Not her department
The Times on the bad behavior of Joanne Harris:
JK Rowling and fellow writers have accused the bestselling novelist Joanne Harris, who is head of the Society of Authors, of betraying the principle of freedom of speech in her stance on gender identity.
Rowling said that Harris, who wrote the award-winning novel Chocolat, had “consistently failed” to defend female authors who disagreed “with her personal position on gender identity ideology”, allowing the women to be intimidated into silence.
She cited the cases of two authors, Rachel Rooney and Gillian Philip, who had suffered “severe personal and professional harm” because they dared to “challenge a fashionable ideology which has been remarkably successful in demonising those who protest against the current attack on women’s rights”.
Rowling tweeted her outrage at the attack on Rushdie, and Harris responded with a sarcastic poll asking writers if they’d ever received threats. She was asked if she’d ever expressed sympathy for Rowling and she said yes.
In a statement to The Times, Rowling said she had received no messages of support from Harris. “I was startled to read this,” she said, “as I’ve received no communication whatsoever from Harris expressing sympathy for the death and rape threats I’ve received.”
So by “yes” Harris meant “no because I don’t like her opinion that men are not women.”
[Rowling] also highlighted remarks by Kate Quarmby, an author who sat on the society’s management committee, who said she had raised the subject of death threats made against Rowling in 2020 and 2021 and asked “that the society put out a statement condemning them”.
Quarmby added: “This did not happen and has not happened since.”
Rowling said:
“Harris has consistently failed to criticise tactics designed to silence and intimidate women who disagree with her personal position on gender identity ideology and has said publicly, ‘Cancel isn’t a dirty word. We habitually cancel things we no longer want.’
“I find it impossible to square the society’s stated position on freedom of speech with Harris’s public statements over the past two years and stand in solidarity with all female writers in the UK who currently feel betrayed by their professional body and its leader.”
Sorry, solidarity is only for the men.
Another interpretation is that she meant “yes but only ever in private where no word could get out, otherwise the mob would turn on me”. Cowardice either way.
It’s astonishing that any “Society of Authors” would decline to put out a formal statement condemning a death threat against any author. I struggle to think of any piece of writing that is better offset with a death threat than with a counter-piece offering better ideas; there is no universe anywhere in which I can imagine it’s better to sit by quietly while an author is vilified and threatened. Even so-called “deplatforming” an author (lobbying to prevent her from speaking her ideas publicly), a vile, cowardly, puerile practice, is orders of magnitude better than making death threats or smugly sitting by and offering snarky quips while your political opponents receive them. In my fucking opinion, of course.
(I’m fucking mad, reading this.)
I’ve just seen (at Glinner’s place) a screenshot of Harris’ Twitter profile, where her motivation is exposed. She describes herself as the proud parent of a trans son.
Snap; I just saw that too.
They seem to have infiltrated high positions everywhere.
I hate to say it, though, because it makes me sound like those people who are convinced that there are Jews running everything to the detriment of ordinary people.
tigger_the_wing@3, now THAT explains a whole lot, doesn’t it?
Long ago (long lost and forgotten source, sorry) I was reading a piece about conspiracy theories. It gave a taxonomy, or a how-to on recognizing them, or some such. Towards the end, it allowed that, you know, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true. It cited Watergate, and one or two others.
Me, I’m still hoping I can get one of the Jewish space lasers to play with :)
If you find out, let the rest of us know!
I mean, I’m not Jewish, but it should be okay if I identify as Jewish, right? Even if only part of the time. Like, not on Saturday when I can’t even turn on the light?
Don’t be so hard on yourself. If it walks like a duck…
Secrecy? Yes.
Harm or unlawfulness? Yes and Yes. Are there bonus points for both?
Plotting with others? Yes.
Group? Yes.
Conragulations, it’s a duck. Trans activism ticks off all those boxes with one of these big, black markers that bleeds through several sheets of paper at once. It’s not paranoia when there actually are people out to get you.
@2 This.
Well put James.