Pronoun Panic: Could J.K. Rowling Be Arrested for Misgendering?

Collateral Damage: any death, injury, or other damage inflicted that is an incidental result of an activity.

There are few better examples of collateral damage than J.K. Rowling, the feminist creator of the immensely successful Harry Potter books and movies. Normally that would be enough notoriety for one lifetime. But Rowling, a committed Labourite, has endured a second notoriety, that as critic of trans people gaining admission into the lives of women.

Let’s just say this iteration has not been as pleasant for her as her Harry Potter success. The forces of the gender jumble have crucified her for saying things such as: “Telling women and girls they must accept increased risk to themselves to appease male feelings is the very definition of the patriarchy you claim to stand against. Vulnerable women are paying the price for a fashionable fallacy that has serious, real world consequences.”

While most critics of men on women’s swim teams or in women’s washrooms have been bludgeoned into silence, Rowling is not easily dissuaded. “I work really hard at it, but I'm lucky enough to have evil genes, and of course I'd be nowhere without the mentorship of Beelzebub himself. Good luck with your journey, I'm sure you'll get there!”

While empathizing with trans people (last U.S. Census had them as 0.01 percent of the population) in their search for happiness in their dysphoria, Rowling draws the line at trans people appropriating women’s rights. “It means refusing to use gender identity ideology’s jargon, refusing to parrot its slogans, refusing to accept that sex doesn't matter when it comes to sport and single-sex spaces, refusing to believe a bearded heterosexual man becomes a lesbian when he declares himself one, and refusing to believe an abusive, misogynistic male is a woman because he likes to wear mini-dresses and pout in selfies.”

She is even more appalled by the surrender of fashionable feminists— women aligned with Hollywood, government and academia who think they’re members of the resistance— who mouth platitudes about “equal pay for work of equal value” then head for the door the second the going gets tough on MSNBC or the BBC.

Or by progressive men who see women only as political pawns. Witness rage monkey Keith Olbermann’s dismissal of the three women on SCOTUS who declined to do his political bidding on the Colorado ballot question for Trump. “The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its (women) members Jackson, Sagan and Sotomayor have proven themselves inept at reading comprehension.”

The answer to “What is a woman?” was self-evident a decade ago. Until the Alynskyists in the political process discovered transgender people in their march to control the Western world. Suddenly the right for biological men to barge into the female world was equated with Rosa Parks sitting where ever she wished on a bus. Appallingly, left-wing media bought the narrative of tampons in men’s washrooms.

Which brought Rowling’s unremitting opposition to reducing the value of being a woman into their cross-hairs. Despite an unbridled mania to destroy her, Rowling continues to punch back. She called trans celebrity India Willoughby "a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks ‘woman’ means: narcissistic, shallow and exhibitionist”. (Rowling was then lamely criticized for “misgendering” the flamboyant provocateur.)

 Some say that this is all simply an intramural skirmish in academia. A tempest in snow globe. But as the United States and then Canada head into elections promising destruction for Woke administrations, the definition of a woman that eludes so many radical political figures is foremost in the minds of voters. As Rowling states, women are united by their gender, but are not a monolith to be banked by a political party.

A recent graph in the Washington Examiner showed American political preferences among married and unmarried women and men. The results are edifying. While pundits define the left/ right schism as racial or economic, the defining gap in these elections is gender-specific. At one end married women support the Republicans by 56-42 percent. At the opposite end, unmarried women support the Democrats by a whopping 68-31 percent. 

It’s clear that backstopping of single women by the state is a powerful weapon. Ergo, the DEMs promote demands for unlimited abortion, birth control, DEI, cradle-to-grave healthcare and hate-speech laws. Married women, while interested in these issues, are skewing to the GOP on economic grounds. (Although the Roe v. Wade overturn in SCOTUS has proven a poisoned electoral chalice for some conservatives).

That’s not all. “Pew Research found that liberal women are about 10 times more likely to have been diagnosed with a mental health condition by age 30 than conservative and moderate men have been by age 65, and about 2.5 times more likely than conservative women in their same age cohort.”

Here in Canada, comparable statistics from married/ unmarried women are equally polarized. If anything Canadian unmarried women are more radical in their outlook as they cling to Trudeau’s big-government globalist agenda against the spectre of a “Trump-like Pierre Poilievre” drummed up by media. While polls suggest a massive repudiation of Trudeau’s unholy alliance with the NDP, the purchased media continue to promote stories such as CTV’s report on “queer and trans Black Canadians calling for a national group dedicated to supporting them amid hate and targeting” that ran second on their national newscast lineup on March 3.

While there are indications that corporate Canada is pulling back from the DEI insanity, politicians have doubled down in their devotion to radical concepts such as trans rights. No wonder the late Brian Mulroney described Ottawa in Peter C. Newman’s book “The Secret Mulroney Tapes: as a “sick” city that runs on incest: “They’re all married to one another. They’re shacked up with one another. Their wives are on the payroll of the CBC. It’s just awful.”

Which is how liberals end up with collateral damage by attacking their own. Like proud socialist J.K. Rowling. 

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada's top television sports broadcaster, he’s a regular contributor to Sirius XM Canada Talks Ch. 167. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his new book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.