JKR rebuttals from cis women?

'People who menstruate' is to include trans men who also menstruate. Saying 'women and girls' does not include them in a way which respects their idenity as (trans) men.

Those who object against 'people who menstruate' are thought to be being deliberately exclusive of trans men which is thought to stem from transphobia.

To say 'women menstruate' is also thought to be transphobic because it excludes trans women, who do not menstruate.

I'm not saying these are my views, but this is an explanatin of the perceived issue.

And then there are all the people who have totally (willfully?) misinterpreted and extended what she actually said.

Sorry, wrong thread.

So Paris Lees is telling Jameela to stop as it's making them look bad.

Yeah, actual bigotry towards domestic abuse survivors will do that.

Transwomen are different to women born female

Transwomen have concerns about safe spaces feeling uncomfortable around some people ( men) in some circumstances, yes, I get that

What I don't get is their right to say that people who are objectively different to them ( not Transwomen) are not allowed to recognise that difference.

If it were provable that on key factors such as sexual abuse rates. they were not different to women then it would be transphobia, but objectively they are different.

Like we are forced to accept that we are the same as Transwomen, because they say so

I meant to add but was interrupted by coffee and toast....

Capturing language is one major step to capturing minds. If you can regulate the language that people can use, you have some control over how they think.

OP, I try to avoid analogies but as this is so current...

What would you say if white people were to declare that they were black, and that from now on people who were visibly black should be called cis-black and people who were white but self ID as black should be called trans-black. And then the trans-black people complain that the word black should never be used because it hurts their feelings and privileges those who are cis-black. And so there is no identifiable class of black people, and no racism, and no oppression of black people.

Now do you understand why cis is so offensive?

The problem with the phrase “people who menstruate” is that it is quite a complex sentence. If we start using it rather than “women and girls” then people with a low reading ability or English as a second language may not understand it, and ignore it as they will think they don’t know what it means so it doesn’t apply to them, whereas if you just say “women and girls” even people with a low IQ will know that they are the group of people who have periods.

By being inclusive you could actually be excluding the people you’re trying to reach. Trans men know that medically they have women’s bodies so they’re not likely to start reading articles about prostate cancer and think it applies to them.

Hi OP,

Feel a bit sorry for you re the ‘cis word’! You won’t make that mistake again! Moving on...

I’m pretty new to this issue too, I hadn’t really been aware of the debate, shamefully and I have spent the last few days reading a lot. I agree with the majority of posters here and stand alongside JKR / alongside women for all of the reasons variously outlined.

However I know that’s not what you were asking and I have seen a few posts from women who support TWAW and the Harry Potter traitors.

The main agreement seems to be that we aren’t being kind enough

So, I’ve seen comments such as:

‘Can you imagine being a transwoman in a male prison or male changing rooms? How vulnerable that must make you feel? If you are living as a woman - live as a woman’

‘Women should be inclusive. Trans women are at risk in places such as male prisons, why can’t we share our places? I don’t feel threatened’

‘but there is more to being a woman than sex. Why can’t we recognise that and allow trans women to live as they would like? What are the actual risks at any scale? Surely we should be supporting this minority’

Etc etc. They are all pretty simplistic statements that lack and critical thinking. That said, I haven’t seen many comments from women supporting the ‘cis’ statement or people who menstruate terms. Probably because they’re ridiculous.

What I keep waiting for is someone really high profile to come and support JKR. I just feel there is a pile on and those in public eye should be AT LEAST defending her from abuse, ideally standing with her. But although she has an army of supporters, no one famous seems to be putting their head above the parapet. It’s so disappointing.

I’d reply but I’m not cis. I don’t have a gender. I’m just a woman who sometimes dresses/behaves in a stereotypically female way and sometimes dresses/behaves in a stereotypically male way. Sometimes a mix of both.

Under the stonewall definitions I suppose I’m gender fluid.

Still a woman though, since I was born female.

I have never seen a coherent objection to JKR's point, which is simply that women are human and have rights and deserve empathy just like everyone else (i.e. given what 'everyone else' is: men).

