Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Honestly? Well, Yes, Probably: Bari Weiss on Lia Thomas
I’ve written before about how much I appreciate Bari Weiss’s reporting, including her Honestly podcast. Hers is currently the only Substack publication for which I am a paying subscriber. I think she is important, a loud voice — albeit from the left — for free speech and open discussion of topics the left would generally like to have censored.
Her podcast today is about Lia Thomas, the man who swims on the University of Pennsylvania women’s swimming team. This is obviously a sensitive topic: Say the wrong thing and, if you’re a public figure, you can expect to be canceled; if you’re just a regular person, anticipate abuse directed at you and, in this case, your daughter if she happens to swim on the team with Mr. Thomas.
Once again, I commend Ms. Weiss for engaging with a contentious issue. You can listen to the 25-minute podcast here.
I think it’s an honest account from Ms. Weiss’s perspective. That is, she refers to Mr. Thomas using feminine pronouns, as is the popular convention, and calls him “a trans-woman,” because, I think, she honestly believes this to be the appropriate way to deal with so-called “trans people.” Those concessions to fanciful terminology don’t strike me as dishonest if the speaker believes that so-called “trans people” should be accorded the courtesy of being referenced by their preferred pronouns. I disagree, but even many generally conservative people are uncomfortable doing otherwise.
I will speak more plainly: Lia Thomas is, like all “trans-women,” a transvestite man posing as a woman. His competition against women disgraces the University of Pennsylvania and, worse, is a betrayal of women. The entire “trans” movement is a betrayal of women, the undermining of centuries of gradual progress toward giving women the protection they need to be secure and to thrive in a culture dominated by the stronger and more aggressive half of the species.
Though she doesn’t actually say it, I suspect Ms. Weiss thinks what Mr. Thomas is doing is wrong. I don’t know how anyone could listen to the podcast and not come to share that view: nothing in the account suggests that this is other than a mockery of women’s athleticism and a terrible injustice to the young ladies who have to compete against this young man. This is a story that needs to be told frankly, and this podcast does that, even as it avoids offering an editorial opinion that, while unnecessary, I would have found more satisfying. It’s straight reporting, and that’s refreshing.
I would prefer that we all stop referring to male transvestites like Mr. Thomas using feminine pronouns, and that we eliminate the confusing labels of “trans-woman” and “trans-man,” which always leave me guessing whether we’re talking about a man pretending he’s a woman or a woman pretending she’s a man. I would prefer that because I think that would bring some much-needed clarity to the discussion — clarity, and honesty.
My children were homeschooled most of their lives. The older three never attended an actual school until they went to college. When I became a single father and homeschooling was no longer a viable option, I placed the younger three in a small Catholic high school, where they discovered sports — something unheard of in our family. They excelled academically and athletically, but I think it was their participation in athletics (and they played almost everything, an advantage of going to a very small school) that was the best and perhaps most important part of their educations and social lives.
It would have broken my heart to watch my daughter trapped in hopeless competition against boys — broken my heart and enraged me. I feel for the families who are being betrayed by the NCAA, by the University of Pennsylvania, and by this selfish young man who, while a mediocre swimmer against other males, is easily good enough to crush in unfair competition the spirit and dreams of countless real women.
Published in Culture
Jerry, I understand your point, but think there’s another interpretation of their actions (i.e., their use of the wrong pronoun) that falls short of dishonesty.
I believe that pronouns should be associated with the actual sex of an individual. However, some people think they should be associated with the sexual persona an individual wishes to present to the world. This may be grammatically questionable (though I’m not sure), but I don’t think it’s dishonest. It’s simply a different use of gendered pronouns. One can refer to a man as “her” because he’s a transvestite, without saying that the man is *really* a woman. I don’t do that, but I know people who do, and they do it because they think that’s how pronouns should be used.
But you and I are in agreement that it would be better if people didn’t make that choice.
Exactly, I imagine that very few of us would feel obliged, out of courtesy, to agree with the man who purports to believe he is the Queen of England.
With respect to you both, I’m going to disagree with the specific assertion that it is necessarily dishonest, necessarily a lie, to use a masculine pronoun when referring to a woman, or a feminine pronoun when referring to a man.
As I mentioned earlier, what one believes to be the function of the pronoun makes all the difference. If one thinks its function is to acknowledge, and to express respect for, the way a person wishes to be viewed and treated, then using a pronoun that way needn’t be dishonest: certainly some people who use it that way will agree that the person to whom the pronoun is applied has not in fact changed his or her sex.
Because I think the trans movement is both silly and destructive, I think it’s counter-productive to encourage it, and so I won’t misgender people (and abuse the language) by using masculine pronouns for females and vice versa.
In general, I’m reluctant to call someone a liar if there’s a plausible alternative. Lying, in my opinion, requires intent, not merely error or sloppy grammatical judgment.
But even if someone, somehow, sincerely believes that 2+2=4, they may not be “lying,” but they’re still wrong. And indulging that error doesn’t seem like a good idea. They need to be somehow shaken out of their mistake, not affirmed in it.
Watch it, buster! I am in the camp of those who believe that 2+2=4. ;)
Seriously though, my point is a little bit different, in that I’m talking about word use rather than objective fact.
One can choose to use gender-incorrect pronouns while fully acknowledging that the person in question has not actually changed his or her sex. That’s simply saying that one accepts a social convention I happen to reject.
