Great article. I don't have an opinion on this topic but it is great to see the "other" side of any issue presented without name calling or hate. Pretty rare these days.
I understand Jen's point about the aggressive aspect of posting a billboard but I have to admit I've found the debate to be very loud and one-sided. I agree with Ms Hamm that anyone who steps back to consider the implications of unrestricted self-identification is immediately assumed to be a "phobe" of some sort and by implication, is attacking trans rights. I'm impatient with that kind of nonsense but find I do keep silent as a result. So yeah, I admit I laughed out loud when I saw the billboard.
Great interview. To me the crux of the issue is in Gerson’s 3rd question, and the problematic assumption it contains. “Signalling an allegiance with JK Rowling signals an allegiance with a set of ideological presuppositions with regards to gender and identity and sex-based rights.”
This is exactly the trap in which the less honest and aggressive trans-activists want to box Rowling (important to note, not all trans activists agree with this approach or operate dishonestly).
This kind of trap Is designed to deflect scrutiny and remove nuance. It’s dishonest and creates a false choice (your with me on all counts or your a transphobe). It is in the spirit of rejecting this kind of dishonest smear approach that I interpreted and applauded the billboard.
Rowling has gone to great lengths to make her views abundantly clear. They are the opposite of ideologically-driven. Irrespective of whether one agrees or disagrees with her, her views have been thoughtful, nuanced, trans-supportive and intellectually honest. Most of her critics can’t say the same.
Happy you linked to Rowling's essay. The work speaks volumes... both about her clear and level-headed grasp of the issue, and of the hysterical backlash she's received for daring to speak against the orthodoxy.
The loud and angry activists who are hijacking this issue remind me of Hilary Clinton. She turned back the clock on women's rights when she chose to attack the women accusing her philandering husband of sexual harassment. These activists are doing the same with women who are being assaulted by biological men who self-identify as trans.
Great article. I don't have an opinion on this topic but it is great to see the "other" side of any issue presented without name calling or hate. Pretty rare these days.
I am a subscriber.
Dan Wright
I understand Jen's point about the aggressive aspect of posting a billboard but I have to admit I've found the debate to be very loud and one-sided. I agree with Ms Hamm that anyone who steps back to consider the implications of unrestricted self-identification is immediately assumed to be a "phobe" of some sort and by implication, is attacking trans rights. I'm impatient with that kind of nonsense but find I do keep silent as a result. So yeah, I admit I laughed out loud when I saw the billboard.
Great interview. To me the crux of the issue is in Gerson’s 3rd question, and the problematic assumption it contains. “Signalling an allegiance with JK Rowling signals an allegiance with a set of ideological presuppositions with regards to gender and identity and sex-based rights.”
This is exactly the trap in which the less honest and aggressive trans-activists want to box Rowling (important to note, not all trans activists agree with this approach or operate dishonestly).
This kind of trap Is designed to deflect scrutiny and remove nuance. It’s dishonest and creates a false choice (your with me on all counts or your a transphobe). It is in the spirit of rejecting this kind of dishonest smear approach that I interpreted and applauded the billboard.
Rowling has gone to great lengths to make her views abundantly clear. They are the opposite of ideologically-driven. Irrespective of whether one agrees or disagrees with her, her views have been thoughtful, nuanced, trans-supportive and intellectually honest. Most of her critics can’t say the same.
Happy you linked to Rowling's essay. The work speaks volumes... both about her clear and level-headed grasp of the issue, and of the hysterical backlash she's received for daring to speak against the orthodoxy.
Cheers also to Ms. Hamm for braving the storm.
The loud and angry activists who are hijacking this issue remind me of Hilary Clinton. She turned back the clock on women's rights when she chose to attack the women accusing her philandering husband of sexual harassment. These activists are doing the same with women who are being assaulted by biological men who self-identify as trans.