Mick Hartley

Good to see the Times is now reinstating comments on trans matters, after its inexplicable and disgraceful ban. Here's the article in question:

The author JK Rowling was embroiled in another row on gender after accusing the Labour Party’s leader of failing to defend women’s rights.

Her comments were a response to an interview in The Times in which Sir Keir Starmer called for reform of gender recognition law and said “trans women are women” according to statute.

Rowling said his words misrepresented the law and indicated “the Labour Party can no longer be counted on to defend women’s rights”. She tweeted that she had been contacted by “innumerable gay people” who, like women, felt “under attack for not wishing to be redefined and for refusing to use ideological language they find offensive”.

Her words were rejected by many people online and the hashtag #JKDoesntSpeakForMe was the No 1 trend in the UK yesterday afternoon.

Starmer, formerly the director of public prosecutions, had said: “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view, that is actually the law through the combined effects of the 2004 [Gender Recognition] Act and the 2010 [Equality] Act.”

Rowling tweeted: “@Keir-Starmer publicly misrepresents equalities law, in yet another indication that the Labour Party can no longer be counted on to defend women’s rights.”

So a Twitter mob has piled in on Rowling. There's a surprise. 

The Times comments are of course 100% behind Rowling:

• JKR absolutely does speak for me. When will politicians start listening to women?
• Keir Starmer did misrepresent the law which given his standing as a lawyer and as an MP is of huge concern. An MP that can not define a woman other than being something that includes men has no place in the public sphere. JKR however has constantly spoken up for both both trans people and women and has helped the women of the UK find their voice and speak out about how our sex based rights, safe spaces and children are all placed at risk by people like Starmer, that would happily throw 51% of the poulation under the bus to appease a tiny fraction of voters. We live in a democracy so why is no one listening the the majority, which in this instance are women.
• JK is right. KS is wrong. As for the Twitter mob, words fail.
• As ever JK speaks for me with integrity and bravery. Keir Starmer – what were you thinking. For the first time in 35 years I am thinking of leaving the Labour Party. Not even Corbyn did that.

And this:

• Good news!! I have just had a reply to my email to John Witherow, the editor, and they are reinstating the comments! Hooray, we succeeded!!

There are also a couple of on-point letters to the editor:

From Jenny Blount:

Sir, Sarah Ditum (“What is a woman? Don’t try asking Labour”, comment, Mar 12) does not go far enough. When women transition into men, are they met by hordes of nervous politicians terrified of defining what makes a man? Of course not. Where are the male public figures who have been cancelled over their definition of what makes a man? The fact we don’t even question what makes a man in the trans debate shows the staggering degree of privilege enjoyed by men, but not their sisters, wives, mothers or daughters.

And from barrister Elizabeth Hodgetts:

Sir, You report that when asked to define a woman (news, Mar 12), Sir Keir Starmer replied “A woman is a female adult, and in addition to that trans women are women, and that is not just my view — that is actually the law”. That is not a correct statement of the law. The phrase “trans women” is generally understood to refer to individuals who were born biologically male but who identify as and live as women. It is not the law that all these individuals are women. According to section 212 of the Equality Act, “woman” means a female. Section 9 of the Gender Recognition Act says that when a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, “the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender . . . and if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman”. For clarity, the phrase “for all purposes” here means “for all legal purposes”. Many trans women do not have gender recognition certificates, and therefore, under the current law, are not women “for all legal purposes”.