Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling gets a taste of the left’s medicine when she stands up for liberty
At my son’s request, I read the first two Harry Potter books shortly after they first came out. They were okay as that sort of thing goes, but since I’m not keen on that sort of thing, I stopped reading them somewhere in the middle of the third book. The series just didn’t hold my interest, and I figured I’d sufficiently paid my Harry Potter dues – although my son felt I had shown remarkable dereliction of maternal duty.
I’ve also noted over subsequent years that J. K. Rowling, the books’ author, tended to voice the usual leftist line on many things. Rowling is a Brit and a writer, two reasons that stance didn’t surprise me.
But now that Rowling has stood up for liberty and freedom of expression against transgender orthodoxy, the hounds of war have been loosed on her – proving once again that, to the left, you’re only as good as your most recent party line:
She has been called a stupid cunt, a bitch, trash, an old woman and so fucking ugly by an army of tweeting sexists. Her crime? She defended the right of a woman to express her opinion about sex and gender without losing her job.
The witch-hunting of JK Rowling, the ceaseless online abuse of her over the past day and night, exposes how unhinged, hateful and outright misogynistic the transgender movement has become. Rowling’s sin was to tweet in defence of Maya Forstater, the charity worker who was sacked for her belief that there are two sexes and that sex is immutable. That is, a man cannot become a woman, and vice versa. This week, an employment tribunal outrageously upheld Ms Forstater’s sacking and in the process it decreed what it is acceptable for people in the workplace to think and say. The judge said the kind of views held by Forstater are ‘not worthy of respect in a democratic society’. This essentially gives a green light to the harassment, isolation and expulsion from the workplace of anyone who questions the transgender ideology.
This is a ruling by an employment tribunal and is not legally binding in terms of the British court system, but it’s a chilling development in line with some of the “pronoun” fights that have gone on in Canada and which catapulted Jordan Peterson into fame when he fought them in the name of liberty.
More about the Forstater case can be found here:
“It is a core component of her belief that she will refer to a person by the sex she considered appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment,” [the judge] continued.
“The approach is not worthy of respect in a democratic society.”
Funny thing, but just a few short years ago this belief was standard and completely acceptable, and science agreed that transgender people never fully became a member (in the biological sense) of the sex to which they transitioned. More recently, transgender activists have openly pursued several goals on their agenda, and this is one of them: to force people to accept their view of things and to act accordingly or to have those people (or people such as Rowling who support their right to speak freely) pay a steep price in public shaming as well as suffer financial loss.
The United States has a legal tradition, as well as laws and presumptions, that favor the exercise and protection of free speech and liberty far more than anyplace in Europe (or perhaps even the world, although it’s Europe about which I know more). Although the curtailment of such liberty has been slower to come here, in part for that reason, there’s no reason to think it won’t happen here.
“Although the curtailment of such liberty has been slower to come here, in part for that reason, there’s no reason to think it won’t happen here.”
There are certainly plenty of people working hard to make it happen here.
Schadenfreude may not be admirable, but one cannot help feeling some satisfaction in the vitriol being directed at the insufferably virtue-signaling Rowling by her fellow leftists, since this billionaire, who has earned much of her money from the devotion of young people to her books, has never once spoken out on behalf of the thousands upon thousands of young girls (some as young as 11 and 12) who have been brutalized by Muslim rape-gangs in towns all over England.
I found it interesting that Rowling wasn’t agreeing that there are only two sexes, but only defending the right of someone else, a woman, to state that opinion.
Once upon a time liberals would trot out this Voltaire quote (though not his actually) with great self-satisfaction:
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
That’s worth self-satisfaction. But not today.
Liberals will be fascists and fascists will be liberals.
It’s a mixed-up, muddled-up, shook-up world.
(with apologies to Ray Davies, “Lola” and the Kinks)
Then there’s this business:
“Madness: Man Sentenced to 16 Years in Prison for Burning an LGBTQ Flag”
https://pjmedia.com/trending/man-sentenced-to-16-years-in-prison-for-burning-an-lgbtq-flag/
And it happened in Ames, Iowa, USA.
She, like Martina Navratilova, find that karma can be a real b***.
View not acceptable in a DEMOCRATIC society
Say what?
