J.K. Rowling, Graham Linehan, Graham Norton and the Right To Ask Simple Questions

Why are people labelling simple questions 'hate speech'?

Millions know the TV series ‘Father Ted’ and billions know about the Harry Potter books. Yet wealth and fame have not prevented the attempted cancellation of both J.K. Rowling and Graham Linehan by Trans-activists, their allies and those that are too frightened to question whether their assertions and assumptions are well-grounded and reasonable, or irrational, unscientific and pushed for reasons we do not quite understand i.e. the people who just ‘go along’ with things.

With hundreds of millions of fans and billions of pounds, J.K. Rowling is probably uncancellable. She may be omitted from Harry Potter exhibitions at this present time, but these petty actions by the Agenda are like a midge trying to take down an elephant. When she tweets, she reaches millions; when she writes a Potter script or book, millions go to the cinema or hungrily purchase them to read. Whatever action she takes will always be significant to people all over the world and her writing has a financial incentive to film studios, TV studios and advertisers that over time is probably once again in the billions - the most read books on Amazon are still Harry Potter! - few people have an interest in seeing her and by extension her work cancelled.

Yet what would she be cancelled for if ‘they’ could it? She is simply asking that the sex-based rights of women be protected. She does not agree with gender ideology and its claims that under a certain rubric, that of gender, a biological man can be a ‘woman’. She asks, like many women do, where is the science and evidence for this claim? And she points out that there are a lot of individuals, some of them deeply damaged and dangerous individuals, who are making claims about gender with an ulterior motive that puts women at risk. Yet this is called ‘hate speech’.

Graham Linehan, writer and comedian, is in a similar position. He does not agree that children should be exposed to this ideology at a young age; he is sceptical of hormone replacement therapy and he questions the ethics of many of the, usually, men who claim another gender but who use this gender as a ruse to hide their predatory nature. Now, there is plenty of evidence to support Graham Linehan’s views and the questions he asks are quite rational, but for asking them, more ‘hate speech’ allegedly, he has been subject to online vitriol and professional boycott: they even kicked him off the musical version of the show he created, ‘Father Ted’. Unfortunately, Graham Linehan is not quite as uncancellable as J.K. Rowling and has had to return to the comedy circuit, those prepared to platform him, to help pay the bills.

Of course, not all Trans-folk are cynical exploiters of the current Self-ID laws. The genuine Trans people are probably hurt, anxious individuals who deserve compassion for what they are going through, whether that is an over-consumption of atrazine, repressed homosexuality, schizoid disorder, dysmorphia, depression and alienation or that state that has not been defined with an accuracy beyond someone’s consciousness of it, being Trans. Yet surely the Trans movement can see that there are practical difficulties and grave dangers to embracing their demands without research, resolving safe-guarding issues and finding compromises. It might be that, sad though it is, the Trans-woman who has a large, powerful physique cannot play full contact rugby because she is an obvious danger to the other biological women playing.

These are the basic points, supplemented by questions and hypothetical consequences, that J.K. Rowling, Sharron Davies and Graham Linehan are making. Three people not noted for extremist views in any other area of life, or have a history of extremism on any issue, let’s note. Trans-activists could engage in a reasoned dialogue, in public, and use their freedom of speech, reason and evidence to make their case with a view to finding a compromise supported by the principles of science and humanity.

Yet that doesn’t happen. Instead, it is howling demand to be affirmed in claims which posses no grounding in science, followed by a personal hounding of the people that disagree with their point of view. Look at how frightened those in the public eye are concerning this topic, and how quickly they become apologetic if their comments are perceived as ‘transphobic’. It is similar to the sort of totalitarian ‘protest’ movement the world witnessed in Mao’s China, calling for the humiliation and confession of those that transgressed against Marxist-Leninism with a Maoist twist.

Graham Norton - a man given his big break in Graham Linehan’s comedy and who has never said anything to defend him - quite recently claimed that the phenomena of ‘cancel culture’ was only asking people to be accountable for what they said. But does accountable mean having to lose your job and career because your views are at variance with an ideology? Does it mean that it is fair game for you to be abused continually by an organised group of online activists? Graham Norton left Twitter after making this remark about accountability, which probably shows that there is a fair amount of abuse going the other way too. However, Graham Norton will not lose work: Graham Linehan, Sharron Davies and journalists like Suzanne Moore have.

J.K. Rowling and Graham Linehan and others are in the front line of an unpleasant culture war that cannot be lost. Winning it does not mean ending ‘Trans-Rights’; it means keeping freedom of speech and right to have a different opinion. It is a very narrow view of diversity if it is only categorised through sexual identity and skin colour; the true test of tolerance and acceptance is whether other people’s opinions can exist unmolested and criticised in the same community while at the same time allowing those people to productively get on with their lives without harassment.

The greatest holocaust ever perpetrated is the one against women, and it is ongoing. From leaving female babies to die on mountainsides in ancient civilisations to the fact that 137 women across the globe are killed every day by a partner or a family member. A little over three each week are killed in the United Kingdom. This sombre statistic is, or should be, as much a part of the debate as the depression rates in transsexuals or the confusion of possibly trans-sexual children. Just as parenting, anti-depressants and puberty blockers are a crucial part of the debate. It would help establish an initial area for understanding for both sides; yet, the pattern currently is when a woman speaks about her fears, she is labelled a bigot and accused of stirring-up paranoia to deprive another group of their rights.

At present, under a hail of unrelenting insults, people like J.K. Rowling and Graham Linehan are holding the line, at a personal cost. Hopefully, they can hold it long enough for there to commence a measured and mature debate that thoroughly and non-ideologically examines the issues involved.