Jump to content
Spam messages. Please stop reporting messages from Orange 15, Ivsa and Pupyh. They’ve been banned. ×

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

 

She really came under the spotlight after liking a tweet describing trans women as 'blackface actors' and 'sick fucks', describing transitioning as a fetish. When this was understandably noticed, she doubled down, getting her publishers to call it a 'middle-aged moment' and blaming fat thumbs. In her response essay to the situation, she went back and described the author of the tweet as 'an immensely brave young feminist'.

She has subsequently expressed views, amongst others, that basically, men will start dressing up and saying they identify as women to get into ladies' bathrooms, and that transitioning is being used a form of conversion therapy for kids.

There's more info here:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270787941275762689.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351

A minefield, and we create them daily!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 38
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Not really.  Just treat people with respect and you will find there is no issue.  

Thanks.you have articulated this better than I ever could. I just chose the wrong topic to try and make the point. I, like most people have no issues with Transexual people, I have friends who ha

I think it's gone far beyond that in some places unfortunately. Oh you didn't state your pronouns when you introduced yourself when everyone else is, are you actively trying to perpetuate systemic opp

Posted Images

Quote

Not really.  Just treat people with respect and you will find there is no issue.

I think it's gone far beyond that in some places unfortunately. Oh you didn't state your pronouns when you introduced yourself when everyone else is, are you actively trying to perpetuate systemic oppression? Oh you're still using ableist language in your vocabulary? As a cis-white person you clearly don't care about those that face constant discrimination in society.

Its hard to talk about these issues as they are such an integral part of peoples sense of identity (and often accompanied by a fair amount of trauma) so it makes sense that these conversations are emotional  - especially online with all the outrage and lack of empathy we see on the internet.  But I do find this hyper woke movement to be worrisome in that it completely shuts down any questioning of or expression of doubt about the ideas that are often very aggressively pushed on others. (To be clear I'm not talking about the NHS chestfeeding guidance which does feel very harmless.) There is something scary about a movement which feels so righteous in its goal to that it justifies permanently labelling and ostracising anyone who is in any way vocal about not sharing the same views. Professed 'social justice warriors' going as far as contacting employers to try and get their positions removed for the  'phobia/isms' they think these people have shown.


This whole issue with JK Rowling does feel more like an attempt to permanently label and vilify her as a transphobe than it does trying to understand the concerns she is vocalising that I'm sure are shared by many people too afraid to raise themselves - and rightly so given the reaction.

Even if there isn't an issue with women bathrooms as the example, at some point these socially enforced norms designed to be inclusive will clash with the inclusion of another group. Most sports for example, where trans-women have an overwhelming advantage over cis-women. But in this case maybe the solution would be to get rid of gender separated sports as the harm done perpetuating the idea of binary genders is greater than just having men and trans-women as the winners constantly, who am I to say.

I have a friend who subconsciously became convinced that the differences in strength between men and women were predominantly a product of patriarchal society and that all she needed to do was train a bit and do more male associated activities and she'd be as equally strong. Until reality caught up, testosterone - the anabolic steroid that it is means there's surprisingly little overlap between the strongest women and the weakest men.

 

As a side point I do wonder how much this huge rise in concern over ones gender and identity comes from an ever increasingly individualistic society.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Aislinn said:

This whole issue with JK Rowling does feel more like an attempt to permanently label and vilify her as a transphobe than it does trying to understand the concerns she is vocalising that I'm sure are shared by many people too afraid to raise themselves - and rightly so given the reaction.

Even if there isn't an issue with women bathrooms as the example, at some point these socially enforced norms designed to be inclusive will clash with the inclusion of another group. Most sports for example, where trans-women have an overwhelming advantage over cis-women. But in this case maybe the solution would be to get rid of gender separated sports as the harm done perpetuating the idea of binary genders is greater than just having men and trans-women as the winners constantly, who am I to say.

I have a friend who subconsciously became convinced that the differences in strength between men and women were predominantly a product of patriarchal society and that all she needed to do was train a bit and do more male associated activities and she'd be as equally strong. Until reality caught up, testosterone - the anabolic steroid that it is means there's surprisingly little overlap between the strongest women and the weakest men.

The issue is not simply with her initial messaging, it was how she doubled down on it.

