JK Rowling ‘entitled to speak her view' on trans issues, says Sturgeon
Rowling was a vocal critic of the gender recognition reforms championed by Ms Sturgeon, famously donning a T-shirt which branded the then first minister a 'destroyer of women's rights'.
Ms Sturgeon said the T-shirt – which Rowling posted a picture of herself wearing on social media – 'brought more abuse on my head than almost anything else'.
But she said she had 'never stopped JK Rowling having a view on anything'.
Ms Sturgeon told BBC Radio Ulster she 'wasn't destroying women's rights', and added: 'Is it really the best way to elevate a debate, put a picture of yourself in a T-shirt with something like that? That is the point I am making.'
In a review of Ms Sturgeon's newly published memoir, Rowling accused the former SNP leader of being 'flat-out Trumpian in her shameless denial of reality and hard facts'.
Ms Sturgeon however has made clear her views on the issue have not changed, despite the fury that erupted when Holyrood debated proposals for her government to make it easier for trans people to legally change their gender.
The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed by Holyrood but it was blocked by Westminster, with the changes never coming into force.
Speaking on Wednesday, Ms Sturgeon said: 'I don't believe – never have and I never will – that you have to choose between being a feminist and being a supporter of the rights of one of the most stigmatised groups in society.
'That's still my position.'
While she added the debate on the issue had become 'deeply entrenched', with opposition to the reforms from people such as Rowling, some within the SNP and women's rights groups, Ms Sturgeon was adamant the 'fundamental principle and the issue is one I haven't changed my mind on'.
Speaking about Rowling, she told the Nolan Show she is a 'huge admirer of her work'.
Ms Sturgeon said: 'I have bought Harry Potter books for all of the kids in my life and I will continue to do so as long as they want to read them.
'I think she is an amazing talent and has done great things.'
She added that Rowling is 'absolutely entitled to speak her mind', but added: 'I don't admire the way some people have gone from speaking their minds on this issue to, almost it seems, to be punching down on trans people who have never harmed anybody at any point in their life.
'I am not singling out one person in this, but a cruelty has entered this debate which I find really difficult, because we are talking here about a discriminated against, stigmatised minority.
'In every group in society there will be bad people, but they are not representative of the wider group and with trans we seem to take the bad apples and say 'that makes all trans people bad'.
'I don't agree with that and I don't like that.
'JK Rowling is absolutely entitled to her view, maybe putting herself up for a bit more scrutiny about her view would be helpful, but I don't criticise her for expressing her view.
'But I think I would like to see a bit less punching down on trans people to be perfectly frank.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Morning Joe host stuns panel by heaping MORE praise on Trump as he warms up to former arch-enemy
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough has said Donald Trump 'holds the cards' over Vladimir Putin in their diplomacy talks surrounding the war in Ukraine. The Morning Joe star made the declaration amid ongoing peace talks between the two leaders on Wednesday. 'You know, there are a lot of people talking about, "who has cards... who's not playing cards,"' he told fellow anchor Willie Geist. 'I heard some people over the weekend said Vladimir Putin is the 'only person that might...' Scarborough continued, before interrupting himself with what was billed as the only answer. 'No. It's Donald Trump. Donald Trump has the cards. 'He has the cards with, first of, with sanctions,' he said. A former Florida Republican who today is one of the left-leaning networks' leading voices, the host went on to outline why he believes Trump has little to worry about. 'He can just say, "Lindsey [Graham], go ahead - let's pass the sanctions bill and let's grind him down,' he explained, referring to the GOP senator from South Carolina. The Morning Joe star made the declaration amid ongoing peace talks between the two, pictured convening in Alaska on Friday 'And the second thing is, well, you know, there was talk about a possible $90million military aide bill to Ukraine,' he went on. 'There's two things that would change the dynamics very quickly.' The comments continued Scarborough's surprise support for the president in recent weeks, and Geist, in turn, observed how Putin has continued to attack Ukraine despite the recent peace talks. Scarborough dismissed such talk as mere posturing. 'Vladimir Putin can huff and puff and say he's going to blow the house down all he wants,' he said. 