Ian McEwan on identity

[Wonderbag]

‘ In 2016, he gave a lecture to the Royal Institution which talked about how modern selfhood, “like a consumer desirable, may be plucked from the shelves of a personal identity supermarket, a ready-to-wear little black number”. He added: “For example, some men in full possession of a penis are now identifying as women and demanding entry to women-only colleges, and the right to change in women’s dressing rooms.” ‘

www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2019/04/ian-mcewan-his-anti-frankenstein-novel-machines-me

Yeah, he got a lot of flak for it at the time.

The Guardian took its usual approach:

Booker-winning author appears to question people’s right to decide their own gender

www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/02/ian-mcewan-criticised-over-transgender-remarks

In a Q&A after his speech, one woman asked McEwan, 67, to clarify what she called his offensive remarks, the Times reported (paywall). “Call me old-fashioned, but I tend to think of people with penises as men,” he said. “But I know they enter a difficult world when they become transsexuals and they tell us they are women, they become women, but it’s interesting when you hear the conflict between feminists now and people in this group.

“It’s quite a bitter conflict. Spaces are put aside, women are wanting to put spaces aside like colleges or changing rooms, and find from another side a radical discussion coming their way saying men who want to feel like it can come in there too. I think it’s really difficult. And I think there is sweeping through American [university] campuses a kind of strange sense of victimhood and a sense of purposeful identities that we can’t actually all of us agree with. Of course sex and race are different, but they also have a biological basis. It makes a difference whether you have an X or Y chromosome.”

"Stonewall condemned McEwan’s “uninformed views” as “extremely sad”. In a statement it said: “The complexity of gender identity extends beyond genitalia. Trans people need and deserve acceptance and equality. This sort of commentary doesn’t just denigrate the trans experience, it denies its very existence, and that’s especially hurtful for a group of people who have spent their lives fighting to be heard and understood.”

"Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell described McEwan’s stance on gender as a form of “ethical authoritarianism”. He said: “There seems to be a league table of oppression, where some people fight other people to claim the title of most oppressed. This disempowering holier-than-thou rivalry was never what identity politics was supposed to be about.”

So pleased to see him speaking up. I jope he hasnt changed his position since then.Such a clever man and I love his novels.

This disempowering holier-than-thou rivalry was never what identity politics was supposed to be about

Identity politics was never supposed to be at the centre stage to begin with! Who made it important? How come a tiny, tiny minority get to set the agenda on what is important and what not?? I get that their identity is important to them but the 99.9% of the rest of us just do not care about bloody identity. Why have real-life problems to solve about that actually mean something.

Narcissism gone batshit crazy.

Do you think this whole identity thing comes from advertising, selling and marketing. I remember Mary Portas talking a lot about tribes. Part of the logo, brand culture. Haven't read 'No Logo' by Naomi Klein - does that shed any light.
Love Ian McEwen-he's got a new book out. (HELL, you're not from the marketing dept are you op)

I jope he hasnt changed his position since then.Such a clever man and I love his novels.

I doubt he has. I’ve never heard of anyone going from gender critical to embracing gender ideology. It’s always the other way around.

Very heartened to hear this. You can feel like you're going crazy at times. Over the last 24 hours I've seen one TRA argue that we had a different social construct of biological sex in 1900 because we didn't know about gametes, and another ask how we know Jane Austen's female characters had vaginas rather than penises because she never mentions their genitalia. In the middle of all this it's good to see an intelligent person talking sense.

McEwan later clarified that the right to change gender “should be respected and celebrated” and that “biology is not always destiny”.

I don’t think that’s changing his position. I read it as gender critical, but it is ambiguous

Intelligent people talking sense are the ones shouted down the most. They see through the bullshit and there is a danger that people will listen to them. They better leave Jane Austen the fuck alone. Anyway the argument
about a character's genitalia is moot because ya know, female penis's?