Latest
Martina Navratilova says Billie Jean King’s trans-athlete stance ‘doesn’t square’ with her own words
Martina Navratilova wants Billie Jean King to explain herself.
King is one of the most important figures in the history of women’s sports, a tennis icon who helped build the modern women’s game and spent decades fighting for equal opportunity, equal pay and respect for female athletes.
But King has also publicly supported trans-identifying biological male athletes competing in girls’ and women’s sports.
In a 2025 interview with The Telegraph ahead of Wimbledon, King called the broader transgender-athlete debate in sports “a nightmare” and said people should listen to transgender people’s stories and make them feel included.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
That position has frustrated Navratilova, another tennis legend and longtime advocate of gay rights and women’s sports, because King has also publicly acknowledged the physical differences between men and women.
Asked how King could reconcile those two positions, Navratilova said the contradiction is obvious.
“I honestly don’t know because it doesn’t square,” Navratilova told OutKick.
Navratilova was responding to a clip of King discussing the obvious physical differences between men and women. In the clip, King said men are generally bigger and stronger, have different skeletal systems and bigger hearts, and that women never claimed they were physically the same as men.
That’s the entire reason women’s sports exist in the first place.
In 2020, King joined nearly 200 athletes in supporting a friend-of-the-court brief against an Idaho law that barred trans-identifying male athletes from competing in girls’ and women’s sports.
“There is no place in any sport for discrimination of any kind,” King said at the time. “I’m proud to support all transgender athletes who simply want the access and opportunity to compete in the sport they love.”
That’s the gap Navratilova is pressing.
“I think she thinks that they play fair and square, meaning males identify as women, take all the hormones and do everything, like Renée Richards did 50 years ago,” Navratilova said. “And that it’s just nice to include everybody.”
But Navratilova said the issue can’t be reduced to kindness or inclusion.
TENNIS STAR ARYNA SABALENKA SAYS FEMALE ATHLETES FACING TRANS COMPETITORS ‘JUST NOT FAIR TO WOMEN’
She offered a hypothetical scenario: a high school boys basketball team holds tryouts, 10 boys make the team, and five boys who don’t make the boys team then try out for the girls team. If they make it, which they almost certainly would, five girls lose their spots.
“That’s not equality,” Navratilova said. “That’s a total takeover.”
And it’s not just about who wins, she said. It’s about roster spots, podium spots, awards, prize money, privacy, safety and the entire purpose of female-only categories.
For Navratilova, the answer starts with keeping sex-based boundaries intact.
“The solution is obvious,” she told OutKick. “No male bodies in women’s sports and no male bodies in women’s sex-based spaces for many different reasons, not the least of which is women’s rights to safety, dignity and fairness and privacy.”
Navratilova said her private conversations with King have made King’s public position even more frustrating.
“Billie Jean has repeatedly told me over the last four or five years that she would love to talk to me about it, that she defers to me because I know a lot more about it than she does,” Navratilova said.
But Navratilova said the conversations she expected, never really happened.
“Without talking to me really and listening to what my points were, she just went her way and put out the statement by her and the Women’s Sports Foundation about inclusion and all this stuff,” Navratilova said.
That, Navratilova said, is what surprised her most.
“I don’t think she really has heard the other side of the debate, so to speak,” Navratilova said.
Navratilova said she wants King to answer the question directly.
“Please get Billie Jean on record,” Navratilova said. “I’d like to know how she explains it because she hasn’t been able to explain it to me.”
OutKick contacted King and the Women’s Sports Foundation seeking comment and offering King an interview. Neither responded.
And Navratilova is not alone.
Nancy Hogshead, a three-time Olympic gold medalist swimmer, civil rights lawyer and former Women’s Sports Foundation president, went even further.
Asked whether King’s comments on male advantages suggested she was starting to come around, Hogshead rejected that premise.
“Oh no, she’s always known that,” Hogshead told OutKick. “She’s a hypocrite, she’s a total hypocrite.”
Hogshead said she could understand confusion several years ago, before more research and high-profile cases brought the issue to the forefront.
Her own view, Hogshead said, was not always what it is now.
“I was in favor of it too,” Hogshead said. “I thought this was about inclusion and nondiscrimination. I thought it was fair.”