She, like Martina…
Can go relax in their Villa by Lake Como, and give the finger to their critics.
The rest of us, reliant on employment, are just gonna have to suffer.
The problem with all these rulings, like this employment tribunal, is the formation of parallel legal system. The same thing has happened in US universities when it comes to rape cases. Another interesting case is this one.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/466347-supreme-court-will-take-on-fourth-branch-of-bureaucracies
…. the three branches of government have surrendered some of their powers to an unofficial “fourth branch” composed of government agencies that combine legislative, executive and judicial powers. This fourth branch doesn’t wield all of the government’s power — the three traditional branches still function — so we don’t live under tyranny in America. But as we allow unaccountable bureaucrats to accumulate more and more power, we move closer to the tyranny feared by Madison.
On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider the constitutionality of one particularly unaccountable federal agency: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Created in response to the 2008 financial crisis, the CFPB enjoys vast legislative, executive and judicial powers. And is it virtually immune from oversight.
Here’s why this is problematic. The CFPB may prescribe rules and regulations under various consumer-protection laws; enforce conduct that it may define as “unfair, deceptive or abusive”; and adjudicate its own enforcement actions and impose legal and equitable remedies. Right away, you’ll notice by that brief description that the CFPB captures the roles and responsibilities of all three branches of government under one roof. So much for separation of powers.
The Revolution eats its own.
European Revolutions always seem to end with thugs in control. And we saved them THREE times in the 20th Century because…?
Liberalism is divergent. Progressivism is monotonic. That said, trans/homo was politically congruent, and trans/bi was socially awkward, but trans/neo was always weird. Now, to their credit, they are normalizing the full transgender spectrum. Next, other politically incongruent choices, orientations, etc. Finally, after chipping away at their Pro-Choice religion, they will lose it, then deny the spontaneous conception theory of life, never. Baby steps.
I am, and have been, completely opposed to the concept of a “Hate Crime”. How can we possibly know what the defendant feel or felt at the moment of the crime? Even if they tell us, we cannot know with certainty what is or was their state of mind. People lie. The whole concept is too subjective.
People should be judged based on their actions, not their thoughts.
“She has been called a stupid cunt, a bitch, trash, an old woman and so fucking ugly by an army of tweeting sexists.”
Why is it that so many on the left resort to using such nasty language when trashing those they disagree with? (just a rhetorical question)
J.K.Rowling was already in the left’s crosshairs because she was loudly critical of Corbyn and called out Labour’s anti-semitism. I believe that she worked for the Lib Dems instead of Labour in this election.
Whatever you think of the Lib Dems (which in my case is ‘not much’), it had to be difficult, even wrenching, for her to leave Labour. I respect her for taking that step and I’m grateful to her for standing up for British Jews.
The Left eats its own and everyone else, when it can get away with it.
Which it does, far too often, because its own backs down when challenged.
Choose your favorite browser to look up “mark hamill rowling” and pick a story.
charles – they use nasty language to everyone all the time.
lurker – the divergence in opinions on the Left about Jews and transpersons may lead to a serious break-up, but what happens after that is unpredictable.
People are slow learners. We’ve seen Bolsheviks vs SRs, Stalin vs the Old Bolsheviks, Maoist Cultural Revolution (Mao vs Old Long Marchers), and now yet another Leftist factional, fratricidal conflict.
I say we encourage show trials, twitter storms, denouncing and exile, and immediate executions (even if only metaphorical, e.g., banning from Twitter) of one Leftist faction by another until everyone learns to shun Leftism.
The attacks on Rowling should be encouraged. She made her bed. Until she renounces Leftism, her lifetime of evil is marred by single statement in favor of liberty. It’s not enough. Until she commits half a billion dollars—she can afford it—against Green, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties, it’s all talk.
The judge has revealed his bias in mischaracterizing her belief. A core component of Forstater’s belief is that biological reality must be acknowledged by all. Any society that denies something as fundamental as biological reality will eventually collapse into an unsustainable level of dysfunction.
Rod Dreher:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/jk-rowling-havel-greengrocer-transgender/
H/T: Instapundit
Key graf (of many):
“If you think that the Rowling row is something you can safely ignore, you are mistaken.”
“Why is it that so many on the left resort to using such nasty language when trashing those they disagree with?”
