Celeb supporters of jkr

Strike stars stand ul for JKR, although they do not weigh in on the trans debate.

More integrity and talent than the Harry Potter lot.

www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2020-08-24/strike-holliday-grainger-jk-rowling/amp/

One very well-known female author and one up-and-coming female author have posted GC friendly comments on FB. I won't mention their names here as they spoke on private groups.
But even in private groups, it can be risky to speak out.

I said this on the other thread but I think it's women (and men) in their mid 20s and 30s who are the most woke as they will not have been personally affected by consequences of trans ideology such as the taking away of single sex spaces in schools, but don't yet have daughters who will be affected.

I agree, although my own two kids and sil fall into this demography (aged 29 - 35) and they are all ardently GC. But then again, they have daughters...
My sil has taken to sending me news stories of the latest horrors, usually a few days after I've been debating those horrors on MN! -- and slowly they are understanding the wider implications. My daughter is now urging me to cancel Amazon Prime, an account she too profits from. I would have been devastated if they were woke.

But I do think there's an increasing number of the generation below who are GC - the girls in school today who are holding their wee in all day rather than use unisex facilities and feel forced to stay at home - missing out on education - during their period due to unisex facilities and period shaming. The real world consequences are hitting them and through them their parents and grandparents.

This is my great hope. That they are the ones who will have to deal with the consequences: mixed sex toilets, female sports, etc.

Hope he's ok.

Seems to have gone all right

Is the Joseph McGann account gone?

Anyway, back on topic I notice Caitlin Moran has just retweeted Hugo Rifkind's Times column on free speech, and mentioned JKR.

Were women-only spaces created in the first place because women were bigots who just didn't like men?

Anyway, I think we've given enough time to your derailing of this thread.

CONGRATULATIONS JK! WELL DESERVED!

I didn't say that, though, did I?

This is (a) tiresome and (b) massively off topic.

Can I suggest we move this to one of the many other more on-topic threads or start a new one?

I'm not making racial segregation up. It happened/happens.

In your strawperson argument, what is the reason for the separation?

OK so if spaces are separated on the basis of race, is that how they should stay, no matter how much someone wants to be there?

Some white men don't want to be in the same room as a black man. Sometimes because of past trauma. Should they be allowed to exclude black men from their spaces? Is prohibiting segregation excluding white people who believe in segregation?

We've done this one eleventy billion times, but white men and black men are still MEN so they share the MEN'S spaces.

If spaces are separated on the basis of biological sex, then that's how they stay. No matter how much someone wants to be there.

They're getting lots of likes, and any demands to chant the mantra are getting robust replies. Here's hoping a couple more get braver...

A couple of MPs and a former MP have just dipped their toes in and tweeted support for JKR.

Pat McFaddon MP: We are very lucky to have @jkrowling. Her books have brought so much joy to millions of children. My nine year old loves every new Ickabog chapter. Thank you @jkrowling

Siobhain McDonagh MP: I join my great friend @patmcfaddenmp in thanking @jk_rowling for her work, her generosity & her bravery. No woman should ever be required to be silent about sexual or domestic violence. I thought that was the past...

Plus Angela Smith, former MP, has retweeted. Shocking how many female MPs have remained silent though- particularly women MPs who campaign on women's issues.

Some communities of hasidic jews believe that women shouldn't be allowed to walk on the same side of the street as men. When they tried to enforce this in Hackney, the council rightly intervened. Were they excluding women who subscribed to that belief from the streets?

Some white men don't want to be in the same room as a black man. Sometimes because of past trauma. Should they be allowed to exclude black men from their spaces? Is prohibiting segregation excluding white people who believe in segregation?

The call was often made to exclude gay men from men's toilets because of the fear of rape. Is the call to include gay men prohibiting straight men from using those spaces?

The answer of course is no. Most women of all faiths share toilets with transwomen, either because they don't realise or don't care. Transwomen have been using women's spaces for decades without bothering anyone.

You say you support third space provision, but how does that work in practice? Who pays for that service to be implemented. Where do trans people go until that service is widely available? Would you (or women of particular faiths, or women who have experienced trauma) feel more comfortable with transmen using women's spaces? Are you happy for people to be challenged more? What if you are a woman but you don't look or dress very womanly? How do you prove you have the right to access?

Pappyon

Maybe don’t just focus on toilets:

Think about refuges and prisons where women and girls really are the most vulnerable in society.

Many TW are male-bodied. Allowing them in to single sex spaces will exclude women and girls of faith and many traumatised by experience of male violence.

These girls and women won’t be able to take part in activities such as sport, visiting a gym, a swimming pool or attending residential trips. Why do you think it’s ok for these women and girls to be pushed out or what would you do to prevent that happening?

Apparently I am a bigot for saying that I want to support trans people and believe trans people have the right to live in safety with dignity, but these rights cannot come at the expense of safety and dignity for women and girls.

And ensuring male-free spaces for women of faiths who can't use single sex spaces, women who have been traumatised by male violence, and women who simply WANT and value single sex spaces is more important than pretending to believe a lie to avoid making a small number of males sad.

I support decent third space provision in addition to women's spaces. I won't be guilted into giving other women's rights away.

there was something bone chilling in that tweet, more so than the abusive ones in some ways. The simplicity, but the authority of that command, and the immediate obeyance

Olive
I absolutely agree. It is a demonstration of explicit power. This is an insight into the mind of an authoritarian who tolerates no dissent. And good point about Tom Watson. Actually, I hadn't considered that angle about Labour. JKR must be a major donor.

Do you think removing women's right to self-id to access toilets will stop them from being raped?

