Harry Potter actor Jim Broadbent, who played Professor Horace Slughorn, recently made it clear he would support novelist J.K. Rowling and her stance on transgender ideology issues.
In an interview with The Telegraph, Broadbent was asked where he stood on Rowling and her stance on transgender ideology issues. He responded, “It’s really sad. I think J.K. Rowling is amazing. I haven’t had to confront it myself, but I would support her in that, I think, if it came to it.”
Back in June 2020, Rowling issued three contradictory tweets where on the one hand she claimed sex was real, but on the other hand also implied that you can indeed change your sex by recognizing “trans” people.
She wrote, “If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth.”
She continued, “The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women – ie, to male violence – ‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences – is a nonsense.”
Rowling elaborated on these thoughts in a lengthy blog post on her personal website explaining five reasons why she spoke out on sex and gender issues while also providing more insight to her thoughts on transgender ideology issues.
In the post, Rowling noted she does indeed support bodily mutilation, “I want to be very clear here: I know transition will be a solution for some gender dysphoric people, although I’m also aware through extensive research that studies have consistently shown that between 60-90% of gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoria.”
However, she couches her support of bodily mutilation by having limits put on it, and the removal of those limits is one of the main reasons why she has taken the stance she has, “The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law. Many people aren’t aware of this.”
She also claims this transgender ideological movement is misogynistic, “I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class.”
“But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive,” she also relayed. “Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning. I understand why trans activists consider this language to be appropriate and kind, but for those of us who’ve had degrading slurs spat at us by violent men, it’s not neutral, it’s hostile and alienating.”
If Rowling hadn’t already made it clear that she believes people can indeed transition from male to female and female to male, she wrote, “I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable for all the reasons I’ve outlined. Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they’re most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk. Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men.”
She then added, “So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.”
While Rowling believes she’s speaking the truth, it’s not the full truth and she is still clearly misguided by believing that one can still transition and that she does indeed embrace bodily mutilation in certain circumstances.
Bishop Michael Burbidge of the Catholic Diocese of Arlington in his letter, A Catechesis on the Human Person and Gender Ideology, explains, “At its core, this belief in a ‘transgender’ identity rejects the significance of the sexed body and seeks cultural, medical, and legal validation of the person’s self-defined identity-an approach called ‘gender affirmation.’”
He then declares, “We know from biology that a person’s sex is genetically determined at conception and present in every cell of the body. Because the body tells us about ourselves, our biological sex does in fact indicate our inalienable identity as male or female. Thus, so-called ‘transitioning’ might change a person’s appearance and physical traits (hormones, breasts, genitalia, etc.) but does not in fact change the truth of the person’s identity as male or female, a truth reflected in every cell of the body. Indeed, no amount of ‘masculinizing’ or ‘feminizing’ hormones or surgery can make a man into a woman, or a woman into a man.”
If Broadbent does indeed support J.K. Rowling it is indeed only a half step and does not directly address the true heart of the issue and its blatant attack on what it means to be human.
Father Roger Landry writes in National Catholic Register, “When the natural, complementary duality of man and woman is called into question, the very notion of being — what it means to be human — is undermined. The body becomes no longer a defining element of humanity. The person becomes reduced to spirit and will and the human person almost becomes an abstraction until one discerns what nature one is or selects which of the four, or 58, or 64, or 100 possible genders or more one wants to be. ”
What do you make of Broadbent’s comments about J.K. Rowling?