Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
Amy the Library Duck returned to her window this year, but fortunately she didn’t nest there. (We had a hard time with her last year, finally having to remove her ducklings after they hatched and jumped and to take them to rehab after mom didn’t know how to get to the nearest water since Botany Pond was dry. The water is a long way away, across several busy roads, and we tried to show her the way.)
But there’s better news this year: a squirrel, presumably a female, has built a nest on the same ledge where Amy nested. And in this case we don’t have to do anything, for baby squirrels don’t have to walk 1.5 miles to get to water. The ledge is isolated and well protected, and the squirrel has been adding leaves, dried and fresh, to the nest.
The squirrel has been named Snoozy, as she sleeps through the heat of the day. If you bookmark this webcam, look in once in a while as I’m pretty sure you’re shortly going to see baby squirrels: a vantage that few people get. And baby squirrels are adorable!
Click here or on the screenshot below. When you watch, be sure to press the “forward” arrow at the bottom left to see the live action (or lack of action). You can scroll back to see the squirrel’s activity over the past day. Stuff right now: move the dot all the way to the right.
Snoozy is there right now, and may be there all day. Have a look! (She was gone most of the morning, and you can’t see anything at night.) I took this picture about three minutes ago.
UPDATE: If the camera doesn’t work, nere are the squirrel friend’s instructions:
I just checked it a minute ago and it was fine. Snoozy is there snoozing away. The operator has it running on the Panopto service that I think is used for class stuff. I noticed it sometimes says “the webcast has ended” and then you have to push play again. Also on my browser it blocks autoplay so you have to push the play button to start it.
I usually don’t put adverts on this site, and of course I’m not getting any dosh for this, but I thought it was a good deal, and it’s effective only today. 23andMe, the DNA-testing ancestry service I used myself, is having a sale on its “ancestry service” today, which will tell you where your genes come from and, if you want, put your data in a bank that allows you to find your registered relatives.
The usual price is $119, but today only it’s $79: a 33% reducation. I don’t think you’re going to find it much cheaper than that. You can, of course, pay more if you want to learn your chances of getting breast cancer, Alzheimer’s, or many other diseases, but I’m too much of a worrier to do that.
Click on the screenshot below (or here) if you want to find out about your ancestry. You can get up to three kits at that price.
New Zealand, which is still moving towards integrating science and woo, has combined them again in a new summer fellowship offered by the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Auckland (below) The supervisors are Professor Cate Macinnis-Ng, an ecologist, and Sarah Rewi, a research fellow.
I’m not sure whether these fellowships are funded by the Kiwi government, though I’m guessing they are because the U of A is a state school. This means that the project below is likely funded by NZ taxpayers. Importantly, it combines science with woo, in the form of Mātauranga Māori (MM), the indigenous “way of knowing” that includes some empirical trial-and-error knowledge, tradition, religion, story-telling, ethics, sociology, and sundry forms of spirituality. Co-supervisor Dr. Rewi has studied how MM “informs” the study of sooty shearwaters and grey-faced petrels. In that study, the contribution of MM apparently included advice from elders on where and when to kill the chicks for food, and, usefully, how to rotate chick harvest among areas. Because MM includes some real empirical knowledge, it’s not all bunk, but there’s no need to meld MM and science when you can simply incorporate the genuine empirical knowledge of MM (which is scant compared to the amount of woo) into science.
See the ad here (scroll down at the link) or click below:
Here’s a description of the position as noted above; bolding is mine:
With interests in mātauranga-based science research on the rise, it is important these forms of research are responsive to Māori community needs. Understanding the impact of land-use, particularly agricultural activity, on groundwater resources is of key concern to Māori. This project will involve field-based work and data analysis researching into spatial patterns of groundwater chemical composition and microbial communities. It will examine how scientific indicators can assist mana whenua in their assessment of the state of the water’s mauri. No specific skills are required but it is recommended that the candidate has an interest in the interface between mātauranga and science. It is a requirement that the student has whakapapa Māori.
Note that no specific skills are required but you have to be willing to meld MM and science (bolding is mine). And you apparently have to be Māori, so in that sense it’s a racially biased ad. As reader Peter said, who found the ad, “Imagine if a student had to prove they had English ancestry to get a grant to study Roman Britain.”
