Several times he uses the word "dishonest." That's a good word for when someone says something they know or believe not to be true. Another word is that he's a liar. Normally, when a journalist or author is exposed to be a liar—or, specific to those fields, a fabulist—that's the end of his career. Will this be the end of his career?
I know that I've been contributing to the end of his career for quite some time by having never read any more of his books than the occasional blurb or snippets that make their ways to reviews. Having absorbed plenty of premium economy psychology many decades ago from my fellow undergrads and then again as a 1L, I really don't need any more.
Any and every journalist who has ever referred to a man as she has been dishonest, and while I'd like to give them all the dramatic Gladiator thumbs down, the truth of it is, the vast majority of them are low-paid content grunts following style guides from above and if they'd taken a stand on common sense and reality, they would have found themselves out of work, while their employer would have had no trouble replacing them with someone who would betray the reality of sex. Multi-millionaire celebrity influencer Gladwell is not in that category. And while he's getting a lot of well-deserved scorn right now, I doubt this will affect the trajectory of his career
My disregard for Mr. Gladwell was complete by 2022 with his disingenuous and baldly performative behavior during the Munk Debate. He’s a weathervane of an intellect, following the money wherever it points. What an insufferably small man.
Gladwell was not "cowed" into anything. Cows are female.
Gladwell was "bulled" into going along with what the other man (adult humans male) on the panel was saying. Bulls are male. Bullshit is the shit of males. The "nonbinary" female panel member did demonstrate that females who deny that they are females also produce bullshit.
It's all so painfully absurd. As a former athletic administrator, I remember fighting against legitimate boys on a girls' team in New Yor State's Section XI, when there was a process by which males could play on girls' teams and girls could play on boys' teams ( I have another story for another day about a girl certified to wrestle on a boys wrestling team). The boy was from Europe, parents moved to the Hamptons on Eastern, Long Island, and since in Europe, boys play field hockey, he was allowed to play in Section XI after filling our some forms, getting a physical, and saying all the right things. I was at a school in the same league. I knew my field hockey coach very well, as she had been a student of mine and a player on a team "up the island" coached by an all-time great in the annals of New York State field hockey. We're talking multiple state championships. My argument was that this one boy was taking away an opportunity for a girl to play, and he was too dominant for the competition. He dominated every game he played in - bigger, stronger, faster. None of the league's coaches or other athletic directors would say a word about it. And since the kid didn't play on my team, I was mostly thwarted. Fast forward to 2025 and it is still absurd for boys to play on interscholastic girls' teams.
Thanks for this Sarah! I've had some heated conversations about this with friends. You and others verified i am not crazy! On first blush, many took this as an apology. But there was no act of contrition. He just said he was a pussy. Fair enough, he was. I would actually have accepted his story if he had said to Ross: "hey, I was trying to be empathetic to a group I was lead to believe was marginalized. But after looking at the science (including yours Ross) and listening to the girls and women who have actually been marginalized and discriminated against, I've changed my mind on this subject. No males in female sports at any level." But he didn't say that. This "thought leader" is personally responsible for the harm to thousands of women and he needs to own that. He has not influenced those of us who have been in this fight for years. While I would hope that after all the time and effort we have put into education, policy change, etc., there will be folks who listen and change their mind, Gladwell is not one of them. Didn't trust or respect his when he hosted that panel and don't trust or respect him now.
Taibbi and Kern aptly drew a parallel between Gladwell’s about face and his book, Tipping Point. He is riding the wave of popular revulsion for trans ideology, just as he rode the wave that promoted it.
He’s a pop culture surfer, not an intellectual. He doesn’t give novel or revolutionary insights. He just regurgitates academic research for the NPR crowd, as Kern accurately put it.
He’s like Ezra Klein. He guides the popular conscience toward the ideas and values that the ruling class wants people to ‘center’.
Very well done. If you haven't seen Gladwell and Goldberg debate Douglas Murray & Matt Taibbi in the Munk Debates (as others may have said as well,) you will see why many people find Gladwell untrustworthy.
I appreciate Tucker and respect him, but the way he's defending Gladwell is disappointing. He compared his evolution on the subject, but it's not the same. Stating what you believe at one time and then doing more research that results in a change of opinion is NOT the same as keeping quiet because you know something isn't right but are afraid to say so. At least Tucker seems to understand why people are angry.
And Rowling's response is spot on. She's a GD legend.
