The Witch Trials of JK Rowling

[CrossPurposes]

An in-depth intervietw with JK Rowling by Megan Phelps-Roper coming next week: twitter.com/meganphelps/status/1625465141046247425?s=20

I've been listening weekly as it comes out, I don't think I could listen to all at once. But if you're catching up put it on and have a break if you need. There is about 6 to 7 hours of it so far. There are also embedded ad breaks on Google Podcasts, so there are some natural breaks.

I meant this episode in particular though I have been listening to the others slowly too.

I haven't finished listening to Noah's interview yet, but something that struck me in Natalie's was that she expressed a belief that [people like JK Rowling] believe that disrupting the notion of gender and making things more jumbled up with the intent to allow people freedom to be who they are without feeling bound by stereotypes - that this will cause people to become violent and predatory in toilets, and therefore people like JK Rowling are afraid of gender shake up.

But that's not right. First of all it doesn't make any sense - why would breaking down the boundaries of gender or whatever just randomly cause people to become violent? It doesn't make any sense because that's not what radical feminists are arguing, nor what they are "afraid" of.

What the real issue is is that male violence and misogyny are endemic. A significant percentage of men (and I don't know or even think it particularly matters whether we are talking about 60%, 20%, 1%, 0.1% - significant because misogyny affects every woman and male violence affects almost every woman and some children) do not see women as fully human and feel entitled to control them, grope them, rape them, as it suits them.

But nobody outside feminist circles acknowledges this! It's like some big secret that everyone colludes in. Like oh, well, yeah, sorry that happened to you, but that was just one bad man, rather than seeing the widespread pattern. Like family annihilations being "an isolated event". Like the police being misogynist suddenly being in the news and being a surprise to everyone, when every organisation is misogynist!

It's not that gender obfuscation is likely to change this pattern, it probably won't. But it's already really hard to talk about gendered violence and sex discrimination, to study it, to get people to see it. Making it taboo to place people into groups by their biological sex, erasing language that denotes biological sex, making out that biological sex "isn't binary" or doesn't matter makes that even harder. And I think it's incredibly important for us (as a society) to understand.

Also, the effect of growing up in patriarchy and rape culture should absolutely be explored as to how it is affecting young GNC women and girls, because a lot of the discomfort and distress young trans boys and NB girls express sounds way more like "It's unbearable to grow up in this environment with this body". (Which I think most TRAs would agree with. It's just we have a different understanding of what "this environment" is.)

They think that deconstructing gender will magically disperse stereotypes but that is not how sexism works. Sexism is not just based on stereotypes which came out if nowhere. Those stereotypes are based on people either being in the "person" (male, adult) class or the "object/property" (female, child) class.

The stand out for me was the doctor telling Noah that the cause of all the issues was gender.

And the treatment was naturally to take off Noah's breasts.

Noah hadn't had any inclination towards this until the doctor said that was the diagnosis. On what diagnostic is a doctor making this diagnosis?

I felt sick listening to Noah's interview. I really did. There is no stopping these ghouls.

It feels almost inevitable that Noah will come to regret this treatment.

I think you'll be fine. Natalie and Noah talk - a lot. So, although what they say is sometimes frustrating, it comes and goes, if you see what I mean.

Yes. Their reliance on the doctor's' recommendations doesn't bode well.

It's the refrain of every detransitioner.

I need to re listen but both interviewees seemed like a bingo cards-worth of transactivist slogans and transition tropes.

IME female teens who take on a trans identity are overwhelmingly like Noah, smart, articulate, socially awkward, information sponges who learn the language of therapy speak online and use it against their parents in getting the cosmetic alterations they want.

As for not meeting the ‘beauty standard’ that might well be Noah’s Instagram fuelled interpretation of a parent pointing out (gently) that Noah is unlikely to ever be perceived as male in general day to day interactions if Noah is obviously female-sized and female-shaped.
Transitions that appear successful online are often much less successful in real life, and while breasts can be amputated, hips, thighs, arm length, hand size etc cannot be surgically altered.

(the only way my teeny-tiny 16 year old DsD can pass as male is as a prepubescent boy - which she then scuppers with a lip piercing and purple hair! Me pointing this out is no doubt discussed amongst her friends as mean stepmother attempting to ‘enforce mainstream male beauty standards’ when really I’m trying to discourage her from using the men’s loos because she is clearly & unequivocally female and it’s not safe for her to do so 🤦‍♀️)

Also, as JammiDodger came up in Noah’s list of influences, I would wager the Noah name is a homage to JammiDodger’s real life friend and fellow YouTuber, ‘Noahfince ’

So much for social contagion not being real, huh?