That has changed.
“I was wrong,” Hogshead said. “I was dead wrong.”
Hogshead pointed to sex-eligibility disputes involving Caster Semenya, the Lia Thomas case and research on male puberty and athletic performance as part of what caused her to rethink her position.
She said the same evidence should matter for King.
“She knows, but she hasn’t made the connection,” Hogshead said. “As she says, men are faster, stronger, bigger lungs structurally, but hasn’t made the connection of like, oh, so that’s unfair to the girls to have to compete with that.”
Hogshead said her frustration with King and the Women’s Sports Foundation predates the transgender-athlete debate.
“I wouldn’t say I left,” Hogshead said of her 2014 departure from WSF. “I would say I got fired because I would not sign a contract.”
Hogshead alleged the contract would have restricted her from speaking publicly about sexual abuse and harassment involving athletes.
Asked why she believed a women’s sports organization would want to limit her ability to speak on that issue, Hogshead pointed to what she described as King’s aversion to backlash.
“Because Billie Jean didn’t want to go into any room and face hostility or having somebody be against her,” Hogshead said.
Hogshead connected that episode to the current fight over transgender athletes in women’s sports.
“I think it’s more political for the same reason, for the exact same reason that she didn’t wanna be involved in the sexual abuse issue or she didn’t want the Women’s Sports Foundation to be involved,” Hogshead said. “It’s hard to be the tip of the spear.”
To Hogshead, both fights come back to the same issue: whether women’s sports leaders are willing to take unpopular stands when women and girls need defending.
OutKick separately asked the Women’s Sports Foundation whether Hogshead’s role ended because she refused to sign a contract restricting her from speaking publicly about sexual abuse in sports and whether King was involved in or aware of that contract decision. WSF did not respond before publication.
That leaves a central question unanswered.
If men have physical advantages over women, and King says they do, then why should biological males who identify as women be allowed into female categories?
Navratilova’s position is especially notable because she has personal history with Renée Richards, the transgender tennis player who sued to compete in the women’s draw at the 1977 U.S. Open.
Richards later coached Navratilova.
That history matters because Navratilova didn’t come to the issue as an opponent of inclusion.
“Because of Renée, I was completely all-in for inclusion,” Navratilova said. “Most of us welcomed Renée into the fold.”
CHRIS EVERT DEFENDS MARTINA NAVRATILOVA ON TRANS ATHLETES: ‘SCIENCE DOESN’T LIE’
But Navratilova said Richards competed at a very different moment and under very different circumstances.
Richards was 43 and not in peak playing shape when competing against women, Navratilova said. At the time, Richards was essentially a one-off case.
“It was only one because she won the right to compete in a court of law,” Navratilova said. “There were no others. Even if there were other transgender people, they would have to sue for the right to compete.”
That has changed.
In recent years, trans-identifying biological male athletes have competed in women’s and girls’ sports across the country, from high school track and field to college and junior college volleyball to cycling, swimming and other sports.
Navratilova said the change forced her to reconsider the issue in a way she did not have to when Richards was the only example. But, more importantly, Richards also has a new perspective on the issue.
“Renée herself now says she should not have been able to compete,” Navratilova said. “She realizes now she had an advantage.”
Richards made a similar argument in a 2024 position paper published by Sports Illustrated in 2025. “I believe that having gone through male puberty disqualifies transgender women from the female category in sports,” Richards wrote, adding that a “retained physical advantage persists” even after testosterone reduction
That’s why Navratilova says it’s no longer enough to rely on the language of inclusion without answering the competitive question.
“Boys are faster, stronger, quicker than girls,” Navratilova said. “And so, if it doesn’t matter who wins, why do they have to compete as a girl? If they feel like a girl, they can still compete with the boys if they don’t care where they end up. Why is it the girls that need to suck it up?”
Navratilova came out publicly as a lesbian in 1981 and became one of the most prominent openly gay athletes in the world.
That’s part of what makes the backlash against her so striking.
Navratilova has been called homophobic, transphobic, bigoted and worse for her position on women’s sports. She told OutKick the attacks are especially frustrating because many of the people attacking her don’t know what it was like for gay athletes when she came out.