It seems as though they reserve the worst language for denouncing each other. I’m not LGBT but I have many friends who are, and I have found recent wanderings through forums elsewhere to be eye-opening to say the least. I am quite capable of taking part in vicious and vile exchange – which I stifle when I am a guest at civil forums such as neo’s – but even I am a little taken aback by what they call actual lesbians and real transgenders these days.
I suspect that this is a way of keeping control over their own masses. “Soft” lefties do what they do because they want to go along and get along; they are probably extremely susceptible just to the threat of being on the receiving end of this abuse. Since this sort of attack can be fatal to one’s career, much less social standing, I would not be surprised if there are a lot of unhappy and frightened people who are afraid of stepping up and speaking the truth.
I abuse; therefore, I am(?)
Rowlings was generally a predictable leftist, but she had a bit of a libertarian bent. The Ministry of Magic were generally fools, and the Minister of Magic one of the most foolish. Just as, we know, bureaucratic governments often are. Way back when, I believe that PowerLine had an article about how Rowlings was at least a LITTLE bit Libertarian.
Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy
Standing up for liberty, free speech, and reality:
https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/12/22/not-ready-play-nice-j.k.-rowling-refuses-apologize-tweet-endorsing-reality-sex-least-far
Backing down:
https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/12/21/outrage-continues-mark-hamill-apologizes-liking-harry-potter-authors-tweet-claiming-sex-real-ignorance-no-excuse/
Still doesn’t have any transphobic substance, regardless of the outrage at its alleged connotations.
However, it is idiotic to retweet anything (or post or comment on) that you haven’t researched first.
There were some positive responses to Rowling’s Tweet, as shown in the above story; so, I guess the science is not settled quite yet.
One of the Tweets referenced above resonated with another post I saw today.
“@PattyArquette
I am not afraid of being raped by a trans woman in fact I’m afraid FOR trans women as they have the highest likelihood of being raped in any group. I’m afraid of rapist who are -everywhere sadly.”
Leaving aside her buy-in to the inflated rape “statistics” that have resulted from misclassifying every romantic encounter that doesn’t work out as “rape” — look at what is now happening to legal designations, which certainly has an impact on Arquette’s assertions.
https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/11/09/uk-rapists-now-allowed-identify-women-purpose-lawmaking-crime-statistics/
It’s not nice to try and fool Mother Nature.
Dreher links to this other post of his, in which he makes a reference to Rowling’s Tweet, but it also ties into the way activists distort facts to make up “statistics” that support their worldview, in more areas than just transgenderism.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/phony-epidemic-anti-trans-murder/
Dreher researches all the cases listed, and concludes that (by the reporting), none were known (by documentary and testimonial evidence) to be related to the victims’ transgender identification.
One death was by natural causes, one occurred during an armed robbery, one in the Ohio mass murder, one in a domestic disputes involving taxes, one in a street assault by a thug; several were killed by their own boyfriends, who supposedly knew their identification and accepted it.
An additional case was almost certainly based on the transgender situation:
Dreher concludes:
And just when you thought (believed? felt? intuited?) things couldn’t get any nuttier:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/22/transgender-woman-accused-hate-speech-wearing-t-shirt-stating/
Clear and eloquent, as usual.
(h/t Power LIne)
https://www.city-journal.org/gervais-rowling-transgender
This *everybody worship at the foot of the trans altar* is getting tedious
They are male homosexuals, they used to be called “fairies”, they typically take a submissive role in
their encounters. They are not women. I consider them silly guys playing dress up. If they are pathologically in to it then they are delusional & I do not have to support their delusion.
If an XX woman is born without a womb, unable to bear children, this is a handicap. She’s a handicapped woman.
She’s not a normal, “real” woman, she’s a real, handicapped woman. Abnormal.
If she thinks she’s actually a man in a woman’s body, she might be suffering from the medical condition of sexual dysphoria or be in some temporary delusion.
Taking hormones and getting surgery will never make her a “real” man. Funny how little we hear about Chelsea–Chas Bono (daughter-son of Cher and Sonny).
We don’t have agreed upon words for what these trans folk are, and what is “reality”. The Dems are pushing against Truth, and against objective reality.
And their desire for the power to punish those who disagree is their sick totalitarianism. Supported by college indoctrination centers.