What do the Māori words mean in the ad? Remember, even most Māori don’t speak the language fluently, and many don’t speak it at all, while European descendants of “colonists” have the language forced upon them without translation, probably because of sacralization of all things Māori. At any rate, here are translations:
(noun) territorial rights, power from the land, authority over land or territory, jurisdiction over land or territory – power associated with possession and occupation of tribal land. The tribe’s history and legends are based in the lands they have occupied over generations and the land provides the sustenance for the people and to provide hospitality for guests.
Apparently the ad means that the research is aimed at helping local people lean some stuff about groundwater, like what spirits it embodies. But things really go into the weeds when we look at the definition of mauri:
Mauri (noun) life principle, life force, vital essence, special nature, a material symbol of a life principle, source of emotions – the essential quality and vitality of a being or entity. Also used for a physical object, individual, ecosystem or social group in which this essence is located.
As Nick Matzke, an American scientist working in New Zealand, noted here, here and here, mauri is simple vitalism, the view that all objects are imbued with some undefined “life force”. In a letter to the New Zealand Herald, Nick correctly noted that mauri, which is worming itself into the NZ science curriculum, is simple pseudoscience:
Unfortunately, the concept of ‘life force’ is a well-known pseudoscience, known as vitalism. Vitalism was experimentally debunked by chemists in the 1800s. Having a government agency force it back into the chemistry curriculum by political fiat — while steamrolling the vehement and informed objections of science teachers — is a huge problem. Vitalism is a pseudoscientific error on the same level as asserting that the Earth is flat, or that the world is only 6,000 years old. If vitalism is right, then all of chemistry and biochemistry is wrong.
To say that the funding will help the locals assess “the state of the water’s mauri“, then, is to say nothing; it’s like saying the project will help assess the state of the water’s Christianity. There is no mauri that we know of, so this is a funded search for nothing.
Finally, what is the single qualification to get the money and do this “science”? The student must have “whakapapa Māori”, which apparently means Māori ancestry. Here’s the definition of the first word (Māori, of course, are the indigenous people, descended from voyaging Polynesians):
Whakapapa. (noun) genealogy, genealogical table, lineage, descent – reciting whakapapa was, and is, an important skill and reflected the importance of genealogies in Māori society in terms of leadership, land and fishing rights, kinship and status. It is central to all Māori institutions. There are different terms for the types of whakapapa and the different ways of reciting them including: tāhū (recite a direct line of ancestry through only the senior line); whakamoe (recite a genealogy including males and their spouses); taotahi (recite genealogy in a single line of descent); hikohiko (recite genealogy in a selective way by not following a single line of descent); ure tārewa (male line of descent through the first-born male in each generation).
In other words, unless I’m mistaken, the only requirement for this fellowship is that the student has Māori ancestry. This, of course, is ethnicity-based hiring, eliminating all requirements for the position save one’s ancestry, which must be indigenous. This would be illegal in America, but it’s both legal and encouraged in New Zealand.
I’ve given up hope for the future of science in New Zealand, a country with a proud scientific past. In a misguided effort to incorporate indigenous “ways of knowing” into science, of which this ad is one example, the NZ government is busy ruining science education in the country. I had hoped that the newish Luxon government would do better then the damaged wrought by the Ardern administration, but the opprobrium towards criticizing anything indigenous seems permanently engrained.
If you have photos (especially if you’re American), today is a restful holiday and a good day to get your wildlife picture together. . .
Today’s photos come from reader James Blilie. His captions are indented, and you can enlarge the photos by clicking on them.
Here is another batch from our local surroundings.
Morning and sunset views from our place with Mount Adams featured. In the morning view, in the shadows, there are several Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) from our local tribe of deer who visit most days.
Next are several photos from a local hike: Panther Creek Falls. This is a short hike to a spectacular waterfall. It was “Plan B” when we found that we couldn’t get to our first choice hike because of snow on the roads. It’s been a long, cool spring and the snow has really hung in there. The last photo shows two specimens of Homo sapiens who seem to think the rules don’t apply to them. They jumped over the protecting fence right next to the signs shown in the photo. Idiots.
