The Dawn & Caitlin Show exposed the bigotry rooted in women’s hoops
The Democratic National Committee on Sunday closed its annual sports convention inside Cleveland’s Rocket Mortgage Fieldhouse, hosting the title game of the women’s NCAA Tournament.
Dawn Staley’s South Carolina Gamecocks rebounded Caitlin Clark’s Iowa Hawkeyes into submission, 87-75, putting a bow on the most remarkable and enlightening season of women’s hoops in this nation’s history.
I will not watch Caitlin Clark play in the WNBA. No way.
Many of you, undoubtedly, did not know women’s basketball is deeply connected to Democratic politics. It is. The sports-loving base of the Democratic Party buys WNBA season tickets, treats the women’s Final Four as its spring break “Freaknik,” and sees the rise of women’s hoops as a key indicator in the destruction of the patriarchy.
The Dawn & Caitlin title matchup symbolized the delivery of a dream. Title IX vowed 52 years ago to grant women fulfillment and happiness through increased masculinity.
Turns out, the dream is really a nightmare. That’s the lesson of Dawn & Caitlin and this entire women’s basketball season. Be careful what you wish for.
Caitlin Clark’s ascension as a superstar athlete, the most influential jock of 2024, has exposed the brutal reality of Democratic Party-orchestrated egalitarianism.
For those of you who want women to run the world, this year of women’s college basketball previewed what that world would look like.
For the sins of being white, heterosexual, and talented, Clark’s basketball peers have unleashed a level of envy and vitriol we haven’t seen since Tonya Harding conspired with Jeff Gillooly before the 1994 U.S. figure skating championship.
From Sheryl Swoopes to Angel Reese to Diana Taurasi to Lynette Woodard to Breanna Stewart, some of the greatest players in women’s basketball history have taken shots at Clark.
In the media, it’s been much worse. Pundits have twisted themselves into pretzels trying to articulate arguments that diminish Clark’s accomplishments. Clark chose to play for her home-state squad, leading the Hawkeyes to back-to-back NCAA title games. She hasn’t played with a single WNBA-caliber player. But the sports pundits have led the argument that she can’t be considered the greatest player because she never won a title in four years at Iowa. The pundits also pretend that Clark taunted her opponents in the same fashion Reese taunted Clark after last year’s championship game. It’s a lie.
Clark has been a blessing and curse for women’s basketball. She’s drawn unprecedented attention to the sport. But many people do not like what they see. The increased masculinity of women mixed with their emotions has created a wickedness that you can’t unsee once you’ve seen it. They’re unlikable.
I will not watch Clark play in the WNBA. No way.
I enjoyed Clark in a college environment because the collegiate game still has the thinnest veneer of purity. Most women’s college players are not tatted from head to toe. They’re not women impersonating men.
I’ve never had an interest in drag shows. I don’t want to see men dressed like women or women behave and look like men.
Clark is making a mistake entering the WNBA. She should return to college basketball for a fifth season. She could easily earn more than $20 million in name, image, and likeness. She could retire, marry her boyfriend, and be a lifetime ambassador for Iowa and women’s college hoops. She will not survive what awaits her in the WNBA. The culture of the league is racist and hostile to heterosexuality.
Honestly, the culture of women’s basketball is racist and hostile to heterosexuality.
That’s the other aspect of the Dawn & Caitlin Show. Dawn Staley epitomizes women’s basketball. She’s the golden child.
On Saturday, the South Carolina coach affirmed her support for mentally ill men being allowed to compete in women’s sports.
“I’m of the opinion, if you’re a woman, you should play,” Staley said. “If you consider yourself a woman and you want to play sports or vice versa, you should be able to play. That’s my opinion.”
According to Staley, being a man or a woman is a matter of consideration. It’s an opinion.
Are you following this? Women’s basketball represents the mindset of the Democratic Party. It’s a coalition of racist and insane women determined to uproot the patriarchy.
Staley represents the stereotypical black female Democrat. She claims to serve God while distancing herself from what is actually in the Bible.
Her postgame tears and praise of God all struck me as scripted and insincere. You can’t affirm transgenderism one day and the God described in the Bible the next day. It’s a contradiction. You can’t be a flaming racist smearing BYU volleyball fans and Iowa coach Lisa Bluder one year, and the next year be a Bible-thumping Christian without public acknowledgement of past mistakes.
I’m not buying what Staley is selling.
This year’s women’s Final Four was a giant stage for the feminist movement and the Democratic Party. Anyone paying attention shouldn’t like what they saw. You saw people hate Caitlin Clark because of the color of her skin and her perceived sexuality. You saw Staley put on a performance intended to convince Christians that their beliefs do not need to align with the God described in the Bible.
You saw messaging and a culture consistent with the DNC.