Yes,as I wrote, changing one's mind when presented with new information is admirable; being afraid to speak up women's rights are being betrayed is cowardice. Quite different
Absolutely. I didn’t mean to imply you hadn’t already addressed this. It’s upsetting to see the comparison is all because, like you said, it’s not the same. One shows growth, and the other shows cowardice and intentional manipulation.
I believe one key reason for Gladwell to begin speaking out is that he now has two daughters, the oldest of whom is 4 years of age. It won't be too long when she might be confronted with the issue of a boy being in her sport and/or private space. I'm only guessing, but I can imagine that he is getting out ahead of this issue preparing for the day he has to defend his girls. Strategically, it makes good sense to face the storm now on asserting a biology-based stance before his girls become the focal point of the inevitable TRA invective. Gladwell has a very keen sense of socio-cultural zeitgeist. As my PhD supervisor would remind me often: "Never underestimate the power of enlightened self-interest." Whether Gladwell did this for conscience, family, prestige or economic prosperity (likely a mix), I consider it to be a clever move from his vantage point.
You are so totally right, Sarah! Malcolm Gladwell is a self-serving weasel. He sees the winds are blowing in another direction so he’s changing his tune. I have zero sympathy for someone like this who is blind and indifferent to how deeply misogynistic the trans agenda is. Malcolm and so many others have shown their true colors and this will not be forgotten. Thank you for this great piece!!!
I welcome any average people who have educated themselves or been peaked by seeing males in women's sports with open arms. Those who have known all along men do not belong in women's sports and spaces, whose job it was to apprise the public of that but who, like Gladwell, were too afraid to do so—they deserve every bit of criticism they get
ICYMI (like me): Neil deGrasse Tyson's apparent conviction that gender identities compete in sport, rather than biological, sexed, bodies. (Less politely, WTAF - Malcolm Gladwell is comparatively a voice of sweet reason.)
I know nothing of this Tyson person other than that he has quite a following. He's doing immeasurable harm to women, and of course to his own reputation for having something, anything, to say, but even he, loudly benighted as he is, would be welcome in the world of the thinking, after going through the spanking machine of course, if—and this goes for Gladwell too—he then equally loudly took up the cause of women's rights, women's sports and spaces. 12-step program
This quote from the Fox story that Katharine linked tells you all you need to know about NdGT’s “understanding” of trans issues:
“Kisin was referring to Tyson stating on TikTok, ‘The XX, XY chromosomes are insufficient because when we wake up in the morning, we exaggerate whatever feature we want to portray the gender of our choice. Suppose no matter my chromosomes today I feel 80% female, 20% male. Now I'm going to I'm going to put on makeup. Tomorrow. I might feel 80% male; I'll remove the makeup, and I'll wear a muscle shirt… What business is it of yours to require that I fulfill your inability to think of gender on a spectrum?’” WTAF indeed. He wants to be the next Carl Sagan. I would like to think Sagan would be rolling in his grave at that.
And “Bill Nye the Science Guy” has come out with similar nonsense.
Tyson is confusing feminine with female, a social construct with a biological reality. That's an easy mistake for people who identify as intelligent to make
Neil deGrasse Tyson's area of expertise is astrophysics, but he is considered a reputable science communicator, in tradition of Carl Sagan. Gobsmacked by illogical & specious line of response - almost as if he takes personal umbrage at men being denied participation in women's sports. Total entitlement and unquestioning embrace of transgender ideology.
Several times he uses the word "dishonest." That's a good word for when someone says something they know or believe not to be true. Another word is that he's a liar. Normally, when a journalist or author is exposed to be a liar—or, specific to those fields, a fabulist—that's the end of his career. Will this be the end of his career?
I know that I've been contributing to the end of his career for quite some time by having never read any more of his books than the occasional blurb or snippets that make their ways to reviews. Having absorbed plenty of premium economy psychology many decades ago from my fellow undergrads and then again as a 1L, I really don't need any more.
Any and every journalist who has ever referred to a man as she has been dishonest, and while I'd like to give them all the dramatic Gladiator thumbs down, the truth of it is, the vast majority of them are low-paid content grunts following style guides from above and if they'd taken a stand on common sense and reality, they would have found themselves out of work, while their employer would have had no trouble replacing them with someone who would betray the reality of sex. Multi-millionaire celebrity influencer Gladwell is not in that category. And while he's getting a lot of well-deserved scorn right now, I doubt this will affect the trajectory of his career
How typically male, to apologize to the buddy you made look a little bad onstage and not to the multitudes of women and girls you threw under the bus.
