The debate over whether you can separate the artist from the art has never been more present following a number of recent focuses on the question, not least with JK Rowling and Harry Potter. However, if we widen the lens further, it reveals a more significant topic: how the Overton window on what is acceptable to say has shifted dramatically in recent years, especially when it pertains to Trans+ rights.
The Polari Prize for LGBTQ+ writing “paused” its competition this year amid boycotts as it stood by the longlisting of author John Boyne, who self-declared as “a fellow Terf” in support of JK Rowling.
The dispute arose amid a defence that it could respect and amplify the works of Trans+ people, alongside people who held prejudice towards the community because Boyne’s views were simply a “differen[ce of] position”. But many people took disdain to this, not least because Boyne went on to say in response to the scandal that the rights of “cis women … must take precedence” over the rights of trans women, “if” they “come into conflict”.
Many feel that the Polari Prize, who consider themselves “committed to supporting trans rights”, have abandoned this commitment by refusing to remove Boyne from the longlist, even at the cost of this year’s award. But all of this is just perhaps one example of a bigger political shift that goes far beyond the Polari Prize.
The ‘Overton Window’, a concept which refers to the spectrum of positions that are acceptable within polite, democratic society, and by extension the positions which aren’t acceptable.
Most people would probably accept that some controversial opinions are covered under freedom of expression, but some are so hateful and damaging as societies we have learned to consider them unacceptable hate speech.
But what’s less obvious is the way that the distinction between these two can shift over time. In 2017 when Theresa May attended the PinkNews awards, she said that “transphobia must be defeated”. It seemed obvious that statements against trans rights were extremist hate speech and that you’d have to be pretty far right to disagree to with the current leader of the Conservative Party.
However, since the Premiership shifted to Boris Johnson, Conservative leaders have increasingly reversed May’s position and spearheaded many anti-trans policies. This culminates in the current leader, Kemi Badenoch, who has made being staunchly gender critical a key part of her political platform. And even the Labour party, formerly outwardly progressive, have shifted in line with the Supreme Court’s decision to legally enshrine biological sex without consulting a single trans person. The Overton Window has shifted so quickly that in 2018, it was a political scandal for Badenoch to say trans women aren’t women; in 2025, it is the official ruling policy of the UK government.
"The Overton Window has shifted so quickly that in 2018, it was a political scandal for Badenoch to say trans women aren’t women; in 2025, it is the official ruling policy of the UK government."
Writer
We can also track how this shift plays out in culture as well. Returning to Boyne, it’s interesting to note that one of his first forays into criticism of the trans community was a 2019 Irish Times article where he advocates for a hierarchy whereby trans men are labelled as such but cis men are unqualifiedly “men”, suggesting their manliness is the more real of the two. Yet here he also found it necessary to take aim at Graham Linehan, the leading Gender Critical pundit of that era, for “masking intolerance by promoting himself as a champion of women”. It’s hard to imagine Boyne having an issue with such a thing now, after he did the very same thing in his response to the Polari Prize fallout.
It could be argued that this shift occurred because Boyne has personally grown more confident in his transphobia, not because society around him has become more receptive – but the point here is that both processes are inextricably intertwined. When it comes to the Overton Window, it doesn’t matter what one individual believes so much as whether that individual feels comfortable expressing that belief, depending on its relative similarity to the beliefs of those around them.
It is precisely this relationship that gives rise to the ‘Paradox of Tolerance’, a political concept which holds that a society must defend its progressive and tolerant nature by refusing to tolerate bigoted ideas before they become the new norm.
Some members of the queer community would argue that trying to remove the platform that people like Boyne have to spread their views constitutes “illiberal and undemocratic … bullying”. Paul Burston, the Polari Prize’s founder, was a signatory of an open letter putting forward exactly that view.
But what those judges and writers who pulled out of the prize understand is that the more we tolerate statements with transphobic implications, the easier it becomes to be openly transphobic as the Overton window is pushed further and further open.
If someone is openly racist, or sexist, or denies climate change or the Holocaust, we hardly ever think that such people should be longlisted for a literary prize that openly seeks to ‘amplify’ the voices of those it selects. Why shouldn’t the same apply to transphobes?
There are, of course, many queer issues that do need to be discussed and debated right now. But when it comes to the value of trans people’s rights, institutions with large platforms might more thoughtfully consider which perspectives they’re creating space for inside the Overton window.
This article is part of a QueerAF and Inclusive Journalism Cymru partnership dedicated to uplifting Welsh LGBTQIA+ emerging and marginalised journalists.
You can follow Gwen on Instagram.
Sign up to QueerAF’s weekly newsletter or become a member.
