Post by Ayla on Apr 7, 2016 14:37:09 GMT 8
www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/06/penis-comment-was-biologically-unexceptional
Not one of the journalists, trans-activists and others who have commented on my remarks at the Royal Institution last week have troubled to complicate matters by finding out my actual views on sexual identity. I made them available on Facebook, Twitter, my website, in statements to the press and a letter to Stonewall. No response. Perhaps my own opinions would have got in the way of a good story, or the opportunity to be righteous and cross – or venomous in some cases.
I’m surprised that a couple of sentences of mine during a short Q&A session at the end of my lecture should have caused a stir. My subject was the literary representation of the self in the work of Montaigne, Shakespeare, Pepys, Boswell and others. In response to a question, I proposed that the possession of a penis or, more fundamentally, the inheritance of the XY chromosome, is inalienably connected to maleness. As a statement, this seems to me biologically unexceptional. However, biology is not always destiny. That the transgender community should want or need to abandon their birth gender or radically redefine it is their right, which should be respected and celebrated. It adds to the richness and diversity of life. It’s an extension of freedom and the possibilities of selfhood. Everyone should deplore the discrimination that transgender communities have suffered around the world. That the community should sometimes find itself in conflict with feminists (over changing rooms, trans beauty pageants, access to women’s colleges) – well, that’s a conversation on which I can shed no useful light.
As for “victimhood”, my remarks concerned the charged atmosphere at many US campuses, where students are seeking “safe spaces”, “trigger warnings” and the “no-platforming” of speakers with views contrary to their own. This represents an assault on freedom of expression – an assault that will, regrettably, be familiar to members of the transgender community worldwide.
Ian McEwan
London
Not one of the journalists, trans-activists and others who have commented on my remarks at the Royal Institution last week have troubled to complicate matters by finding out my actual views on sexual identity. I made them available on Facebook, Twitter, my website, in statements to the press and a letter to Stonewall. No response. Perhaps my own opinions would have got in the way of a good story, or the opportunity to be righteous and cross – or venomous in some cases.
I’m surprised that a couple of sentences of mine during a short Q&A session at the end of my lecture should have caused a stir. My subject was the literary representation of the self in the work of Montaigne, Shakespeare, Pepys, Boswell and others. In response to a question, I proposed that the possession of a penis or, more fundamentally, the inheritance of the XY chromosome, is inalienably connected to maleness. As a statement, this seems to me biologically unexceptional. However, biology is not always destiny. That the transgender community should want or need to abandon their birth gender or radically redefine it is their right, which should be respected and celebrated. It adds to the richness and diversity of life. It’s an extension of freedom and the possibilities of selfhood. Everyone should deplore the discrimination that transgender communities have suffered around the world. That the community should sometimes find itself in conflict with feminists (over changing rooms, trans beauty pageants, access to women’s colleges) – well, that’s a conversation on which I can shed no useful light.
As for “victimhood”, my remarks concerned the charged atmosphere at many US campuses, where students are seeking “safe spaces”, “trigger warnings” and the “no-platforming” of speakers with views contrary to their own. This represents an assault on freedom of expression – an assault that will, regrettably, be familiar to members of the transgender community worldwide.
Ian McEwan
London