The Spectator (UK): how Rowling became a radical feminist, not recognizing the rights of transgender people

Personal story of Joanne Rowling turned up in a story about a modern witch, are guilty of spiteful attitude towards issues of sex and gender, reminiscent of the messages of the media focuses on all the bad in this thread and on a public discussion taking place in social networks and their. That is the essence of the crime Rowling: she wrote on Twitter that biological sex is real and should not be subordinated to the subjective concept of gender.

“My life is determined by the fact that I’m a woman. I don’t think there’s something about people hating that I’m saying this, she wrote. — If gender is not real, then there can be same-sex attraction. If gender is not real, it is the current reality of women globally erased”.

These words caused a storm.

If you haven’t seen the discussion on this topic on Twitter or on another platform, then just Google her name and select any message of a few dozen about this writer and her views have appeared in the media around the world. All this illustrates the first disadvantage “twitterature” public culture. Most of these “news” consists of repetition (or reprints) of the reaction of Twitter users on their own tweets by JK Rowling dedicated to the issues of gender and transgender people.

Here I may seem old fashioned, boring hack, but I do remember a time when “news” meant more than just something “people say”. Traditional the voice of the people (vox pop) or message based on several non-random way selected observations of several non-random way of the chosen people, have always existed in journalism, but they rightfully were in the bottom of the list of important and serious formats.

However, the situation changed. Now what “some people said in Twitter,” apparently, is news. However, many leaders of the media today are concerned that people no longer value the products of their labor sufficient to pay for it. I never comment on this strange coincidence.

Another lesson of modern life presented in the relegation of JK Rowling to the level of a rule breaker, is that the world must always be strictly divided into good and bad people. Good people are good people, and good also is that what they are doing. Bad people are bad people, and, accordingly, the bad is all that they do.

Therefore, all these messages filled with sobs of Twitter users about the betrayal of Rowling, and how it poisons her works and even her very existence. People who just like Harry Potter, don’t even want to think about these books, because they know that their author, apparently, has another distinct from their own point of view. Perhaps it will surprise you. You might think: of course, you can disagree with someone and not consider such a person evil. And are you able to dislike of the artist’s position on some issue and to see dignity in his work? Obviously not.

Don’t be surprise if “history” with Rowling soon will include “invitations” (from the people of Twitter, of course) to ensure that its books were removed from libraries, that they are not given to children or to just burned. And how do JK Rowling went from good in the evil category? How the Creator of the world’s most popular children’s books ceased to be beloved and harmless the author and turned into the one who is usually (and quite common) is called in the Twitter word for the female sexual organ (c**t)?

The lesson of modern life increasingly relates to the debates about transgender people, although associated with the broader “twittersocial” culture. Bad people just do bad things. They have bad motives. Man no longer has the opportunity to Express their disagreement with something, guided by honest and sincere reasons. People making other conclusions, are not well-intentioned, but misguided. They are wrong and they are bad. And to the point.

In the debates about transgender this means that any person — including the old villain, Joan, whose doubts about the legality of the recognition of women who were born men but consider themselves women, is in fact disgusting transform. The only acceptable explanation for such actions is bigotry and prejudice.

It is here rooted in the mass consciousness the stereotype of Orthodoxy views on transgender people is the most fragile, and this is one of the reasons for the relentless stream of insults JK Rowling. (Other reasons are mostly associated with how a certain type of people involved in this issue, feels and responds when women disagree with them and refuse to submit to their preferences). How did the priests of transgenderism explain to his flock that J. K. Rowling became a radical feminist, not recognizing the rights of transgender people, which you can now threaten and even attack it?

I’m not personally familiar with JK Rowling, but I suspect that she won’t mind if you call her a supporter of progressive and liberal views. She donated to charities, tens, if not hundreds, of millions of pounds. She sent the funds of the labour party Gordon brown, she was on friendly terms with Barack Obama, and she worked in the organization Amnesty international (note that this was long before the organization sided with the Orthodox transgender). And she opposed Brakcet. In short, she’s not the person that can be called a social conservative. If concepts such as “left” and “right”, something mean today, it is on the left side.

The same can be said of many women (and men) that have long been on that path, which does not recognize transgender radical feminists. A large part of feminist groups and grassroots organizations concerned about the ratio between “transgender rights” and the legal and social status of women, are influenced women, with their policy of left-wing views. Woman’s Place UK, the most famous of such groups, was founded by representatives of trade unions from long experience. Among its supporters in the labour movement was a major figure of the inner circle Jeremy Corbin (Jeremy Corbyn).

All this uncomfortable things for the witch hunters who are trying to silence bad JK Rowling. They constantly claim that anyone who refuses to repeat the catechism of transgenderism (transgender is women transmachina is men, people of third sex are the people of the third sex) have already committed a mortal sin, but it is difficult to explain how this sin appeared.

All hopes of this kind of fanatics associated with the assumption that the inability to accept the Orthodox tenets of transgenderism is part of a disgusting, regressive conservative social agenda that actively support the mysterious and influential Americans from the right wing. Look at trump and the Republicans, fixated on the toilets (don’t pay attention to such inconvenient facts as the refusal of Hillary Clinton to pronounce these Holy words). Remember Section 28, that prohibits the teaching in schools of homosexuality (never mind that sexuality and gender are two different things). All radical feminists are participants in the global March regressive populists, who want to destroy the foundations of progressive societies. Or something like that.

And this is why JK Rowling is smart, deep and is able to distinguish between shades JK Rowling — is a threat to all those people who are talking about radical feminists and that have to do with women who do not share their views. In fact, if someone will cry about the views of JK Rowling and her sinfulness, he will be forced to explain the essence of its sinfulness and to ask people to draw their own conclusions.

Here are two broad explanations for Rowling, as well as for many other women (and men) who hold progressive, liberal views and which challenge the prevailing views on transgender, asking the question about the consequences for women, their rights and their safety.

The first explanation is that many people who previously stood firm on the left side of political life today — in secret — were enumerated by the representatives of right-wing radicals to social conservatism, and only because of this single issue.

A second explanation of the movement Rowling on the way to radical feminism is that she’s a smart woman, she has closely followed this issue and decided for myself that there is nothing progressive, or liberal no good in the movement, whose supporters advocate the use of suffering from autism children with untested drugs. There is nothing progressive, kind, and liberal movement, whose members say adolescents are dissatisfied with their body, that the surgery will bring them happiness, but the alternative is suicide. There is nothing progressive, kind and liberal in the movement, which supporters say lesbians that they are bigots if they refuse to have sexual relations with women who have a penis. There is nothing progressive, kind, and liberal movement, whose supporters throw mud and showered with insults of a sexual nature of women (really, it’s just the women) if they don’t agree with things like this.

I’m not personally familiar with JK Rowling, but I know which of these two explanations is more likely.