Ryan T. Anderson Responds to Amazon’s Controversial Decision to Relist His Book on Transgender Issues

Ryan T. Anderson Responds to Amazon’s Controversial Decision to Relist His Book on Transgender Issues

Conservative author and scholar Ryan T. Anderson recently reacted to Amazon’s decision to reinstate his 2018 book, “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment,” after it had been removed from the online retailer’s marketplace for four years. This unexpected turnaround has attracted significant attention and debate regarding political influence on corporate policies.

A Political Shift in Book Accessibility

Anderson characterized Amazon’s actions as a purely political maneuver, stating, “I think this is purely a political move. Four years ago, with the Biden administration, they thought that they were on the right side of history. And now, four years later, they see that they’re not.” This reflection highlights shifting attitudes within major corporations as they navigate the current political landscape.

He further speculated that Amazon may have sought to avoid the scrutiny of the Federal Trade Commission, suggesting possible motives behind the company’s decision-making process.

The Impact of the Book

At its launch in 2018, “When Harry Became Sally” quickly ascended to the top of two of Amazon’s bestseller lists. The book seeks to provide thoughtful discourse regarding transgender issues, aiming to foster a balanced public policy on gender identity. It also examines the potential human costs associated with deviating from traditional understandings of human nature.

Background on Amazon’s Previous Decision

Amazon initially removed the book from its platform in February 2021, closely following President Biden’s inauguration. In a letter to Republican senators, Amazon’s Vice President of Public Policy, Brian Huseman, defended the decision, stating that they do not sell books that frame LGBTQ+ identity as mental illness.

Anderson strongly refuted Amazon’s claims, asserting that his book does not categorize LGBTQ identity as a mental illness. He emphasized, “There was nothing remotely hateful in the book,” and pointed out its success and the positive reception it received from academics at Ivy League institutions.

Federal Scrutiny and Political Ramifications

Despite the book’s relisting on Amazon’s platform, Anderson noted that the company never communicated directly with him regarding the reasons behind the decision. He speculated that Amazon’s fluctuating policies may reflect the prevailing political climate in Washington. He stated, “I do think professionally, the attempt here was to discredit me because of the timing of when the book was banned.” This claim underscores the potential entanglement of corporate decisions with political pressures.

Anderson also highlighted a critical moment in 2021 when the book was delisted right before a scheduled vote on the Equality Act in Congress. As a prominent critic of this legislation, Anderson believes that his opposition may have played a role in Amazon’s initial decision.

The Role of Government in Corporate Policy

The corporate landscape shifted significantly during the Trump administration. Under Trump, the emphasis on biological definitions of sex led Anderson’s organization to press Amazon for his book’s reinstatement. He suspects that the recent reversals in Amazon’s policies stem from the current Republican control in the Senate and the Federal Trade Commission, stating that these developments could exert pressure on Amazon to reassess its approach.

Political Reactions from Lawmakers

Prominent politicians like Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee, and Andrew Ferguson, chair of the Federal Trade Commission, have expressed interest in the implications surrounding Anderson’s situation. Their involvement signifies broader political ramifications regarding corporate content policies and freedom of speech.

Amazon’s Justification for Relisting

After relisting the book, Amazon released a formal statement discussing its decision-making process. The statement highlighted the inherent difficulties in balancing free speech against content potentially considered hate speech. It acknowledged that the removal of Anderson’s book was not an easy choice and was subject to intense internal debates.

Amazon stated, “Since then, many other retailers have continued to sell this book, and we’ve continued to receive feedback from customers that the ideas presented in this book, while controversial, should be available for those who want to read and understand the perspective of its author.” This acknowledgment emphasizes the evolving discussions surrounding content and customer feedback.

Broader Implications for Conservative Media

Anderson’s case also intersects with the recent unbanning of the film “The War on Children” by conservative filmmaker Robby Starbuck. Starbuck remarked that the availability of the film reflects a shift in momentum for conservative content, asserting that prominent companies are becoming wary of associating with perceived censorship driven by liberal ideologies.

Despite the changes in Amazon’s policies, Anderson remains critical of the company for not issuing an apology regarding the initial removal of his book. He stated, “It just strikes me that this was more of a political move on Amazon’s part. They haven’t apologized. Rather than apologizing, saying that we got it wrong four years ago, they make it seem like it’s a tough call.” This sentiment encapsulates the ongoing tension between corporate decision-making and political accountability.

A Call for Accountability and Transparency

As the debate surrounding content moderation continues, many are calling for greater accountability and transparency from major corporations like Amazon. The relisting of politically charged literature opens up discussions about the responsibilities of retail giants in navigating controversial topics while ensuring free expression.

While Anderson’s relisted book may be available again on the Amazon platform, the ongoing conversations about the intersection of politics and corporate policy remain critical. The move raises questions about who gets to decide what constitutes acceptable content and how these decisions can impact broader societal dialogues.

As discussions evolve, the implications of Amazon’s actions and the responses from stakeholders will be essential to monitor, illustrating the complex relationship between the marketplace of ideas and the ever-changing political landscape.