November 23, 2021 - 11:45am
In a move that has proved to be as popular as a holiday in Peterborough, three trans activists rocked up to JK Rowling’s family home last week, strategically posing for a photograph that included her address for all to see.
Claiming to be protesting the writer’s ‘transphobia’, the three posted the photograph on Twitter, clearly hoping for a pile-on.
The trio chose Trans Day of Remembrance to pull their pathetic stunt, but in reality, not one trans person has been murdered in the UK this past three years. In contrast, 120 women have died at the hands of men this year. The narcissistic arrogance of the activists is staggering, bearing in mind that Rowling’s trouble began with her having the nerve to defend women’s sex-based rights and single sex provisions such as domestic violence refuges. It is extraordinary that the activists and their propaganda machines, such as Pink News and LGBTQ Nation, can turn it around to make the three activists look like the victims and Rowling the perpetrator.
The headline and blurb on LGBTQ Nation reads:
PinkNews’ coverage was no better:
What has happened to Rowling is a high-profile example of what will happen to other women if they don’t toe the line. Unlike Rowling, most women targeted by the extremists are at risk of losing their livelihood. I have been stalked by trans activists for 17 years now. During that time, I have experienced attempts to get me blacklisted from newspapers and magazines and I have lost paid and unpaid work when organisers cancelled events at which I was scheduled to speak. I am one of the lucky ones because I have a public profile and enough of a solid reputation as a campaigner against male violence, something I was known for decades before the trans activists came for me.
I have lost count of the number of times I have heard said about Rowling that she is rich and famous enough for this harassment to not affect her, so what is she complaining about? The assumption that slurs and bullying can be doled out with impunity at successful women is nothing short of sadistic. Unlike the trans activists, Rowling spends much of her time and money supporting disadvantaged groups of people and has stood up for women who have no public platform, despite the cost to her.
What has happened to Rowling is a clear warning to other women to ‘shut up, bitch’. But the feminist tradition is to defy bullies and resist attempts at silencing our voices. Thankfully, in Rowling, women and girls everywhere have an exemplary role model and a mentor.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWhen it comes to JK Rowling’s cancellation I believe the correct spell is, “Hoistus Petardo!”
As (fellow TERF cancellee) Suzanne Moore, formerly of The Guardian, could have told her, going along with the woke crowd for years and mouthing all the “approved” lines is no defence against the dark arts of the social justice activists. If and when you stray from the orthodoxy, they will disown you, threaten you and attempt to cancel you without a backwards glance.
But although I was appalled that Ms Rowling had been “excommunicated” by the HP cast-members who owe her their careers, I have to admit that I struggle to sympathise over-much with her plight given that she has seemed perfectly willing in the past to join or instigate Twitter pile-ons against those with whom she disagreed, so, when the mob turned on her, she got to see how it felt.
Suzanne Moore and Graham Linehan have also upset the Trans-activist mob and like JK Rowling they both have form.
You can spend years going along with the progressive herd, but the minute you fall out of lock-step with them on a single contentious issue you will be turned on. Previous adherence to orthodoxy is no defence once you’ve been accused of trans-heresy.
Linehan gleefully piled on to denounce a fellow comedian – who goes by the name “Count Dankula ” – for making what was (obvious to anyone of the meanest intelligence) a joke.
Was the joke funny? Well, to each his own.
Was the joke in poor taste? Certainly to some, yes.
But it was a joke. And Linehan knew it was a joke.
He is a comedy writer – he knows that not every joke will be found funny by an entire audience – so he presumably would agree with the principle that a comedian has the right to say anything in search of a laugh? … Actually, as it turns out, no, not so much.
As the twitter mob lit torches and sharpened pitchforks to lay siege to Dankula’s castle, there was Linehan, feeding the mob and accusing the hapless Count of trying to “sneak fascism and hatred in under the guise of irony”.