One of the tweets she liked for example.

Image result for jkrowling tweet trans

The author of the following tweet, Rowling describes as 'an incredibly brave young feminist'.

EaK1rdAWkAEoeB2.jpg

This isn't cancel culture. This is a public figure, who, with their platform is spreading very harmful messaging.

On her answers page, she spreads blatant misinformation about gender transition, stating "dismisses the question of whether psychological therapy might help to relieve or resolve gender dysphoria and provides interventions without an adequate examination". Note that, this is entirely false. The referral period for a Gender Identity Clinic in the UK is in the region of years. And the evaluation, physical and mental, a trans person has to go through for hormones or surgery? Both significant. Statements like hers cannot be backed up, and thus can only be judged as harmful.

Of course, testosterone is one hell of a drug, look at how it is used and misused in sports, but you can actually test for those levels if you're so inclined. Your argument about testosterone becomes tricky when you have cisgender women with syndromes like PCOS, where testosterone can be significantly higher. There has been debate in the past whether women with those conditions should be excluded. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159262/

It is also important to note, that the levels of testosterone in a trans woman aim to match those of a cisgender woman. Whereas, per the previous link, the levels of a cisgender woman with PCOS can be 10 to 20 TIMES higher.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aislinn said:

I think it's gone far beyond that in some places unfortunately. Oh you didn't state your pronouns when you introduced yourself when everyone else is, are you actively trying to perpetuate systemic oppression? Oh you're still using ableist language in your vocabulary? As a cis-white person you clearly don't care about those that face constant discrimination in society.

Its hard to talk about these issues as they are such an integral part of peoples sense of identity (and often accompanied by a fair amount of trauma) so it makes sense that these conversations are emotional  - especially online with all the outrage and lack of empathy we see on the internet.  But I do find this hyper woke movement to be worrisome in that it completely shuts down any questioning of or expression of doubt about the ideas that are often very aggressively pushed on others. (To be clear I'm not talking about the NHS chestfeeding guidance which does feel very harmless.) There is something scary about a movement which feels so righteous in its goal to that it justifies permanently labelling and ostracising anyone who is in any way vocal about not sharing the same views. Professed 'social justice warriors' going as far as contacting employers to try and get their positions removed for the  'phobia/isms' they think these people have shown.


This whole issue with JK Rowling does feel more like an attempt to permanently label and vilify her as a transphobe than it does trying to understand the concerns she is vocalising that I'm sure are shared by many people too afraid to raise themselves - and rightly so given the reaction.

Even if there isn't an issue with women bathrooms as the example, at some point these socially enforced norms designed to be inclusive will clash with the inclusion of another group. Most sports for example, where trans-women have an overwhelming advantage over cis-women. But in this case maybe the solution would be to get rid of gender separated sports as the harm done perpetuating the idea of binary genders is greater than just having men and trans-women as the winners constantly, who am I to say.

I have a friend who subconsciously became convinced that the differences in strength between men and women were predominantly a product of patriarchal society and that all she needed to do was train a bit and do more male associated activities and she'd be as equally strong. Until reality caught up, testosterone - the anabolic steroid that it is means there's surprisingly little overlap between the strongest women and the weakest men.

 

As a side point I do wonder how much this huge rise in concern over ones gender and identity comes from an ever increasingly individualistic society.

 

Thanks.you have articulated this better than I ever could. I just chose the wrong topic to try and make the point.

I, like most people have no issues with Transexual people, I have friends who have gone through the whole process and during the 80s this was a very brave thing to do. There does seem to be a militant wing though which seems to be looking for something more than equality, a bit like the BLM movement. I'm happy with equality, equal rights, opportunities and treatment. I'm against attempts to manipulate things to favour any group of people over another, no matter who they are! 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it wasn’t my intention to disparage your inital post about the chestfeeding! Reading the snopes link posted did give it some extra context to this specific case however, which it turns out doesn’t actually seem too representative of the wider issue. But I think it’s a really interesting topic, and I took the opportunity to share my current thoughts on the wider situation. I completely echo what you said about the militancy of this movement, even if its just a very small minority who are actually like that.

