Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on The feminists seem to, as it were.

…he has many trans and intersex* friends who are “deeply upset” by JK Rowling.

Then their “upset” is not in good faith, and not based on facts. If trans activists and their allies can’t be bothered actually reading what Rowling actually wrote, but condemn her out of hand on the sayso of trans “thought leaders,” then their “upsetedness” is not worth paying attention to, or taking seriously.

In his dangerously honest and conciliatory understanding of Rowling’s position, Fry has unwittingly outed himself as a heretic. As Ophelia has noted, in trying to place himself in the “reasonable” middle ground, or above the pettiness of it all, he has found himself without any feminist equivalent to the trans’ TERF-shouting. It must be there somewhere, seemingly, as it were. Otherwise, he can’t be in the middle.

Since he now has nothing to lose, Fry should sit all these friends of his down, read Rowling’s words to them, and then ask them which parts are “hateful,” “hurtful,” or “transphobic.” If they are objecting to plain statements of reality (sex is real, binary, immutable, and determined at conception), or her defence of the legally protected characteristic of sex, then it’s not Rowling they have a problem with. It’s reality and the law that they’re objecting to. Hating on Rowling conveniently helps to conceal this fact. If she didn’t exist, they’d have had to invent her, or find someone else to vilify. Without their effigy to burn, they would have to rail against Reality itself.

A wider public understanding of this would likely lose them support, as their goals are unreasonable and unjust. That’s a much harder sell than fighting against vague, better-left-unspecified “transphobia,” perpetrated by “bigots.” Institutional capture has helped them avoid the public discussions that would normally surround the sorts of policy changes that trans activism has managed to engineer in secret. The press now treats it as a “fact” that Rowling is “transphobic,” and uses language that deliberately obscures reality (calling male offenders and athletes “she,” translating measures to protect female only facilities and positions as being “anti-trans” rather than male-excluding). This collaboration with trans activism does immeasurable heavy lifting for a movement that would otherwise fail.

It is ironic that transactivism has chosen to turn Rowling into its Emmanuel Goldstein. In scapegoating her, in trying to turn her into an example to warn others, they have failed spectacularly. To be sure, in the short term, to the extent that people believe the lies and smears they broadcast, they’ve won a tactical victory. But they did not count on her character. Certainly her wealth has offered Rowling some measure of protection, and made her Uncancelable, but there’s more to it than that. There are plenty of indviduals and institutions which fell at the first hurdle, surrendering their moral judgement to the frothing hatred of the liars and bullies. Unlike so many others, who have been subjected to little more than schoolyard taunts, she has not backed down. She has not kept quiet. She is the nail that refuses to be driven flat. She has stood firm and become a lightning rod, continuing to speak out when others could not, would not, or feared to do so.

Though they tried to burn Rowling as a witch, she has taken this fire and become a beacon. She did not have to do this. But remarkably, she did, and continues to do so. She could have stayed quiet and comfortable. She could have mouthed the platitudes. She could have used her fame and celebrity to jump on the trans bandwagon, joining in on the attack against women defending their rights (Hello Billy Bragg!). But she didn’t. She stood up and spoke the truth. She defended women when many others who should have did not. Good on her. Shame on them.

* I actually doubt this. As far as I know, their preferred terminolgy is not “intersex” but DSD. I’ve seen a number of DSD people (or at least people claiming to be DSD), ask that their condition not be used as a transactivist talking point or gotcha. They are all still male or female, not evidence that sex is not real, or a spectrum, or that there are any more sexes than just the two. So just as Ophelia doubts that he has many “trans friends,” I doubt that he has many “intersex” ones. And what has Rowling ever said about them? Here I think Fry has fallen for the forced teaming. I suppose we should be happy he hasn’t lumped in the (presumably much larger number of) LGB friends he probably has.