Asked what she makes of being called homophobic, Navratilova dismissed the idea.
“It’s just stupid,” Navratilova said. “I came out before they were born, so they don’t know what it was like.”
Navratilova said the criticism from within the LGBTQ advocacy world has been painful because she still believes in equal rights.
“I respect everybody’s right to human rights, equal rights everywhere,” Navratilova said.
But she said equal rights do not include the right for male-bodied athletes to enter female sports or female-only spaces.
“You do not have a right to come into my space,” Navratilova said.
That doesn’t mean the verbal attacks haven’t stung.
“What does it make me feel like? Just sad,” Navratilova said. “Just really sad that they would just name-call rather than have a discussion and totally discount what I went through and twist it around.”
King’s legacy in women’s sports is undeniable.
She fought for women to have opportunities, respect, prize money and a professional tour of their own. She famously beat Bobby Riggs in the “Battle of the Sexes,” a moment that became larger than tennis and helped cement King as a symbol of women’s equality.
But that history is exactly why Navratilova and Hogshead say King’s current position deserves scrutiny.
Women’s sports were not created because women lacked talent, discipline or courage. They were created because biological sex matters in athletics.
King knows that. She has said so herself.
That’s why Navratilova wants an answer.
How does King square a lifetime spent fighting for women’s sports with a position that allows biological males to compete against females?
So far, King hasn’t answered that question for OutKick. And according to Navratilova, she hasn’t answered it for her, either.
Latest
BREAKING: US Diplomat Found Dead
An American diplomat assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Myanmar has been found dead under mysterious circumstances, prompting a murder investigation that has already led to charges against a Thai national in the military-ruled Southeast Asian nation.
The State Department confirmed the death of the embassy employee but has remained tight-lipped about the details surrounding the case, citing privacy concerns for the diplomat’s family and loved ones.
“Out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones, we have no further information to provide at this time,” the State Department said in an emailed reply to questions from The Associated Press.
American officials stationed in neighboring Thailand, along with representatives from the U.S. Embassy in Myanmar, referred all inquiries back to the State Department, underscoring the sensitivity of the investigation and the limited public information that has been released so far.
According to members of Myanmar’s diplomatic community, the diplomat was discovered dead on May 11 at the Sakura Residence & Hotel in Yangon. The property serves as a long-term residence for diplomats, foreign business executives, aid workers, and other international visitors. Located roughly one mile from the U.S. Embassy, the hotel has long been considered a secure location frequently used by members of the diplomatic corps.
The circumstances surrounding the diplomat’s death remain unclear, and authorities have provided few public details about what investigators believe occurred inside the residence.
However, significant developments emerged this week when a Thai woman appeared in court and was formally charged in connection with the case. According to two attorneys familiar with the proceedings, the woman faces a murder charge as well as a separate immigration-related offense under Myanmar law.
If convicted, the penalties could be severe. Under Myanmar’s legal system, a murder conviction can carry a sentence ranging from 10 years in prison to life imprisonment or even the death penalty, depending on the circumstances of the case and the court’s findings.
Thailand’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that it has been providing consular assistance to the accused woman and has notified her family about the case. Officials declined to comment further on the allegations or the evidence being presented by prosecutors.
The case is unfolding against the backdrop of ongoing instability in Myanmar, which has been engulfed in political turmoil and armed conflict since the military seized power in a 2021 coup that ousted the democratically elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Since then, the ruling military junta has faced growing resistance from pro-democracy groups, ethnic militias, and armed opposition forces. The conflict has expanded into a nationwide civil war that has left thousands dead and displaced millions, while drawing international condemnation from Western governments, including the United States.
The country’s military government maintains strict control over information, making independent reporting and transparency difficult. Authorities rarely release detailed information regarding criminal investigations, particularly those involving foreign nationals or diplomatic personnel.
Consistent with that pattern, police officials, prison authorities, and court representatives have all declined to publicly discuss the case involving the American diplomat. No official explanation has been provided regarding the cause of death, potential motives, or evidence supporting the charges against the Thai woman.
For now, many questions remain unanswered. U.S. officials have offered little information beyond confirming the diplomat’s death, while Myanmar authorities continue to conduct their investigation largely behind closed doors.