Next, the new moon on June 7, 2024:
Next are two photos showing how much more snow cover there is this year, compared to last year (a very dry year). Photos of Mount Adams taken June 25, 2023, and yesterday, June 26, 2024. The snow melt is what keeps our rivers going over the summer and is critical to the salmon and other fish in the rivers.
Finally a ringer. A drone shot of our new house that we just moved into. As you can see, it’s aligned directly at Mount Adams. You can also see me on the back patio, flying the drone. Based on my calculations, the photovoltaic array on the roof should provide all of our electrical power (averaged over the year).
Equipment:
Olympus OM-D E-M5
LUMIX G X Vario, 12-35MM, f/2.8 ASPH. (24mm-70mm equivalent)
LUMIX 35-100mm f/2.8 G Vario (70-200mm equivalent)
LUMIX G Vario 7-14mm f/4.0 ASPH (14-28mm equivalent)
LUMIX G Vario 100-300mm F/4.0-5.6 MEGA O.I.S. (200-600mm equivalent)
DJI Mini Mavic drone (this is a very easy to fly drone with a quality camera: My flying camera)
Greetings on July 4, 2024: the beginning of a long (4-day) weekend in America, celebrating Independence Day. A lot of places weren’t happy with the use of drones last year as a replacement for fireworks, as people presumably want to hear a Big Bang. Here’s a big display by the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C.
Camera Operator: SSGT. LONO KOLLARS, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
President Biden has told a key ally that he knows he may not be able to salvage his candidacy if he cannot convince the public in the coming days that he is up for the job after a disastrous debate performance last week.
The president, whom this ally emphasized is still deeply in the fight for re-election, understands that his next few appearances heading into the holiday weekend must go well, particularly an interview scheduled for Friday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News and campaign stops in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
“He knows if he has two more events like that, we’re in a different place” by the end of the weekend, said the ally, referring to Mr. Biden’s halting and unfocused performance in the debate. The person, who talked to the president in the past 24 hours, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation.
The White House, however, denies it, but I no longer believe the White House spokespeople, who are paid not to tell the truth, but to make the President look good (this is not unique to Biden, but I notice it more often these days).
Andrew Bates, a White House spokesman, said the report was “absolutely false” and that the White House had not been given enough time to respond.
The conversation is the first indication to become public that the president is seriously considering whether he can recover after a devastating performance on the debate stage in Atlanta on Thursday. Concerns are mounting about his viability as a candidate and whether he could serve as president for another four years.
Several of his allies stressed on Wednesday that Mr. Biden still wanted to fight to keep control of his candidacy even as headwinds in his party grew stronger.
A top adviser to Mr. Biden, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the situation, said the president was “well aware of the political challenge he faces.” That person added on Wednesday that Mr. Biden was aware that the outcome of his campaign could be a different ending than the one his is fighting for, but that the president believes he is an effective leader who is mentally sharp and “doesn’t get how others don’t accept that.” Mr. Biden still adamantly views his debate showing as a bad performance and not a revelatory event.
Well, to the rest of us, Biden doesn’t look mentally sharp, or even physically healthy (see two tweets down):
*From the Free Press‘s newsletter (not on the site); Nellie Bowles (I think) on Gavin Newsom. I’ve just finished Nellie’s new book, and was a bit disappointed. She simply reports on woke stuff, like Robin DiAngelo and transsexual issues, without giving her own views or even any snark. The best part was the end, about San Francisco and its decline (and the decline of California as a whole), for there she doesn’t hide her horror at what’s happening. Some of the issues in the book are in her post below (not a TGIF post):
→ The trouble with Gavin: The quick-witted, smooth-talking governor of California would be an obvious pick for Biden’s replacement—in some ways. Gavin Newsom has been Biden’s surrogate throughout the campaign, and he’s good at it, always appearing vigorous and alive, seeming to genuinely enjoy sparring with Republicans. He’s charming; he’s dashing; he’s funny. And he runs the most important state in the union, California, the world’s fifth-largest economy. You can complain about its politics all you want (I do, I have, I will in the following paragraphs), but the numbers don’t lie: the state is a world power unto itself. Plus, there is his age. At a spry 56, Newsom looks like a teenager next to our gerontocracy. Our Gavin Newsom is only 56 years old. Sure, that’s about ten years older than Bill Clinton and Barack Obama when they began their terms, but that’s not what matters. To our eyes now, adjusted for Trump and Biden, a 56-year-old president is basically a teen mom—shocking, wild, vibrant.