When Linehan, JK Rowling and Suzanne Moore found themselves at the eye of a twitterstorm for “thoughtcrimes”, I wonder whether their predicament made them feel any sympathy for those they’d denounced in the past? They’ve certainly not said so.
Alongside the special-pleading of the aforementioned cancellees, is the bizarre mental gymnastics and intellectual contortions taken up by those who wish to appear right-on to Guardian readers. One of the silliest to try was Billy Bragg trying (and failing) to make an argument in support of cancel culture – under the guise of not criticising it.
His piece in the Guardian last year stated that …
Cancel culture’ doesn’t stifle debate, but it does challenge the old order. … Speech is only free when everyone has a voice – that’s why young people are angry
In the article he made the very strange leap from quoting Orwell’s
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”
to then question that with
“Surely the author of Nineteen Eighty-Four would understand that people don’t want to hear that 2+2=5?”
I struggle to see how anyone who looks at this situation with their eyes (and minds) open would fail to recognise that many of the people who have been cancelled, or branded as heretics, were the ones insisting that 2+2 =4. It was those who were doing the cancelling that were insisting we should all agree that the sum added up to 5.
If mathematical truth is his model, one of scientific and measurable correctness, as opposed to the perceived political correctness of our time, then was Mr Bragg seriously suggesting JKR was scientifically and measurably wrong when she suggested that biological sex was a thing, and that mere self-identification doesn’t alter ones chromosomes?
Because it doesn’t – it REALLY AND FACTUALLY doesn’t.
There is surely a debate about gender to be had but, if he’s using maths and science as his yardstick, rather than ‘culturally acceptable’ norms, then his argument falls on its face. JK Rowling was attacked for saying something that was, until very recently, universally accepted, and in scientific terms is still correct. Yet she was criticised and threatened for it.
One is forced to wonder about people of Mr Bragg’s persuasion, “Which is more important to you, being able to voice uncomfortable truths, or protecting those who wish to only hear consoling half-truths or believe in absolute untruths?”
One of the favourite insults from the Left when castigating those they disagree with is “Orwellian”.
Yet that tag could be far better applied to the “progressive Left” attitudes and the insistence we all adhere to the new orthodoxy – that denies demonstrable fact – or face cancellation, a social media pile-on, the deletion of content, demonetising of channels, banning from platforms or any other penalty for straying from what they deem acceptable thought.
It probably won’t help you if you’re caught out by the activists but I would suggest it is far better to retain your dignity by never pandering to such illiberal, woke nonsense in the first place.
Completely agreed.
It’s been said before, but worth saying again. People like Bragg are still fighting what they think is ‘the establishment’ without even realising that the establishment is them – a cozied and increasingly deluded metropolitan elite with tendrils deep inside in all the major institutions and in control of most public discourse.
Bragg talks like an anarchist, yet lives like an aristocrat.
Could you point to some specific acts of cancellation that JK Rowling has been involved in – as opposed to just having generally progressive views?
https://wingsoverscotland.com/jk-rowling-is-a-litigious-bully/
Fill your boots.
Not impressed. I am a bit surprised that JK should follow a creature like Brian Spanner – but then I do not know what else there is to say about him, apart from those selected tweets. For the rest:
“Cet animal est très méchant,
Quand on l’attaque il se défend..
As a follower of Unherd, do you not believe in the right to self-defence?
I’ve re-read these blog pages, the outpourings of a man who loathes Rowling for being a unionist, and the cases he quotes are where she’s defended her reputation when it’s being trashed unfairly by keyboard warriors.
Is she not allowed to defend her reputation in your view?
Exactly, I went to the site and wondered what on earth it was all about, it was only when I went to the BTL comments that I realised it was not what she did in these cases, but how she voted in the Scottish referendum that was the reason for all the bashing.
A dispute on Twitter about possible defamation is not the same thing as an ideological pile on by activists saying you are a hate criminal.
You can spend years going along with the progressive herd, but the minute you fall out of lock-step with them on a single contentious issue you will be turned on. Previous adherence to orthodoxy is no defence once you’ve been accused of trans-heresy.
