J.K. Rowling defends speaking out on trans issues

[MonsterPaws 2,631]

2 hours ago, MelbHawker said:

I may not fully agree with her perspective, but I do applaud her for standing her ground and actually addressing the backlash with her own knowledge, experiences and reasoning. It gives context to what she said, and all those who have jumped on the sudden hate bandwagon for her should sit down and read into what she said from her own perspective.

Completely agree.

 Having read through the essay, one big issue I have with JKR's view is that she mentions sudden spikes in transitioning youth. The issue here is confusing correlation with causation. She mentions Tumblr, Reddit and other social media platforms as echo chambers that might pressure confused youth into transitioning. While she might have a point, it could be that the rise of awareness and recognition of trans issues made people realize they themselves are trans, leading to spikes in trans cases.

But that's one takeaway I have. Too tired to read through it again but I'm definitely interested in this whole JKR vs Trans debacle and how it will turn out. I really hope Contrapoints comments on the situation. She's the voice of reason on YouTube imo when it comes to LGBTQ issues.

^ This video is a good overview of the Gender Critical community/mindset and is a good watch after reading JKR's essay. Rowling explicitly uses the term:

"None of the gender critical women I’ve talked to hates trans people; on the contrary. Many of them became interested in this issue in the first place out of concern for trans youth, and they’re hugely sympathetic towards trans adults who simply want to live their lives, but who’re facing a backlash for a brand of activism they don’t endorse." - Rowling.

She mentions having never talked to gender critical women who hate trans people yet also received hundreds of emails of people sharing their experiences and commentary (I highly doubt JKR hasn't seen a single gender critical comment that disparages trans people but oh well. I'll give her benefit of the doubt).

 

 

[Fish 6,086]

1 minute ago, GagaSine said:

This is literally one of the most bigoted websites I have seen in a long time, and I used to go on 4chan, voat, and kiwifarms 

then leave. go discuss things with people who always agree with you! 

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, Fish said:

then leave. go discuss things with people who always agree with you! 

This isn‘t about agreeing, it‘s about human rights. 

[DrVictor 82]

1 hour ago, OG Gaga Stan said:

The fact that she turned off replies so that people can't criticize her ignorance... That feature was a mistake. 

EDIT: It's just her pretending that she's a victim, complaining about people saying mean things to her on Twitter, and fear-mongering about how dangerous trans activism is. Again.

You're worth hundreds of millions of dollars and if you didn't want to receive criticism like this from trans activists, you could've kept all of your opinions on trans people to yourself. Just log off. It's not that hard.

you mean, those "trans activists" who call her B ** CH, WH ** E? just for stating that sex is real (which is a fact). that's very progressive of all of you. you are so progressive that your progressiveness proceeded to misogyny

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Pennywise said:

But you're talking as if trans people OWE transphobes anything. They don't. They don't owe them civility, just like I do not owe any civility at all to homophobes. If ANYONE is insulted by being likened to trans people, they are a transphobe, period. I know I would not be, because, you know, there is nothing wrong with it. 

This "people feel like trying to erase women and dehumanize them" is just transphobe demagogy, and is just trying to legitimize their transphobia, and I will not let that slide. 

Of course trans people don't owe anything to anybody. I think you can be civil and have an open conversation without calling people with these terms. I only mentioned that, doesn't mean the whole movement is like this, it's kinda similar to feminism and how some went too far with it and started insulting men and becoming men-hater. So in that case and in that CONTEXT it wasn't transphobia to say that calling women "menstruators" and "people with vulvas" are dehumanizing, because it is. If you believe it's not and it was the right thing to do then maybe I'll be extra like you and call you a misogyne. But that's now how it works is it

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

No one is trying to erase women, they are trying to be inclusive of trans men & nb ppl and not exclude trans women from so called ‘women’s healthcare’ why is that so hard to understand 

Again this was in the context of calling women 'menstruators'. It's dehumanizing, do u not agree?

[Fish 6,086]

human rights. as if as soon as you throw that word your opinion becomes the only valid one. sorry, human rights are complex issues. even if i agree with you on the majority of your points, your rhetoric is actually dangerous. sorry not sorry 

[shame 25,360]

1 hour ago, Brecht said:

A man who wants to sexually assault a woman will not stop because “he’s a man and can’t go in the female bathroom”. A criminal is a criminal, he doesn’t need to pretend he’s a woman. That’s the most ****ing absurd argument I’ve ever heard.

Exactly. It’s absolutely unfathomable to imagine a scenario where an individual transitions just so they can assault someone. At that point it isn’t even a trans issue, it’s a sexual assault issue.

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, KanyeWest said:

Again this was in the context of calling women 'menstruators'. It's dehumanizing, do u not agree?

First, you are lying the context was calling people who menstruate ‘people who  menstruate’, not ‘menstruators’, so no it is not dehumanizing.

Secondly it is a way to include trans men in discussions of reproductive health bc they may still menstruate and require products/healthcare/information that doesn’t invalidate their gender identity, without excluding trans women from the category ‘women’ bc trans women don’t have uteri/menstrual cycles.

 

 

[selenalavigne 1,256]

hmmm

 

 

 

[GagaSine 7,464]

2 minutes ago, Fish said:

human rights. as if as soon as you throw that word your opinion becomes the only valid one. sorry, human rights are complex issues. even if i agree with you on the majority of your points, your rhetoric is actually dangerous. sorry not sorry 

How is it dangerous to ask a famous person to not spread transphobic misinformation and lies and ignore what trans people are saying?

[Fish 6,086]

7 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

This isn‘t about agreeing, it‘s about human rights. 

human rights. as if as soon as you throw that word your opinion becomes the only valid one. sorry, human rights are complex issues. even if i agree with you on the majority of your points, your rhetoric is actually dangerous. sorry not sorry 

[Guest]

Just now, GagaSine said:

First, you are lying the context was calling people who menstruate ‘people who  menstruate’, not ‘menstruators’, so no it is not dehumanizing.

Secondly it is a way to include trans men in discussions of reproductive health bc they may still menstruate and require products/healthcare/information that doesn’t invalidate their gender identity, without excluding trans women from the category ‘women’ bc trans women don’t have uteri/menstrual cycles.

 

 

"But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive. Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning"

This was her quote. 

Okay if u call trans men menstruators and they're fine with it, then it makes sense. But for women it would be pretty negative 

[Fish 6,086]

Just now, GagaSine said:

How is it dangerous to ask a famous person to not spread transphobic misinformation and lies and ignore what trans people are saying?

your rhetoric is dangerous. You're actually saying that we cannot have a debate on this because it's about "human rights". Yes it is about human rights. It is also about science, psychology and a bunch of other stuff. It's very complex, and sometimes emotional. People should be allowed to express views and opinions that are contrary to the more aggressive, majority, opinion. The way you're approaching this is actually restricting the free exchange of ideas and opinions in a democratic form of society. You may be right, but you can't always assume you'll be.

[Suuus 5,632]

15 minutes ago, Arturo said:

JK Rowling’s essay on why she isn’t transphobic (even though she totally is) reminds me of certain essays on this forum of people explaining they’re not racist  

Are you referring to StrawBerryblond