Since the 2024 election, it has become increasingly fashionable to sacrifice trans people on the altar of political approval. Within hours of Kamala Harris loss in November, some pundits were already throwing trans people under the bus. This is painful enough when theyre coming from Democrats in red states and those who are looking to dodge a complicated issue. But the comments that recently came from former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg leave a particularly bad taste in the mouth.Not only has Buttigieg historically shown support for the LGBTQ+ community (of which hes a part), but he has also built his brand on being able to explain nuanced and complex issues in a careful and compelling way to right-wing viewers on Fox News. Now, Buttigiegs take on trans athletes fails both the trans community and his own reputation. Related The Supreme Court will hear trans sports ban cases, which could spell doom for trans rights Buttigiegs comments came at the end of July during a discussion with Steve Inskeep for NPRs Morning Edition. Inskeep brought up Rahm Emanuels recent interview with Megyn Kelly, where Emanuel agreed that a man cannot become a woman and the ensuing backlash, and then asked Buttigieg how he approached the topic.Buttigieg arguably started out well, saying that we need to treat trans people with compassion. He also suggested that we need to approach, with empathy, those who are concerned and recognize their confusion. Dive deeper every day Join our newsletter for thought-provoking commentary that goes beyond the surface of LGBTQ+ issues Subscribe to our Newsletter today Taken by itself, that suggestion has merit: a lot of people have been fed lies and propaganda about trans people for a long time, and responding by telling people to blindly get over it hasnt been working. Educating those people on the science behind trans people and why they absolutely have a place in the restrooms and sports teams that match their gender identity is not unwarranted.We gain acceptance through understanding, and that understanding can come from a lot of places. But right now, both sides are throwing out claims without taking the time to support them, and the anti-trans crowd is packaging their lies in fear and hate, which makes them more appealing for those who are looking for someone to blame. Unfortunately, after an acceptable start to his response, Buttigieg went off the rails and spouted some of the same anti-trans rhetoric that weve heard seeping into Democrats discussions in recent months. Without further prompting from Inskeep, Buttigieg suggested that most reasonable people would recognize that there are serious fairness issues [] when a trans athlete wants to compete in womens sports.Inskeep asked whether that meant a parent complaining about a trans athlete competing against their child had a case, and Buttigieg agreed that they would. Those comments very quickly take Buttigiegs potential argument from theres nuance to be understood and science to be explained, but ultimately trans people belong in sports to maybe trans people shouldnt be playing sports.When Inskeep quoted Donald Trumps comments about no boys in girls sports and said that it didnt sound like Buttigieg is signing on to that, Buttigieg didnt shut it down, but rather deflected, noting that chess is different from weightlifting and weightlifting is different from volleyball, and middle school is different from the Olympics. Its important that politicians highlight just how much the anti-trans movement is primarily about ostracizing trans people from society, and banning trans women from womens chess is a great example of that. But the way that Buttigieg raised it here suggests that he thinks theres room to discriminate against trans people in some places but not others. Its perhaps worth noting that a trans woman who is on hormones will lose muscle mass, etc., and her weightlifting ability will be much closer to that of her female counterparts: the science behind all of that is being examined and is evolving. That might be hard to trot out in an interview, but again, thats what makes this quite so disappointing: Buttigieg has shown he can present that sort of data and nuance in a discussion, but here he seems to be bringing out the new weak Democratic messaging on trans people instead of speaking up for a marginalized community.While weve seen other Democrats throw people under the bus or deliver less-than-perfect messaging, this is different. When someone like California Gov. Gavin Newsom does it, its not as surprising as it should be, as hes proven to be so motivated by political ambition. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE) has been heavily criticized for some of her comments because shes trans herself and expected to stand up and be the model minorityperfect on everything. But compared to someone like Buttigieg, shes relatively inexperienced with this sort of matter and handling the level of attention it has been receiving. Whether its a matter of following new talking points or getting pressured by an interviewer into making concessions, Buttigieg should know better and has shown that he can hold his own in situations like this, so this all feels like more of a choice on his part to support some of the anti-trans messaging around inclusivity in sports. Buttigieg has since done another interview where he sought to clarify his points. This time, he didnt talk about whether someone would have a case to complain about trans athletes inclusion in school sports. Additionally, rather than vague fairness concerns, he suggested that people were going to have questions about how to make sure thats fair, which (to give him the benefit of the doubt) leaves the door open for trans inclusion under certain considerations.But crucially, the problem with his second interview is that he doubled down on another point he originally brought up. In pushing that trans people shouldnt be a political football, he suggested that the solution to all of this was to remove the discussion from politics and instead leave it to the sports leagues and school boards.While trans people have received too much political attention with bans on everything from our healthcare to our ability to go about our daily lives, what Buttigieg is suggesting here is simply passing the buck in the most dangerous of ways. When it comes to school sports, there are issues of Title IX discrimination at play with whether trans students are allowed to compete with students of the same gender identity. That very definitely is a matter that needs to be addressed by federal politicians because Title IX is a federal statute that bans discrimination on the basis of sex in education.The idea that the solution for this issue of discrimination against trans people is to leave it to the leagues is as flawed as Trumps suggestion that we leave abortion up to the states in the wake of Roe v. Wade being overturned. No, politicians shouldnt be the ones unilaterally deciding on peoples access to reproductive care, but they should be listening to scientists and data to ensure that everyone gets the appropriate access that is best for their well-being.If ending segregation had been left up to the states, many states would still be segregated: we know this because the National Guard had to be sent in to force local agencies to allow Black students into school. Politicians shouldnt be restricting gender-affirming care against a medical consensus that such health care is safe and life-saving; instead, they might need to enshrine protections for it by working with doctors and researchers. Politicians might need to work with sports leagues and experts to ensure that trans athletes can be included, but leaving decisions up to the leagues while Trump is loudly influencing such choices is simply not enough. Buttigiegs words are an attempt to avoid the issue altogether rather than actually engage with protecting the vulnerable.Right now, a lot of the trans community is justifiably feeling betrayed by Buttigieg. Whether he misspoke or was taking up talking points handed to him, the appearance is very much that he has decided trashing trans people is acceptable if it helps him to set up a 2028 run for president thats more palatable to centrists and conservatives.We can give him the benefit of the doubt, but if he wants the trans and ally vote, hes going to need to come out swinging in defense of trans people. Going Eh, its complicated and essentially leaving our rights to the bigots is not going to be enough.Subscribe to theLGBTQ Nation newsletterand be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.