I rather think that this is the point, a lot of these “celebrities” are trying hard to fit in with what they see as “correct thinking” and are just bound to fall foul as I don’t think that they really believe in it. It is reminiscent of people in my youth always trying to be “with-it” and making fundamental errors, because at heart they’re not really “with-it”, they’re just afraid to plough their own furrow.
Well said.
Agreed. It’s rather sad to see them struggle to use the right words, speaking cautiously, pausing, apologising.
One day the Harry Potter actors will realise, like those who betrayed ‘commie’ actors for Mcarthy, that they betrayed Rowling and the cause of women.
JK Rowling just calls it as she sees it. Not for the “Left” or the “Right”. She has stood by her essay and what she said originally and never wavered, no matter what has been thrown at her. I do not like her books, any of them, but I do admire her grit and stamina when it comes to the sexism and misogyny she has had to put up with.
Maybe many of her detractors will finally get fed up and leave the bus!
That comment is fair enough in itself, but when talking of J K Rowling it would be useful to find any example of where she has tried to cancel someone rather than disagree with them.
And in the case of some US liberal ‘cancelees’, declaring that you disagree with Donald Trump, which to various commentators on here is like a red rag to a bull, is not at all the same thing.
And your point is? Women should shut up? Women have no right to an opinion? Women have no right to allies? But transfolks are allowed to do what they want, when they want, to whom they want?
The majority of those who are most vocal are not young. They are are middle aged, middle class white men who have power as men and want to keep that power when they transition. One of the ways of doing this is to use younger people who are angry at the world by promising a powershare when they bring women to their knees.
But guess what… Women are not stupid nor will we keep quiet.
You are entitled to your opinion because that is what freedom of speech is what it is about, but few will agree with that opinion.
Wow. You REALLY missed the point!
Your comment is far more sensible and compelling than anything I have read from this writer.
The trans activists are destroying themselves. They overreached massively with Stock and it’s been downhill all the way from there. These intolerant entitled bigots have shown themselves for what they are. The threats and blackmail no longer work.
I wish!
I hope you’re right. But in the meantime they’re running a lot of HR depts in business and government, and academia, and distorting our kids understanding of these issues in schools.
And worst of all, transitioning children without proper review.
Second JB article in a week where “male violence” is shoved in. As it happens, I can’t stand Rowling, but I take her side on this issue because she just happens to be the one on the wrong end of the trans-thugs’ metaphorical hobnail, and very possibly a real hobnail if some in that camp had their way. The issue needs no reference to any hobby horse of mine and if I tried to constantly shoehorn one in I’d be degrading the point I’m making.
Probably for the first time I agree with you here; the mention of male violence was a totally unnecessary addition to the article, it didn’t prove a particular point and antagonised some readers. I do urge Ms Bindel to tone this down and to keep to the main issue about which she is writing.
I urge JB to crawl under a rock and stay there, never to be herd from again, at least on UnHerd….
Cancelling someone again Mr(?) Joyce?
Maybe try engaging, as you usually do, instead of resorting to insults?
Fair play. Engaging how exactly? I don’t think JB is very smart and I think her writing is exceptionally poor, beneath UnHerd standards. Seems others disagree. But I absolutely don’t believe that this is JB’s personal sandbox to endlessly settle scores. Perhaps others agree with me on this point? Or not.
Maybe take your own advice? We need more female writers not less. You don’t have to read what she writes…
How woke! Nah, we need more great writers, any gender. I pay my dues, I have a voice, I expressed my opinion. No worries.
The reference to male violence is because the activists did this on “Trans Day Of Remembrance” which is an annual stunt which is meant to promote the idea that trans-women live in constant fear of life and limb. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable for JB to make the point that (1) that’s bollocks, (2) actual reality is that women aka females get murdered by men aka males all the time, (3) rather a large part of JB’s issue is that she quite reasonably considers that males shouldn’t be in spaces intended for females due to the risk of violence. JB does have some views that are legit bonkers, her “political lesbianism” and so on, but referencing male violence in an article about wacko trans activists, who are all males, and who all decided to doxx JKR isn’t out of line.