Similarly, one can choose to refer to Al Sharpton as “Reverend,” even though he’s a despicable man who deserves no reverence at all. I won’t do it, but people who are sticklers for social convention might — while still acknowledging that the guy is a cynical shyster.
Having said all that, I completely agree that the trans movement is fundamentally wrong and fundamentally misguided, and should be quashed as mercifully but firmly as possible.
Even this (for a post-op trans woman) should disqualify a former man from competition. We’ve seen athletic organizations skirt the issue by refering to “hormone levels” and stuff like that. The truth is, once a guy develops the muscle mass, a lot remains even with hormone therapy. He may slim down, but the strength is still there. His current hormone levels may fit the rules, but the damage to real female athletes is already done . . .
Woops, obvious glitch. Even though I tried to type 2+2=5, my subconscious mind wouldn’t let me!
Certainly by the time a child has entered puberty no amount of surgery or hormones is going to change the person’s core physical structure. A guy is still a guy for athletic purposes. [And before anyone suggests that is why sex changes need to be done before puberty, giving prepubescent children puberty blocking drugs because ghe child thinks he should be something other than what he was born as is child abuse.]
I only presented this trying to get at what conditions @arizonapatriot thought might be the basis for a discrimination complaint. He hasn’t responded.
I’m not convinced, Hank.
“When I say dog, I mean a cat that I want to pretend is a dog. So I’m not lying when I say my cat is a dog.”
To me, it seems that they are justifying their lie by changing the meaning of words. Very Orwellian, in my view.
This “Lia” Thomas guy says that he is a woman, so it’s OK that he’s competing against actual female swimmers. His claim is a lie. I think that you’re excusing his lie by allowing him to claim that he means something different by “woman.”
Changing the pronouns — and even allowing men pretending to be women to change their names to women’s names — is in service of the same thing. If Thomas is a “she,” then how can you keep him — no wait, “her” — off of the women’s swim team?
I would be disappointed if you were, Jerry. ;)
No dog ever expressed a desire to be treated like a cat, so courtesy can’t be invoked as a reason for humoring the request.
Again, I think our disagreement comes down to our differing ideas about why one might choose to use the wrong pronoun when referring to someone, and what that choice means to the speaker. I don’t do it, but some who do are not endorsing the claim of sexuality, but merely granting an individual’s wish for a particular form of address.
He does in fact say that. He might actually believe that, in which case he’s wrong, but not dishonest. Or he might not believe it, in which case he’s actually lying. That seems an important distinction to me, that of error versus lie.
No, it isn’t okay. It’s wrong. I think most people consider it wrong, even if they’re willing to grant him the courtesy of using his preferred pronouns. They think it’s wrong because they don’t think he’s actually a woman.
Were we in a courtroom drama, I’d jump up at this point and shout “objection.” ;)
I’m not excusing anything. I think Mr. Thomas is either dishonest or deluded, and that he is a selfish man taking unfair advantage of his masculinity to win hollow victories against real women. I don’t think he should be allowed to get away with it.
I do think that someone can reasonably say “I’m willing to refer to you as ‘she/her’ as a courtesy, but I don’t think you’re a woman and I don’t approve of what you’re doing.” I think a lot of people say that, or think it.
How? By saying this:
“I’ll humor your pronoun choice and your right to legally change your name; those are your choices and they do no harm. But you can’t compete against the girls, because you aren’t really a girl.”
I found this article by Naomi Wolf, published at FrontPage Magazine, interesting and welcome, in light of comments here about speaking out in the face of public censure. She is speaking specifically of our Wuhan coronavirus response, and focused principally on high-profile people with public reputations, but it’s nonetheless worth reading and taking to heart. In my opinion.
I’m not ‘Brave’; You’re Just a P—y
I read some of it, it’s very long. Sounds like maybe she’s waited until the restrictions she’s against seem to be pretty much over already, before “bravely” protesting them. She “dares them” to arrest her in March of 2022, and is pleased and maybe self-satisfied when “nothing happens.” I wonder if the results would have been the same, several months ago?
In some ways, I was never all that impressed by Mahatma Ghandi, either. It doesn’t take that much courage to defy a system that you already pretty much know is not going to roll over you with a tank like they would in China. Or maybe cut off your head like they might have in earlier Iraq or maybe even present-day Afghanistan, especially if you’re homosexual or something.
She’s been a vocal critic of our COVID response for a long time. She was suspended by Twitter in June of last year for publishing “misinformation” about vaccines. She’s been loudly anti-Fauci since at least a year ago and taken heat for it.
The left is upset with her because she’s left the reservation. Kind of like J.K Rowling, David Mamet, Bari Weiss.
I appreciate her willingness to call out those who make excuses.
“Vocal critic” is one thing, but was she refusing to wear a mask in public places, 6-8-10 months ago? People did get arrested for that, and lost their jobs, and more.
I don’t know, KE. She was speaking to Congress in opposition to vaccine mandates a year ago, and being savaged for it by the press. But if you need proof that she was flaunting her masklessness in late 2020, I can’t give it.
I just appreciate that she is saying what I think is true: that we need people to man up and stop being afraid to buck against the orthodoxy.
Sure, but it’s also true that she probably has less to fear from backlash than many people.
Do you have an opinion about what she actually said, or are you simply interested in speculating as to why she might be a poseur or hypocrite?