As the case moves through Myanmar’s judicial system, American officials, members of the diplomatic community, and the diplomat’s family are awaiting further answers about what led to the death of a U.S. government employee serving overseas in one of the world’s most volatile regions.
Latest
Supreme Court Delivers Landmark Midterm Decision With 6-1 Ruling
Florida Republicans notched a major victory this week after the Florida Supreme Court handed Gov. Ron DeSantis and GOP lawmakers a significant legal win, ruling that the state’s newly drawn congressional map will remain in place for the 2026 midterm elections.
In a decisive 6-1 ruling, the court rejected an emergency effort by left-leaning voting-rights organizations seeking to block the map before voters head to the polls this fall. The decision ensures that Florida’s elections will proceed under the congressional districts approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature during a special session earlier this year, bringing much-needed certainty to the state’s electoral process.
The legal challenge was brought by the Equal Ground Education Fund and several allied groups, which claimed the map was drawn to benefit Republicans and therefore violated Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment. That amendment, approved by voters in 2010, prohibits lawmakers from intentionally drawing districts to favor or disadvantage a political party.
The plaintiffs sought an injunction that would have prevented the map from taking effect while their broader lawsuit continued through the court system. However, Florida’s highest court declined to intervene.
Writing for the majority, the court emphasized that the case should proceed through the normal judicial process before the Supreme Court becomes involved.
“At this time, we do not have jurisdiction over that matter,” the majority opinion stated.
The justices further made clear that they would not assume future rulings from lower courts would automatically warrant Supreme Court review, signaling a commitment to allowing the judicial process to play out as designed.
The ruling provides stability for Florida voters, election officials, and candidates as the election season rapidly approaches. With candidate qualifying deadlines looming and election preparations already underway, the court’s decision removes uncertainty that could have disrupted the electoral process.
Justice Jorge Labarga was the lone dissenter.
Labarga argued that the court should have immediately stepped in because of the statewide significance of the dispute and the fast-approaching election calendar.
“Unfortunately, for now, and with a filing deadline and an election fast approaching, we will not have the opportunity to review the issues of statewide importance raised in the petitioners’ efforts to enjoin Florida’s 2026 congressional map,” Labarga wrote.
Notably, Labarga remains the only member of the Florida Supreme Court who was not appointed by a Republican governor.
The decision marks yet another victory for DeSantis, who has consistently argued that Florida’s congressional districts should comply with recent federal court rulings limiting the use of race in redistricting decisions. The governor has maintained that districts drawn primarily around racial considerations face increasing constitutional scrutiny and should be revisited to ensure compliance with federal law.
Following those court rulings, DeSantis pushed for changes to portions of Florida’s congressional map that had previously been crafted with race-based considerations in mind. Rather than waiting for lawmakers to formulate a proposal, the governor’s office took an active role in developing a new map.
Jason Poreda, an aide to DeSantis, drafted the congressional plan that was ultimately presented to lawmakers. Republican legislators later adopted the proposal without making changes, reflecting strong support for the governor’s approach.
Predictably, Democrats and voting-rights activists immediately objected to the new districts, citing testimony regarding partisan voting data and public statements discussing potential Republican advantages under the map. Supporters of the plan countered that the changes were driven by evolving legal standards and recent court decisions, not partisan considerations.
Florida’s 28 congressional seats make it one of the nation’s most influential political battlegrounds. Republicans believe the new map could help solidify the party’s position in the state and strengthen efforts to maintain or expand the GOP majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The Florida case is part of a larger national battle over congressional redistricting as states across the country grapple with court rulings that continue to reshape election law. Republicans have increasingly argued that district maps should be based on constitutional principles and equal representation rather than race-based political engineering.
While the underlying lawsuit remains active and could continue through Florida’s courts, the Supreme Court’s decision ensures that the 2026 elections will move forward under the current map.
Justice Adam Tanenbaum highlighted that point in a separate concurring opinion, emphasizing the importance of certainty as election season nears.
“The people of Florida can rest assured that elections will take place this year,” Tanenbaum wrote.
