Abigail Spanberger’s Silence on Biological Males in Female Spaces Is a Failure of Leadership

When I saw the recent ABC7/WJLA piece by Nick Minock, I was disappointed but not surprised. The question is simple, direct, and increasingly urgent: Do you support biological males using women’s locker rooms and bathrooms, or competing in women’s sports? Yet Abigail Spanberger, a candidate for governor of Virginia, has spent months ducking this question. That is not acceptable.

Spanberger’s refusal to give a clear answer is not a small misstep. It’s a failure of leadership, a betrayal of transparency, and a disservice to the voters who deserve to know where she stands — especially when it comes to issues of safety, fairness, and parental rights.

---

What We Know

According to Minock’s reporting:

• Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears has expressly stated that she opposes biologically male students using female locker rooms and bathrooms, and competing in girls’ sports. ^WJLA+1
• Spanberger has repeatedly refused to say whether she supports those same policies. During a media event in Fairfax County, Minock asked her directly: “Do you support biological males, who say they’re women, using women’s locker rooms and bathrooms and competing in women’s sports?” She responded instead with legalistic comments about pending court cases and guidance under Title IX, then shifted attention to what she believes the federal government is doing to Virginia’s schools. ^WJLA
• When pressed further, she and/or her staff avoided answering; on one occasion she walked away. ^WJLA

Thus, the public still does not have Spanberger’s explicit views.

---

Why This Matters

1. Clarity for Voters
   A gubernatorial candidate owes voters clarity. These debates are not academic: they affect school policy, civil rights enforcement, and how local communities balance competing rights (of trans students, of female students, and of parents). Voters deserve to know exactly where Spanberger would lean before deciding their vote.
2. Safety and Fairness
   The concern many express is not about discrimination, but about safety, privacy, fairness in sports, and protecting female athletes’ opportunities. If biological males can use female locker rooms or compete in women’s categories, what is the impact on cis-female students? We deserve a public discussion about balancing rights — and it’s irresponsible for a candidate to dodge this.
3. Legal and Fiscal Consequences
   Federal decisions (via Title IX, Department of Education rulings) matter. Some Northern Virginia school districts are under pressure from the U.S. Department of Education because their policies allowing students to access bathrooms/locker rooms based on gender identity are considered violations. ^WJLA+1 If Spanberger won’t say how she would respond — whether she’d defend the district policies or push back — Virginians can’t predict what legal/fiscal consequences may follow.
4. The Ethics of Avoidance
   Often, when public figures avoid answering, it suggests they want the best of both worlds: appealing to multiple constituencies without taking a stand. But leadership requires taking difficult stances, especially when values and principles are at stake. Silence can itself be interpreted as a position — but not one voters should be forced to guess.

---

What Spanberger Should Do

• Give a direct answer to the question: Do you support biological males using women’s locker rooms/bathrooms and competing in women’s sports?
• Explain the reasoning behind that answer — what legal, ethical, and policy considerations guide her thinking.
• Address trade-offs, including parental rights, student privacy, fairness in competition, and compliance with Title IX.
• Commit to transparency: insist that her campaign stops moving the goalposts or hiding behind broad statements about “safety” or “fairness” without specifying what those mean in concrete policies.

---

Conclusion

Abigail Spanberger’s dodge of this question is more than political caution; it is an abdication of leadership. When voters ask a straight question, especially one with real consequences, they deserve a straight answer — and then a reasoned debate. Virginia deserves a governor who will not run from tough issues, but confront them head-on.

If Spanberger wants support, she must stop hiding and start leading. The electorate deserves nothing less.

---

Endnotes

1. “Spanberger turns down questions on transgender bathroom policies that Earle-Sears opposes,” Nick Minock, WJLA / 7News. Spanberger was asked directly whether she supports biological males using women’s locker rooms and bathrooms and competing in women’s sports—and refused to answer, instead discussing pending court cases and broader policy impacts. ^WJLA
2. Same, WJLA / 7News: asked again, but she or her staff declined follow-ups; on one occasion she walked away. ^WJLA
3. “Winsome Earle-Sears, Abigail Spanberger differ on transgender sports and bathroom policies,” Minock, WJLA / 7News: Outlines that Earle-Sears has taken clear positions, in contrast to Spanberger’s non-answers. ^WJLA

---

David Lee, is a contributor for Direct Line News. He can be reached at David.lee@mcgopclub.com      

About The Author