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.
I find it difficult to understand how anyone could seriously formulate the sentence that is the title of this post. “She’s not a woman.” It seems like madness, to me. If words have meaning, that sentence has to be false.
The offending party here is Megyn Kelly. Kelly is supposedly a conservative and appears to be an intelligent woman. Yet she has somehow adopted a view of the world, or a definition of terms, that led her to make that statement, “She’s not a woman.”
What, pray tell, does the word “she” mean? For almost my entire life and, as far as I can tell, for the past several hundred years in the English-speaking word, “she” has been the pronoun used to refer to a woman (or female animal). “She is not a woman” is an irrational, contradictory sentence, as logically incoherent as “this statement is false.”
This quote comes from Kelly’s interview of Matt Walsh, reporting on Walsh’s interview of an anonymous female college swimmer who is a teammate of William Thomas. William Thomas is a roughly 20-year-old man who calls himself “Lia” Thomas, claims to be a woman, and has been competing in women’s collegiate swimming. He has ambitions of competing in women’s swimming at the Olympics.
Here is the interview (about eight minutes long):
I actually find myself in agreement with a statement that Thomas made, in an interview clip in the middle of this video. He said:
You can’t go halfway and be like, I support trans-women and trans-people, but only to a certain point. Where if you support trans-women as women, and they’ve met all the NCAA requirements, then I don’t know if you can really say something like that. Trans-women are not a threat to women’s sports.
I think that he’s right about the first two sentences here. There is no halfway. Of course, his statement is absurd, as one would think that meeting any sensible requirements for women’s sports would involve, you know, actually being a woman.
Kelly’s response strikes me as something out of a Monty Python skit. I do think that she is serious, and it makes me think that she is deranged. I do believe that she is deranged, in a specific way — for some reason, Kelly has accepted a completely incoherent redefinition of terms. This redefinition leaves her without the vocabulary to express herself, leading to the formulation of logically incoherent sentences. Kelly’s response to the clip of William Thomas is:
OK. Then I won’t go halfway. Then I’ll stay on zero, and I won’t meet you halfway at all, cause I’m not going to ten. She, like, the nerve of that man, for her, how does she know? She’s not a woman. She doesn’t get to say, after 20 years living as a man that now she’s a woman, and anyone objecting isn’t really supportive of trans. Like, did you swim in the pool, like all of your teammates did, when they were going through puberty, and they started getting their periods, and it’s a terrifying event for a young girl to get into a damn pool because you don’t know what’s going to happen, you haven’t managed things yet? Did you swim with breasts growing off of you, and try to figure out how to move your arms and still win? You didn’t. You went overnight from male to female, and your accomplishments on the women’s leader board are not that of a woman. They’re not. But she says we’re not allowed to meet her halfway. just out of, to be polite, or to be kind, or to try to be loving and respectful. It’s zero or ten.
Hearing this, I think to myself, self, this is satire, right? John Cleese is surely about to chime in with a funny line, don’t you think? What in the world is wrong with Megyn Kelly? This harangue is just incoherent.
I think that it’s worse. Kelly is a big part of the problem, in my view, and so are all of you who go along with this linguistic dance of pretending that some men are women, and some women are men. I think that Kelly actually identifies the problem. Kelly wants to “meet her halfway” to be “polite” or “kind” or “loving and respectful.”
I dissent. It is not impolite, or unkind, or unloving, or disrespectful to tell a man that he is not a woman. Or to refuse to refer to a man as “she” or “her.” Or, for that matter, to refuse to refer to Matthew Thomas by the female name “Lia” that he wants to use in support of the lie that he is a woman.
I’ll tell you what is impolite, and unkind, and unloving, and disrespectful, in my view. Calling me any of these things for speaking the truth. William Thomas is a man masquerading as a woman and insisting that everyone call him “Lia.” I say no.
I do credit Matt Walsh for refusing to refer to this man, William Thomas, as “she” or “her.” I am critical of Walsh for referring to him as “Lia.”
Guess what we got when we were persuaded, or browbeaten, to engage in this nonsense. A large outbreak of dreadful confusion about sexual identity among teens, especially teenage girls. Nice job, people.
I think that this is an example of what you get when you accommodate a lie.Published in