I think Noah's dad was concerned about Noah's ability to pass as a transman. That he had trans friends who didn't pass in everyday life and that made life harder for them.

I actually thought Noah's parents sounded fairly kind and reasonable from Noah's relaying of the story. Concerned generally but supportive when suicide arose as a potential issue and - honestly I can't say I would be any different as a parent in that situation if it were my child.

The thing that made me angry (not at Noah) was the amount of naive trust Noah placed in doctors and the health professionals they had seen. Noah said they would probably not have gone ahead with such huge irreversible surgery if it hadn't been confirmed by medics as the right thing to do in this situation. I hope there are enough lawsuits cropping up to make doctors stop and seriously think about the 'care' they are providing.

That’s exactly what I took from the Noah section too. Blind faith in doctors on the part of the parents and child on what is clearly not a medical issue, but a psychological and cultural/political one. Where is the evidence that a young person feeling suicidal is going to be permanently made to feel happy long term by having permanent physical surgery?

I also felt Megan Phelps Roper made a really good interviewer in this episode. She didn’t need to challenge them. Contrapoints didn’t think about anyone’s needs but her own. The charges against JKR were daft- that someone could misuse the facts JKR highlighted, so those facts shouldn’t be said. Right OK. Hoisted by Contrapoint’s own petard.

Noah I felt really sad for, the sadness that Noah had felt as a teen and the way that the unresolved distress was now going to physically define Noah’s body and self image forever. Everything said by Noah made the case without needing to push journalistically, that Noah was way to young to be making these permanent changes with any certainty of a positive outcome. I really hope that Noah is right.

Also, as JammiDodger came up in Noah’s list of influences

I recognised the voice and think I've seen some of their reels - if it's who I think it is (a doctor? Hopefully not a medical one), there's not many TRA accounts who have more stupid, infuriating, ill-informed opinions than that one. I did worry for Noah at that point.

Yes I have enjoyed Megan Phelps-Roper too. At first I wanted her to ask more challenging questions in this latest episode but I think her interviewing style is very clever - just enough 'ahmms' and 'hmms' in response to answers to leave space for the listener to draw their own conclusions.

I thought her personal experience in regard to challenging 'no debate' was particularly relevant too.

Wasn't it interesting to compare Natalie and Noah's responses to JKR? One like a bull in a china shop ranting and raving about bigotry with no significant insight into the similarities in being cancelled. The other thoughtful, nuanced and considered, trying to see the best in JKR despite a difference of opinion.

One typically masculine in behaviour, one typically feminine in my mind.

I keep flip-flopping when it comes to my opinion of the podcast. On the one hand I think it’s smart to let everyone just speak for themselves with no leading questions or challenge. I particularly loved the episode that dived into internet culture driven by 4chan and Tumblr.

But on the other hand, it’s so frustrating when a section gets tantalisingly close to a key issue on which no one can fence sit and and I think finally, here we go… and then they skirt around it.

I need to re listen but both interviewees seemed like a bingo cards-worth of transactivist slogans and transition tropes.

Very much so!

One typically masculine in behaviour, one typically feminine in my mind.

That struck me, too. I thought Megan's approach was fine - the weakness of the logic in CP's position and the heartbreaking misplaced trust in the medical/counselling professionals of Noah were clearly exposed, but without TRAs being able to claim that MP-R had somehow manipulated them or how they expressed themselves.

I’m 30 minutes in and Contrapoints seems to be arguing that JK Rowling has a big social following/media presence and therefore shouldn’t ask questions about or discuss trans ideology because that’s an irresponsible use of public speech and shows a lack of interest in trans people’s lives.

However, Contrapoints, who also has quite a large social following (for a YouTuber) and media presence, IS allowed to discuss the topic of women’s rights because, unlike JK Rowling, Contrapoints does not have disguised bad intentions.

The Contrapoints interview is confusing - cancel culture is bad and traumatising when it happens to Contrapoints but not when it happens to JK Rowling because Rowling (like other celebrities) is wealthy and famous and should be above it all….🤷‍♀️

I finished listening to the episode and I really liked Noah. It was very hard to listen to when I believe Noah has been so sadly let down by the medical profession. 17 is so so young. Already Noah seemed like a very thoughtful and intelligent young person, but at 17 you just can't know what it's like to be an adult. You have no perspective on how much growing up you have left to do. It's so sad that kids like Noah can't just experiment without closing those doors back to a healthy, whole body. It just shouldn't be an option.

I don't know if it's intentional but I found the difference between Noah and Natalie's views quite an interesting choice and likely to provoke more discussion.

For example, Natalie says JKR is wrong infer that young people seeking to transition should receive help for anxiety/depression etc first as those issues are a result of their trans-ness and will be resolved with transition.

