(LifeSiteNews) — J.K. Rowling has gone viral once again, this time with a long post on X (formerly Twitter) denouncing the cruelty of transgender activists. The post has already accrued 3.8 million views. It’s worth reading in full:
The trans activist outrage that ensues on here whenever I share my belief that jailed women shouldn’t be used as validation tools or emotional support props for trans-identified male sex offenders is as revealing as it’s predictable.
Such activists can’t bring themselves to concede that a man who was convicted of harming women/girls ought not to be incarcerated with the demographic to whom he is a proven danger, because if they do, all their stock arguments (‘no sexual predator would bother to pretend to be trans’, ‘no trans woman has ever harmed a woman in a women’s only space’, ‘there is no danger in making all single sex spaces unisex’) are exposed as the lies they are. If they admit that even a single man isn’t a woman because he says he is, the entire edifice of gender identity ideology crumbles. This leaves activists who rely on bullying and slogans with nowhere to go but ‘you hate all trans people’, ‘so you’re saying all trans people are rapists’ and, of course, ‘you are causing a trans genocide.’
I think this particular issue also causes conniptions because it threatens the activists’ self image. These are people who preen themselves on their kindness and virtue, so acknowledging the truth – that they’re indifferent to vulnerable women being assaulted or traumatised – threatens the idea they have of themselves. They therefore double down. The prisoners complaining aren’t really afraid of rape or voyeurism or violence at all, they say. They’re ‘not exactly delicate flowers’, as one self-identified empath put it.
If you support putting violent and sexually predatory men into women’s prisons, you are knowingly forcing those women to live in fear of, and, in some proven cases, to suffer abuse that many of them will have endured pre-incarceration. You are not kind. You are not righteous. Women have the basic human right not to suffer cruel and unusual punishment.
It has been fascinating to watch Rowling’s radicalization from someone making cautious, carefully-worded posts to an activist making the case against gender ideology itself. Her first foray into the issue, the infamous 2019 tweet, was downright banal in retrospect – she merely defended a woman who was fired for saying that “sex is real.” But transgender activists came after her with a vengeance, barraging her with a potent mixture of rape threats, offers of reeducation, calls for her cancellation, and threats of violence. Rowling proved too big to cancel; the attacks on her had precisely the opposite of the intended effect. If you’d told me in, say, 2015 that the author of Harry Potter would be one of the transgender movement’s most effective critics, I would have laughed. But here we are.
The phrasing Rowling is now using is significant – in her first line, she refers to “trans-identified males.” The language here is incredibly important, because this characterization rejects the fundamental premise of the transgender movement – that men aren’t being locked up with women, “transgender women” are being locked up with women. She then mocks the “trans genocide” accusations constantly leveled at critics of the transgender movement – mockery which effectively undercuts the power of these allegations. Then, she turns around and accuses them of cruelty and enabling sexual abuse. She’s right. I’ve written many times on the cruelty of the transgender movement. But when Rowling does it, it creates cultural shockwaves.
Rowling’s activism has another effect, as well: it provokes reactions that highlight the ugly heart of the transgender movement. I won’t quote any of these posts directly, but the vile, sexualized misogyny of transgender activists is truly revolting – especially coming from transgender-identified men. These are men who deeply hate any woman who dares to tell them the truth, and their very masculine rage is yet more evidence of their dangerousness and delusion. There are thousands of these posts, and if there were more real journalists reporting on this movement, the dozens of press stories that are published after each of Rowling’s posts would quote them. I believe that, given the chance, some of these people would gladly attack Rowling – they’ve certainly shown themselves willing to physically attack other women, such as Posie Parker.
Rowling is not a conservative, she is a social liberal. Indeed, her feminism informs much of her worldview. For that, she has been branded a traitor – and the worst thing she has done to her opponents is tell them that she couldn’t care less what they think of her, rendering them powerless.