I've looked for it. For years, actually.

The objections by women (and a lot of men) boil down to "Stop dumping on the poor minority. Be kind." With the always unspoken coda: Nothing about women or that happens to women is worth one jot of discomfort for anyone else.

I'm not sure why some of these TRAs have predicated their entire struggle on erasing women. But whatever their reason, erasing women is obviously central to them. JKR's crime was saying, "No." It's impossible to express a coherent objection to that without saying women don't count. So all we get is incoherence.

Why do we have to include trans men and women into the definition of the word and make cis a subset? Why can’t trans men and women just me a subset. If things need to be inclusive (like san pro) they can just say they are for women, non binary people and trans men. If we focus on stopping discrimination against trans and non binary people, what’s the problem with accepting there are just different categories of people, all equal.

Women’s sport and things reserved just for women should be for women, third spaces created for everyone that needs them and trans people can have their own awards etc where it is felt they need to be acknowledged and encouraged (similar to women).

The whole TWAW and they don’t want to constantly be reminded they aren’t 100% a member of their chosen gender identity to me seems a bit of a fallacy. Surely they don’t forget, especially the fast majority that still keep their penises and actively campaign for TW to be W. Being acknowledged as a trans woman/man can’t possibly be consistently confronting them with an uncomfortable truth that they see every time they take a piss and spout propaganda on the internet.

Why isn’t that good enough?

I am comfortable with the term as I am a person and I menstruate. I feel it is more inclusive and considerate of those trans men who still menstruate. Trans people have already gone through a lot and could do with some kindness.

Can people please RRFT? The OP's use of the word 'cis' has already been addressed. It's derailing the discussion to concentrate on that.

I think it is arrogant of JKR to dismiss the experiences of trans people and suggest they are broadly influenced by social media. I find it odd she thinks her own feelings about her own gender are in any way relevant to the majority of trans people. She clearly struggles to comprehend others may have experiences that differ from her own. However she clearly is on the side of women and is coming from a good place

JK doesn't have "feelings about her own gender". She has opinions about her own sex.

I personally find it arrogant that male-born people assume that their 'feelings about their gender' make them women in the same way I am - how on earth would they know?

And, transwomen have different experiences but they are women. HUH?

The whole not wanting to be defined by biology bit but then being fine with being called a person who menstruates - that is literally defining someone’s biological function.

I hate that word. I am a woman. No prefix required.

Cis off.

I have a female body and am seen as a woman by society but do not see myself as a cis woman and would not call myself a woman if the choice is between cis and transwoman as I do not gender identify as woman having never wanted to be seen as female

Are you interested in my opinions and how would you classify me ?

and that trans women were allies in repeal and need to be supported now.

Yes well, there was self interest involved there, wasn't there?

Ps If people ID themselves as cs that is their choice, as unfathomable as I find it. But labelling others* that way without their consent is WRONG (and miss me with the bullshit analogy about yt / straight people).

“c*s” women.. what the hell!?

This is one of the few (left leaning) places where that offensive concept does not apply ... gross.

OP there are lots of entitled men and women putting Jo on blast (just check, I dunno, Twitter).

Why are you asking us to de-scramble their waffle?

@worriedmama1980 Do you have a link to that article? I tried to find it but failed. I am Irish and am interested ...

I find it fascinating that after years of man being the default human, up to and including men debating if women are human, the transgenderists have made trans the default and all others are cis.
Then when you find out they mean people whose sex matches their societies sex role stereotypes, gender, you realize that the vast majority of women are not cis, nor are we trans.
We are simply left out, the way we have always been.
Hundreds of years of this degradation of women by men and they have the gall to call themselves civilized.

It really makes me sick, the idea of children on hormones. I mean what fucked up idealogoy is that?

This is what they propose todo in Scotland. There is no gatekeeping.

www.gov.scot/publications/gender-recognition-reform-scotland-bill-consultation-scottish-government/pages/6/