JAN MOIR: Why JK Rowling SHOULDN'T forgive the weaselly band-wagon jumpers she made famous

J.K. Rowling has said she won't forgive Harry Potter stars Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, who criticised her and 'cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women's hard-won rights' during the early stages of the toxic trans debates.

Nor will she accept any apology they might be willing to make, now that the Cass Review has been published — which ­vindicates her views on what she calls 'the catastrophe of child transition'.

Good for J.K. — why the hell should she make nice with these mini-tyrants, forever desperate to polish their woke credentials at her expense?

'There are all kinds of courage,' as Professor Dumbledore once said. 'It takes a great deal of ­bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends.'

Radcliffe and Watson and even Rupert Grint owe their entire careers to J.K. Rowling's creative brilliance. You might have hoped this would earn her if not their undying gratitude, then at least a bit of respect. But not a bit of it.

The weaselly bandwagon jumpers didn't hesitate to kick Rowling to the kerb when she aired her beliefs — widely held by the British ­public — that sex is real and has lived consequences, not least that women's lives are fundamentally shaped by being female.

We can all respect and be ­supportive of trans people living lives that feel authentic and ­comfortable to them, was her ­general feeling. However, not to the point where more is lost than gained. When children's well­being, women's safety, women's rights, the sanctity of female sports and all-women safe spaces are ­threatened and eroded by noisy pressure groups insisting upon trans rights above all rights. Then and now, Rowling's beliefs were popular, thoughtful, non-transphobic and admirable. Surely she deserved support from her former proteges?

Are you kidding? Radcliffe released a statement ('transgender women are women') and piously apologised to any Harry Potter fans who felt that 'their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished' by her stance. How utterly enraging of the little pipsqueak.

Then Hermione Granger actress Emma Watson was equally ­dismissive of Rowling's views. 'Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren't who they say they are,' she cheeped on her Twitter account.

Ron Weasley actor Rupert Grint followed along. 'I firmly stand with the trans community and echo the sentiments expressed by many of my peers. Trans women are women. Trans men are men. We should all be entitled to live with love and without judgment.'

But who was really being judgy here? It's not that these influential young actors are not entitled to their express their opinions — of course they are. But why feel they had to weigh in — uninvited! — on the beliefs of the woman who gave them their careers? The publication of the Cass Report this week has changed everything — and thank God for that.

The review, which primarily looked at gender identity services for under-18s, found that children in the UK have been let down by a lack of research and 'remarkably weak' evidence on medical interventions in gender care.

We all know what that means; the terrible, bleak reality of too many ruined young bodies, too many troubled lives blighted by parents, adults, teachers, misguided Harry Potter celebrities, nutcases and numerous people in organisations such as the BBC and the Guardian newspaper who supported this flawed ideology with all their hearts.

And by doing so, insidiously ­supported the transitioning of minors, encouraging young women to cut off their breasts and young boys to take puberty-­blocking hormones. Children who were too young to drink, smoke or vote were encouraged to make far-reaching, irreversible decisions about their sexuality and physical appearance. It was a kind of ­madness. And it is far from over, despite the screech of U-turns being heard from the progressive Left.

Look at Shadow Health ­Secretary Wes Streeting, who is thrashing about in the post-Cass sheep dip of his very personal ­conversion therapy.

Quicker than you can say 'forthcoming election' Mr Streeting has dramatically tried to disinfect himself from his formerly hardline stance on ­gender, admitting it was a mistake to insist 'all trans women are women'.

Yet his greasy mea culpa doesn't make it all right. It doesn't make him or his brutish views all right, nor does it ameliorate those who used their platforms to cheer on gender treatments that wrecked lives for ever.

Several transgender people were invited to comment on the news. BBC Radio 4's PM programme had Amelia Hansford, a trans­gender journalist for PinkNews. 'It is not going to stop the trans people who really need this care,' she said — and I hope that it doesn't.

But only when they are adults, old enough to make an informed decision themselves or at the very least pass stringent psychological assessments in ­paediatric gender clinics. BBC News had Hallie Clarke, who said that she knew she was trans from a young age because she had 'a Hannah Montana cake and a blonde wig'. And now she feels 'underminded' by the Cass Review.

Outspoken trans woman India Willoughby tweeted herself into a fury, expounding a belief that the Cass Review is an ­'ideologically-driven' report that ignores evidence and is trying to 'ban transitioning'.

I don't think that is true. And I don't think that is what anyone wants, on all sides of the ­argument. But I am growing tired of the ­militant trans lobby propounding the belief that 'psychologically' believing you are a woman automatically makes you a woman.

For being a woman is not just a thought — and it is offensive to many of us that biological males who think that wearing a wig, ­having breasts and a Hannah Montana birthday cake is all it takes, argument over.

The reality is much more ­complex, of course, but at least the Cass Review is a vindication of J.K. Rowling and common sense at last. No apology needed.

Do we still want Bridget? 

Bridget Jones is back — should we be pleased? Filming has started on the fourth book, Mad About The Boy, which was published a decade ago.

Renee Zellweger and Hugh Grant have signed up to reprise their roles with a release date set for early next year. We will rejoin Bridget in her 50s, a ­widowed mother of two who still doesn't know how to boil an egg without setting fire to the kitchen.

Darling Mark Darcy — played by Colin Firth in the earlier films — has gone to the great courtroom in the sky, so no more handsome brooding from him.

What I am wondering is has Bridget, the hapless patron saint of ditziness and failed relationships, overstayed her welcome? What seemed cute and amusing way back in the 1990s is just boring now.

Beanie Babies, grunge, crop tops, scrunchies and Hugh Grant being arrested for ­participating in lewd conduct in a public place? None of that is quite so funny any more. Except Hugh, of course. That will never stop being hilarious.

Brooklyn's 'anniversary love letter' that's sweet as a donut

Never underestimate the power of crafting. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has told of the 'freedom pinafore' she made for her daughter while she was imprisoned in Iran.

What a beautiful thing it is, an embroidered testament to the human spirit. She also spoke of the joy she took in sewing and knitting during her six-year incarceration.

Contemplative, meditative, practical and useful crafting skills are rarely given their due. I learned to sew and knit in ­primary school — and in later years was grateful, although I hated it at the time.

Sewing has not been on the national curriculum since 1995 — is there a place for it now? Or would today's little boys and girls find it demeaning and want to play Minecraft instead?

Try to see the good in your people, Paula

Is it because I is Christian? The moral superiority of Paula Vennells, who chose to believe that 800 sub-postmasters had been 'tempted' by piles of cash sitting around their workplace continues to be gasping.

Ms Vennells could not or would not see the glaringly obvious — that it was the Horizon software that was at fault, not the ­hundreds and hundreds of good people who worked for the Post Office.

Despite being a churchgoing Christian worshipper who believes in moral goodness, she was quick to believe in the widespread and wilful badness of her staff. Why does she behave like this? Only Paula and her God can know.

Joe Wicks says a diet of ultra-processed foods could be to blame for the surge in ADHD diagnoses.

Does he have a point? Certainly, poor diet and energy crashes must have a part to play in the focus and mental application of the young. The sugar highs from constant ingestion of Sunny Delight, Wagon Wheels, lollies, sweets, Turkey Twizzlers and the rest can only have a deleterious effect. Yet there is a suspicion that too many parents feel that getting an ADHD diagnosis is both a handy excuse and the answer to their troubles with Junior — when it is only the beginning of the problem.