Nigella Lawson apologizes for 27 year old column

Hostage note? Strange choice of words.
People sometimes change their minds, their opinions, it's not unheard of.
So when this person brought up this article, stands to reason that if she'd changed her views she'd say so and apologise if felt the need to.
I know I'm not particularly proud of all my views from nearly 30 years ago, difference is they weren't aired in public via social media.
If they were and they'd got unearthed, I'd probably feel like saying I don't think that anymore.
Hardly a case of "people made me apologise!" People can change, you know.

Maybe she has listened to different arguments and is more convinced by some than others?

Timeline

Nigella tweets pro-trans article
mobile.twitter.com/Nigella_Lawson/status/1299832628003176448

Receives much approval from usual sources
metro.co.uk/2020/08/30/nigella-lawson-says-trans-rights-lgbtq-organisations-thank-speaking-13198563/

Christie E-C calls her out on it and requests apology
mobile.twitter.com/ChristieElanCan/status/1300455167444299778

And keeps calling her out until NL offers the apology

Looks like Nigella went woke well before all this hit the fan.

I'm amazed any celebrities bother to keep a twitter account any more. Surely the minor benefits from a slight uplift in profile are hugely negated by the ever present threat of pile ons, cancellations and requests for personal struggle sessions.

I read a distinct "I'm sorry you feel that way " tone about her apology. As well as a "please don't troll me, I'll look like I'm saying shit you like"

We have to keep in mind that such children are victims of the ideology. Criticising the ideology is about protecting these children.

Bovary, I think you and I are almost speaking in different languages. I'm trying to understand your points, but you listed multiple issues in your previous post such as the 4000% increase in girls wanting gender reassignment. I would consider that a topic separate from Nigella's apology that warrants its own thread, and in fact there have been many such threads.

It may be a separate topic from Nigella's apology, but it's certainly relevant to the article which she apologised for. Her article in 1993 was about a woman having unnecessary surgery to remove her healthy breasts and uterus, which is what many of these girls will also do if encouraged along this path of thinking that there is something wrong with their healthy bodies.

I don't think we can discuss the nature of Nigella's apology without discussing what she was apologising for. She has apologised for being critical of young women having unnecessary surgery to remove healthy body parts, and the ethical position of the doctors who are willing to carry out those operations.

One of the comments under The Times article says Nigella "changed her mind because she currently has a young trans person in her family". Is that the case?

Seems to me she was right. The person in questions seems to me to be in search of happiness via denying her own existence.

Won’t it? I’d have thought the demographic most likely to buy her books will be extremely pissed off at her volte face

The vast, vast majority won't give a shit.

as it is clear you and I perceive different connotations of the word

I agree. That is clear.

Bovary, I think you and I are almost speaking in different languages. I'm trying to understand your points, but you listed multiple issues in your previous post such as the 4000% increase in girls wanting gender reassignment. I would consider that a topic separate from Nigella's apology that warrants its own thread, and in fact there have been many such threads.

It is generally good forum etiquette to discuss topics on the appropriate thread rather than risk the discussion getting diluted or derailed.

The topics you listed and suggested I present my opinion on were the ones I was referring to when I suggested separate threads. I am sorry if my post directly quoting that list of topics did not make that clear. I don't feel that continuing to attempt to discuss this with you will be productive, as I just am unable to keep up with the way you present your 'arguments' (for want of a better word - I mean 'arguments' in a neutral way).

I think I will draw a line under this and not continue this particular discussion here, but happy to contribute to discussion on those topics in other threads. Perhaps I should not have presented my thoughts on the word 'woke' as it is clear you and I perceive different connotations of the word.

No such thing as bad publicity!

Someone commented that there were only two genders, 'male and female' and were told {on Farcebook} that they were being ''Offensive''.

It does seem to be men who are the aggressors ..it seems to be downright bullying in many cases.

That a physical man can ''Identify'' as a women and use women's refuges and prisons and changing rooms seems alarming to me.

There are Gay men's spaces where a woman wouldn't be welcomed, so it probably cuts both ways.

DeaconBlue

The topic of this thread is Nigella Lawson's public apology for a 27 year old opinion piece. One obvious reason for her recantation is because of the vilification directed at those who refuse to submit to the current orthodoxy on trans. Witness JKR. The NL episode is just one frame in a larger picture whose recurrent theme is denunciation on social media of anyone who does not embrace the 'woke' ideology and its slogans. I do not think this in anyway is a 'good' thing. It has enabled authoritarians to stamp out dissent and shut down debate. That is the central issue. Pointing it out isn't remotely 'discourteous.'

It won't hurt her book sales will it?

Nigella has built her brand on being pleasing to men. She is fiercely intelligent, but has chosen to model herself on a 1950s stereotype - coiffed, corseted, and in the kitchen (simpering.)

I'm still surprised and disappointed by this though. I thought she'd feel a bit of loyalty, solidarity and sisterhood with women too.