It's about what's a proportionate response. Stopping women from accessing toilets from self-id, , imposing checks for instance, would be undignified and unsafe for trans and ciswomen. And it wouldn't stop predatory men. In fact it might make it easier, because they could just claim to be a post-op trans man.

BovaryX there was something bone chilling in that tweet, more so than the abusive ones in some ways. The simplicity, but the authority of that command, and the immediate obeyance.

Not a celebrity as such, but former Labour bigwig, Tom Watson. tweeted his support for JKR. He said

The persecution of @jk_rowling is shocking. Despite the abuse, she still has the courage to speak out for what she believes in, which seems like a rare quality in these polarised times.

Her acceptance of Lloyd Russell-Moyle’s apology is classy, and worth reading.

Whatever one thinks of his politics and conduct while an MP, at least he has stuck his head above the parapet. Where are all the other ex-Labour bods who were happy to benefit from JKR's donations?

However we can also acknowledge that whatever your position on that philosophical point, trans people fair far better psychologically if they are enabled to live the life of the gender in which they identify.

I think you miss where the main thrust of the GC discussion is directed.

TW are not biological women. The edge cases of significant but rare DSDs do not alter that and aren't really relevant.

We don't want self ID in sport because it creates an inherent disadvantage for women.

We want women to have the right to run single sex services where needed such as DV shelters or programmes for religious groups.

We want the right to discuss public policy without being threatened or sacked.

None of this implies rudeness or unkindness to individuals. In practice most people are happy to treat TWAW in most situations but the times when sex matters are hugely important to women's rights.

That seems to boil down to 'be kind', pappyon.

And 'women will be raped anyway'.

Before I do I think it's important to point out that not everyone agrees with what 'being a woman' means, and that's fine (let's come back to that later if you disagree), it's also true (imo) that how we can define 'being a woman' in different ways depending on the context, and that's also fine. Eg. it would make more sense to refer to the simple biological model for abortion rights issues.

But there are inherent issues with the simple biological model which mean that doesn't work in all cases. Whether you refer to chromosomes, hormones, primary or secondary sex characteristics, there are cases that exist which mean that there are no solid biological definition that will include everything that is a 'woman' and exclude everything that is not (blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/).

For me, I have to make the appeal to common sense and say that my womanhood isn't just about what's between my legs, or what's inside me (not that I can see that). The fact that I feel like a woman is an important part of it. I certainly didn't always feel like a woman. I used to feel like a girl, and sometimes I still do. But at some indiscernible point, definitely not bang on my 18th birthday, I 'transitioned' into womanhood. Now, how I express my identity as a woman is very personal to me, and isn't at all normative - I wouldn't say that you have to express womanhood or feel like a woman the way I do in order to be a woman. It also doesn't necessarily align with traditional norms of femininity. It's unconscious and plays out in every way I talk and behave.

If you want to get a bit less fluffy and common-sensical, this is more or less what Judith Butler describes as 'performativity'. This is the idea that our gender, while usually assigned at birth, is afterwards reinforced through how we talk, behave and interact with one another, mostly but not always according to specific cultural norms. It's performative, but not a performance. This means our manhood/womanhood doesn't result in these actions, instead these actions (unconsciously) result in our man/womanhood. There are tonnes of books written about performativitity (here's a short article medium.com/@willfraker/gender-is-dead-long-live-gender-just-what-is-performativity-582f35bec23) and like I said, not everyone agrees with this definition, but it feels correct to me.

If you disagree, I'd like to illustrate it with a thought experiment. The fact that I strongly feel like a woman means that I have a strong core preference for being viewed as a woman. It can feel odd to identify that feeling because it's so normal for people who aren't trans (cis, sorry, it's just easier), but imagine, hypothetically, if you 100% physically and socially transitioned into the 'opposite' gender. Would you feel a strong sense of discomfort in seeing yourself, and other people seeing you in that way? Or would you rather see yourself, dress yourself, and call yourself in however way you identified, but as the gender in which you identify?

I say it's a thought experiment, but it was actually done to someone. David Reimer was a cis man who was raised, and made to look like to society as a girl, following medical advice. As he grew up he experienced all manner of impulses and mental discrepancies (which we now call dysphoria) from being told one thing from all sides while experiencing internal conflict with the mere concept of being a girl. This is generally how trans people feel before they transition.

But if you still disagree with the idea that you can strongly 'feel' like a man/woman, well then that's fine. Isn't it? We can disagree about that. However we can also acknowledge that whatever your position on that philosophical point, trans people fair far better psychologically if they are enabled to live the life of the gender in which they identify. That's why most people who want to promote trans rights say trans women are women, regardless of the science or philosophy.

But maybe you think it isn't fine if we disagree, because it's about concern over men's access to women's toilets. Well without wanting to ramble on any further, I'd say simply that the concern is overblown. A predatory man isn't going to wait for legal recognition of womanhood before he enacts his plan to abuse women in toilets. In countries where reforms have made it easier for trans women to gain that recognition, there hasn't been an uptick in sexual assault in toilets. It's been legally possible for transwomen to access women's toilets for decades, and there hasn't been an uptick in sexual assualt in toilets. If you still want to exclude trans women from toilets, you should know that doing so would make their lives much worse, and it would also make cis women's lives much worse. There are already many stories of cis women being thrown out of toilets because they don't 'pass the test' of womanhood.

It's interesting, isn't it? Stephen King's TWAW pledge seems to be a response to this

You should address the T××× tweet*

A stark statement which reads not as a piece of advice, but as a command, similar in effect to You should watch your words. And the literary world and its celebrity authors are perfectly well aware of the implications of ignoring such a command.