The number of men killed by men is something like twice the number of women. This strongly suggests that these have nothing to do with sexism on the part of the perpetrators.
What? And that makes the killing of women by men okay then? Only a misogynist would put that down in writing.
Only a buffoon would misunderstand a simple statement so totally.
Thanks for pointing this out to those who think it wasn’t relevant.
It wasn’t shoved in – it was actually relevant as pointed out below by John Murray. I’m sensing that you don’t like the topic of male violence being brought up at all?
It seems odd to me that men-in-skirts hold such sway in the West.
Men-in-skirts would be Scotsmen. What you mean is men in dresses.
Julie, your bold defense of JK is well-stated, appropriate, and timely. Keep up your vigilant work.
Agreed.
“the feminist tradition is to defy bullies and resist attempts at silencing our voices”
I would suggest that defying bullies and resisting being silenced is, thankfully, a common enough trait in both men and women. I suspect it is more visible in the working classes, who are proudly unWoke, non-PC and less fearful than ‘professionals’ of being complained against.
Bullies are generally despised, and the anonymous ‘activist’ types on social media, who find power in numbers, are more than likely inadequate cowards who would avoid confrontation on a one to one basis.
On the subject of being silenced, I think it worth mentioning that International Men’s Day fell last Friday. the 19th Nov. Just saying.
I suspect that those who staged their photo-op outside J K Rowling’s house do not really care for trans-people. But they do care about finding a cause to be noticed for. Without one their lives lack meaning.
These battles between radical feminists and transgender lunatics remind me of Kissinger’s comment on the Iran-Iraq War: It is a pity that they both can’t lose!
“Male violence”
I wonder what Bindel would say about the term “Muslim violence.”
Radical feminists like Bindel have lost their safe spaces on the Left, so now they have come to moderates and conservatives for comfort and relief. I don’t believe we should oblige them. Trans vs Terf is the Left eating itself, which we have long predicted. Let them have at it.
UnHerd is not the personal sandbox of Julie Bindel. I don’t like her. I think she’s stupid and her writing is poor. Cue the downvotes, the trolls. Fair play. Give it a go. Fill your boots.
Yes, the people attacking her are horrible, but they are only slightly worse than JB. Enough already. I am against the whole trans hysteria. I am completely against the most extreme woke–JB is perhaps only “extreme woke,” but enough already.
I suggested to UnHerd that someone do an article on that filthy scammer Meghan Markle, specifically on her citizenship. The question is “Why wasn’t she stripped of her US citizenship when she became the Duchess of Sussex?” You can have her. Let her live in the UK with that Ginger Moron. I’m almost on side with her, though, as I’m against the monarchy, and MM is doing what she can to destroy The Firm. So that’s good!
The article I suggested could be interesting, not the endless personal travails of JB. Enough already.
And for those who wish to hector me about how bad these people attacking JB, Kathleen Stock, JK Rowlings, etc.–keep your powder dry: I’m on side. I just don’t want to hear more about it–especially from JB.
“Why wasn’t she stripped of her US citizenship when she became the Duchess of Sussex?”
On what basis would she be stripped of her citizenship for this? She’s scarcely the first American to marry foreign royalty and get a title. Grace Kelly, Wallis Simpson, etc.
There are provisions in American law–look in a US passport–that prohibit serving in foreign governments. Also, the US doesn’t have royalty–I think there was a war or something some years ago. You may have read about it. For that filthy scammer to be calling US Senators as The Duchess of Sussex is wildly, wildly wrong.
And I’m not sure about Grace Kelly and Wallis–if they gave up their citizenship when assuming royal titles. Need to research this, but I ask the UnHerd crowd for help….