'He's not the one holding the cards. Donald Trump's holding the cards right now. 'It will be very interesting to see if he'll play them over the next 10 days.' Just last week, he criticized Democrats for publicly complaining about Trump 's takeover of Washington, DC - where Morning Joe is based - while secretly pining for a crackdown behind closed doors. Without naming names, the host detailed how he'd received calls from his friends who quietly expressed support for the deployment of federal agents to DC. Their political allegiance? 'All democrats,' Scarborough said on-air August 12. A few days before, he said he agreed with Trump in his assessment that DC is now a dangerous city. 'Certainly don't need the National Guard in there, or certainly not Marines,' he said with wife Mika Brzezinski by his side. 'But you look at Washington, DC, and it's been dangerous for years. 'There have been, you know, a year, a couple of years here, a couple of years there, where it's been a bit better - but certainly over the past five years it has just been an absolute mess. 'Its quality of life has been terrible.' Earlier this week, Scarborough - who faced criticism for meeting with Trump in Mar-a-Lago after the election - revealed MSNBC would be changing its name to 'MS NOW'. The change, CEO Mark Lazarus said in a memo viewed by Daily Mail, represents the new company's focus on 'building our individual identity and vision for the future while laying a foundation for the continued growth and success of our businesses.' MSNBC will also lose the peacock logo long associated with NBCUniversal when the name change goes into effect later this year. MS NOW is an acronym for My Source News Opinion World, execs said - after previously promising the network would keep the 'NBC' in its its name as it prepares to spearhead a spinoff company that's been dubbed Versant. The firm, also based in 30 Rock, is comprised of Comcast channels like MSNBC that had been causing declines in the parent company's share price. The stars of Morning Joe, Brzezinski and Scarborough, are said to be in the midst of exploiting their power to 'leverage their stature within the network,' according to Mediaite's Colby Hall. In a report penned earlier this month, Hall cited an unusual number of absences from both after execs pulled their show off the air following the July 2024 assassination attempt on Trump. 'It's hard to ignore the timing,' Hall wrote. 'With MSNBC's realignment on the horizon and talent contracts under review, Joe and Mika's extended absences feel like a flex - a reminder that Morning Joe doesn't work without them,' he added. The Versant spin off is expected to take place between late 2025 and early 2026. An exact date has not yet been announced.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Solving the asylum question is suddenly even more urgent
What next? As ministers digest the High Court ruling on the use of a hotel in Epping to house asylum seekers, they have very limited options in front of them, none of them good ones. The High Court should not be attacked for making a ruling that takes no account of politics or even practicalities, for that is not its job. It has, though, made a bad situation very much worse. It is hardly helpful to anyone, in such circumstances, for Nigel Farage to exploit a delicate and sometimes combustible situation by calling for more peaceful protests. From bitter experience, we know how such demonstrations can degenerate into minor disorder, or worse. In fact, given the force of the High Court judgment, there is even less need for such protests now. Instead, Mr Farage and his deputy, Richard Tice, as usual, are playing on the fears of people and behaving in a way that is irresponsible at best and dangerous at worst. Mr Farage's interventions in the riots last year only added to the campaign of disinformation underway, and most recently was made to apologise for claiming that the Essex police had 'bussed in' counter-demonstrators in Epping. The Conservatives, mesmerised by the rise of Reform UK, are in a constant losing battle to out-Farage Farage, and they should know better than to propagate myths about asylum seekers living in 'offensively luxurious' conditions, which was today's unhelpful sideswipe from former Tory MP Damian Green. The shadow home secretary Chris Philp and the shadow communities secretary James Cleverly should bear their share of the blame for the mess the asylum system is in, and offer some constructive alternatives and call for calm. They will not recover as a serious alternative party of government until they too come up with a plan for the asylum system. The leader of the opposition, Kemi Badenoch, often talks of such a thing, but it is yet to be seen. Meanwhile, her undeclared rival, Robert Jenrick, appears to be constantly