I feel I should also clearly state like you did that the issue isn’t at all with trans-people, or wanting them to feel less accepted by society whatsoever. I think a lot of the pushback on people who raise doubt about the direction the woke movement is going is that they must not care about or are actually just trans/x/phobic themselves and this is a shame. I have a lot of respect for trans people and the decision they have made in spite of the significant social challenges.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

The issue is not simply with her initial messaging, it was how she doubled down on it.

I must admit I don’t know the specifics of the JK Rowling case but I did follow it unfold on twitter.

Liking those tweets is unfortunate.
However I don’t know how much of it should really be called doubling down. Of course, she didn’t apologise profusely and say that she’s learned tremendously of the error in her ways and right this moment she would donate £100,000 to some trans charity, like many public figures do when they are called out on these topics.

Instead she responded with a balanced and respectful response clearly outlining her thinking and concerns.

Now it’s totally fair to disagree with her position, maybe she really doesn’t have the facts right, in which case it should be simple to just point out the wrong things with evidence etc. In fact, isn’t it a great opportunity to lay out why her point of view is wrong, given its surely not just her that has that opinion?

What I feel is far more harmful messaging is the idea that people shouldn’t be allowed openly discuss their thoughts on a particular topic in a respectful way, right or wrong, no matter their platform because the bad ideas could somehow influence people and spread.
And that the right thing to do is to publicly display disgust and contempt for those who even dare bring up those topics - that’ll definitely have the desired effect of shutting up anybody else with similar doubts and force those ideas to fester in private forums instead.

Almost all I’ve seen has just been huge waves of outrage and public denunciation, people claiming they’ll never read her books again, actively burning her books etc. Even if this isn’t a massive overreaction, is the outcome of this really a more respectful and enlightened society?

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aislinn said:

I must admit I don’t know the specifics of the JK Rowling case but I did follow it unfold on twitter.

Liking those tweets is unfortunate.
However I don’t know how much of it should really be called doubling down. Of course, she didn’t apologise profusely and say that she’s learned tremendously of the error in her ways and right this moment she would donate £100,000 to some trans charity, like many public figures do when they are called out on these topics.

Instead she responded with a balanced and respectful response clearly outlining her thinking and concerns.

Now it’s totally fair to disagree with her position, maybe she really doesn’t have the facts right, in which case it should be simple to just point out the wrong things with evidence etc. In fact, isn’t it a great opportunity to lay out why her point of view is wrong, given its surely not just her that has that opinion?

What I feel is far more harmful messaging is the idea that people shouldn’t be allowed openly discuss their thoughts on a particular topic in a respectful way, right or wrong, no matter their platform because the bad ideas could somehow influence people and spread.
And that the right thing to do is to publicly display disgust and contempt for those who even dare bring up those topics - that’ll definitely have the desired effect of shutting up anybody else with similar doubts and force those ideas to fester in private forums instead.

Almost all I’ve seen has just been huge waves of outrage and public denunciation, people claiming they’ll never read her books again, actively burning her books etc. Even if this isn’t a massive overreaction, is the outcome of this really a more respectful and enlightened society?

 

Well, like we pointed out, some of her statements. With her response piece to the debacle, she made some very bold, and untrue claims. See my previous post. Note that nothing is cited, she claims herself to be an adjudicator on the subject. https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

Her post above for example, references an alarming number of people detransitioning, the true figure being <1% in the UK, as an example. She makes reference to people growing out of their gender dysphoria in droves in a number of studies, but cites none.

She essentially states that trans right are a threat to the treatment of illnesses such as MS.

She gives the notion that trans people are being tricked into their identities, and at one point says she'd be trans but she instead got through it by reading and music.

Hell, she even alienates women who don't menstruate in one of her tweets.

By the end of the linked piece, she basically says that trans people are an essential sacrifice for the safety of cis-women. Her point basically boiling down to, what if someone who is just a man in a dress tries to sneak into the bathroom to attack women? They could do this, because they could declare they're trans and start using ladies' spaces. Now, also note there has been no increase in sex-crime in any country with self-identification laws.

 

 

Essentially, her views seem to revolve around the fact that trans women could just be predators trying to attack cis women. So we must assume any transgender-identifying woman is a risk to cis women. Not acknowledging the fact that actually, cis men tend to be the aggressors to both cisgender and transgender women.