The US not having royalty does not bar Americans from becoming royalty. The US Constitution allows anybody who pleases to call Senators, it is called The First Amendment. Given your apparent ignorance, I doubt you’ve heard of it.
Ouch. Really? I’d be willing to bet otherwise, especially not to use a foreign royal position to lobby American Senators. Is MM a registered lobbyist for the UK? You don’t know what you’re talking about, mate!
But in the meantime, you can Let’s Go Brandon!
Ooher John, bit harsh! Our James used to be a prosecutor and knows what he’s talking about (eh James? I’d do the winking emoji now if I knew how to).
True. Thanks. I’m sure that in certain circumstances someone can be fired to give up citizenship. One Israeli ambassador to the US, born in NJ, had to renounce citizenship. It initially appeared that The Firm would make MM renounce, but she seems to be a loose cannon.
But stay tuned. When the filthy grifter and the ginger child have to file US taxes, it will absolutely involve The Firm’s finances, which will bring this to a head. MM may have committed crimes by lobbying while an agent of a foreign power. She’s gotten a pass for now. It’s wrong, it’s PC, and it has to end. She should be deported back to the UK with Shamina Begum. You can have them both!
I think Miss Markle’s status caused a bit of consternation in the Royal family because American citizens must pay American taxes as long as they retain citizenship. Not sure if they can have dual? But they need to renounce to not be liable.
I’m sure the financial implications of MM being entitled to House of Windsor funds once married and later intending to hold onto semi-detached status and eventually exiting must have given the advisors some serious homework.
I hear you, and OK so you don’t want to keep reading this stuff. Fine, so don’t read it. You’re not forced to read everything on UnHerd, unless there’s some rule on subscribing that I’ve missed. There are plenty of articles on here that don’t interest me. I don’t see it as UnHerd’s duty to only publish material that I approve of.
Fair play. But I raise a larger issue that UnHerd should not be the personal playground of JB to settle scores. I like to read about this issue, as I am a fierce combatant in the woke wars. If UnHerd wishes to publish this, perhaps someone other than JB could do it. I think that JB’s writing is far beneath the standards that we should see on UnHerd.
But banging on about it James, here and elsewhere, by yourself included, is what raises awareness of the issue and catalyses change once enough people care about it and want to do something.
Unfortunately, it’s your cross to bear. Like I have to tolerate the endless articles about how useless our Covid response was, how useless our government is, blah blah blah. They always say the same thing and I have to search for a new angle when there is none.
Not sure I get the ¶, mate. IF trans issues must be discussed on UnHerd–not an unreasonable position–someone other than JB should write at least some of the posts.
What kind of change are you referring to? I fiercely advocate treating trans and all people with respect (at least initially), but I am a fierce believer in reality, too.
What is the new frontier–trans-racial? Rachel Dozier? She’s not the only one. Once “passing for white” was a thing, to get a better life. Now “passing for a COW (Citizen of Wakanda)” is sometimes done for the same reasons.
I get you don’t like JB James, fair play, but others do write some of the TG posts on here – I’ve read pieces by Douglas Murray, Maya Forstater, Debbie Hayton and Gareth Roberts among others in the past six months or so.
“Yes, the people attacking her are horrible, but they are only slightly worse than JB.”
Well you seem to be describing yourself.
I completely agree.
Cheers, Andy. Fair play. You ca Let’s Go Biden!
US immigration law requires foreigners to renounce titles of nobility when applying for US citizenship. But it does not say anything about current American citizens adopting titles of nobility. Sorry to disappoint.
Is this a pay per view event? What is this sinister fighting style Julie Bindle will be using?
lighten up people with cervixes’seses, don’t get your breast binders in a twist. The way that headline is written….. it was asking for it….. badum tish… still no? ill get my coat.
Julie Bindel, beacon of free speech and tolerance.
We’ve seen everything. .
Do you agree you’re a heterophobe?
I’m a transactivistphobe
#MeToo.
Hell is other people, and me.