A better name for the current Women’s National Basketball League (WNBA) might be Women’s Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), given the growing performance-art violence that is now endemic in the league.
Read more Three USSS Officials Placed on Administrative Leave, Stripped of Security Clearances Amid Leak Probe
Prior to the 2024 arrival of then-22-year-old Iowa superstar Caitlin Clark, very few people watched the WNBA.
Team franchises were worth less than $20 million. The league ran chronic deficits and was subsidized by the men’s professional basketball league, the National Basketball Association (NBA).
An unspoken subtext of the WNBA was that the owners and coaches were left-wing and made little effort to hide their political biases.
Despite talk of diversity, the league was—and remains—about 83 percent nonwhite and about 70 percent black.
Some media outlets have suggested that about 50 percent of the players are gay.
By Clark’s third year, her level of play had revolutionized the WNBA—or rather, saved it from financial collapse and cultural obscurity.
Economists have concluded that she has already infused $1 billion into the league through increased attendance, new media contracts, endorsements and sponsorships, and sports tourism.
Once-obscure players are now pampered and highly compensated.
Team franchises are now more than 20 times as valuable. In Caitlin Clark’s mere three years, the average team market value has soared to nearly $500 million.
Caitlin Clark did not revolutionize the WNBA by belonging to a white and heterosexual minority. Indeed, there are plenty of such players in the league.
Rather, in less than three years, she has proven to be arguably the greatest and most exciting female basketball player in history—hence the strange envy and hatred of her competitors.
Clark herself has already recorded more 30-point, 10-assist games than all other players in the league’s entire history.
What has been the players’ reaction to Clark’s brilliance and the cash she has infused into the league?
She seems headed for permanent injury.
In almost every game, opposing players are given freedom to gratuitously flatten, scratch, slap, poke, punch, and trip her—or use threats of violence to intimidate her.
The once-loud and politically activist league owners, coaches, and referees are not merely silent about this suicidal travesty. They instead often make their DEI/LGBTQ advocacy clear by directly harassing Clark’s fans.
They apply silly, made-up, ad hoc rules to expel fans who loudly champion players like Clark’s teammate Sophie Cunningham, who went on record suggesting that biological men should not play women’s sports.
There are three explanations for the unhinged and nihilistic behavior of WNBA players, staff, and owners.
One, in racist and sexist fashion, these left-wing actors deeply resent being saved by a white, heterosexual player who towers over others in skill—and to such a degree that they are willing to metaphorically strangle the very goose that lays their golden eggs.
Or, two, they feel the more violence and controversy they can spark in trying to neuter and hurt Clark, the more attention—money—they will attract.
Or both.
The more they gin up racial and sexual-orientation frenzy in World Wrestling Entertainment-style, the more they can inflate profits and gain popular attention.
But these gladiator-like women seem clueless about this possibility: if the battered Clark is permanently injured, quits, or joins another league, the WNBA temple of riches she built could come crashing down upon them.
The league currently has no “transgender women”—that is, biologically male—players and no publicly stated policy specifically addressing transgender players. Yet its officials and players virtue-signaled their embrace of them anyway, pledging support for “trans rights.”
Two ex-NBA players, Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White, took the WNBA at its word, nobly identifying as women and declaring themselves for the WNBA draft. Yet their declaration of their preferred gender identities—which are usually affirmed as brave and stunning by the WNBA and other forms of officialdom—only elicited furor from the league.
But if the WNBA insists that gender is simply based on a declaration of identity or a preference—that is, that sexuality is merely constructed—then the men claimed they could “psychologically” transition, at least momentarily, from game to game.
Their bids were promptly squashed.
Apparently, the WNBA hierarchy assumes that had the two taken the effort to put on skirts and lipstick and wear wigs and high heels now and then, they might pass—and thus be accepted.
The public remembers that blond, very white, and stylishly dressed Sen. Elizabeth Warren was once mocked for cynically fabricating a phony Native American ancestry to leverage a Harvard professorship.
In contrast, the late University of Colorado professor and Native American faker Ward Churchill profited for years from his own fabricated Native American identity by at least making the effort to dress up in buckskins, moccasins, beads, and headbands.
Why did Freedom and White seek to embarrass the league? Because they knew it was no longer really a basketball league at all but rather had transitioned to a World Women’s Entertainment money-making show.
The WWE is getting rich not so much by just playing basketball as by waging a veritable physical and cultural war on Caitlin Clark and Sophie Cunningham.
In sum, the WWE has turned into a Roman Colosseum blood sport. Thousands now watch it nightly, in anger or glee that their popular heroes are bloodied—or may soon be even maimed or killed.
Read more Elementary School Named After Obama Closes Indefinitely Due to Rats, Mold