You know what else is going in Gavin Newsom’s favor? His ex-wife is Donald Trump Jr.’s fiancée, which is funny, strange, and definitely falls in the pro column. Plus, he’s managed to wrangle the rest of California’s political class of corrupt communists without ever seeming too corrupt or too communist himself. He’s done some vaguelymoderate things. I do believe Gavin Newsom believes in the free market, and that’s a big deal for an elected Californian in the year 2024.
But Gavin Newsom would probably fail as a Biden replacement. Because he does, I’ve heard, have weaknesses. What are they?
Well, there’s the homelessness situation. California’s cities are overrun with tent encampments. Root causes: lack of cheap housing thanks to “environmentalists” and neighborhood heritage types who block anything that’s not a single-family home, preferably with a chicken run out back. Also: empathetic-seeming but insane drug policies that all but pay people to do more fentanyl.
There’s the high-speed rail. This one’s a boondoggle has so far cost $18 billion across 15 years, with no train in sight, though the project randomly announces a few feet of track has been laid in a desert every couple years. The top railroad operator in France was supposed to help build it before abandoning the state to build one in a region that was “less politically dysfunctional” (that region: North Africa).
There’s the fact that California’s required ethnic studies courses are pretty antisemitic. There’s the fact that Newsom was eating indoors with all his friends at the French Laundry during the pandemic when everyone else was banned from indoor dining. I mean, don’t even get me started on Gavin’s lockdown policies.
As for the top issue on many voters’ minds: he’s not exactly an Abolish ICE guy, but he’s not particularly strong on the border. You’ve heard of sanctuary cities, but Newsom wants the whole state to be “a sanctuary to all who seek it.” Which is a lovely notion but. . . the entire world would like to move to California for a little Santa Monica sanctuary.
Personally, I like Gavin. (Stop throwing things at me, I am who I am!) But he’s too vulnerable on too many hot-button national topics right now, and I think the DNC knows that. —Nellie Bowles
*And another bit of information (caveat: it’s a long-distance diagnosis) from the daily FP newsletter. I thought this would interest readers. In her piece yesterday, linked below, Emily Yoffe said this: “In the absence of actual medical scrutiny, serious diagnoses are being floated: Alzheimer’s, Lewy body dementia, stroke, and Parkinson’s. The Parkinson’s diagnosis seems to be leading the pack.” Here’s today’s report (bolding is by the anonymous author)
Biden has Parkinsonism, a neurologist tells The Free Press: On yesterday’s Front Page, Emily Yoffe called for the president to address questions about his fitness for office by undergoing a medical assessment conducted by a group of independent doctors and making the findings public. Biden’s team doesn’t appear to have any appetite for further medical scrutiny. Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said a cognitive test was “not warranted in this case.”
But whether the White House likes it or not, medical experts are observing Biden closely and coming to their own conclusions. One of them, an emeritus professor of neurology at a top medical school, wrote to Emily to say he thinks the president has Parkinsonism. He did not want to be named, for fear of making himself a target. Here’s his full note:
Dear Ms. Yoffe,
I read your piece in The Free Press on President Biden’s obvious neurologic illness.
Neurologists frequently make diagnoses by observation. In fact, most movement disorder diagnoses are made by direct observation or description by patients and families. Mr. Biden has Parkinsonism, an umbrella term that refers to neurologic conditions that cause slowed movements, rigidity, and tremors. By observation, he has a masked face, reduced blinking, stiff and slow gait, hunched posture, low volume voice, imbalance, freezing, mild cognitive disturbance, and difficulty turning. I have seen one video of tremor. All these diagnose Parkinsonism. He would need further investigation by experts to determine which specific disease within the broad term he has, such as idiopathic Parkinson’s disease or another specific disease.
While there is no cure for the many conditions comprising Parkinsonism, there are effective treatments for many of the symptoms. By failing to get a diagnosis, the president is denying himself such treatments, and so worsens his own situation.
