JENI O’DOWD: Why I agree with Donald Trump on defining men and women based on biology

Love him or hate him, Donald Trump’s policies have a way of sparking debate, and his stance on gender definitions is no exception.

At the very least, it has people talking about how far woke culture has gone — and in Australia, the so-called woke agenda has pushed us to extremes that would have seemed absurd just a decade ago.

Allowing students to identify as cats in schools? Check. Unisex bathrooms in schools? Check. Replacing “merry Christmas” with “happy holidays”? Check.

Woke culture has infiltrated society, and often to ridiculous lengths.

In many workplaces, a simple compliment on a colleague’s outfit is a minefield, with people fearing it might be seen as harassment.

Greetings such as “ladies and gentlemen” are being scrapped, and even Father’s Day has been re-branded as “Special Person’s Day” in some schools to avoid offending children without fathers.

I am all for inclusion, but overcorrections leave people on edge, unsure of what they can say or do without inadvertently offending someone.

This tension is more than evident in the debate over gender identity. While we should respect individuals’ rights to live as they choose, the push to accommodate every expression of identity — no matter how far-reaching — raises serious questions about the limits of acceptance.

How did we get here? How did we go from advocating for fundamental rights and respect to questioning the foundation of reality?

I don’t agree with many things Donald Trump advocates, but I do support his stance on defining men and women based on biological sex.

He signed an administrative order recognising two sexes only: male or female, as determined at birth.

Trump also criticised policies that allow transgender athletes — school-age players, college athletes and professionals — to play on teams that align with their gender identity, arguing this could harm women’s sports.

Remember the widespread outcry when Lia Thomas, a transgender swimmer, competed in women’s college swimming in the United States and broke records?

Or when New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard’s inclusion in women’s categories at the Tokyo Olympics led to international controversy.

These cases highlight the importance of maintaining fair competition while ensuring the rights of all individuals are respected.

Australia’s approach to transgender participation in sports has tried to balance inclusivity with fairness.

The Australian Sports Commission set guidelines in 2023 which recommend testosterone limits for transgender athletes competing in elite female categories.

But Netball Australia rejected a global ban on transgender players. Meanwhile, the Women’s Professional Golfers’ Association Tour of Australasia implemented a policy restricting participation to those either born female or who had transitioned before puberty.

These mixed approaches show the issue’s complexity and highlight the need for more straightforward guidelines to protect fairness in sports.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton last week argued that young men were “fed up” with feeling ostracised and sick of being treated like ogres.

He believes push-back on “woke” practices, such as being overlooked for jobs under affirmative action policies, is gaining momentum, and the decline of “wokeism” would be accelerated after Donald Trump’s election.

Speaking on Mark Bouris’ Straight Talk podcast, Mr Dutton said in the US and elsewhere, young males felt “disenfranchised and ostracised”.

“They’re saying: ‘Well, hang on, I have nothing but respect for women, and I would never treat my female friends differently than my male friends’,” he said.

“I think there’s just a point where people are fed up, and they are pushing back and saying: ‘Well, why am I being overlooked at work for a job . . . three jobs running, when I’ve got . . . a partner at home . . . with three young kids, and I want a promotion at work so that I can help pay the bills at home’ and so I think all of that has morphed.”

Many organisations in Australia have actively implemented diversity hiring practices to promote inclusion and equitable opportunities.

ASX-listed companies are encouraged to increase female board representation to 40 per cent and expand diversity reporting to include race, sexual orientation, and socio-economic background.

Government guidelines support inclusive recruitment by minimising bias and fostering workplaces that reflect Australia’s diverse community.

This is all well and good, but if you’re a male, white, middle-class — and even the most qualified candidate — you might not get the job. How does that benefit companies and society in the long run?

While I agree that steps were necessary to stop the “jobs for the boys” culture and increase female representation on boards, have we now taken it too far?

Woke culture aims to make society more inclusive, but when taken to extremes, it undermines the very values it seeks to uphold.

The challenge is not whether to embrace inclusion but how to do so without sacrificing fairness and common sense.