The WNBA has spent years telling us that gender is whatever you say it is. Royce White is now calling the league’s bluff.
Read more It’s always America’s fault!
White, a former NBA player, says he intends to declare for the 2027 WNBA Draft as a “transgender woman.” He has challenged the league to explain why he shouldn’t be eligible and has threatened legal action if it refuses him. When the obvious biological question came up, White put it in the most direct terms possible, referring to the fact that he has “a pair of balls.”
Well, there you have it. The WNBA and their most powerful partners have spent years insisting that gender identity determines who is a woman. Now a former NBA player is simply taking the league at its word and asking for a roster spot.
This is what happens when ideology meets a rulebook.
And let’s be clear about what the actual issue is. It isn’t whether Royce White is a good rotation defender. It isn’t whether transgender people deserve to live their lives without harassment. It isn’t even primarily about the WNBA.
It is about whether a man should be allowed to take a professional roster spot from a woman in any league created specifically to give women the opportunity to compete at the highest level for their sex.
That woman may have spent her entire childhood playing basketball. She may have sacrificed weekends, friendships, vacations, and a normal teenage existence to train. She may have played college ball, paid her dues, and spent years dreaming about the one professional opportunity that might change her life.
And now men can show up and say, “I’d like that spot.”
Sorry, ladies. Somebody brought his old NBA résumé.
This isn’t complicated. Basketball is a physical contest. Men are generally bigger, stronger, faster, and more explosive than women because male puberty produces substantial physiological advantages. That’s why we have men’s and women’s sports in the first place. As I write in The Curse of the Bearded Lady, the physical differences aren’t an invention of conservative culture warriors. They’re the biological reason women needed their own competitive category to begin with.
And anyone who thinks the difference is merely theoretical should consider what happened to Serena and Venus Williams.
In 1998, the Williams sisters, already elite and physically dominant professional tennis players, said they could beat a male player ranked outside the world’s top 200. Karsten Braasch, ranked No. 203, accepted the challenge.
Braasch reportedly spent part of the day drinking beer and playing golf. Then he beat Serena Williams 6-1. He beat Venus 6-2.
Let that sink in. These were two of the greatest and most decorated (regardless of sex) tennis players who have ever lived. The man who beat them wasn’t even one of the 200 best male players in the world. That’s an argument for women’s sports.
The entire point of a women’s athletic category is that women shouldn’t have to compete against the physical advantages produced by male biology in order to earn the right to compete.
Take that away, and you haven’t made sports more inclusive. You’ve made them less fair. And eventually, the fans notice.
Read more When tariffs spark patriotism
The WNBA already has a perception problem. It has spent years trying to convince Americans that women’s basketball is worth watching, worth investing in, and worth taking seriously as professional sports.
So why would anyone think it is a brilliant marketing strategy to make the league’s central controversy whether men can play in it?
France is giving us a preview. Julie Tétart, a male player competing in French women’s basketball, has been dominating the country’s second-tier women’s league. He reportedly averaged more than 21 points and 20 rebounds per game during the 2025–26 season, leading the league in both categories while collecting major individual honors. He has also expressed interest in playing in the WNBA.
With Europe having already gone considerably farther down this road, France and other European countries are wrestling with questions that American sports leagues are only now beginning to confront. We don’t have to follow Europe off the cliff just because somebody has already built a parking lot at the bottom.
The political irony is almost too perfect. Women are one of the Democrat party’s strongest constituencies. In 2024, women voted for Kamala Harris over Donald Trump by 51 percent to 46 percent, and according to a NPORS study, women 18–29 identified as or leaned Democrat at roughly a 2-to-1 pace versus any other party combined.
So perhaps Democrat women should ask: What happens when the ideology of the political movement they overwhelmingly support collides with the competitive interests of women?
Women fought for women’s sports. They fought for scholarships. They fought for roster spots. They fought for equal opportunity. They fought for the ability to compete without having to overcome the physical advantages of male athletes. The left has painted itself into a corner. If gender identity is all that matters, then Royce White has a perfectly reasonable question: Why not me?
If the WNBA says no, then it has to explain why. And if the explanation is that sex matters in athletic competition, congratulations.
The question is, will they fall on their sword of ideology, or will logical minds prevail? Is it possible for the WNBA and its partners, who are so invested in virtue-signaling towards the transgender community, to acknowledge the biological diffferences in men and woman at the risk of being labeled bigots?
And finally, most importantly, do they care enough about the women who competed fairly against members of their sex their whole lives to be protected from men who can easily dominate them, game in and game out?
Women’s sports exist for a reason. The WNBA exists for a reason. If we erase the reason, eventually we’re left with a basketball league that has forgotten what the “W” stands for.
Read more A conservative versus the homeowners’ association
Image via Raw Pixel.