 

'People shouldn't be allowed to openly discuss their thoughts on a particular topic'. Would you condone similar statements about sexuality or religion? What if a public figure came out and said that actually, maybe people wouldn't be gay if they just got some more psychological treatment? I'm fairly sure there'd be a lot of backlash there too.

In JK Rowling's case, remember, that Harry Potter was very much a staple of the younger generations, those of which are now in their teens, 20s and even 30s. When an author of a series you idolised comes out and says things that are fundamentally against who you are, you can understand the visceral reaction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The important thing to remember, in most circumstances. People just want to crack on with life, without getting murdered, abused or attacked.

See the trans panic defense. People have used that as a plea for murdering a partner who transpires to be transgender. In the US, the bills to make that defense illegal failed.

It's not about being woke, or hip and trendy, it's literally just acknowledging that other people are having different experiences, but, in the case of the bathroom debate, everyone wants to piddle in peace. That's it.

Nobody is trying to deprive cisgender people of any rights or freedoms. Nobody is trying to turn people LGBTQ. All that's wanted is a way for people falling under that umbrella to be able to seek the help, support and safety they need and deserve as much as anyone else.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2021 at 2:03 PM, Max Power said:

There does seem to be a militant wing though which seems to be looking for something more than equality, a bit like the BLM movement. I'm happy with equality, equal rights, opportunities and treatment. I'm against attempts to manipulate things to favour any group of people over another, no matter who they are! 

Whenever there's a militant white person, or a militantly heterosexual person, or a militantly Christian person, they get dismissed as an individual moron. When there's a militant black-rights person, or a militant trans person, or a militant gay person, their existence gets used frequently in threads like these to disparage the movement as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HeliX said:

Whenever there's a militant white person, or a militantly heterosexual person, or a militantly Christian person, they get dismissed as an individual moron. When there's a militant black-rights person, or a militant trans person, or a militant gay person, their existence gets used frequently in threads like these to disparage the movement as a whole.

I don't think so, all would be considered in the same light? In the context I used 'militant' I was referring not to any individual but the aims of the militant tendency. 

 

Edited by Max Power
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2021 at 5:43 PM, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Well, like we pointed out, some of her statements. With her response piece to the debacle, she made some very bold, and untrue claims. See my previous post. Note that nothing is cited, she claims herself to be an adjudicator on the subject. https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

Her post above for example, references an alarming number of people detransitioning, the true figure being <1% in the UK, as an example. She makes reference to people growing out of their gender dysphoria in droves in a number of studies, but cites none.

She essentially states that trans right are a threat to the treatment of illnesses such as MS.

She gives the notion that trans people are being tricked into their identities, and at one point says she'd be trans but she instead got through it by reading and music.

Hell, she even alienates women who don't menstruate in one of her tweets.

By the end of the linked piece, she basically says that trans people are an essential sacrifice for the safety of cis-women. Her point basically boiling down to, what if someone who is just a man in a dress tries to sneak into the bathroom to attack women? They could do this, because they could declare they're trans and start using ladies' spaces. Now, also note there has been no increase in sex-crime in any country with self-identification laws.

 

 

Essentially, her views seem to revolve around the fact that trans women could just be predators trying to attack cis women. So we must assume any transgender-identifying woman is a risk to cis women. Not acknowledging the fact that actually, cis men tend to be the aggressors to both cisgender and transgender women.

 

'People shouldn't be allowed to openly discuss their thoughts on a particular topic'. Would you condone similar statements about sexuality or religion? What if a public figure came out and said that actually, maybe people wouldn't be gay if they just got some more psychological treatment? I'm fairly sure there'd be a lot of backlash there too.

In JK Rowling's case, remember, that Harry Potter was very much a staple of the younger generations, those of which are now in their teens, 20s and even 30s. When an author of a series you idolised comes out and says things that are fundamentally against who you are, you can understand the visceral reaction.

She made some really valid points.

Far too much made out of it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TerryFuchwit said:

She made some really valid points.

Far too much made out of it.

She couldn't back up any of her points though, at best, she occasionally alludes to materials, and that's it.

Nor does any validity excuse her fundamental view that a transgender woman is liable to be a pervert in a dress.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...