dialling up tensions. The position is serious. Were the Bell Hotel the only place to be affected by the ruling, then it would not be such a challenge to relocate its 140 residents by the date set by the court of 12 September. However, the judgment also sets a clear precedent, albeit largely based in planning law, for the end of the use of hotels to provide emergency housing. It does so with near-immediate effect. That means some 32,000 individuals will need to be rehoused, at absurdly short notice. Already, local authorities controlled by Reform UK and the Conservatives are expected to bring their own cases, which, as the Home Office lawyers warned the High Court, will make the dilemma of finding shelter for them even more acute. In practice, too, it will encourage many more local protests and increase the pressure on police forces to maintain order. One other immediate effect will be to increase the pressure in areas where Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green councils may still try to stick to a 'refugees welcome' policy. This only creates a sense of unfairness that the task of finding shelter for the immigrants is not being properly shared across the country. And, in any case, all, including the refugees and other migrants affected, agree that using hotels is a far from ideal solution in any case. Contrary to some of the anti-refugee propaganda, these hotels, whatever their nominal star ratings, are unsuitable for long-term residence, and are not the lap of luxury. Concierge is not available. Asylum seekers are not allowed to work, they are given shelter and a minimal allowance to stave off destitution, some medical attention and, courtesy of some councils, access to some recreational activities. They are not cosseted in the way some seem to imagine. There is talk of the migrants being placed in flats, which would be relatively expensive, student accommodation, and houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). These create their own problems, particularly because the tendency will be for the irregular immigrants to be moved in disproportionate numbers to parts of the country where rentals are relatively low. The effect there will be to push rents up for the locals, and create more friction in host communities. It may also prompt more action by some local councils to frustrate the strategy, such as using their powers to block the conversion of houses across large areas into HMOs under Article 4 of the town and country planning acts. Even where HMO accommodation is found for families or smaller groups of asylum seekers, they will be more vulnerable to any aggressive demonstrations organised by neighbours alarmed by extremist misinformation about them. Such incidents will be much harder for the police to control. It may be that some form of emergency legislation will be required to delay the implementation of such High Court orders, although that in itself may not be constitutional. The only course then open to government is to redouble its efforts to process the backlog bequeathed to them by the previous administration, speeding up the grant of leave to remain for genuine refugees, or issuing deportation orders in expedited fashion for rejected claimants. It will take too long to build vast detention centres, while the old army barracks that have been commandeered in the past have been found to be completely unsuitable. The High Court has listened to the representatives of the people of Epping Forest and made its decision, and it is right that the judges should do so. Citizens have a right to have their cases heard impartially and have their grievances aired. The courts will no doubt soon be issuing many similar orders. Yet there are other people with a stake in these cases. Perhaps the most lamentable aspect of this latest episode in the migration crisis is that the voices of the immigrants themselves have been so rarely heard, and their plight disregarded. They have their human rights, too, enforceable by law – though many would cheerfully seek to deny them that. Indeed, the tendency in the media has been to demonise these fellow human beings as malevolent monsters determined to wreak crime and havoc in whatever neighbourhood they find themselves bussed to. Whether refugee or economic migrant, they are entitled to be treated properly in a civilised society, and not portrayed, as cynical politicians pretend, as an 'invasion' of 'fighting-age' men. They are not an alien army, but individuals who want a better life. Many would have preferred to stay put, were it not for war, persecution, famine and poverty. In a land such as Britain, with severe labour shortages, they have much to contribute, as have previous waves of immigrants. They could help to fix the 'Broken Britain' we hear so much about, and do the jobs that need doing. Yet they are all too often regarded as terrorists, rapists and murderers. The police at the hotel demos fare hardly any better, berated as 'paedo-defenders' and verbally and physically abused for doing their duty and preserving the King's Peace. The wider challenge for ministers now is to persuade the public that they are doing all they can to restore order to the asylum system – and to rebuild confidence in it. That task just got a lot more urgent.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
