Critics of JK Rowling consider her to be transphobic. In a podcast that launches next week, the Harry Potter author pushes back against that assertion. And in a New York Times column, Pamela Paul writes that Rowling is correct to do so. "This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous as it is absurd," writes Paul. "The brutal stabbing of Salman Rushdie last summer is a forceful reminder of what can happen when writers are demonized. And in Rowling’s case, the characterization of her as a transphobe doesn’t square with her actual views." Yes, Rowling has supported the idea that certain places, such as domestic abuse shelters, should be designated for biological women only. And yes, she has rejected the use of phrases such as "people who menstruate" to describe biological women.
"But nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic," writes Paul. She does not deny the existence of gender dysphoria or suggest that trans people be denied the right to transition. In fact, she has written of her support for such decisions. Rowling tells Paul that "the attempt to intimidate and silence me is meant to serve as a warning to other women” who share her views. Paul suggests that the tide is turning in Rowling's favor, as critics who once denounced Rowling reconsider the overarching label of transphobic. "If more people stood up for JK Rowling, they would not only be doing right by her; they’d also be standing up for human rights, specifically women’s rights, gay rights and, yes, transgender rights," writes Paul. Read the full essay. (Or, for a contrary view, read Daniel Ratcliffe's previously stated criticism.)
,
uBlock 
,
and
Ghostery 
)
