And yet
Rowling was proven correct, was she not?
This could be dismissed as an one-off case.
But there is much worse in this story.
The father of a teenage victim of rape in a chool, by a self-proclaimed "gender fluid" boy who was given easier access, was himself attacked, had the police set on him, and
arrested on orders of the school board and supporting vocal "trans rights advocates" who clearly attempted to silence him and prevent the crime from being investigated.
There are contradictory reports on whether it actually happened in a bathroom, but I'm going with the trial version that it was in an empty classroom. So not a total vindication of Rowling, granted, but it could have happened in any women's only space.
This is disgraceful and worse than disgraceful. The self-proclaimed defenders of the rights of the oppressed minority had a father arrested for the "crime" of denouncing the rape his daughter had suffered. And
they nearly got away with it.
The
daily mail is more
graphic, and this is one case that calls for graphics so that you can see the violence of police repression directed against a man who protested that a rape be investigated. This was
vile.Those "activists" and that school board know they were covering up a rape. They didn't care: the "cause" was more important. This is the really evil thing: when a movement covers up crimes and acts against innocent people to suppress denunciations,
when it attacks victims, they have crossed the line, they can no longer claim virtue and automatic support. It is fair and proper to discuss these problems, not allow howling packs to suppress discussion because the supposedly "oppressed" as we can see in this example, or rather,
the ones who claim to defend the oppressed can very easily be oppressors. Rowling had a right to express her opinions, and events have shown that the did have a good point.
Advocacy for a cause must be grounded in reality and face not just the positives but the negatives and the risks. And obviously allow discussion of those.