Billionaire Tom Steyer wants California voters to know exactly where he stands on transgender athletes in girls' high school sports: he's all for it. The Democratic gubernatorial candidate used a podcast appearance and a separate interview with CBS Los Angeles to defend the practice, dismiss concerns about competitive fairness, and label the entire debate a "right-wing attempt" to smear vulnerable people.
It is a revealing position, and not just because of what it says about Steyer. The California governor's race is shaping up as a test of how far left the state's Democratic establishment is willing to go on cultural issues, even as the rest of the country moves in the opposite direction.
With primary elections set for June 2 and a crowded field of Democrats jockeying to replace Gavin Newsom, Steyer's full-throated defense of biological males competing in girls' athletics tells voters something important about the priorities of at least one man who wants to run the largest state in the union.
Appearing on the "I've Had It" podcast, hosted by Jennifer Welch, Steyer laid out his reasoning in emotional terms. He framed the issue almost entirely around the mental health of transgender youth, not around the girls who would compete against them.
"When you understand the vulnerability, the stress, the danger of being a trans kid, and you understand almost half of them try to commit suicide, then you think, 'We're gonna punish those kids, we're gonna cut them off from team sport.' It's like, no we're not."
He went further, dismissing the scope of the issue and attacking anyone who raises it.
"To be clear, this is not some huge epidemic. This is a right-wing attempt to victimize and villainize already vulnerable and desperate people, and my heart completely goes out to the people who are so sad, feel so rejected, and so unaccepted that half of them would try to kill themselves."
Notice what's missing from Steyer's argument: any mention of the girls who lose roster spots, playing time, scholarships, or championships when biological males enter their competitions. The word "fairness", as it applies to female athletes, does not appear in his quoted remarks. For Steyer, compassion flows in one direction only.
His "almost half" suicide statistic, repeated twice, went uncited. The source material does not identify where Steyer drew that figure, and no study or organization was named to support it. Voters are left to take the billionaire's word for it.
Steyer is not the only Democrat running for governor who struggled to give a straight answer on the issue. A gubernatorial debate held May 5 at the East Los Angeles College Auditorium in Monterey Park forced candidates to address the question directly, and most tried to have it both ways.
San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan acknowledged the unfairness question, at least in passing. He said he could "imagine it being unfair" if a biological male played soccer against his daughter. But he quickly pivoted.
"But I also think that we are allowing ourselves to devolve into using that as a litmus test that is actually about demonizing difference, dividing people, scoring political points, and I'm just not going to be a governor who allows vulnerable people to be a punching bag."
So Mahan sees the unfairness, he just doesn't want to do anything about it. That is a familiar posture in Democratic politics: acknowledge the problem, then accuse anyone who wants to fix it of bad motives.
Former U.S. Representative Katie Porter echoed parts of Steyer's position, arguing that youth sports are meant to build character and teamwork rather than determine who is best. That line may play well at a progressive fundraiser, but it would ring hollow to any high school girl who trains year-round for a chance to compete at the next level.
Former HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, who has taken a commanding lead in recent polling, urged officials to continue protecting certain classes in accordance with existing law, a careful, lawyerly non-answer from a man who spent years in federal government.
Former California State Controller Betty Yee stressed the need to find ways to promote fairness while ensuring inclusion, another exercise in saying nothing while appearing thoughtful. Yee's own campaign has since fractured under pressure from the competitive primary.
State Superintendent Tony Thurmond took a more definitive approach, openly supporting transgender athletes. Former State Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa dismissed the entire debate as a "non-issue", but then stated his personal belief that biological males who have undergone puberty should not compete in women's sports. That's a contradiction, not a position.
The two Republican candidates in the race, Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco, offered the clearest answers. Both support overturning existing California legislation that allows students to participate in school activities based on their stated gender identity rather than their biological sex.
California law currently permits that practice, though the specific statute was not identified in the debate coverage. The Republican position aligns with where the vast majority of the American public has landed on this question: biological males should not compete in girls' sports.
The broader leftward lurch of the Democratic primary field makes the Republican contrast even sharper. In a state where Democrats dominate registration and fundraising, the cultural gap between the party's candidates and ordinary voters, including many Democratic voters, continues to widen.
Steyer is not just another candidate floating trial balloons. He is a billionaire who has spent or booked more than $115 million in broadcast TV, cable, and radio advertising, roughly 30 times the amount of his nearest Democratic challenger. That spending could eventually approach the $178.5 million record set by Republican Meg Whitman in 2010.
When a man with that kind of financial firepower takes a hard public position on a divisive cultural issue, it is not a casual remark. It is a strategic bet. Steyer is wagering that California's Democratic primary electorate is progressive enough to reward a candidate who goes further than his rivals on transgender policy.
He may be right about the primary. But if Steyer advances, he will carry that position into a general election where the politics look very different. Polls nationally, and increasingly in blue states, show broad public opposition to biological males competing in girls' sports. Parents who watch their daughters train and compete do not see this as an abstraction.
Steyer's personal brand extends to the Jerusalem Cross he draws on his hand daily, which he has described as a reminder to "tell the truth no matter what the cost is." Whether his stance on transgender athletes reflects truth-telling or ideological positioning is a question voters will have to answer for themselves.
The California governor's race matters beyond California. The state's policies on gender identity in schools have ripple effects across the country. Its laws set precedents. Its court battles shape federal litigation. And its elected leaders influence the national Democratic Party's direction on cultural issues.
Steyer's position is not an outlier in the field. Most of the Democratic candidates either endorsed or hedged toward the same conclusion: transgender inclusion in girls' sports should continue, and anyone who objects is motivated by bigotry. Only Villaraigosa broke with that consensus, and even he tried to minimize the issue as irrelevant.
Meanwhile, Steyer's massive campaign spending ensures his message will reach every corner of the state. The question is whether California voters, even in a deep-blue primary, are willing to hand the governor's mansion to a candidate whose answer to girls losing athletic opportunities is to call their parents' concerns a right-wing smear.
The girls on the other side of this debate, the ones who train, compete, and lose to biological males, don't have $115 million to make their case. They just have common sense. In California's Democratic primary, that may not be enough.