The long history in the U.S. of so many “covering” for the president going back to Woodrow Wilson should now be broken.
*Well, more about Biden, this time a NYT editorial by Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight, “Doing nothing about Biden is the riskiest plan of all.” The NYT also reported yesterday that “Donald Trump is ahead of President Biden by six percentage points among likely voters in a new national survey. Overall, 74 percent of voters view him as too old for the job, an uptick since the debate.”
. . . . Looking at polls beyond the straight horse-race numbers between Mr. Biden and Donald Trump — ones that include Democratic Senate candidate races in close swing-state races — suggests something even more troubling about Mr. Biden’s chances, but also offers a glimpse of hope for Democrats.
You don’t need another pundit telling you that Mr. Biden should quit the race, although I’m among those who emphatically think he should. But Democrats should be more open to what polls are telling them — and again, not just Biden-Trump polls. There is a silver lining for Democrats to be found in these surveys. Voters in these polls like Democratic candidates for Congress just fine. More than fine, actually: It’s Mr. Biden who is the problem.
he data is remarkably consistent. There are five presidential swing states that also have highly competitive Senate races this year: Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. (Sorry, Florida and Ohio don’t count as swing states anymore — and Texas isn’t one quite yet.) In those states, there have been 47 nonpartisan surveys conducted since Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump emerged as their parties’ clear nominees in March.
In 46 of the 47 polls, the Democratic Senate candidate polled better than Mr. Biden. He and the Senate candidate performed equally well in one poll. Which means that Mr. Biden didn’t outpoll the Senate candidate in any of the surveys. (I’m using the versions of the polls among likely voters, and the version with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. included if the pollster made one available.)
None of the 47 polls — not a single one of them — showed the Democratic candidate trailing in the Senate race, though two showed a tie. In contrast, Mr. Biden led in only seven of the surveys, was tied with Mr. Trump in two and trailed in the other 38.
But surveys like the ones above are vital for two reasons. First, they make it much less likely that there’s some sort of systematic skew in the surveys. The pollsters are finding plenty of Democratic voters, just not enough Biden voters. And second, these Senate candidates are well known to voters in their states and running in actual races, not hypothetical matchups, like those featuring other prospective Democratic presidential candidates that pollsters occasionally test. Relatively unknown candidates typically underachieve in surveys.
Silver then suggests that Biden drop out and be replaced by an open poll of Democrats who want to run; they will then debate each other. Then there would be a few straw polls that the delegates at the Democratic National Convention could take into account when choosing Biden’s replacement. But to me it seems too late to do this, and even Silver has his doubts:
It’s not a great plan. But there is no great plan left. At this point, any Democrat would likely be an underdog to Mr. Trump. Not because Mr. Trump is popular, which he very much isn’t, but because it’s hard to imagine a replacement being fully prepared for the race.
Indeed. Trump’s lead is widening, and we’re screwed.
*According to the Seattle Times, the Feds are getting ready to kill “hundreds of thousands” of barred owls—perhaps half a million. (h/t Wayne).
It is time, federal wildlife managers have decided, to kill invasive barred owls in the Pacific Northwest that threaten native spotted owls with extinction.
The barred owl, ransacking forests and pushing deeper into fragile habitats, is outcompeting the spotted owl. It’s bigger, more aggressive, and eats anything in the spotted owl’s territory. Wildlife managers see no choice but to reduce the number of barred owls in some areas, to create refugia where spotted owls may persist.
The control program, outlined in a final Environmental Impact Statement announced Wednesday by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is intended to result in the annual removal of less than one-half of 1% of the current North American barred owl population — but it’s still a lot of birds: as many as 500,000 barred owls, over the next 30 years, depending on how fully the program is implemented.
The policy is the result of more than 15 years of review and study and collaboration, said Bridget Moran, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office deputy state supervisor.
“We are at a crossroads. We now have the science. … There is time for us to act now, but that window is closing,” Moran said.
“We are wildlife biologists, we don’t take this on lightly. We do so because we know the Endangered Species Act requires us to do everything possible to protect endangered species, and we are doing that.”
