The Uncancelling of JK Rowling

I guess the better question is this...

If a natal woman was born without certain natural female parts does she become recognized as a transwomen? Does she earn legal protections that transwomen receive?

What did I say earlier? 'It'll be hysterectomies next'.

Thanking you.

If a woman (a real one) of childbearing age can't conceive a doctor will refer her to a fertility treatment clinic.

if a transwoman of childbearing age can't conceive would the doctor do the same?

Yes, there's a difference in how they would be treated - and unless you are stupid you know exactly why!

And the rest of the question? If woman is anything more than an adult human female, I am not one.

Many other people formerly known as women also aren't

Does it bother you to exclude me and those others from the category of women?

Another question re your definition. If a man loses his cock in an accident, you're saying g he's not longer a man. Is that right?

So by that definition no TW in the ladies unless they've been through an invasive and painful procedure to remove their phallus, to somehow prove their woman hood.

And no TM in the gents unless they have had a pseudo phallus created

Gotcha. Seems a bit transphobic as well TBH but better than "anyone who identifies as a man can use male spaces" and vice versa

Sorry for pause, Cock or no cock defines it for me.

*balanced viewpoint

@hotdiggetydog

I've asked this a couple of time now. Can you answer? It's a really important point in your ideology.

If you also want to provide a valued viewpoint, you can't just ignore important questions.

Thanks to those that provided sensible balanced viewpoints

Before all this madness? Of course. Now? Not really comfortable with it anymore tbh, now I know why people identify as women, at least a third agp and these are the ones most likely to have surgery. Even Debbie Hayton who I respect as a tw teacher admits their own motivation is sexual agp. Now I don't think she would offend but its not what it was sold as!

We can’t police who’s had surgery and who hasn’t, so it’s best if they all just kindly use the gents or unisex spaces. I agree with Terflady that there’s been an erosion of goodwill due to TRAs’ increasingly unreasonable demands. We need to be clear about what single-sex means. A post-op TW is still a biologically male person, not female, so does not belong in ladies’ toilets.

There was a time I would have said yes. But now I’m changing my answer. No because the TRA’s and trans women have abused their privileges. They demanded too much. Took advantage of women’s good will. Give them an inch they will take a mile. The GRC certificates are meaningless now because it means so many things that are abstract.

They will have to fight for their own SEPARATE spaces to go to the bathroom. Not piggyback off of women’s hard won spaces.

Leave us out of trans people’s problems. They should solve their own problems without involving women.

Would you let post op trans women into ladies toilets? Genuine question

It never fails to amaze me how people can be so inextricably captured by this nonsense, happy to argue that some women have penises.

Many intelligent, well-read, left-wing people - the sort of people I used to have so much common ground with politically - truly believe TW are ‘actual women’. I used to think people were just being kind when they said TWAW, not that they fully BELIEVED that. It’s mind-blowing. People have fallen down a rainbow rabbit hole. Some men are women? Soon they’ll be saying war is peace and freedom is slavery.

Meanwhile, anyone criticising this irrational, reality-defying stance is a trans-hating hyena. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so disturbing.

As Ricky Gervais succinctly put it "Lose the dick"

You want to know the difference between a biological woman with no womb and a trans woman with no womb?

The biological women cannot reproduce without medical intervention. Something terrible probably happened along the way that she didn’t get a say in.

The trans woman very likely just needs to find a FEMALE partner so they can sire children without medical intervention. If they can’t then it’s a high probability they willingly opted out of their reproductive organs and therefore DID get a say in it.

It is selfish to try to compare the situations and insulting to the biological women who go through life like this.

That wasn't the question. If the definition of woman includes TW, it does not include most actual women. Does it bother you to exclude women from the definition of woman?

What definition are you using?

If cats don't all have claws, does that make me a cat?

In a tolerant non GB news watching non daily mail reading society, the definition of women includes trans women. It's an inclusive definition not an exclusive one.

What the point of a definition of women that includes some men, and a definition of men that includes some women?

Why not use different words, rather than trying to repurpose the usual ones?

Hotdiggetydog you seem to be incapable of doing a Post without mudslinging. It is very telling and smacks of desperation when you know the tides are turning and the blinkers are coming away.

Move with the times, it’s 1933?

I am not trans hating. And I don’t think hyenas are either. Hyenas and humans are both mammals, though.

It is interesting the lies that are told in order to not be SEEN as a hater.
But I can’t help but feel - nothing - when being called all these weird things/names/slurs for simply stating facts about our shared biological reality as humans.
It makes me giggle, and I appreciate that is a luxury. My job is not on the line and I am unable to go to any meetings where I may be kettled or punched, so I am not in harms way. If I am doxxed it makes no difference; I have voiced these same opinions publicly under my own name.

I just hope the Tide really is turning, like it seems to be.

Some women have wombs some don't.

In a tolerant non GB news watching non daily mail reading society, the definition of women includes trans women. It's an inclusive definition not an exclusive one.

Move with the times, it's 2023.

How on earth can anyone be so stupid as to think a man without a womb is the same as a woman without a womb!!

it's desperation, indeed. I guess some men so want to be a woman (well their misogynistic version of one), that they'll change the definition in order to fit it.

There are at least 5000 posts on the trans widows threads which will testify as to how far these men will go to achieve their aim.

Watching someone say it like this in real life is ridiculous, though

Especially since many of those TW can technically sire children they just can’t CARRY them which is not the same at all.