Open letter by UK writers in solidarity (not with us obviously)

[CrossPurposes]

Prepare for some disappointing names.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/18p-rvgNitRKYs9C2PoIBC86Fb2ZQnBd8PzEfgGfnsKo/edit?usp=drivesdk

Presumably self ID, so we're all writers too in that case (we write on MN after all)

Lots of names on there I recognise but more that I don’t.

It’s hard to contend with the fact that women and our rights seem so inconsequential to so many people but at one time, I also thought the kind thing was to wholly accept TWAW without thinking about the impact on women so I’m hopeful that some of these people may also not have considered it from that perspective.

It starts with this nonsense "The UK Supreme Court ruling of 17th April 2025 was the result of a coordinated and privately funded attack on the human rights and dignity of trans and non-binary people in the UK." which implies (a dog whistle perhaps?) that scores of women giving a little to For Women Scotland to clarify the existing law is actually the result of big money support and that the women aren't thinking of themselves but of simply being horrible to others.

I love that bloke holding the ' Feminism is the refusal to define a woman' placard.

Imagine that boldly proclaiming, ' I'm a bit thick, me.'

Maybe she's just one of those people who always agrees with whoever she is talking to.

I like the ones that put in a little plug for their business, next to their names.

Timothy Allsop, Turn of Phrase and Allsop Therapy

Shame there was no room for a link to the website.

The 'big names' are the ones whose last work of note was about 5 years ago. Much like lockdown, gender ideology is very 2020.

There's just over 1200 signatories so far but an awful lot more writers, it's only a tiny fraction of them.

Philip Pullman not on list
Julia Donaldson not on list

But unfortunately @WarriorN Robin Ince is on it

It always seems to come down to clothes, ignoring that the majority of people on any given high street are wearing jeans, trousers or leggings. I'm senior in a male dominated profession and substantially out earn my (male) partner who does more childcare than me. I also like baking and skiing - am I gender conforming or not?

Really?

The UK Supreme Court ruling of 17th April 2025 was the result of a coordinated and privately funded attack on the human rights and dignity of trans and non-binary people in the UK

You think a letter that starts like this and continues in this vein, which says the court was on shaky legal ground, could be signed by someone who supports the ruling? You think this is not polarising language? Or extremist language?

The court action was not an attack on anyone but a defence of the existing legal protections women had under the Equality Act. I am tired of this whopper of a lie that it is trans rights that have been eroded, whereas in the past ten years it is women's existing legal rights that in practice, and in actual demonstrable reality have been eroded. This court case clarifies women' existing legal rights and reminded everyone of the rights trans people have AS trans people under the law.

So these writers are openly lying about what has actually happened.

What Equity and the Writers Guild should have done is write to assert to women and to trans people that they will uphold both groups clarified legal rights. Because that is how to signal you are not being polarising.

I recognize barely any but this isn't my field really, despite that we are a house full of enthusiastic readers. I'm quite pleased how few of the better known people you might expect sign this have signed it at this point.

I just had a quick check of Amazon top 30 best-sellers and can't find any of those authors on this list - yes, I even checked Douglas Murray (currently no 3)

And actually, they are all a bit thick because they could not even get right that the court ruling was on the 16th April, not the 17th. What low grade 'writers' that don't even check their copy before publishing it.

Honestly, that basic error and all the deliberate lying in that letter, and appealing to the 'authority' of the continually wrong Good Law Project. I'm embarrassed for them.

To be fair he's been identifying as a singer for years so why not?

I am stuck by how keyboard warrioring has become so mainstream.

The SC ruling has led to a wave of proclamations about how wrong the process was, how spiteful the case was, how deleterious the outcome will be…….when people write or sign these proclamations, what do they think or hope they will achieve?

They don’t suggest what should be done to address the issues arising. They don’t show an understanding of the issues arising. They make sweeping demands such as trans people must be ‘included’ or ‘accepted’ but fail to state what this means when it comes to bringing stripped searched, or sharing a hospital ward, prison cell or medal podium in weightlifting.

beyond generating heat and tension, I’m not sure what it achieved beyond feeling like you are contributing to a cause.

The letter appears to be 90% people you've never heard of (and I'm an avid reader) and the usual nobbish suspects, Bragg, Ince, Duker et al 🙄

I'm not sure what they hope to achieve otherwise than shining a light on their inability to understand basic science.

I only recognised a few names, and they did not come as a surprise.
Neil Gaiman must be gutted no one wants his signature anymore.

Ageism, the one truly enduring acceptable -ism.

Suspect very few of then have looked further than their own noses on the issue. Bunch of ignorant twats. Never heard of 98% of them.

I know several of the signers well and I'm incredibly disappointed. These are smart, highly educated, critically thinking women. I can only imagine that they haven't done much research into the issues and are #beingkind, but that's disappointing, too.

Everyone involved will likely be a professional writer of some description, by the way. There are a great many jobbing writers out there who you've never heard of.

"There are a great many jobbing writers out there who you've never heard of."

Thanks, I think this needed saying.
Signed, a fellow nobody.

Wrote an address on an envelope once, I think. I barely recognise any of those names!

I mean, that just seems like a list of people who were asked “please sign this letter if you support trans rights” rather than a list of people who have actually read the judgment and who appreciate the legal status that the different classes of trans people (i.e. with and without a GRC) would have had if the opposite ruling had been given.

I doubt these people realise they’re signing up to say they’d prefer it if transwomen with a GRC were treated as women but that they’re actually fine for the ones without to be kept out of the ladies’ loos.

They knew that Equity had already released a similar letter, and gender identity culture is incredibly embedded in the creative industries, so this isn’t a surprise and doesn’t say much at all, except possibly that some people are probably still very scared of being cancelled for going against the grain.

Meh. We've got Rowling 👸.

Erin Hunter isn't even a person. It's a collective nom de plume - & they got rid of Gillian Philip for knowing what a woman is. Saved me a fortune, as dd1 instantly decided to boycott the bloody Warrior Cats books she'd been tearing through at a rate of 3 a week, which is roughly how fast they seemed to be being churned out.

I think this one is a great writer 😉
Jesuis O. Mofobique

This article focuses on loos and pronouns and a misconception that feminists who do not accept TWAW do not care about safe and dignified ways to include people with trans identities in society.

I discuss these issues with lots of young people (between 16-25) and most will accept that a ‘more nuanced’ approach is needed in some contexts (e.g sport and intimate care). Typically, they see no contradiction between these ‘exceptions’ and the claim the TWAW.

The media is complicit by focusing on loos and pronouns. This is because nuance and balance does get clicks or reactions and doesn’t sell/make them money.