Under the program, trained professionals would be deployed in about half of the areas where spotted owls and invasive barred owls are found in the northern spotted owl’s range, and also deployed to limit the barred owl’s invasion into California. Hunting by the general public would not be allowed. Shooters are to call barred owls into close range to confirm the species’ identity, and kill them with a shotgun. Lead shot will not be used.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, having already collected public comments, will make a decision on this plan within a month from Friday. I don’t know how I feel about it, as I love owls; all I know is that I don’t want to be the one shooting them. Do any readers think that this is a bad plan?
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili’s heading for dinner:
Hili: The road to the bowl is sometimes rocky.
A: But at least you have the guarantee that it will not be in vain.
In Polish:
Hili: Droga do miski bywa kamienista.
Ja: Ale przynajmniej masz gwarancję, że nie będzie bezowocna.
From Masih, how some women allow themselves to be oppressed in Iran:
Listen to these candidates to understand , why I say voting for these people in so called election in Iran for a woman, means choosing how you want to be assaulted.
Presidential candidates, both reformist and conservative, justify hijab enforcement. Pezeshkian boasts of… pic.twitter.com/I7t1TMaZlH
Madame VP Harris reassures a worried woman that “girl, I’m out here in these streets”, and every thing is okay except for those damn extremists. “Fellow Bison” refers to Howard University, where Harris went to school.
From the reliably loony Candance Owens. Have a listen! Do you think she still uses scientific medicine, or does she go to a shaman? (For a bit more of her spiel, go here).
“Science, what it is actually—when you think about it—is a pagan faith.”
This is one of the most moronic things I have ever heard, and I deal with gender activists every day. Nobody should take @RealCandaceO seriously.pic.twitter.com/iO7JcuWztB
— Why you should have a cat (@ShouldHaveCat) June 21, 2024
From the Auschwitz Memorial, one I posted:
A whole family wiped out in Auschwitz, with the mother and child gassed to death within a couple of hours after arrival. In America, people were celebrating Independence Day. https://t.co/7esBA3FvNq
Because the UK Parliament was dissolved on May 30, every seat in the House of Commons is now vacant, but they’ll be filled in a general election tomorrow. And the head of the party that gets the most seats will become Prime Minister. Matthew gives us the following information in response to my questions:
The PM is, by default, the leader of the largest party. Although they are, of course, named by the head of state – the monarch. On Friday there will be what is known as the ‘kissing of hands’, which involves the leader of the largest party meeting the monarch and being made PM. In the case of no clear majority (as in 2010 – a ‘hung’ parliament), the parties negotiate between themselves, and effectively nominate a PM (in that case, Cameron), who is then approved by the monarch.
The Tories are going to be voted out, it seems to be a question of quite how crushing is their defeat. Labour will be the government on Friday morning.
The new PM will be Sir Keir Starmer, who got his knighthood as a formality for being the Director of Public Prosecutions (a kind of national DA) in the noughties.
Like most Americans, I’m woefully ignorant of politics outside the U.S., for our news is quite parochial. But it’s widely known that Labour had its issues with antisemitism, issues that I hope have now been resolved (Since Labour seems to be the UK equivalent of the Democratic Party, I suppose I’d vote for that party were I a Brit). But according to two articles below—curiously, one in the conservative Times of London and the other in the left-wing Guardian—Labour is said has a new set of issues, especially for women: issues involving gender activism. According to J. K. Rowling, writing in the Times, Labour has fallen prey to that activism, while the Guardian reports that “many [women] are frustrated at failures to tackle inequality, the climate and Labour’s struggle to define a woman.”
I’ll just report on the “struggle to define a woman,” which, of course, is something I’ve followed regularly on this site, and which I’ve talked about in public.
The issue appears to be that Labour not only won’t define women as biological adult females, but wants to include trans women in that mix as well, adhering to the mantra “trans women are women.” The consequences include not only confusing people about biology, but, more important, giving trans women some privileges that entail equating them with biological women in every sense. And that’s what Rowling (and I) object to. Let me quote Rowling from the Times piece on what she believes, and what I adhere to as well:
For left-leaning women like us, this isn’t, and never has been, about trans people enjoying the rights of every other citizen, and being free to present and identify however they wish.
