JK Rowling has rightly been cheered (and inevitably, abused) for her bold public stand against the Scottish government’s detestable new Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act, which came into force this week. The Harry Potter author has challenged Police Scotland to arrest her under the act for ‘misgendering’ several trans sex offenders on X / Twitter. Bravo to Jo.
Many people support Rowling’s right to speak out against trans ideology because they agree with her about the threat it poses to women’s rights. They want her to be able to say that there are only two biological sexes, since they know that she is speaking the truth. And they are right to do so. Otherwise, we risk allowing cancel-culture warriors to get away with what George Orwell called Big Brother’s ‘final, most essential command’ – telling you ‘to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears’.
But here’s the thing. We should still defend free speech for JK Rowling or anybody else, even if we disagreed with everything they say – and indeed, even if we thought they really were transphobic liars motivated by hate. Freedom is always for ‘the other man’, the one we disagree with. If we only demanded freedom of speech for those who agree with us, we would be as bad as the other side. Free speech is an indivisible liberty. We defend it for all – yes, even for those freedomphobic bigots in the trans-activist camp – or for none at all.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member