My disregard for Mr. Gladwell was complete by 2022 with his disingenuous and baldly performative behavior during the Munk Debate. He’s a weathervane of an intellect, following the money wherever it points. What an insufferably small man.
I have mixed thoughts on Douglas Murray, but when he said "Well, Malc..." with acidity somewhere around 1.0 on the pH scale.... chef's kiss.
I feel the same way. Murry is..well..Murry, but that was an absolutely brilliant moment.
My feeling with the redoubtable Douglas Murray is that you have one shot at the King. Best not keep calling him Doug.
Gladwell was not "cowed" into anything. Cows are female.
Gladwell was "bulled" into going along with what the other man (adult humans male) on the panel was saying. Bulls are male. Bullshit is the shit of males. The "nonbinary" female panel member did demonstrate that females who deny that they are females also produce bullshit.
Ha, that occurred to me too!
Love it. 😂
It's all so painfully absurd. As a former athletic administrator, I remember fighting against legitimate boys on a girls' team in New Yor State's Section XI, when there was a process by which males could play on girls' teams and girls could play on boys' teams ( I have another story for another day about a girl certified to wrestle on a boys wrestling team). The boy was from Europe, parents moved to the Hamptons on Eastern, Long Island, and since in Europe, boys play field hockey, he was allowed to play in Section XI after filling our some forms, getting a physical, and saying all the right things. I was at a school in the same league. I knew my field hockey coach very well, as she had been a student of mine and a player on a team "up the island" coached by an all-time great in the annals of New York State field hockey. We're talking multiple state championships. My argument was that this one boy was taking away an opportunity for a girl to play, and he was too dominant for the competition. He dominated every game he played in - bigger, stronger, faster. None of the league's coaches or other athletic directors would say a word about it. And since the kid didn't play on my team, I was mostly thwarted. Fast forward to 2025 and it is still absurd for boys to play on interscholastic girls' teams.
Thanks for this Sarah! I've had some heated conversations about this with friends. You and others verified i am not crazy! On first blush, many took this as an apology. But there was no act of contrition. He just said he was a pussy. Fair enough, he was. I would actually have accepted his story if he had said to Ross: "hey, I was trying to be empathetic to a group I was lead to believe was marginalized. But after looking at the science (including yours Ross) and listening to the girls and women who have actually been marginalized and discriminated against, I've changed my mind on this subject. No males in female sports at any level." But he didn't say that. This "thought leader" is personally responsible for the harm to thousands of women and he needs to own that. He has not influenced those of us who have been in this fight for years. While I would hope that after all the time and effort we have put into education, policy change, etc., there will be folks who listen and change their mind, Gladwell is not one of them. Didn't trust or respect his when he hosted that panel and don't trust or respect him now.
Taibbi and Kern aptly drew a parallel between Gladwell’s about face and his book, Tipping Point. He is riding the wave of popular revulsion for trans ideology, just as he rode the wave that promoted it.
He’s a pop culture surfer, not an intellectual. He doesn’t give novel or revolutionary insights. He just regurgitates academic research for the NPR crowd, as Kern accurately put it.
He’s like Ezra Klein. He guides the popular conscience toward the ideas and values that the ruling class wants people to ‘center’.
Let’s make him inconsequential.
Ignore him.
I like your comment x 3
Very well done. If you haven't seen Gladwell and Goldberg debate Douglas Murray & Matt Taibbi in the Munk Debates (as others may have said as well,) you will see why many people find Gladwell untrustworthy.
I appreciate Tucker and respect him, but the way he's defending Gladwell is disappointing. He compared his evolution on the subject, but it's not the same. Stating what you believe at one time and then doing more research that results in a change of opinion is NOT the same as keeping quiet because you know something isn't right but are afraid to say so. At least Tucker seems to understand why people are angry.
And Rowling's response is spot on. She's a GD legend.
Yes,as I wrote, changing one's mind when presented with new information is admirable; being afraid to speak up women's rights are being betrayed is cowardice. Quite different
Absolutely. I didn’t mean to imply you hadn’t already addressed this. It’s upsetting to see the comparison is all because, like you said, it’s not the same. One shows growth, and the other shows cowardice and intentional manipulation.
