Fox News89%

Megan Rapinoe rips IOC's new policy to protect women's sports, rejects notion rule is based in science 83%

By Ryan Gaydos0%

4/5/2026, 3:32:28 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Hasty Generalization, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 34.1% saturation with 233 hits. Analysis detected 2,195 faulty-reasoning hits from 684 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 74.5% and a BS Rank of 83% (3,813 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.60% of the article peer group.

Former U.S. women’s soccer star Megan Rapinoe ripped the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for implementing a new policy to ensure fairness across women’s competitions. 
The IOC said "eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females, determined on the basis of a one‑time SRY gene screening." 
The organization added that the policy was "evidence-based" and "expert-informed." 
The testing can be conducted via saliva, cheek swab or blood sample. 
A presentation at a World Athletics panel in Tokyo in September revealed that 50 to 60 athletes with male biological advantages have been finalists in the female category at global and continental championships since 2000. 
The panel was led by the head of the World Athletics Health and Science Department, Dr. 
Stéphane Bermon, who said sex tests were necessary because of an "over-representation" of DSD (differences of sex development) athletes among finalists, per multiple reports. 
However, Rapinoe rejected the policy in the latest issue of her "A Touch More" podcast. 
"Unfortunately, we have to say that all in the same breath as a really horrible rule came out from the International Olympic Committee," Rapinoe said as she praised the transgender community. 
"They announced a new policy that they’re calling, I can’t even believe that they’re calling it this because it has nothing to do with protecting women, I feel like two people, who played at the very highest level for every competition that you possibly could, don’t agree with this and never felt like this was an issue at all, ‘The Protection of the Female [Women’s] Category.’" 
Rapinoe dismissed the notion that the policy was rooted in science and said the IOC was subjecting women to "invasive testing." 
"We already know that biology, as much as we want it to be just nice and clean and tight and perfectly in one category and another, it’s not," Rapinoe said. 
"We know that. 
So, now what we’re doing is subjecting everybody, all women and all people who are identifying as women to this really invasive testing that only to me says like, ‘Oh we’re just trying to whittle it down to a certain type of woman.' 
Is that what we’re doing? 
That’s really the whole game here. 
"They sort of lost the battle on gay marriage and lost the battle on all these things so it’s just like, ‘We’re gonna have this whole campaign for all these years to just hate trans people,’ which is such a small percentage of the population. 
It’s actually on a single hand when we’re talking about sports. 
And just like thread the absolute tightest needle thread that you possibly could." 
Rapinoe added that the IOC only implemented the rule to appease President Donald Trump's administration. 
"This committee is framing it as based in science, which it’s not," she said. 
"This will ultimately just prevent people from competing within the women’s category that they feel like they have an unfair advantage. 
It’s just really hateful. 
There’s been so few athletes that are trans or competing as trans and it’s so blatant on its face. 
It’s a total acquiescence to the Trump administration and to really right-wing conservative politics that really is just bringing down so much hate against such a small percentage of people who are just trying to live their life. 
It’s just horrible and I’m just sickened by it, really." 
Conversely, several Olympians supported the IOC’s decision. 
Kaillie Humphries, a three-time Olympic gold medalist for the U.S. and Canada, was among them. 
"Today is a great day for women’s sports and a big win in the Olympic world," she told Fox News Digital last month. 
"By implementing the sex testing, it will allow for fair competition. 
It used to happen years ago, and by bringing it back it will protect the women’s category. 
I think it’s very fitting that LA28 will be the games to protect women’s sports as it’s something that our president has advocated for." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.6%Ryan Gaydos: 1.4%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.7%Ryan Gaydos: 2.5%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic6.7%This article: 5.1%Ryan Gaydos: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.1%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Ryan Gaydos: 0.3%Fox Nation: 3.0%Overconfidence Bias1.6%This article: 7.0%Ryan Gaydos: 7.3%Fox Nation: 11.9%Framing Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias6.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.4%Ryan Gaydos: 2.3%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias3.4%This article: 14.5%Ryan Gaydos: 1.9%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias14.5%This article: 34.1%Ryan Gaydos: 11.0%Fox Nation: 10.8%Negativity Bias34.1%This article: 9.6%Ryan Gaydos: 4.2%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias9.6%This article: 8.5%Ryan Gaydos: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error8.5%This article: 3.1%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias3.1%This article: 6.6%Ryan Gaydos: 1.3%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias6.6%This article: 2.8%Ryan Gaydos: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias2.8%This article: 2.2%Ryan Gaydos: 2.5%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect2.2%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.6%Ryan Gaydos: 2.6%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias5.6%This article: 3.5%Ryan Gaydos: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 1.1%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.5%Ryan Gaydos: 3.7%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority9.5%This article: 9.6%Ryan Gaydos: 1.6%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma9.6%This article: 12.9%Ryan Gaydos: 1.2%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope12.9%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 25.0%Ryan Gaydos: 5.2%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization25.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 27.0%Ryan Gaydos: 7.5%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion27.0%This article: 11.1%Ryan Gaydos: 1.6%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question11.1%This article: 18.4%Ryan Gaydos: 3.0%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)18.4%This article: 3.5%Ryan Gaydos: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque3.5%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.4%Ryan Gaydos: 2.3%Fox Nation: 2.4%Anecdotal4.4%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 15.9%Ryan Gaydos: 1.4%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)15.9%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground1.0%This article: 6.3%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity6.3%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 17.4%Ryan Gaydos: 1.4%Fox Nation: 1.8%Unattributed Quote17.4%This article: 4.5%Ryan Gaydos: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection4.5%This article: 15.6%Ryan Gaydos: 4.5%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice15.6%This article: 9.4%Ryan Gaydos: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination9.4%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 0.9%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Ryan Gaydos: 0.4%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Ryan Gaydos: 2.2%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

684 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers78%attributed speech151writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageInternational Olympic Committee (IOC) • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageStéphane Bermon • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 31 words • 100.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 66 words • 100.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 21 words • 100.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 30 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 3 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 43 words • 100.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 5 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 6 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 45 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 14 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 21 words • 100.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 4 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 19 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 38 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rapinoe • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageKaillie Humphries • 23 words • 0.0% coverageKaillie Humphries • 11 words • 0.0% coverageKaillie Humphries • 17 words • 0.0% coverageKaillie Humphries • 24 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Megan Rapinoe

98%flagged-word coverage
395 attributed words74% of attributed speech92% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.4 ptsWriter: 27.2%Megan Rapinoe: 16.7%16.7%Unattributed Quote-17.9 ptsWriter: 23.2%Megan Rapinoe: 5.3%5.3%Indoctrination+16.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Megan Rapinoe: 16.2%16.2%Quote-first Misdirection+7.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Megan Rapinoe: 7.8%7.8%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.