This is about the right of women and girls to assert their boundaries. It’s about freedom of speech and observable truth. It’s about waiting, with dwindling hope, for the left to wake up to the fact that its lazy embrace of a quasi-religious ideology is having calamitous consequences.
To clarify, trans women (and trans people) should indeed enjoy the rights (well, nearly all of them) of every citizen, with just a few exceptions, and can “present and identify however they wish,” Simple morality and civility dictate that.
The rights I don’t think that transwomen (the topic of both articles) should possess include competing in sports against biological women, being put in jail with biological women, and being able to act as rape counselors or staff in women’s shelters. That’s not a huge list of “non-rights” (there may be a few I haven’t thought of), but people like Rowling raise these issues because they are not fair to biological women. (I’ve discussed this at length, and won’t do so here.)
But my view on the few “nonrights” for trans women has predictably earned me opprobrium from gender activists, and I regularly get emails of denunciations calling me a “transphobe”, a TERF (Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist), and, in the latest one, simply “offensive”. Well, too bad for that. It’s free speech, Jake, and I can ignore it. Again, there are only few issues on which biological women’s rights trump transwomen’s rights.
I found Rowling’s piece because it’s in her latest pinned tweet:
With apologies to Strike fans waiting for book 8, I spent much of today writing this.https://t.co/j6rGaM8XZI
And you can read her Times piece by clicking below (I’ve given the archived link, which is also here.
Rowling is struggling because she’s always been a Labour voter, but now finds Labour imbued with gender activism, to the point where their politicians can’t or won’t define “woman,” and also consider transwomen completely equivalent to biological women in every respect, including the issues above.
What prompted Rowling’s piece was a book launch she recently attended. The book is called The Women Who Wouldn’t Wheest, with the last word being Scottish argot for “shut up”. In other words, it’s a series of chapters by “uppity” women, described by Amazon like this:
Through a collection of over thirty essays and photographs, some of the women involved tell the story of the five-year campaign to protect women’s sex-based rights. Author J.K. Rowling explains why she used her global reach to stand up for women. Leading SNP MP Joanna Cherry writes of how she risked her political career for her beliefs. Survivors of male violence who MSPs refused to meet are given the voice they were denied at Holyrood. Ash Regan MSP recounts what it was like to become the first government minister to resign on a question of principle since the SNP came to power in 2007. Former prison governor Rhona Hotchkiss charts how changes in prison policy in Scotland led to the controversy over Isla Bryson.
I’ll concentrate on Rowling’s feelings about Labour, which began wavering when Keir Starmer (the next PM) criticized Labour MP Rossie Duffield for saying that only women have a cervix. Apparently Starmer walked that back a bit, but recently averred that the statement that “only women have a cervix” was something “that shouldn’t be said”, and “wasn’t right.” That got Rowling’s hackles up, and she rattles off a series of similar views from other Labour Party members:
Unfortunately, by 2021, Starmer’s answer had to be seen in the context of a Labour Party that not merely saw the rights of women as disposable, but struggled to say what a woman was at all.
Take Anneliese Dodds, the shadow secretary for women and equalities, who, when asked what a woman is, said, it “depends on what the context is”. Take Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary: “I’m not going to get into rabbit holes on this”; Stella Creasy, Labour candidate for Walthamstow: “Do I think some women were born with penises? Yes … But they are now women and I respect that”; Emily Thornberry, the shadow attorney-general: “Women who are trans deserve to be recognised, and yes — therefore some of them will have penises. Frankly, I’m not looking up their skirts, I don’t care.” Dawn Butler, the former MP for Brent Central, actually announced on TV that “a child is born without sex at the beginning” (I choose to believe she meant the lesser of two insanities here: a sex, not that children really are delivered by stork.)
Some of this is almost funny, but loses its humour when real-world consequences of gender ideology arise. When asked whether violent sex offenders who transition should be rehoused in women’s prisons, Lisa Nandy, the shadow secretary for international development, said: “I think trans women are women, I think trans men are men, so I think they should be in the prison of their choosing.”
Rebecca Long-Bailey, the candidate for Salford, said female victims of male violence shouldn’t use their trauma “as an argument to discriminate against trans people” and vowed to change laws to stop women’s refuges excluding men who identify as women.
