The press watchdog has been branded “outrageous” and accused of having a “chilling effect” on free speech after it ruled that the phrase “a man who claims to be a woman” is discriminatory. The Telegraph has more (note some sex-specific terms in the below have been corrected).
An article in the Spectator magazine about Nicola Sturgeon was investigated by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) after it described a trans author as “a man who claims to be a woman”.
Author Juno Dawson complained the description amounted to discrimination. Ipso has now issued a rare ruling that it breached the Editor’s Code of Practice and forced the Spectator to publish the ruling on its website.
Michael Gove, the new editor of the Spectator who was not at the magazine at the time of publication, described the ruling as “outrageous”.
“I am in no doubt this is an outrageous decision, offensive to the principle of free speech and chilling in its effect on free expression,” he said.
Free speech campaigners such as MP Rosie Duffield and Maya Forstater have also defended the article and criticised attempts to prevent authors expressing gender-critical views.
Mr. Dawson complained over the reference within an online comment piece published in May by Gareth Roberts, titled: ‘The sad truth about “saint” Nicola Sturgeon.’ Ipso said the comment article breached clause 12 of the Code, which deals with discrimination.
The article focused largely on the former Scottish First Minister’s stance on transgender rights and at one point described Ms. Sturgeon as having been interviewed “by writer Juno Dawson, a man who claims to be a woman”.
Mr. Dawson, who writes young adult novels, was legally declared a woman by the gender recognition panel in 2018. The author complained the description in the article was both inaccurate and discriminatory, and the Spectator had deliberately misgendered him with the intention to cause offence, which Ipso upheld.
Writing in the Spectator, Mr. Gove set out a strident defence of Mr. Roberts’s article, arguing the journalist was exercising his right to free speech.
He said: “When Gareth Roberts wrote that Juno Dawson is a man who claims to be a woman, he was exercising his right to free speech and indeed expressing a view that many would consider a straightforward truth.
“Dawson may have a gender recognition certificate but no piece of paper, whatever it may say, can alter biological reality. Parliament may pass laws, but they cannot abolish Dawson’s Y chromosome.” …
Ipso required the Spectator to publish the finding online to remedy the breach of the code.
The Spectator had argued it had not breached the Code because the reference to Mr. Dawson’s gender was “was relevant, as it put the remarks made by Ms. Sturgeon into context”. It “did not consider this to be either prejudicial or pejorative”.
But the Ipso finding, published on Tuesday, stated that the language used was “personally belittling and demeaning toward the complainant, in a way that was both pejorative and prejudicial of the complainant due to her [sic] gender identity, and was not justified by the columnist’s right to express his views on the broader issues of a person’s sex and gender identity given that this targeted her [sic] as an individual”. …
Toby Young, the Director of the Free Speech Union, told the Telegraph that it was not the press regulator’s role to “enforce gender identity ideology”.
He said: “Ipso is supposed to make sure newspaper and magazine articles are fair and accurate. It shouldn’t be in the business of trying to enforce gender identity ideology.
“Punishing the Spectator for publishing something factually accurate about a trans woman risks turning it into a laughing stock.” …
Ipso did not uphold Mr. Dawson’s complaints of inaccuracy or harassment.
Worth reading in full.
In a separate leading article, the Telegraph, which is regulated by Ipso, called the ruling a “regrettable overstep“.
The issue of gender identity is highly contested, and Roberts should have been entitled to express his view. By deciding to rule in favour of Dawson on this matter, Ipso risks a chilling effect on the ability of gender critical voices to express their views and make the strongest arguments available to them, including the argument that a legal change of gender does not alter biological reality.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.