What has JK Rowling said or done that’s transphobic

pick me is a misogynistic insult.

It is not remotely misogynistic to recognise that trans people’s experiences are real.

On the other hand calling a woman a 'pick me' because they disagree with you, is a highly misogynistic way of dismissing her.

What, as misogynistic as claiming woman is just a feeling in a man’s head? Or that women don’t deserve single sex spaces because some men want to go into those spaces? You’re the one arguing a man can be a woman if he “feels” like one so I’d go easy on calling other people misogynistic if I were you….

pick me is a misogynistic insult.

Me too, most of the time. I find the second hand embarrassment for the Carla Denyers, Kate Nashs, Deborah Francis-White pick me women of this world too much to stomach sometimes though.

Is believing that "transwomen are men" or that "transwomen are not women" an example of holding transphobic ideas?

Me too, most of the time. I find the second hand embarrassment for the Carla Denyers, Kate Nashs, Deborah Francis-White pick me women of this world too much to stomach sometimes though.

As I said, I don’t care.

Not really no. I find it quite funny.

Does anyone really care about being called trans phobic anymore? We are told that pretty much everything is tranphobic: knowing that women are adult human females, that biology is real, most importantly- saying no to men larping as women.

if I am described as a transphobe now I am not going to tie myself in knots trying to prove that I am not as these men are never satisfied.

You cancall me what you want, dude - any pronoun, transphobe whatever. And I will refer to you by your biological sex. I hate compelled speech.

I don’t think identifying transphobic ideas is the same as ‘calling someone names’. Transphobia describes a pattern of beliefs or arguments that are rooted in prejudice, stereotyping or misunderstanding about trans people.

Calling out those ideas is not necessarily an attack on someone’s character. It is criticism of the content of what they are saying and the assumptions it rests on.

People are of course free to reject that view of their ideas.

I don’t think identifying transphobic ideas is the same as ‘calling someone names’. Transphobia describes a pattern of beliefs or arguments that are rooted in prejudice, stereotyping or misunderstanding about trans people.

Calling out those ideas is not necessarily an attack on someone’s character. It is criticism of the content of what they are saying and the assumptions it rests on.

People are of course free to reject that view of their ideas.

I don’t think identifying transphobic ideas is the same as ‘calling someone names’. Transphobia describes a pattern of beliefs or arguments that are rooted in prejudice, stereotyping or misunderstanding about trans people.

Calling out those ideas is not necessarily an attack on someone’s character. It is criticism of the content of what they are saying and the assumptions it rests on.

People are of course free to reject that view of their ideas.

Prison statistics are often very skewed relative to the wider population because imprisonment is not a random sample of society. Differences in socioeconomic disadvantage, homelessness, substance use, mental-health problems, exposure to violence, policing, criminalisation, sentencing, age profile and routes into custody can all affect who ends up in prison.

So if trans women make up a larger share of transgender prisoners than they do of the wider trans population, that tells you that the pathways into imprisonment differ between groups. It does not, by itself, tell you why they differ, and it certainly does not let you infer the offending rate of trans women in the general population without a proper denominator and comparable population data.

here may well be differences in offending patterns between trans women and trans men, and some of those differences could plausibly relate to sex-linked physical or developmental factors. But we do not have the population-level evidence needed to establish the offending rate of trans women or trans men in the general population from prison statistics alone.

And I don't agree with naturalising sexual violence as though it simply flows from chromosomes, hormones or genitals. Sexual violence is shaped by social, behavioural and situational factors, not reducible to anatomy.

For the same reason, I don’t think blanket sex segregation based solely on genital anatomy is, by itself, an adequate or evidence-based strategy for preventing sexual violence. Risk assessment, behaviour, offence history and vulnerability are far more directly relevant to safeguarding.

Yes that’s pretty much where I’m at too, @Terfarina- I don’t respect the opinions of people who think a group of men should be classed as women, they can’t back up their arguments or convince anyone of these supposedly strongly held views because there is no reasoned argument at all.

At best they’re tragically naive, at worst they have their own psychological reasons for attacking women and coddling men. It’s just special pleading and it’s misogyny in action. So I don’t care that they call me names.

Does anyone really care about being called trans phobic anymore? We are told that pretty much everything is tranphobic: knowing that women are adult human females, that biology is real, most importantly- saying no to men larping as women.

if I am described as a transphobe now I am not going to tie myself in knots trying to prove that I am not as these men are never satisfied.