His statement underscored what many Republicans view as the central takeaway from the ruling: Florida voters now have clarity, election officials can move forward with confidence, and the state’s democratic process can proceed without last-minute judicial interference.
Latest
The Moment Trump Supporters Have Waited For — Happens At 4pm
Here’s a rewritten version in a more engaging, conservative news style:
President Donald Trump signaled Thursday that his patience with Iran has run out, declaring there will be “no more negotiation” after accusing the regime of dragging out talks while continuing to resist U.S. demands.
During an appearance on Fox & Friends, Trump said Iran has squandered multiple opportunities to reach an agreement and warned that the United States remains prepared to increase pressure if Tehran refuses to comply.
“Well, that could happen if we want to keep going,” Trump said when asked about reports that Iran had been given a final ultimatum. “And the deal is a very good deal. The problem with the deal — it could be the greatest deal in history. They could wave the white flag of surrender.”
The president mocked media coverage that he believes has downplayed Iran’s deteriorating military position.
“‘We surrender. We’re finished. Praise be to Allah,’” Trump said, describing what he believes would be required before some outlets would acknowledge a U.S. victory. “And they could do all of this loud and clear, and the fake news would say it was a great victory for Iran.”
Trump then painted a grim picture of Iran’s military capabilities, claiming U.S. operations have crippled much of the country’s defensive infrastructure.
“We’re killing them. They have no navy. No air force. No anti-aircraft,” Trump said. “We are flying planes over the middle of Tehran and they don’t have any idea.”
According to Trump, U.S. actions have severely damaged Iran’s radar systems, missile launchers, drone capabilities, and air defenses.
“We’ve knocked out all their radar, all of their anti-aircraft, much of their missiles — probably less than 20%,” he said. “Most of their launchers, the missile launches, which is quite important. Their drone capacity is way down. Their attacks are very minor. They’re finished.”
The president also blasted major media outlets for what he described as misleading coverage of the conflict.
“And yet the fake news — just like with the election — the fake news is out there saying, ‘Wow, Iran is doing just so well. Trump is doing terribly,’” he said.
Trump specifically singled out MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, saying he recently watched a portion of Morning Joe and was stunned by the program’s portrayal of events.
“I watched it yesterday, one of his shows for five minutes,” Trump said. “This fake Joe Scarborough talking about how well Iran is doing. Where did that come from? It’s just the craziest thing.”
Despite Trump’s tougher rhetoric, Fox News anchor Bret Baier reported Wednesday that the president remains cautiously optimistic that a diplomatic resolution is still possible.
“I talked to him today, and there was this sense of optimism — cautious optimism — that they maybe get to a deal soon,” Baier said during America Reports.
At the same time, tensions remain high. Baier noted that Iranian state media announced a new authority intended to regulate traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical shipping routes. The proposal would require vessels to obtain authorization before crossing the strategic waterway, a move likely to face resistance from the international community.
Additional details emerged Wednesday regarding recent U.S. military operations. Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst revealed that Trump personally contacted him from the Situation Room shortly before American forces launched another wave of strikes against Iranian military targets.
According to Yingst, the president described the operation before it began, underscoring the administration’s confidence in its military strategy.
Following the strikes, Trump took to Truth Social to deliver a blunt assessment of Iran’s condition.
“Iran’s Military is a complete and total mess,” the president wrote.
With negotiations appearing increasingly fragile and military pressure intensifying, the coming days could prove decisive in determining whether Iran returns to the negotiating table—or faces even greater consequences from the United States.
-
Latest2 months agoVance Leaves Meeting, Looks Straight Into Camera, Announces Stunning Arrest
-
News2 months agoAdam Schiff Facing 30 Years In Prison After Bank Records Leak
-
Latest2 months agoSupreme Curt Sides With Trump — He Can Remove The All
-
News2 months agoAll Hell Breaks Loose On Fox When Jesse Watters Asks Fetterman One Question
-
News2 months agoNBC Stops LIVE Broadcast — Breaks Big Trump News
-
Latest2 months agoTrump Pulls Off Miracle Of A Lifetime — It’s Permanently Open
-
News2 months agoSwalwell Facing Jail Time After Sickening New Video Leaks
-
Latest1 month agoBarack Obama Just Made Insane Announcement About His Marriage
