When did #metoo become #notyou

It feels like five minutes ago the country was championing the voices of women who were speaking hard truths about uncomfortable things, hello to the Harvey Weinsteins and Bill Cosbys and Sean Combs's of the world. "Go along to get along" became "It's not okay" morphed into "That's really not okay" turned into the superbly unironic Twisted Sister anthem, "We're not gonna take it (anymore)."

But then - someone decided we'd #metoo 'd for long enough, and it was time to put aside all that nonsense about championing girls and women and caring about their stories and their narratives. Because there was a new shiny group of people who have feelings that get hurt and can be championed. Because that's what it seems to be about, at least as far as I've figured out. It's not about nurturing individuals to become champions but rather to find a group, no matter how niche or how small, that can be championed? Do you see the difference? I love the concept of "agency" as it applies to personhood so I'm sure I'll get around to talking about that soon, but nurturing champions vs. championing causes are two very different things. The first is supportive, encouraging, "I've got your back", "I'm here when you need me". The second? "Let me stand in front of you, fight on your behalf (whether you ask me to or not, whether you need me to or not, whether my cause is valid or not)." The second is tricky, because it masquerades as caring about the individual being championed but it's really about the person wearing the cape.

One area where this seems to be on the fast train to upside-down world is the idea of biological males in women's sports. This is not a post about transgender politics, the ethics of bioengineering the human body, or appropriate interventions for individuals who feel as though they are somehow "mis-bodied". It is about one super-small, very niche issue. And I think part of the reason it's even an issue is that we're asking the wrong question. It shouldn't be, "why shouldn't we allow transgender athletes compete in women's sports" but rather, "why would we ever consider allowing biological males to compete against biological females?"

Because crossing fingers and wishing really really hard cannot change things that are truths. You can't wish away the biological differences in muscle mass and distribution, skeletal density and composition, or even something as simple as wingspan (think Michael Phelps with outstretched arms).

When the discussion starts getting cantankerous, you'll hear the argument, "Well, it's such a small group of people, it shouldn't be an issue to let them compete on the team with which they identify." I think the opportunity we miss is to say, "On the contrary. It's such a small group of people, they should continue to compete on the team that aligns with their biology.

We have to get on a good path with this and we have to do it soon. If we don't, our daughters, grandaughters, nieces, sisters, and all girls and women are in jeopardy of growing up not in a #metoo world but rather a #notyou society - a society that tells them their dreams, wants, and needs matter less than - and it will leave them to fill in that blank.