BBC ‘not institutionally antisemitic', editor says after row over Gaza coverage
The BBC is 'not institutionally antisemitic', a newspaper editor has said following a row over the broadcaster's coverage of the conflict in Gaza. James Harding, The Observer 's editor-in-chief said the perception of a 'political presence looming over the BBC' is a problem and the broadcaster needs to be 'beyond the reach of politicians'. The BBC has been criticised for a number of incidents in recent months which include breaching its own accuracy editorial guidelines and livestreaming the Bob Vylan Glastonbury set, where there were chants of 'Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)'. Following the incident, UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said ministers expect 'accountability at the highest levels' for the BBC's decision to screen the performance. Mr Harding discussed the difficulties of covering the Gaza conflict when he delivered this year's James MacTaggart Memorial Lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival on Wednesday. He described how 'newsrooms are in a furious argument with ourselves over the coverage of Israel and Gaza', with the situation 'very hard to view dispassionately'. The Observer chief said this is true for all media organisations, particularly the BBC, and it is 'about as difficult as it gets in news'. Mr Harding said: 'This summer, Lisa Nandy has weighed in.' He said the Culture Secretary's office insists she did not explicitly ask Samir Shah, the BBC chairman, to 'deliver up' director-general Tim Davie 's resignation following the Bob Vylan incident, but 'people inside the BBC were left in no doubt that was the message'. Mr Harding said: 'The place became paranoid about how the BBC itself would cover the story; people around him thought the political pressure would be too much. 'Whatever your view of the hate speech vs freedom of speech issues, an overbearing government minister doesn't help anyone. 'The hiring and firing of the editor-in-chief of the country's leading newsroom and cultural organisation should not be the job of a politician. It's chilling. 'Political interference – and the perception of a political presence looming over the BBC – is a problem, one that we've got too accustomed to. 'It looks likely to get worse. We need to get on with putting the country's most important editorial and creative organisation beyond the reach of politicians now.' The broadcaster is also facing an Ofcom investigation into its documentary Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone after a review found it had breached the corporation's editorial guidelines on accuracy. The programme was removed from BBC iPlayer in February after it emerged the child narrator, Abdullah, is the son of Ayman Alyazouri, who has worked as Hamas's deputy minister of agriculture. Mr Harding said the BBC is not antisemitic. 'I am Jewish, proudly so,' he said. 'I'm proud, too, to have worked for the most important news organisation in the world. 'The BBC is not institutionally antisemitic. It's untrue to say it is. 'It's also unhelpful – much better to correct the mistakes and address the judgment calls that have been wrong, than smear the institution, impugn the character of all the people who work there and, potentially, undermine journalists in the field working in the most difficult and dangerous of conditions.' The UK Government and the BBC have been asked for comment. Mr Harding is co-founder of Tortoise Media, which acquired broadsheet newspaper The Observer in April. Before he co-founded Tortoise Media, Mr Harding was editor of The Times from 2007 to 2012 and was in charge of the BBC's news and current affairs programming from 2013 up until the beginning of 2018. He also co-presented On Background on the BBC World Service and wrote the book Alpha Dogs: How Political Spin Became A Global Business. A spokesperson for the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said: 'The Culture Secretary has been repeatedly clear that the role of the director-general is a matter for the BBC board. Any suggestion to the contrary is untrue. 'The BBC has itself acknowledged a number of serious failings in recent months, including the broadcasting of the Bob Vylan set at Glastonbury. 'It is entirely right that the Culture Secretary raised these issues with the BBC leadership on behalf of licence fee payers.'
