Videos by OutKick
The New York Times pulled the trigger on an op-ed defending legendary author J.K. Rowling, and it’s a significant sign there’s been a major tide shift.
The famed “Harry Potter” author spent most of her life known as the woman who brought joy to millions of children and teenagers around the world. Her books and later, the movies, were arguably the greatest achievement in youth literature ever.
Yet, there’s just been one problem the woke mob can’t get over:
J.K. Rowling believes women are women and men are men.
Rowling has been a target for the wokes for years.
Not bowing down to the utter delusion of some people isn’t acceptable. That’s a crime that simply can’t be forgiven in modern society. For her crime of believing in biology, she’s been tarred and feathered as an enemy of polite society and a bigot who hates transgender people.
Did she ever say transgender people should be killed, arrested, discriminated against or harmed in any way? No, not at all. Rowling has simply always maintained women are women and spaces and places meant for women should be reserved for just them – not biological men who believe they’re women. Ironically, the same individuals who spent years screaming about vaccines and masks as pro-science people don’t like science when it comes to biology. Irony rich, indeed.
For years, she’s been a prime target of the outrage mob. Rowling has been branded maybe the most famous transphobic person in the world. That, of course, is comically stupid and inaccurate.
The New York Times finds its backbone.
Well, it appears there’s been an attitude shift because the New York Times actually supported free speech with an op-ed titled “In Defense of J.K. Rowling” from NYT opinion columnist Pamela Paul.
The argument from Paul is very straightforward. The “Harry Potter” author isn’t a bigot and the campaign to ruin her life must be stopped.
Paul wrote the following in part:
This campaign against Rowling is as dangerous as it is absurd. 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.
So why would anyone accuse her of transphobia? Surely, Rowling must have played some part, you might think.
The answer is straightforward: Because she has asserted the right to spaces for biological women only, such as domestic abuse shelters and sex-segregated prisons. Because she has insisted that when it comes to determining a person’s legal gender status, self-declared gender identity is insufficient. Because she has expressed skepticism about phrases like “people who menstruate” in reference to biological women. Because she has defended herself and, far more important, supported others, including detransitioners and feminist scholars, who have come under attack from trans activists. And because she followed on Twitter and praised some of the work of Magdalen Berns, a lesbian feminist who had made incendiary comments about transgender people.
Outrage follows defense of J.K. Rowling.
As expected, the woke mob simply couldn’t let The NYT publish an op-ed, briefly share an opinion, and move on. That’s not how the mob works. The mob coordinates, plans and executes vicious campaigns against its enemies.
In fact, The New York Times is now being hammered for *gasps* giving a platform to a diversity of views. The Human Rights Campaign released the following reaction:
Just yesterday, HRC joined hundreds of people and organizations, including many of The Times’ own contributors, to call on the New York Times to stop publishing stories that harm the transgender and non-binary community. And just one day later, yet another transphobic column by one of their most consistently anti-transgender opinion writers is published to defend one of the most famous transphobic writers in the world. The circumstances are so outlandish that I almost can’t believe it—but that’s the reality for transgender people in our country: every day is a battle. The Times must stop consistently platforming anti-LGBTQ+ extremists. They must do better, because there are real lives at stake.
Yes, you can’t even state that you AGREE with someone who supports biology or that author getting a platform without being targeted.
It’s an unfortunate reminder nobody is ever safe. You can’t ever be woke enough to protect yourself from these idiots. However, there is good news.
J.K. Rowling getting a defense in The New York Times is a great sign.
Believe it or not, this entire situation should give hope and optimism to those of us who believe in simple science and basic facts. Men are men and women are women. From a biological standpoint, this isn’t up for debate. It’s a fact.
Yet, for the past few years, anyone who holds these views has been told to shut up and branded a bigot. When Lia Thomas – a biological male – was absolutely obliterating biological women in the pool, ESPN and others in the media acted like the Penn swimmer was a Medal of Honor winner. Disagree? Congrats, you’ve been sentenced to life in ideological prison.
Every action eventually finds an equal reaction. The wokes pushed transgender issues on children and the general public for years, and most people didn’t do anything. After all, who would dare speak up? You could lose your job, your reputation and have your life destroyed if you said you didn’t want biological males competing against your daughter.
People have had enough and are starting to fight back. Not just fight back, but do it in the public arena with support. The New York Times, despite its massive issues, is a huge platform. Just a few years ago, the outlet caved for publishing a Tom Cotton op-ed supporting law and order during riots.
Now, in 2023, the outlet gave Pamela Paul to write an op-ed with a thesis most rational people agree with. The witch hunt against J.K. Rowling is disgusting, dangerous and pathetic. There’s nothing wrong with believing men are men and women are women. In fact, that’s what nature has determined for millions of years.
Yet, society allowed her to get crushed without saying much. The actors she made famous and rich beyond their wildest dreams even threw her under the bus. Daniel Radcliffe speaking out against her was one of the most cowardly things we’ve ever seen. He owes her everything. But of course, the movement consumes all.
For far too long many outlets stayed silent on J.K. Rowling’s treatment. It was shameful, cowardly and against everything Americans and the west claim to be for. She never threatened anyone, encouraged harm or endorsed violence against a single transgender person. The “Harry Potter” author simply stated the obvious:
We shouldn’t erase women to appease transgender individuals.
For that, she had to be destroyed and for far too long, it happened. Now, the tide is turning and a resistance is rising. For those of us who love freedom, freedom of speech and the truth, The New York Times publishing an op-ed defending Rowling is a great sign. Hopefully, the ground that’s been lost over years gets taken back and sanity returns.
One CommentLeave a Reply
Progressives believe in actual science in the same way they claim to be antiracist. They just use a word as cover for their own racism, or in this case, hate of actual science. After all, these are the same people who censored and destroyed careers of any time someone used actual science to question or debunk one of their ridiculous COVID policies. Hell, these “believers in science” still think COVID came from eating bats. No surprise that they will shout in your face that a man can get pregnant.