Council bans feminist writer for gender views

Julie Bindel claims that ‘misogynistic’ activists cited trans rights to stop her talk on male violence

COUNCIL chiefs have cancelled a talk by Julie Bindel, a feminist writer, on protecting women from male violence because it contradicts their position on trans rights.

Nottingham city council said yesterday that allowing Ms Bindel to speak at one of its libraries would violate its commitment to being an “inclusive city”.

Citing its allegiance to the campaign group Stonewall, it said it was preventing the event from going ahead owing to Ms Bindel’s views on trans rights and in support of the city’s LGBT community.

The activist, who is gay, has become a target of elements of the radical trans movement after voicing concerns about transgender athletes taking part in female sports, allowing transgender patients onto female-only hospital wards, and the removal of “female” and “women” from menstrual products. Meanwhile, Stonewall has had ties severed with partner organisations after criticism of its aggressively pro-trans stance.

Ms Bindel wrote on Twitter: “I was asked to speak to (predominantly working class/young) women about feminist activism to end male violence in Nottingham. Just now, we have been informed that the talk is cancelled.

“Why? Because misogynistic men’s rights activists (masquerading as supporters of trans rights) have badgered & harassed the venue to the point where they could take no more inconvenience.”

Ms Bindel said the event took place on the street outside the library.

Adele Williams, deputy leader of Nottingham city council, and Neghat Khan, portfolio holder for neighbourhoods, safety and inclusion, said: “While it was known that the event was going to be from a feminist perspective, no information around the speaker’s views on transgender rights was brought to the library service’s attention.

“Once we became aware of this, we took the decision to cancel the booking. We did not want the use of one of our library buildings to be seen as implicit support for views held by the speaker which fly in the face of our position on transgender rights.”

The decision was criticised by Rosie Duffield, the Labour MP, who tweeted ironically: “A library banning a woman writer with a history of writing about women’s rights. How very progressive.”

Others have speculated Nottingham city council may have acted unlawfully in excluding someone based on their belief. It comes a year after the landmark case which found that saying trans women are not real women is a belief that “must be tolerated”. Last December University College London became the first university formally to cut ties with Stonewall, saying its membership of its programmes could inhibit academic freedom.

However, the charity’s links with public sector bodies remain strong. This month a whistleblower said an NHS trust, Lewisham and Greenwich, was awarding companies vying for healthcare contracts higher marks in its bidding process if they adopt Stonewall’s stance on trans issues.

Yesterday, Nottingham City Council cancelled a talk due to be given by the writer Julie Bindel, citing her views on the trans debate. Taking its lead from Stonewall, the charity that has pushed employers and institutions towards promoting an extreme approach to gender issues as a settled matter, the Council said it did not want the event to be seen as “implicit support for views held by the speaker”.

This is chilling. Ms Bindel is no reactionary: she is, by her own description, a radical, feminist lesbian and her argument against the agenda of Stonewall et al is that it threatens to undo victories won by women since the 1960s, such as the protection of female-only spaces in prisons and shelters. Moreover, many readers will find it bizarre that a public authority can cancel speaking events on the basis of ideology, deciding what can or cannot be heard, even if those views are perfectly lawful. Other feminist events have been disrupted violently and there have been serious efforts to destroy the careers of those who are critical of one particular school of thought – notably JK Rowling, whose opinions on gender were ludicrously described by a BBC journalist as “very unpopular” (the BBC later ruled this was misleading).

Some of the more aggressive activists want to give the impression that there is no debate to be had and that anyone who dissents from their line is a bigot, which is not only a dangerous infringement on free speech but damages their own cause in the long-run. If there is no opportunity for dialogue then there is no basis upon which to build sympathy and understanding on such a deeply sensitive subject.