Tel-Chai Nation

Giulio Meotti's written on Israel National News about the transsexual movement's continuing villification of Harry Potter author J.K Rowling, now basing their hatred on that she made a transvestite into a villain in one of her new books:

Going into an English-language bookstore, it is impossible to avoid an essay on men who hate women even unintentionally. Laura Bates' “Men Who Hate Women”, Peggy Orenstein's “Boys & Sex” and Kate Manne's “Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women”, to name just the last three releases. It is the usual refrain of the “oppression of patriarchal masculinity.”

True, there had already been “Dressed to Kill” by Brian de Palma, a famous thriller about a murderer disguised as a woman. But that was 1989. Then another blockbuster, “The Silence of the Lambs”, where the murder is another trans wannabe. And in 1960, Alfred Hitchcock shocked us with "Psycho". But we are in other times, so much so that three years ago, a remake of Psycho had taken off Norman Bates' female clothes for fear of being accused of "transphobia".

If that wasn't enough, J.K. Rowling of "Harry Potter" fame is involved in a new controversy that sees her accused of "transphobia". Her murder is not perpetrated in a shower, but in the social media, and not by a knife, but a reeking stinkbomb Here is a woman, a famous writer, with left-wing credentials in the right place (a past in Amnesty, feminism, anti-Trumpism), who - heaven forfend - defends women from men who declare themselves women in the name of gender.

In Rowling's latest novel, the villain is a killer who dresses as a woman. “Troubled Blood” was written by Rowling under the pseudonym of Robert Galbraith (in a game of mirrors that also earned her the accusation of favoring the conversion of gays), and was released a few days ago. It is already causing chaos.

“Someone needs firewood this winter!” reads a tweet. “JK's new book is perfect to burn.”

For months, Rowling has been called a “femi-Nazi witch” for saying that trans and gender activism erases female identity and that there are biological differences between men and women. Monsieur Lapalisse? A truism, an obvious truth. But these are strange times.

They sure are. So now, we've reached another point where not only homosexual men, but even male transvestites, cannot be depicted as villains out of modern political correctness (lesbians, by contrast, are more likely to be fair game from what I've seen in Hollywood over the years). I'd say that's all the more reason why there should be more authors who, if they're realists, have to demonstrate the courage to follow Rowling's example, and come up with more similarities. Even in Israel, writers would do well to join the fight. That way, they can also join the protest against cancel culture and make it clear all this PC insanity and faux outrages have got to stop. Rowling's done nothing wrong, and nobody can claim victimhood, sainthood, or declare these topics off limits in the name of their narrow notions of political correctness. That mentality has to end.

Labels: londonistan, misogyny, Moonbattery, showbiz