What has JK Rowling said or done that’s transphobic

You can’t “find” anything transphobic in what she’d said because you’re unwilling to actually consider that she might legitimately BE transphobic. You agree with her. Confirmation bias and all that.

Confirmation bias works both ways

People can’t change sex. Some spaces and services should be single-sex.

Whats to disagree with?

JKR is an absolute goddess for standing up for women's rights.

I adore her.

but I don’t think it’s too much to ask, do you?
Asking a trans person not to be trans is too much to ask , absolutely it is.
You can't relate, because you are not trans.

Is the definition of trans using the opposite sex facilities?

No one is saying 'don't be trans', just respect single sex spaces.

People who define transphobia as including systematic invalidation or denigration of transgender identities

Which is to say, people who define “woman” as “anyone who says they are a woman”.

Which for some reason is different from identifying as black or identifying as a child. For some reason, those are considered material reality whereas womanhood is considered identity.

She isn't anti trans

She's pro reality

Telling a man he cannot invade women’s spaces does not require him to alter his self-image any more than telling an adult who believes himself to be a child that he has to pay full fare nonetheless.

Nobody is saying they can't be trans. But they can't be biologically female if they were born male, that's just a fact of life. Just like I can't be a pilot because of my bad eyesight, I can get all the aids I want but it still won't allow me to be a pilot because that would be putting other people at risk. Biological men can't be allowed to be in single sex spaces for females because it puts women and girls in danger. They can do whatever they like outside of these spaces.

Why don’t you quote what she’s said that YOU consider transphobic.

If we are talking about excluding people from public life, let’s discuss the women who can no longer use women’s swimming sessions/pools like the women’s pond at Hampstead because they allow trans-identified males to use those spaces. Religious women, women who are modest, women who prefer the vibe in a group of women to a mixed group, survivors of male violence against women all may self exclude from these spaces as they’re no longer single sex. Certain groups are more likely to be impacted, and those groups are also more likely to live in the intersection between misogyny, poverty, racism, and religious discrimination.

Yet we are being asked here to give greater empathy to people who would rather stay home than use a toilet that has a urinal in it? Why cannot we consider women who are far more consistently excluded from consideration?

And trans people can't in reality relate to peope of the opposite sex, because they are not the opposite sex.

We can absolutely accept trans peope as they are.

What we cannot do is accept them for what they are not, because the only way to do that is to force everyone else to lie about who we are and what determines our challenges and needs in life.

Trans people may be genuine in what they believe, but that doesn't make it real in the reality they share with everyone else. Sex will still exist and still have consequences.

You can't relate, because you are not trans.

Men can’t relate to being women, because they are not women.

No, she isn't. They are right there, she's not claiming they've vanished in a puff of smoke. Such hyperbole.

What she is doing is disagreeing with what they say about themselves. That's normal; we disagree with others' self identification all the time. I don't agree some people are unattractive, or gorgeous, or geniuses, or failures, or 'good people' or feminist just because they see themselves that way.

We have DBS checks and safeguarding because we don't accept everything at face value.

Where it's different with trans people is the claim that their internal sense of how they want to be perceived overrides the material reality of the rest of society.

Where sex doesn't matter, a person's sense of gender isn't a problem. On those occasions where sex is important, agreeing with a trans person disadvantages other people to their detriment. Or to the trans person's own detriment, like the poor transman raped on a male psych ward.

My right to move my hand ends before it makes contact with your face. A transwoman's right to think of themselves as a woman ends before they take away cycling medals from female athletes.

OP it’s exasperating. If you say to the young person “so what you are saying is women and girls rights = transphobia” she will say but “TWAW” and you’ll go define a woman, and she’ll go anyone who says they are. And so it goes
on. I usually just go hard with the sexual assault stats, and there being no way to tell good men from bad ones which is why we have SSS. They don’t like that either.

There is nothing to find because

JKR - and those supporting her on here are simply sticking to FACT

man = man for ever
woman = woman for ever
man can not ever become woman
woman can not ever become man

FACT

whatever verbiage or emotion or politicking or violence or threats might take place to try and convince people otherwise is pointless - you could 'convince' every person in the world that a man is a woman, but the reality is still FACT - even if every person in the world accepted the lies and delusions in this area, it would not and can not change FACT.

What is really frustrating is the minority who use this for their own purposes, to dominate women / or other more nefarious reasons... which becomes the noise and debate - and therefore we lose sight of the fact that actually there is a whole (small but important) section of society where people do have mental health issues, gender dysphoria, etc. and need help - the debate needs to change, we need society to acknowledge material reality / FACT which is now happening at least in the UK, though slowly due to the corruption of so many organisations... once we are at that point, we can recognise the debate for what it really is and help those who need support in a way that is centered on their actual needs - so that autistic young girls are no longer encouraged to mutilate their bodies, but to deal with their emotions / worries / mental health which takes them into that place.

oh - and to repeat once more - it is not possible to be transphobic, because there is no actual thing as any human who has ever transitioned - therefore no actual real 'trans' only those with a brain perspective which in many cases can be linked to some other genuine issue - usually mental health based.

I don’t use much social media so cannot comment on anything recent but I remember a few years ago when people first started “cancelling” J K Rowling, I read what she had written and could not find anything transphobic. She appeared to me to be very concerned about women’s rights, it’s therefore no surprise that men have tried to silence her.

If you treat a trans person according to their birth sex in all settings where sex is relevant, then you are asking a trans person not to be trans in all public settings where being trans might be relevant.

What settings would ‘being trans’ be relevant?

They can walk around all day every day being trans, no one is going to stop them. The only time they can't self identify as the opposite sex is when they are accessing single sex spaces. Toilets, changing rooms etc, that isn't the majority of someone's life it's a very tiny part of it, it's just something they will have to accept to keep the spaces available. Women need single sex spaces to keep them safe, we can't allow them to be taken away because someone wants to be the opposite sex

And if you do treat a trans person according to their self identified sex in any public setting, you are telling every single person in that public setting that their being a "woman" or a "man" means they can be assumed to only dress, think or feel certain ways. How on earth is that reasonable?

JK’s latest tweet, in response to raving TRA MP Stella Creasy is a thing of beauty and anyone who wants to understand JK’s standpoint better, should go and read it. She is not and never has been transphobic, but it helps aggressive male activists to pretend that she is.

Providers have to justify single sex services. It has to be proportional to exclude men or women from the service.

They justify this on the bases of sex.

To be protected under the PC of GR, someone can propose to undergo sex reassignment, to obtain a GRC, a person has to have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria.

Neither of these changes someone sex.

What TRA want one of two scenarios-

Providers continue to justify provision based on sex, but allow some people of the opposite sex to use the services.

Or to organise provision based on gender identity.

The first - including men in women spaces, means that the service is no longer fit for purpose. A pool recognises women dont use mixed sex sessons, therefore introduces a women only session. If they allow men to join, its another mixed sex session and the women won't attend.

If providers offer services based on gender identity, what unique characteristics are they providing for, and what will the service look like?

What do the group of 'women and tw' have in common and why do they need services away from 'tm and men'?