Yes, Malcolm says he was “cowed” when what he should say he was a coward.
Well argued, Sarah:
I believe one key reason for Gladwell to begin speaking out is that he now has two daughters, the oldest of whom is 4 years of age. It won't be too long when she might be confronted with the issue of a boy being in her sport and/or private space. I'm only guessing, but I can imagine that he is getting out ahead of this issue preparing for the day he has to defend his girls. Strategically, it makes good sense to face the storm now on asserting a biology-based stance before his girls become the focal point of the inevitable TRA invective. Gladwell has a very keen sense of socio-cultural zeitgeist. As my PhD supervisor would remind me often: "Never underestimate the power of enlightened self-interest." Whether Gladwell did this for conscience, family, prestige or economic prosperity (likely a mix), I consider it to be a clever move from his vantage point.
I suspect you're right. And I love your supervisor's words of wisdom!
Hi Sarah,
Thank you. You had me at "marginalized, my ass".
Is anyone going to apologize to women? I shouldn't put my hopes on that, I guess. We have to do this for ourselves.
I would not hold my breath for an apology, ever
You are so totally right, Sarah! Malcolm Gladwell is a self-serving weasel. He sees the winds are blowing in another direction so he’s changing his tune. I have zero sympathy for someone like this who is blind and indifferent to how deeply misogynistic the trans agenda is. Malcolm and so many others have shown their true colors and this will not be forgotten. Thank you for this great piece!!!
Gladwell is not telling us something new about himself
He is telling us the same thing twice, once in 2022 and again in 2025:
I follow the herd.
Yeah we know already fuckface
Correction: Panelist Katie Barnes is not a trans-identified male. Barnes is a femal who claims to be "nonbinary."
Thanks for this
Before my correction about Barnes, I should have led with, "great post!"
Wow! Nice job!
I wonder if Neil deGrasse Tyson will finally come out and join Gladwell??????
I wonder if the doctors and scientist at University of Washington will finally stand up for women and just admit the facts!
I welcome any average people who have educated themselves or been peaked by seeing males in women's sports with open arms. Those who have known all along men do not belong in women's sports and spaces, whose job it was to apprise the public of that but who, like Gladwell, were too afraid to do so—they deserve every bit of criticism they get
ICYMI (like me): Neil deGrasse Tyson's apparent conviction that gender identities compete in sport, rather than biological, sexed, bodies. (Less politely, WTAF - Malcolm Gladwell is comparatively a voice of sweet reason.)
https://www.foxnews.com/media/neil-degrasse-tyson-explodes-during-debate-transwomen-competing-womens-sports
I know nothing of this Tyson person other than that he has quite a following. He's doing immeasurable harm to women, and of course to his own reputation for having something, anything, to say, but even he, loudly benighted as he is, would be welcome in the world of the thinking, after going through the spanking machine of course, if—and this goes for Gladwell too—he then equally loudly took up the cause of women's rights, women's sports and spaces. 12-step program
This quote from the Fox story that Katharine linked tells you all you need to know about NdGT’s “understanding” of trans issues:
“Kisin was referring to Tyson stating on TikTok, ‘The XX, XY chromosomes are insufficient because when we wake up in the morning, we exaggerate whatever feature we want to portray the gender of our choice. Suppose no matter my chromosomes today I feel 80% female, 20% male. Now I'm going to I'm going to put on makeup. Tomorrow. I might feel 80% male; I'll remove the makeup, and I'll wear a muscle shirt… What business is it of yours to require that I fulfill your inability to think of gender on a spectrum?’” WTAF indeed. He wants to be the next Carl Sagan. I would like to think Sagan would be rolling in his grave at that.
And “Bill Nye the Science Guy” has come out with similar nonsense.
Not to mention Scientific American.
All captured. So infuriating.
Hopefully the tide is starting to turn.
Tyson is confusing feminine with female, a social construct with a biological reality. That's an easy mistake for people who identify as intelligent to make
You’d think someone with a STEM PhD would know the difference.
Neil deGrasse Tyson's area of expertise is astrophysics, but he is considered a reputable science communicator, in tradition of Carl Sagan. Gobsmacked by illogical & specious line of response - almost as if he takes personal umbrage at men being denied participation in women's sports. Total entitlement and unquestioning embrace of transgender ideology.
Malcolm who?
Heh