The Witch Trials of JK Rowling

Richard coles HAS dipped a toe in before. The tweet hastag was something like,, ruin a film in o e line. Rev coles tweeted 'my name is bond, James bond and my pronouns are he/ him'

Hilaire!! And relatively harmless. But he did get a huge backlash and I think apologised, I remember tweeting about it myself.

Such a gentle, kind, empathetic funny man, deeply involved in gay culture, very clever. I hope he has understood the assignment......

I'm so glad Richard Coles has dipped a toe in the water of the debate. I've always liked him. Now he no longer works for the BBC I guess he can say what he wants. Whether he is willing to do more than dip a toe is something we'll have to wait and see but this is a hopeful start.

He can’t be so naive as to think he can post something positive about the Witch Trials podcast without being cancelled! Surely he’ll have given it some careful thought, knowing that anything less than outright condemnation of JKR would attract a stinging rebuke from TQ+ activists.

I also hope he stands firm against the bullies.

Somebody did a thread rounding up some of the appalling abuse the rev has been getting just for admitting listening to this. Even knowing what Twitter is like, it was still horrifying. Just for listening to an investigative podcast with an open mind. I hope a) he was to some extent steeled for it and b) doesn't resort to a swift delete and recant. These bullies have to be stood up to now.

Indeed, although someone did quickly point out to Rev Coles that ContraPoints is also featured in the Witch Trials podcast and that is enough of the windbag to be going on with (I paraphrase slightly, but not very much).

And they’re straight in there with giving him a link to Contrapoints….🙄

Surely, there’s got to be a more intellectually coherent contrasting opinion to Witch Trials than one of Contrapoints dressing-up box videos 😩

Some of the responses to his tweet are going to come as a shock to him...

https://twitter.com/RevRichardColes/status/1658075713856061440

I usually steel-man to the extent I'm practically arguing with myself.

Struggle to do it with gender though, the more you try to put it in non obscuring language, the more absurd it sounds. I do my best attempt at a steel-man and get accused of taking the piss.

I mean come on, help me out here.

Okay, they believe that everyone has an internal sense of 'gender', which is a kind of feeling that tells you how you relate to - either sex, or roles and fashions stereotypically associated with sex.

But I've already failed the test there because we're not allowed to mention that it's associated to either sex or stereotypes. But to steel-man more like it's presented by believers, I have to say it's a feeling of how you relate to gender, and I can't see circular logic as steel-anything.

I think this is really important thing to do. It’s so frustrating to argue with someone who constantly argues against a fake point if view. I’d hate to think that I do that too.

The opposite of strawmanning is “steelmanning”: creating a version of your opponent’s argument that is as strong as possible, and arguing against that version. In my academic field, philosophy, where we care very much about good arguments, strawmanning is considered a central vice, and steelmanning is considered a central virtue.

From that article, and something I hadn’t heard of before - great advice.

Holly Lawford Smith’s article on the podcast and CP’s participation is pretty good. Interesting that CP has spoken about CP’s disappointment at the limitations of transition. Might explain how bitter they come across.

https://quillette.com/2023/04/26/the-witch-trials-of-jk-rowling-continue/

CP podcast clip.

https://m.youtube.com/clip/UgkxMsC-dCOariHOeau45LvtVkLr5Qexj4nN?ref=quillette.com

@McSweeney Christians' right to believe homosexuality is a sin should be respected, because it's about respecting their authority over their own mind. Anyone has the right to believe and think whatever they want, whether it's Maya Forstater, Contrapoints, a Spanish cardinal or Shaquil O'Neil. Acting on a belief and physically hurting someone because your beliefs justify it is a seperate thing. Obviously there's also the question of psychological harm, and how best to mitigate the psychological pain of all parties when there are conflicting beliefs.
There must be unfathomable pain in genuinely feeling the sex of your body misrepresents you and being compelled to function in a way that's not congruent. But whatever the solution for that is, it's got nothing to do with people who don't have that problem revising their beliefs. If a person feels their happiness depends on what someone else thinks then they're screwed because they have absolutely no power over that whatsoever.
In terms of people who are trans, there must be a way of helping them live in the world as comfortably and happily as anyone should have the right to expect, according to their own specific experience, without anyone being forced to compromise on how they talk about, experience and express who they are.

R U OK HUN?
^^
“Gender-critical beliefs include the belief
that sex is biological and immutable,
people cannot change their sex and sex is
distinct from gender-identity.”

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/employment-tribunal-rulings-on-gender-critical-beliefs-in-the-workplace/#:~:text=Gender%2Dcritical%20beliefs%20include%20the,is%20distinct%20from%20gender%2Didentity.

This is completely ordinary, everyday stuff - the only people who don’t agree with it are The Faithful Followers of the Church of Pink and Blue Gendered Souls.

So Nope, Wynn’s comparison doesn’t work because it’s Wynn and the transactivists who are most like Bryant, not JKR.

Transactivists are gnashing their teeth and wailing about the poor beatified, martyr children of the transgender community who are being endangered by sensible safeguarding policies (aimed at preventing them from amputating body parts before adulthood).

The earth was never flat. Men have never become women and EHRC actually made a submission to Maya's case explaining that her perfectly ordinary statements were entirely aligned with the law in the equality act.

Is it that time of night?

Getting a bit philosophical here, but isn’t everything a belief? Facts are founded on evidence presented to us but new evidence can be presented that alters these ‘facts’. We therefore perceive sex to be immutable or not. Nothing is a fact. The earth was flat, etc, etc

Absolutely, Rosa.

Yes but how in the actual fucking fuck did we get to a place where we even have to debate whether the "belief" that sex is binary and immutable (which is actually a fact, not a belief) and that sometimes that matters is "worthy of respect in a democratic society"?

The belief in magic pink and blue genders and things being assigned at birth is actually the belief that, as batshit as it is, shouldn't actually be banned. It belongs in the same category as the earth being flat or the moon landings being fake.

Maya's beliefs are just common sense, and shared by the vast majority of all people who have ever lived.

Also, I do just have to point out that the whole ‘worthy of respect in a civilised society’ phrase that is now firmly attached to Maya Forstater’s rigid world view is an absolute misreading of the legal issues at stake in that case. Forstater’s beliefs were deemed not to be SO BAD that they were ‘unworthy of respect in a civilised society’ I.e., they could not be banned, they were not literally fascist. That is NOT the same thing as saying that they were acceptable or mainstream or ‘worthy of respect’ in the ordinary non-legal sense. They were deemed exactly as ‘worthy of respectI’ as Christian beliefs that homosexuality is a sin. Which is why Contrapoints’ parallel between JKR and Anita Bryant actually works.

That’s not a review? Unless ‘hey you used my tweet but I actually disagree with you and your opinions are shit’ is a review 💁‍♀️

That whole flag is one unholy mess by now.
Such a shame.

Brilliant!

I see Shelter's tweet didn't get quite the response that they hoped for - what a ratio!

I managed about 44 minutes last night.

Might try and go back in for another shift later.

I reckon I can do it in three goes as long as I have my FWR buddies around for moral support.

Shame @McSweeney hasn’t supplied some highlights timestamps.

(Wynn seemed pretty riled up about Sam Harris talking to Megan PR. I wonder if Sam is still subscribed to Wynn’s Patreon? 😂)

Here's an alternative interpretation of the redesigned flag:

https://twitter.com/LouiseWluddite/status/1400866710983426049