way, that’s happening with the Canadian truckers now).

Some people get mad at me because I attempt, however difficult it might be, to hold everyone to the same precedents, just like a judge would do. You can’t shut down the Rittenhouse and Canadian trucker fund raisers, in my opinion, while allowing BLM to raise money to bail out an attempted murderer.

Similarly, you can’t allow Twitter to shut down the Hunter Biden story because they claim it’s hacked materials while allowing all the hacked names of the Canadian trucker donors to be plastered all over your site. Those aren’t content neutral policies, they’re being applied to benefit left wing causes and punish right wing ones.

It should be the job of the media, in my opinion, to hold hypocritical organizations responsible for their hypocrisies. Now I understand some of you are fed up and don’t enjoy this exercise, but I think it matters because a huge percentage of the American public, despite what the media tries to tell you, is made up of rational adults. And those rational adults, over time, are getting red pilled in huge numbers. I know because I’m one of them. I still don’t like labeling myself as a member of any particular party because over time party identity changes. It used to be a major tenet of the Democratic party to support free speech, that’s a traditionally liberal perspective. But now it’s a tenet of the Republican party. Will it still be in twenty years? I hope so, but who knows?

But come this fall, I think anyone who values freedom and sanity has to vote Republican. Which is what I’ll be doing.

Shane writes:

“If children could vote, would their mask mandates in school already be lifted?”

Of course they would be.

Children would overwhelmingly vote against having to wear masks.

But kids are conditioned to have to listen to adults so many in the mainstream media pretend their opinions don’t matter. (Unless, that is, they decide to pick their gender. Then it would be unacceptable not to let a seven year old be whatever gender they want to be.) Do you remember when you were a kid, you lack agency, you have been instructed to listen to and obey the dictates of adults, even if those decrees are sometimes nonsensical. Part of growing up is becoming aware of your own agency and recognizing that you might differ with your parents in the decisions you make.

I’m fine with kids who are teenagers deciding they want to or don’t want to wear masks. I think that should be their own choice, they’re old enough to have a rational basis for their opinion. If my 14 year old told me he wanted to wear a mask to school, I’d disagree with him, but I think he should be able to make that choice on his own.

But my 11 year old and seven year old, who thankfully haven’t had to wear masks all year in their public schools, have to do what adults tell them to do. And I asked them early this year before I went and spoke at my local school board meeting whether they wanted to wear masks to school. And they told me in no uncertain terms they didn’t want to do so. And that’s when I went and spoke on their behalf at the school board meeting.

So I was proud to advocate for their choices and for the rights of parents to make choices for their young kids.

Remember, and I think this gets lost in the fever pitch of debate, no one is telling any parents that their kids can’t wear masks, they’re just saying that parents should get to decide whether their kids wear masks or not. If you’re a diehard mask person, guess what, you can continue to put your kindergartner in a mask for the rest of this year and next year too for that matter. I think it’s an awful choice, but I’m not telling you you can’t make that decision.

But if kids made the choice? Yeah, there would be zero mask mandates anywhere in the country.

Jimi writes:

“When will we fly without masks?”

It’s hard to forecast when the next covid variant is going to arrive and terrify everyone else into accepting more restrictions.

But I think the polling has turned against Democrats in a monster way here when it comes to wearing masks.

And that’s because a huge percentage of those of us who are part of team sanity have recognized that masks don’t make any difference. Remember that last May Joe Biden tried to do away with masks. And then delta and omicron popped up and killed that hope.

Well, I think there is desperation right now in the Democratic party, they know inflation, the border, the murder rate, foreign policy, all of it is an unmitigated disaster. And they know Biden ran on the idea he’d fix covid. So if I had to predict, I think come sometime in July or August, there will be an end to mask mandates on plane.

Because this will allow Biden to claim he’s defeated covid and try to take away some of the dangers looming in the mid terms.

Interestingly, Biden actually has the biggest issue with his own base now who have come to see masks as a virtue signaling security blanket. Will they be willing to give them up? I have no idea. But I don’t really care. They can make their own decisions and the rest of the rational Americans should be able to make their choices too.

Russell writes:

“Why have health experts been beating the obesity drums for decades yet when covid arrived and offered a real-life example of the dangers it presents the health officials suddenly clammed up about how the virus affected the obese?”

Because they sold the idea that everyone was at equal risk of covid in order to beat Trump in 2020.

That’s what you have to see here, this was never about analyzing who was actually at risk and modifying decision making as a result. This was about terrifying everyone because that way suburban moms who had zero risk from covid would think they did and vote for Biden instead of Trump.

Rebecca writes:

“Have you watched a single second of the Olympics or any of the ongoing forced down your throat NBC coverage? Follow up question: if you haven’t, and per ratings not many are watching (however seriously those are taken) do you think this will change any future games?”

I can honestly say I haven’t watched a single moment of my own choosing.

Last night my wife had on the women’s figure skating and I saw a few minutes of that while I was talking with her. Otherwise I haven’t seen any of it.

I’m a huge sports fan, but I made the conscious choice not to watch the winter Olympics this year because they were taking place in China.

I’ve never been a big Winter Olympics fan, but I’m choosing not to watch any of it because we allowed the winter olympics to take place in Beijing.

The disastrous ratings for NBC confirm that many people are making the same decision as me when it comes to watching or not watching.

Brian writes:

“Happen first, Titans win a home playoff game or that potential domed stadium is built?”

The domed stadium needs to happen.

I want Nashville to host Super Bowls, the national championship game, college football playoff games, the World Cup, Wrestlemania, the final four, you name it. This is a 25 to 30 year decision and the city needs it to happen.

Having said that, it won’t be finished until 2025, at the earliest.

That means you have the 2022, 2023, and 2024 seasons to be played, at least, before they could move into a new stadium.

Given how weak the rest of the AFC South looks right now, I like the Titans chances to be competitive at winning the division even with Ryan Tannehill at quarterback. So I’d go with the Titans winning a home playoff game before a potential domed stadium is built.

Duke writes:

“If Republicans take back the House and the Senate this fall Fauci will be gone. Are there any crimes he could potentially be charged with?”

The easiest crimes to charge Fauci with would be lying to congress.

But it’s hard to prove perjury.

So I’d be happy with that labcoat tyrant just being fired. (Or effectively being fired and retiring.)

My expectation is that if Republicans take back the House and Senate that Fauci will retire sometime in the late summer and claim victory over covid. He’ll probably get the presidential medal of honor or whatever claptrap Biden can wrangle up to send him off to pasture.

I’d be shocked beyond belief if Fauci continues to work into January of next year when Republicans would take back control of Congress and begin hard care investigations of him, which should occur anyway, but will have less potency if he’s already retired from office.

Okay, hope you guys have fantastic weekends.

I’ll be on Hannity tonight.

And then we’ll be live down in Florida at Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday with President Trump.

In the meantime, go listen to this interview with Senator Marco Rubio.

Written by Clay Travis

OutKick founder, host and author. He's presently banned from appearing on both CNN and ESPN because he’s too honest for both.

2 Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. Rubio is a less noticeable Rino – he only cares about his popularity. When Repubs win the house and senate, no one will get charged or convicted – there are no parties in DC. It is the ruling class versus the American people – thats why both parties dont want DT back as POTUS.

    I am happy to ear crow – but it just wont happen. See Trey useless Gowdy and Benghazi hearings among others.

Leave a Reply

to comment on this post. Not a VIP? Signup Here