This level

Written by

May 12, 2026

"J.K. Rowling believes that if you're born a man, you can't ever be a woman."

"Biologically, she's correct, but when you introduce this level of hate into a debate, rationality goes out of the window."pic.twitter.com/MJRDOHqUuU
— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) May 11, 2026

What level of hate? What hate? It’s not hate to say that a man is not a frog or a lampshade or a car or Albania or sunset over the Pacific. It’s not hate to say that people are not something they are very obviously not – it’s just stating the obvious.

It can of course be cruel to tell people they are ugly or boring or a nuisance, but saying that a man is a man isn’t like that. If there’s any cruelty in this conflict it’s the cruelty of men trying to usurp even being a woman. It’s not hate to tell men they can’t join a group that’s specifically and explicitly for women, and it’s not hate to tell them they’re not women. They may not like it, but that’s another matter.

It’s a kind of egotism, this puffing up ordinary expressions of reality into “cruelty” and wounded feelings and sleepless nights and whole piles of handkerchiefs soaked with tears. Maybe it’s time to grow up now? Hmm?

Comments

5 responses to “This level”

Holms

May 13, 2026 2:35 AM

If she’s correct, then it is not hate to bring that fact into a discussion, the only question is relevance. Given the discussion is of spaces and protections reserved for women, the fact of what a woman is and is not strikes me as highly relevant.
Holms

May 13, 2026 2:44 AM

Oh and her quote continues with a lie, or perhaps an internal contradictions she genuinely can’t see despite it being bloody obvious:

“Biologically she’s correct, but there are human beings here that [should be who] feel that they are a woman, and I’m not saying that they’re right or they’re wrong, …”

But if you concede JKR’s position (men can never become women), then those people are wrong. Then again a few words later:

“There is no right or wrong in this” – but there is. The position aligned with the facts of the matter is the right one, the position unaligned with the facts is wrong. She conceded the relevant fact of biology and then wanted to exclude that fact a sentence later.
Ophelia Benson

May 13, 2026 8:02 AM

“Biologically she’s correct, but” – that sentence never ends well.
Colin Day

May 13, 2026 8:33 AM

@Holms #2 Thank you for correctly using “who” in place of “that”. The misuse is a pet peeve of mine.
iknklast

May 13, 2026 8:39 AM

To be fair (not that I’m inclined to be), ‘that’ often comes naturally. I work very hard on editing to make sure I remove ‘that’s where there should be a ‘who’. It’s been my experience that most writers today don’t edit anywhere near as ruthlessly as I do; I’m always thrilled to find a writer without major errors in their work. For that, you should look no further than our hostess – she keeps her work tight and correct.