She made this claim because we ran an article, and have run many articles previously, describing groups like Sex Matters as “anti-trans”.
I would like to take the opportunity to defend this newspaper against Rowling’s frankly ridiculous description, and explain why “anti-trans” is indeed suitable language for these activists.
In the social copy for the article, we stated: “An anti-trans campaign group is threatening further legal action against the Scottish Government, saying ministers are failing to implement the recent Supreme Court judgment on biological sex in equalities law.”
On Wednesday night, Rowling tweeted: “For Women Scotland is a feminist campaigning group. You appear to be an anti-woman newspaper.”
Rowling was right. It’s not “anti-trans” to resist the wholesale attack on women’s rights that’s going on under the banner of tranzzz inclooosion. We despise the ideology and the rhetoric and the endless relentless remorseless bullying of women.
First of all, let’s take on the argument that describing Sex Matters as “anti-trans” is unfair, pejorative language. Rowling says it is simply a “feminist campaigning group”. Is that the case?
Sex Matters is an organisation which spends most of its time trying to keep trans women out of all women’s spaces.
Yes, because they are men. You are a person who thinks men get to invade women’s spaces as long as they call themselves “trans women.” We disagree.
Comments
4 responses to “Who is most anti?”
Despite the title, Rowling did not actually call The National ‘anti-woman.’ Her exact words were:
There’s a difference, and it seems quite likely that Rowling purposefully worded it this way.
*Laura Webster is the editor, not Laura Pollock.
Oops, thank you. Fixed.
Speaking of Sex Matters, I highly recommend their recent mini-series of
concersations on YouTube, patiently
explaining what all the fuzz is about. An excellent resource to point to for a solid introduction to the issue.