Minnesota Lynx head coach Cheryl Reeve wore a shirt that said, “Trans Kids Belong” during Sunday’s game against the Indiana Fever. The political network ESPN had to of course point it out. Analyst Rebecca Lobo praised her earlier comments in which she called the debate over transgender athletes problematic. The whole thing was presented as a quiet act of solidarity.
And here you thought this whole topic was done because of a couple of Executive Orders being signed. Let me recap the current score for you. Reeve’s wearing the shirt is stupid but let’s dig in to what this really means.
ESPN praises Cheryl Reeve for wearing pro “trans kids” shirt in response to Sophie Cunningham standing up to protect women and girls. pic.twitter.com/e5uoIcH2XQ
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) August 2, 2026
Confession: I don’t follow women’s basketball, or basketball at all. When this story started circulating, I had to look both Cheryl Reeve and Rebecca Lobo up. I figured they had a decent career, otherwise they wouldn’t be where they are now. Reeve, a head coach of a professional sports team and Lobo is an ESPN basketball analyst.
Cheryl Reeve has four championships and more Coach of the Year awards than anyone in WNBA history. She seemed to have a decent playing career when at La Salle in the 80s.
ESPN’s analyst, Rebecca Lobo, was the face of UConn’s first national title team, an Olympic gold medalist, and a Hall of Famer.
Truly impressive resumes. Nobody is erasing a single accomplishment. They played, worked hard, and earned everything they achieved.
And neither of these women ever had to compete against boys/men.
They never lost a scholarship to a male who decided he was a girl. They never shared a locker room with a man. They never had to physically go up against a male player. The entire system that made their success possible existed because earlier generations helped open the door for them. Title IX.
I guess before she sported the infamous T-shirt, Cheryl Reeve said transgender athletes are not the biggest problem in women’s sports. She called protecting “trans kids” a human rights issue and insisted every child deserves access to sports. She dismissed the idea of biological males in girls’ locker rooms as a false, harmful narrative. Then she pointed to cisgender men as the ones who historically held women back from facilities, uniforms, and opportunities.
Listen to the whole clip.
Cheryl Reeve speaking on the trans rally that is planned prior to the Indiana Fever game Sunday and her views around trans athletes and Women’s sports
Full video below: I don’t feel it’s right to clip or cut out snippets for quotes, so if you have time, give it a listen. pic.twitter.com/56NAo30aPq
— Andrew Dukowitz (@adukeMN) August 1, 2026
Maybe Cheryl Reeve just took one too many elbows to the head.
She correctly remembers that women had to fight biological males for their own spaces… and somehow concludes the answer is to let biological males back in.
The women who rose the highest within a protected category are now among the loudest voices telling the next generation of girls that that protection is optional. The message to the next generation of girls from Cheryl Reeve and Rebecca Lobo is to shut up and let the men play against them. No one cares about your safety. Just shut up.
Then there is the shirt itself. The trans cult wants you to think that the slogan “Trans Kids Belong” is something kind. They want it portrayed as being gentle. But it is doing a lot of heavy political work. It is not simply a call for basic human decency towards children who are struggling.
Cheryl Reeve said she wore her “Trans kids belong” shirt to “educate.”
Educate us on what? That boys belong in girls’ sports?
What a freaking weirdo. pic.twitter.com/KDM4eyJULO
— Gina Milan (@ginamilan_) August 2, 2026
It has become shorthand for an ideology that treats a child’s temporary distress about their body as evidence that the body itself is the problem. The prescribed solution is not patience, therapy aimed at underlying issues, or time. The prescribed solution increasingly involves puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and, in some cases, surgeries that permanently alter healthy tissue.
Why people are not talking more about this being profound child abuse is beyond me.
Children cannot consent to sterility. They cannot fully grasp what it means to trade normal puberty for a medical pathway that will require lifelong intervention. The adults pushing this path have decided that a young person’s feelings in a particular moment outweigh the permanent physical consequences.
Cheryl Reeve says she’s educated herself and talked to transgender families. Well, Cheryl, I don’t think you’ve educated yourself nearly as much as you think you have. If you had, that T-shirt would be in the burn barrel.
Reeve can wear whatever slogan she chooses. Lobo can call the surrounding commentary thoughtful. But neither of them had to face the competitive reality they are now asking young female athletes to accept without complaint.
They competed in a category that existed precisely so girls would not have to compete against male bodies. And players like Sophie Cunningham are defending that same principle. More of this, please.
I keep coming back to the contradiction. Reeve and Lobo had the opportunity to play, compete, succeed, and build lucrative careers without ever having to compete against men. Now that they’ve gotten theirs, they seem perfectly willing to tell the next generation of girls to accept a reality they never had to face themselves.
Cheryl Reeve and Rebecca Lobo are not courageous. Sophie Cunningham and Riley Gaines are.
Feature image: @JonnyRoot_ on X, edited and enhanced with AI.
Wfjag says: If she wants to coach in a mixed-gender league, go set one up.
Granted, you’ll probably end up with the NBA-didn’t-makeits, retirees and has-beens, and the female players will only play the positions expressly reserved for them for the minimum required time, but, it will be a league open for all.
However, I expect that this will not be acceptable to “trans-men” since they want guaranteed privileges, not the opportunity to compete on an equal basis.
1 Comment