Noah clearly states that transitioning "helped" but did not "cure" the anxiety and co-morbid conditions they faced.

I also appreciate the presentation of the podcast as a narrative and not a series of "us and them" interviews. It's an invitation for wider discussion and reflection rather than desperately trying to add another barrage of opinion to a heated debate.

Finished Ep 6 (by playing it on 2x speed to get through it quickly).

From my understanding both interviewees were of the opinion that Rowling came to her views without properly listening to trans people and that her speaking about the issues in public is wrong. Noah allowed that Rowling receiving lots of bad and negative responses to her tweets is showing the trans community in a bad light but (my understanding of Noah’s logic is) this means Rowling should stop tweeting about the issue 🤷‍♀️

They both (Contrapoints more so than Noah) seem to think that Rowling did not arrive at her views by rational means and that the only correct (rational) position for Rowling would be for her to change her mind and agree with them.

Noah seemed more charitable towards non-believers (and came across as thoughtful/pleasant in comparison to Contrapoints).

Phelps-Roper mentioned on a couple of occasions that open discussion and dialogue with non-believers was what helped her disassociate from what she described as her hateful bigoted views. She mentions this when talking with both interviewees about whether or not they would like to discuss issues of disagreement with Rowling. Is Phelps-Roper (consciously or unconsciously) associating the views she held as a member of the WBC as being equivalent in timbre/character to Rowling’s beliefs/stance? I wasn’t clear on that and would appreciate other analyses 🤔

Night all!

Yes, good points. I am enjoying the narrative element as well.

They both (Contrapoints more so than Noah) seem to think that Rowling did not arrive at her views by rational means and that the only correct (rational) position for Rowling would be for her to change her mind and agree with them.

I suspect this is because they value feelings over rational thought when arriving at their own conclusions. They therefore assume JKR has done the same.

There was an interesting programme on R4 a few weeks back about the idea of a cultural shift away from objective truth to 'feelings', and the concept of 'my truth' in society. A couple of students talk about how feelings are the foundation of all their thought.

Many young people feel JKR must be transphobic to have said anything that threatens to burst the all-important TWAW TMAM bubble, so they seek facts to prove her transphobia. They haven't found any in her actual words so they conclude (because they've already made their minds up) that she must simply be motivated to say non-transphobic things from a starting point of unacknowledged transphobia.

I've seen the same thing on other FWR threads about Kelly Jay Keen. Posters who say 'KJK hates trans people' but who are unable to articulate exactly what she's said that proves this. Their answer seems to be that the hate-filled subtext is 'obvious'.

CP and Noah are saying the same thing, albeit in milder terms. JKR hasn't actually said anything transphobic but I still feel she must have misguided transphobic motivations and if I talked to her about how it makes us feel, her feelings will change and then she will think differently.

In case anyone's interested.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001j43d

I listened yesterday and didn't find it as difficult to do so as expected. Phelps-Roper was very low key in her challenges but I thought they were quite effective nevertheless. When she mentioned how open discussion and dialogue had helped her change her mind, it was open to the listener to interpret whether she was associating WBC with JKR or with transactivism. Contrapoints automatically assumed the former, I tended to assume the latter (I hope not just out of personal bias but because JKR has explained her views, it's not just about her and what suits her, and she has said in this series that she constantly questions whether she is right. Contrapoints, on the other hand, had no arguments other than JKR's lack of agreement with the demands of trans ideology and did not feel that JKR had any right to state her views.)

Noah was far less annoying than Contrapoints but the interview made me feel very sad. Such a young, but bright and articulate person, has so much time ahead for regrets. I hope sincerely that there aren't many.

Listened to Ep 6. Both the interviewees were interesting to listen to although Natalie less so than Noah because I have heard it all before. Natalie's happy to undermine or dismiss the significance of women's boundaries so it's the same old same old. Noah was more interesting. Clearly an intelligent and articulate person. But the "gender journey" nonsense is obviously parroted from therapists who thought an emotionally challenged teenager would only start to feel better after body mutilation and drugs. I hope both of them find happiness but not at the expense of my boundaries
This constant attempt to equate this to the battle for gay marriage is just tiresome at this point.

Contrapoints didn’t think about anyone’s needs but her own

I wrote this above. I meant to repeat the name but not to use the posessive ‘her’ there, but I was thinking of the interviewee’s name, Natalie, not the work name, Contrapoints, and it is reflex for me to say ‘her’ with Natalie. However I usually try to avoid using preferred pronouns because, rohypnol. This is the link for the excellent short article about that if anyone has not already read it: https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

since I can’t go back to edit on MN this is my edit post.

I really dislike the ‘every link with picture’ function seemingly now happening automatically, need the visual clarity of plain text. Off to Site Stuff