A striking feature of the past decade or so of American life is how quickly and aggressively many elites and institutions moved toward the most radical positions of transgender activists. It is unlikely that the process will occur in reverse in the same way. Recently, however, there have been some indications that elite opinion might at least be becoming more open to debate on this issue.

After oral arguments for the Supreme Court case United States v. Skrmetti, which centers on the constitutionality of a Tennessee law restricting transgender treatments for minors, the Washington Post editorial board published an article skeptical of such treatments. And now, Helen Lewis of The Atlantic has written a bracing critique of the Left’s stance on the participation of men in women’s sports.

She focuses on the story of University of Reno volleyball player Sia Liilii. Liilii’s team is in the same athletic conference as San Jose State University, which allowed a male player to compete on its women’s volleyball team. A boycott, ultimately joined by other teams, ensued. The situation made clear that male participation in women’s sports blows up the Left’s intersectionality framework.

Not only is it the case that “every spot taken by someone with a male athletic advantage is an opportunity closed to a female rival,” Lewis writes. It’s also that the Left, “which had become attached to a simple, hierarchical ranking of oppression,” could not “arbitrate between two traditionally marginalized groups: gender-nonconforming people and women athletes” — or even admit a need to do so.

Lewis wrote an interesting assessment of the debate over Tennessee’s law after the Skrmetti oral arguments. So maybe it is less surprising to see her write on a similar topic in this way. But for a publication that, not too long ago, erupted over the mere presence of National Review alumnus Kevin Williamson to permit departures from leftist conformity is a welcome sign. Perhaps 2025 will bring more.