by Sofia Lammali
JK Rowling may be best known as the author of a beloved children’s book series that spawned a major film franchise and a legion of loyal fans. But in recent years she has become infamous for her transphobia– rather, in her words, her ‘gender-critical’ views.
The basis of these views is that trans rights threaten women’s rights and safety. The rights under threat are always left vague, but usually imply one thing: that any transgender person is potentially a sexual predator that will use their presence around women to assault them. These justifications nearly always use bad faith bio-essentialist feminist arguments whilst ironically enforcing gender roles and the gender binary, something that many feminists actively fight against. For reference, bio-essentialist feminists believe that women are categorised as women by virtue of their possession of breasts, wombs, and the ability to bear children. It was a view commonly held during the first wave of feminism and was subsequently critiqued heavily during the second wave.
JK Rowling’s transphobic history is too long to fully delve into in this article, but it has manifested itself in various blog posts, support for fellow ‘gender-critical’ scholars and perhaps most notoriously, in Tweets. In 2020, she published a lengthy essay on her website, outlining ‘five reasons for being worried about the new trans activism’. She argued that replacing the legal definition of sex with gender would place victims of sexual and domestic abuse at risk, that the trans rights movement will affect children’s education and safeguarding, that young women engaging in hormone therapy was a cause for concern, and that single sex spaces were under threat. Plainly put, these arguments are dog whistles: they insinuate that trans people are a hidden threat to women and children, while sounding innocuous to the untrained ear.
The UK media establishment has been largely accommodating of her views. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, the UK media itself has a record of transphobia. JK Rowling is not the only celebrity to express anti-trans views or “concerns.” Ricky Gervais and actor John Cleese are two figures also known for their anti-trans views. And second, because any person who dares to criticise her is faced with an angry mob of her supporters. Even Emma Watson, who starred in the film adaptations of JK Rowling’s books, has been ridiculed online after she publicly supported trans charity Mermaids, as have Eddie Redmayne and Daniel Radcliffe, who also publicly expressed support for trans women.
Recently, Graham Norton, in an interview for the Times, was drawn in to discussing Rowling and her place in the trans debate, stating: “… my voice adds nothing to that discussion…Talk to the parents of trans kids, talk to doctors, talk to psychiatrists. Talk to someone who can illuminate this in some way.”
The video went viral on Twitter and JK Rowling promptly quote-tweeted: “Very much enjoying the recent spate of bearded men stepping confidently onto their soapboxes to define what a woman is and throw their support behind rape and death threats to those who dare disagree.” She added: “You may mock, but it takes real bravery to come out as an Old Testament prophet.” Graham Norton had not even expressed a truly earnest support of the transgender community and, of course, said absolutely nothing about condoning rape or death threats or attempting to define what a woman was. But by merely refusing to participate in the so-called ‘trans debate’ and deferring to experts rather than a children’s author, he was enough of a traitor to incur Rowling’s wrath. The online furore that her response caused led to Graham Norton deleting his Twitter account. This whole incident is testament to the viciousness of the anti-trans lobby in the UK, spearheaded by JK Rowling, who has used her considerable wealth and influence to undermine trans rights, attacking anyone who expresses even the mildest of disagreement with her views.
Despite Rowling’s burgeoning influence, she maintains that she is the one being ‘cancelled’ for her views. Of course, there is no basis for this, as she remains a millionaire (something she boasted about in response to criticism) and her views are platformed in major news outlets across the UK. The BBC placed her essay on the concerns of trans activism placed third in their Russell Prize for best writing; the Times dedicated a whole spread to her criticism of the gender recognition bill in Scotland. Despite her view that her opinions are ‘controversial’, the reality is that they are incredibly mainstream. We do not live in a society that listens to trans people’s concerns nor is sympathetic to them, which is why JK Rowling’s views and concerns have been platformed and accommodated for so long.
Having someone as wealthy and powerful as JK Rowling present transphobic views, building up a charged online following, completely unchallenged and even embraced by the media landscape is dangerous for trans people. In my view, it has already had an impact. In Scotland, Rowling’s essay played an important role in a surge of political pushback that has compelled the Scottish government to water down much of its legislation on gender recognition. The bill remains the subject of heated debate in Scotland. Rowling’s arguments have also been used by the American Right in relation to the so-called “bathroom bill” which Democrats and activists warn will infringe on trans rights. The measure remains blocked, but has persisted as a key front in the ‘culture wars’ of American politics.
More broadly, her views have strengthened an increasingly hostile environment for trans people. Trans conversion therapy was not included in the ban for gay conversion therapy in the UK. In the leadership election between Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss, both felt emboldened to mock trans people, particularly trans women, leaving little hope of any legal progress for trans rights.
Trans people are suffering the consequences of letting such rhetoric dominate the conversation. It is not just ‘offensive’, but actively dangerous. It’s time for the media to be more critical and sceptical of her views and promote trans voices, or indeed take on Graham Norton’s advice and listen and platform real experts instead. It cannot be a ‘trans-debate’ if you only hear from one side.