You cancall me what you want, dude - any pronoun, transphobe whatever. And I will refer to you by your biological sex. I hate compelled speech.

Yes, I stand by it. I did not say sex is irrelevant to prison placement, nor did I say ‘put men in women’s prisons because of feelings’. I said that blanket segregation based solely on genital anatomy is not, by itself, a sufficient safeguarding strategy.

Physical strength, anatomy and birth sex can absolutely be relevant to risk. So can offence history, sexual offending, violence, behaviour in custody, vulnerability, medical transition and the risks posed to and by the individual prisoner.

Women in prison are often highly vulnerable, and their safety matters enormously. That's why I favour a meaningful individual risk assessment rather than pretending that one anatomical characteristic tells you everything you need to know about risk.

More generally, men and women coexist throughout society and segregating people by anatomy is not a meaningful solution to preventing sexual violence. In fact, highly sex-segregated societies are often also characterised by stronger gender hierarchy, restrictions on women’s autonomy and more rigid gender norms — factors that are associated with higher levels of violence against women. Sexual violence happens most often within intimate relationships between people who know each other.

Prisons are obviously a highly specific context in which the safeguarding threshold is obviously very different — but that does not mean anatomy should be the only criterion.

Yes, I stand by it. I did not say sex is irrelevant to prison placement, nor did I say ‘put men in women’s prisons because of feelings’. I said that blanket segregation based solely on genital anatomy is not, by itself, a sufficient safeguarding strategy.

Physical strength, anatomy and birth sex can absolutely be relevant to risk. So can offence history, sexual offending, violence, behaviour in custody, vulnerability, medical transition and the risks posed to and by the individual prisoner.

Women in prison are often highly vulnerable, and their safety matters enormously. That's why I favour a meaningful individual risk assessment rather than pretending that one anatomical characteristic tells you everything you need to know about risk.

More generally, men and women coexist throughout society and segregating people by anatomy is not a meaningful solution to preventing sexual violence. In fact, highly sex-segregated societies are often also characterised by stronger gender hierarchy, restrictions on women’s autonomy and more rigid gender norms — factors that are associated with higher levels of violence against women. Sexual violence happens most often within intimate relationships between people who know each other.

Prisons are obviously a highly specific context in which the safeguarding threshold is obviously very different — but that does not mean anatomy should be the only criterion.

For the same reason, I don’t think blanket sex segregation based solely on genital anatomy is, by itself, an adequate or evidence-based strategy for preventing sexual violence. Risk assessment, behaviour, offence history and vulnerability are far more directly relevant to safeguarding.

You genuinely believe this statement?

Men are faster, stronger, have greater muscle mass, larger heart, larger lungs, faster reactions. It's a safety issue. There are outliers, but the vast majority of men can overpower nearly every woman.

Over 90% of all sexual crime is committed by men. And you think it's ok to pop them in prison with women?
Because of feelings?

Vulnerable women who are often in there because of the actions of men in the first place?

Cute analogy, but it only works if you first assume that trans identity is equivalent to falsely believing a person is an inanimate object. That is the very point under dispute. So the vignette doesn’t prove anything; it just rather unsubtly hides the conclusion inside the joke.

Very smug reductio though. Very demure, very mindful. 😘

Prison statistics are often very skewed relative to the wider population because imprisonment is not a random sample of society. Differences in socioeconomic disadvantage, homelessness, substance use, mental-health problems, exposure to violence, policing, criminalisation, sentencing, age profile and routes into custody can all affect who ends up in prison.

So if trans women make up a larger share of transgender prisoners than they do of the wider trans population, that tells you that the pathways into imprisonment differ between groups. It does not, by itself, tell you why they differ, and it certainly does not let you infer the offending rate of trans women in the general population without a proper denominator and comparable population data.

here may well be differences in offending patterns between trans women and trans men, and some of those differences could plausibly relate to sex-linked physical or developmental factors. But we do not have the population-level evidence needed to establish the offending rate of trans women or trans men in the general population from prison statistics alone.

And I don't agree with naturalising sexual violence as though it simply flows from chromosomes, hormones or genitals. Sexual violence is shaped by social, behavioural and situational factors, not reducible to anatomy.

For the same reason, I don’t think blanket sex segregation based solely on genital anatomy is, by itself, an adequate or evidence-based strategy for preventing sexual violence. Risk assessment, behaviour, offence history and vulnerability are far more directly relevant to safeguarding.