David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, called women like me “dinosaurs hoarding rights”. Lammy, too, has form on the vexed question of cervixes: “A cervix, I understand, is something you can have following various procedures and hormone treatments.” It’s very hard not to suspect that some of these men don’t know what a cervix is, but consider it too unimportant to Google.
Apparently, Duffield has received a bunch of hate for her views, but that’s free speech; what’s worse is that she’s gotten death threats so serious that she’s hired personal security and has been advised not to campaign in public. According to Rowling, Tony Blair said things almost identical to what Duffield maintains, but never got into trouble for them. Times have changed.
Yes, Rowling is a one-issue candidates about this, but remember that this is an issue she takes seriously, and, importantly, has the clout that renders her not only publicly respectable to many, but also makes her immune to cancellation. Her voice for the rights of biological women has been the loudest and most important. As to how she’ll vote tomorrow, she says this:
An independent candidate is standing in my constituency who’s campaigning to clarify the Equality Act.
Perhaps that’s where my X will have to go on July 4. As long as Labour remains dismissive and often offensive towards women fighting to retain the rights their foremothers thought were won for all time, I’ll struggle to support them. The women who wouldn’t wheesht didn’t leave Labour. Labour abandoned them.
And from the Guardian (click to read; it’s free):
A few quotes:
Many of the women who responded to an online callout or spoke to the Guardian expressed frustration with politics that had failed to address poverty, inequality, healthcare for women and children in particular, the climate and Brexit, and voiced acute fears for their and their families’ future:mothers of children with SEN (special educational needs) or mental health issues, mothers unable to afford childcare, or with adult children unable to buy homes, unpaid carers, women feeling exploited in low-paid jobs with no prospects of progression, and women with disabilities fearing harsher welfare conditions in future.
Scores also said they were concerned about rising extremism and political polarisation, misogyny, violence against women and girls, antisemitism and Islamophobia.
From an anonymous “Sharon”:
“However, the final straw for me is the issue of women’s rights,” she added.
Sharon was one of hundreds of women who shared that sex-based rights for women and girls was a main political concern of theirs this election.
Women from across the country, dozens of them economically disadvantaged or with disabilities, said they would abandon Labour, the Lib Dems or the Greens over this issue and vote either Conservative, Reform or spoil their ballot – particularly women from marginal areas Labour is hoping to gain, such as Lincoln, Darlington, Derbyshire, Warrington North and Truro and Falmouth.
Various said they felt “politically homeless” because of this issue, with Starmer having repeatedly referred to the debate over trans rights as “divisive and toxic” culture wars.
“This ain’t a culture war,” said Kerri Clarke, a 46-year-old stay-at-home mother from Hertfordshire. “I’ll be voting Conservative for the first time in my life, as the child of Labour activists.”
Clarke worries that the current Labour party is “utterly uninterested in women, our rights to safety and dignity”.
“This is about supporting our sisters in prisons and women’s shelters,” said Anne, 61, from Burnley, Labour’s “most winnable seat”.
Having always voted Labour, Anne said she might abstain for the first time unless she heard something positive from Labour on the protection of women’s and girls’ “safety and opportunities” this week.
Tracy, from Kent, in her 40s and usually a Labour voter, is likely to spoil her ballot. “I want to vote Labour but I can’t bear to support a party that so struggles to define the word woman.
“There are some contexts where biological sex matters, and women’s rights have been affected in recent years by a failure of law and policy to recognise this. Starmer wants this to go away, but it’s not going to go away.”
There are lots of other issues discussed, and some remind me of problems that centrist Democrats have with the newly progressive Biden, , including immigration, the women’s issues described above, and failure to hear the concerns of the middle class. And, like the “progressive” Democrats, Labour has embraced “woke” political positions that could drive voters into the hands of the right wing. This is distressing for Left centrists like me, but we don’t have a party acceptable enough to get our “X”. (I suppose mine will go for Biden—if he winds up being the candidate.)
I had hoped, at least that Labour had abandoned its patina of antisemitism, but that still seems to be a concern for many.
In today’s Jesus and Mo strip, called “adults”, the boys ask the barmaid to use their Divine Pronouns. She refuses, and, surprisingly, they give in easily. Or, as the artist wrote, “They took that well.” I guess they were thirsty.
