Rowling's Razor - James Kirkup

[MiladyBerserko]

www.spectator.co.uk/article/JK-Rowling-trans

Once again, James Kirkup writes the truth beautifully.

Brilliant. Thank you for sharing. Unfortunately, I think cognitive dissonance will prevent the most for entrenched to recognise they may have got her wrong and they'll still scream bigot whenever she dares open her mouth on the issue.

Kirkup captures it perfectly.

Rowling’s Razor
Which of these is more likely?

A person who is otherwise socially liberal and tolerant has taken a position on sex and gender that is driven by prejudice and hatred.

That person has some concerns about how changes in sex and gender law could have consequences for women and girls.

When I look at J.K. Rowling – and the many other women (and men) I know who take similar positions – I know which of those explanations I find more plausible. And I suspect that most of the people drawn to pay attention to this issue by Rowling’s involvement will reach a similar conclusion.

JKR deserves her own special Vipers' Toast to be drunk in or wherever we gather, Regina Luminis and we should definitely have a roll call of people like Kirkup and other journalists/authors.

James has been a real ally in all this, writing coherently and clearly about what's going on. He was also responsible for revealing the Denton's Report that uncovered the sinister tactics used by the trans lobby to avoid democratic scrutiny.

I do like his style. He is very clear.

Fantastic article
Thanks for sharing

I do love kirkup's writing.

I understand what he is saying, which is ‘it seems strange to jump to concluding someone is hateful when their track record shows otherwise’.

However - people are constantly telling us ‘you agree with this hateful person so you are clearly wrong’.

Both can be answered, of course, by ‘water is wet’ but sadly I don’t think looking at who expresses what view on this subject gets us very far.

I wish I could agree with him that anyone coming to this cold will start from a position that Rowling probably has thought about the issue. Sadly, I think many younger people come from it from a ‘older people, no matter how well meaning, are wrong on a number of diversity issues’ angle. Whilst they may not therefore direct hate at JKR, they nevertheless are disposed to the thought that she may be wrong.

I like how he has put it. I have framed the question this way with friends of decades standing who seem to have bafflingly jettisoned everything they ever knew about me due to my stance on this one issue.

It may well be that younger people conclude that previous generations don’t know anything about anything and are behind the times, that’s the arrogance of youth and it was ever thus. But, crucially: in this instance, they’re provably wrong and have no answer when asked to resolve the obvious conundrums, eg around threat to women’s sports.

@Iknowitisheresomewhere

I understand what he is saying, which is ‘it seems strange to jump to concluding someone is hateful when their track record shows otherwise’.

However - people are constantly telling us ‘you agree with this hateful person so you are clearly wrong’.

Both can be answered, of course, by ‘water is wet’ but sadly I don’t think looking at who expresses what view on this subject gets us very far.

I wish I could agree with him that anyone coming to this cold will start from a position that Rowling probably has thought about the issue. Sadly, I think many younger people come from it from a ‘older people, no matter how well meaning, are wrong on a number of diversity issues’ angle. Whilst they may not therefore direct hate at JKR, they nevertheless are disposed to the thought that she may be wrong.

Based on my conversations with various people, I think the vast majority have no idea about what it is, exactly, that the gender identity movement is demanding.

They think that the current gender movement is exactly like the gay/Lesbian movement, affecting the rights of nobody else. They have no idea that 'woman' and 'man' must now be entirely rewritten or that there will now be no names for people who are, say, biologically female and who are discriminated against on that basis.

Margaret Atwood's earlier comments and her later reaction to the erasure of the names for the female sex seems to reflect that pattern. She didn't know what she signed on, and that is the case with almost everyone I have chatted with.

Marvellously put. If only certain people would put this into practice! But of course that would require thinking for yourself, and not being brainwashed by twitter...