New York Times Journalist Says Solution For Trans Rights Is To Be Nicer To JK Rowling
The latest New York Times article interviews transgender leaders to argue transgender rights will come through giving up on sports and being nicer to anti-trans campaigners like Rowling.
In a recent, discourse-eliciting article on transgender rights, The New York Times’ Jeremy Peters pushes arguments that a “confrontational approach” is detrimental to advancing transgender rights. Peters interviews figures like Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, director of Advocates for Transgender Equality, and Mara Keisling, founder of the National Center for Transgender Equality and one of the subjects in the extreme anti-trans ads run by Trump. The piece echoes arguments from political pundits and Democratic representatives like Seth Moulton, who have suggested that Democrats should scale back their advocacy over transgender rights. Notably, the article begins by defending someone Peters believes has faced excessive “unsparing criticism” on trans issues: J.K. Rowling, a high-profile anti-trans activist who has denied that trans people were targeted in the Holocaust and referred to a transgender journalist as “a man… cosplaying.”
The piece states, “To get on the wrong side of transgender activists is often to endure their unsparing criticism,” before immediately citing two individuals seemingly presented as undeserving of such criticism. The first is Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton, who, Peters notes, “expressed concern about transgender athletes competing against their young daughters.” The second is J.K. Rowling, painted as merely “an author who disagrees with denying any relationship between sex and biology.”
Of course, Representative Moulton faced backlash not just for expressing “concern about transgender athletes,” but for fueling fear after stating that he didn’t want his daughters “getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete” and claiming that Democrats “spend too much time trying not to offend anyone." As for Rowling, she has denied that transgender people were ever targeted in the Holocaust, dismissing the burning of books from the Institute of Sexology—the first major Nazi book burning and a pivotal moment in trans history—as “a fever dream.” Since then, Rowling has become a firebrand for anti-trans policies, referring to a transgender journalist as “a woman cosplaying” and publicly agreeing with individuals using slurs to describe transgender people.
The article has sparked significant discussion within the transgender community, fueled by its content and remarks from leaders of pro-transgender organizations. Heng-Lehtinen is quoted saying, “We have to make it OK for someone to change their minds… We cannot vilify them for not being on our side. No one wants to join that team,” a statement made in response to what the author frames as “all or nothing voices within their coalition.” These reportedly include criticism of misgendering and so-called “policing language” around terms like male and female. Meanwhile, Keisling cites boycotting Harry Potter and opposing bans on trans athletes in high-level sports as positions that may be “unreasonable.” These remarks have ignited post-publication disagreement, particularly among those concerned about ceding ground on transgender rights.
It remains unclear to what extent Keisling and Heng-Lehtinen, prominent figures in the transgender community, align with the New York Times article on issues like Rowling and transgender sports, or whether those topics were shoehorned in by the author. For example, it is uncertain if Heng-Lehtinen’s call to “make it OK for someone to change their minds” extends to figures like J.K. Rowling, who openly misgenders transgender people, or if this framing is a rhetorical flourish by the Times—a publication often criticized for editorial choices that lean toward anti-trans interpretations.
The transgender community is increasingly wary of figures perceived as compromising on transgender rights. Congressman Seth Moulton has suggested a compromise involving restrictions on transgender athletes in exchange for healthcare rights, though he has not provided specifics on this proposal. This raises concerns about whether immediate concessions, such as limiting sports participation, are being made in hopes of future promises like the Equality Act, which may never materialize. Similarly, political commentator Jon Favreau of "Pod Save America" has attributed electoral losses to activists pressuring Democratic candidates to “publicly embrace unpopular positions,” including support for transgender healthcare for inmates.
One thing is certain though: allowing space for people like JK Rowling would mean an increase in anti-trans hostility within the Democratic Party, an action that is unlikely to improve their electoral chances… and while organizations push for better policy, allowing and promoting a regression on rights does not have many positive results to show for in US history.
Update: Advocates for Transgender Equality have released a statement calling the quotes “taken out of context,” and emphasizing the organization will refuse to cede ground to those targeting transgender people.
Yesterday, Advocates for Trans Equality (A4TE) Execuve Director, Rodrigo Heng-Lehtnen, was quoted out of context in a New York Times story, and he released the following statement…
“Yesterday, New York Times ran an article in which I was quoted as saying, ‘We have to make it OK for someone to change their minds,’ and ‘We cannot vilify them for not being on our side. No one wants to join that team.’ Because my quotes were taken out of context, I’d like to clarify what I meant. Those statements were regarding how to persuade every day, undecided people in the public, not people who have already taken actions to oppose our equality…
For nearly a decade, trans advocates have been holding the line against thousands of an-trans state bills and vile rhetoric to prevent the erosion of hard-fought progress. Now, more than ever, we need to use every tool we have because we cannot afford to cede any ground to anti-equality forces. And we are prepared to confront this period of uncertainty and hardship with the work our community relies upon.”
See their full statement here:
“The way to fight fascism is to appeal to Nazi sensibilities!” Really hard-hitting stuff from the NYT these days, huh? At this point I think it’s clear that the publication has been captured by right-wing interests
I am a career professional nurse, with a 25-year history of trans activism. I am nearly 70 years old. Fuck JRK (oops, did it again). Fuck the NYT. Our lives are on the line.