J.K Rowling's Position

"And this is again showing your ignorance. Most of the examples that have been posted here on this thread have been examples from well before Musk took over X.

Th difference being hate speech was heavily policed before Musk took over as in reports of abuse were actioned with deletions & suspensions ruthlessly given as they were to provocations that invited them.That's not happening now which only encourages the vicious circle of provocation & retaliation. Of course what Terf Is A Slur.com won't conveniently show is the preceding provocations.

"As to your claim that the interactions are restricted to social media, that is again simply false. Again, just here in the UK we have demonstrated how that violence from social media has translated to violence and intimidation in real life. Where female people have to be protected by lines of police just to enter meeting venues!"

Security at contentious public events IE that target the basic rights & dignity of people has long been a thing prior to social media. The idea that people take oppression lying down is a hot one…

"And this is again showing your ignorance. Most of the examples that have been posted here on this thread have been examples from well before Musk took over X.

Th difference being hate speech was heavily policed before Musk took over as in reports of abuse were actioned with deletions & suspensions ruthlessly given as they were to provocations that invited them.That's not happening now which only encourages the vicious circle of provocation & retaliation. Of course what Terf Is A Slur.com won't conveniently show is the preceding provocations.

"As to your claim that the interactions are restricted to social media, that is again simply false. Again, just here in the UK we have demonstrated how that violence from social media has translated to violence and intimidation in real life. Where female people have to be protected by lines of police just to enter meeting venues!"

Security at contentious public events IE that target the basic rights & dignity of people has long been a thing prior to social media. The idea that people take oppression lying down is a hot one…

"And this is again showing your ignorance. Most of the examples that have been posted here on this thread have been examples from well before Musk took over X.

Th difference being hate speech was heavily policed before Musk took over as in reports of abuse were actioned with deletions & suspensions ruthlessly given as they were to provocations that invited them.That's not happening now which only encourages the vicious circle of provocation & retaliation. Of course what Terf Is A Slur.com won't conveniently show is the preceding provocations.

"As to your claim that the interactions are restricted to social media, that is again simply false. Again, just here in the UK we have demonstrated how that violence from social media has translated to violence and intimidation in real life. Where female people have to be protected by lines of police just to enter meeting venues!"

Security at contentious public events IE that target the basic rights & dignity of people has long been a thing prior to social media. The idea that people take oppression lying down is a hot one…

“Injustice breeds injustice. Brutality breeds brutality. We just saw this in Gaza & Israel. October 7 didn't come out of a vacuum but decades of violent oppression as did many brutal historical uprisings. It takes two to tango”

Fuck!

You have just done it again.

Women, ‘if you don’t allow male people to enter your groups, male people won’t know how to treat you with respect’.

Women, ‘watch out! If you don’t give this group of male people access to your single sex spaces, then you should expect those male people to retaliate with brutality and violence.’.

Every day there is another form of intimidation coming directly from you on this board. You simply can not accept women saying ‘no’.

Female people saying ‘no’ to male people is not injustice”. Female people saying ‘no’ to male people is not ‘brutality”. It is beyond catastrophising and beyond hyperbolic to leverage the incidents you have just attempted to here.

This line of argument is yet another example of DARVO. It is abusive and it is done for the chilling effect.

Your leverage of the situation in Gaza is showing just how far you will go. You know no boundaries.

“But Musk's free for all on X has normalised demonisation & dehumanisation/hate speech. And that's not just coming from racists & trans people but gender critical feminists.”

And this is again showing your ignorance. Most of the examples that have been posted here on this thread have been examples from well before Musk took over X.

The pattern of behaviour has been established for years. If you had ever bothered to open mindedly started discussing the issue with any of us on this board instead of behaving as you have done now for months you might be a little better informed than you are.

As to your claim that the interactions are restricted to social media, that is again simply false. Again, just here in the UK we have demonstrated how that violence from social media has translated to violence and intimidation in real life. Where female people have to be protected by lines of police just to enter meeting venues!

And that women are being told that our abusers who are male people should be accepted into female single sex spaces.

Shall we also post the violence that happens to women meeting in the USA, NZ and Australia too? It is not just a UK issue.

So your ‘it just remains on social media’ claim is very clearly false.

"What I was originally asking about was larger-scale evidence about the threat that some say trans women pose to women in those primary circumstances described by Rowling.
If you have any links to studies or reviews about the threat that trans women as a population pose to women, please can you post? If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence."

Given the numbers of the trans women population is so miniscule (approx 0.5%) its unlikely there's going to be any statistically significant data where meaningful conclusions can be made. As incarceration numbers don't adequately reflect sexual violence offending numbers, offending patterns via self reporting surveys are an indicator of crime but again statistically significant data comes into play as does the unreliability of self reporting. What we can glean for self reporting is generalisations about men offending at a substantially higher rate than women but this is confounded by the categories of men & women who offend at different rates & the circumstances they offend in. Older, wealthier men & gay men offend at substantially lower rates than younger, poorer, straight men. Lesbians offend at much higher rates than heterosexual women with some studies showing lesbians offend at higher rates than gay men for sexual violence. The circumstances indicate that the overwhelming majority of sexual violence by men & women is perpetrated by someone the victim know in the home, workplace, date, friendship group. IE not in public bathrooms.

Given that lesbians are considered a greater risk to women than straight women shouldn't they also be using 'separate spaces' for consistency sake? After all they are a larger population than trans women?

The answer is no because the risk of sexual violence from lesbians just like trans women isn't in public bathrooms. Public bathrooms usually being busy places don't afford opportunities to offenders. Privacy/isolation does.

"What you’ve posted is absolutely alarming. It looks like what I would call ‘secondary content’ - i.e. content where abuse and slurs link to those engaged in the discourse itself, rather than content documenting the experiences of women who’ve been harmed by trans women in situations of concern like those raised by Rowling around female-only spaces. This type of content exemplifies one of my original points about how the inflammatory discourse around this has detracted from and damaged sensible, proportionate discussion like you and I are trying to engage in here."

Inflammatory speech, particularly hate speech on the internet doesn't appear to manifest in direct real world violence on any meaningful scale. Its real harms come about when its so widespread against a particular group that it has the indirect capability of facilitating institutional action as evidenced in numerous genocides so I doubt that a very small pocket of abusive trans people could ever garner any widespread social risk to others. However, that certainly doesn't excuse or condone it & we must work towards eliminating it.

But Musk's free for all on X has normalised demonisation & dehumanisation/hate speech. And that's not just coming from racists & trans people but gender critical feminists. I don't see them calling out Musk for his blind eye to abuse or them lowering the temperature although when pressed will minimise their views as being limited to just 'women's safety'. In fact they laud him for his free speech absolutism. The fact is free speech absolutism & civilised speech are mutually exclusive. And when added to the normalisation of inflammatory rhetoric is going after people's right to self determination, dignity & safety without opportunity for recourse is begging for a back lash of barbaric vigilantism. Injustice breeds injustice. Brutality breeds brutality. We just saw this in Gaza & Israel. October 7 didn't come out of a vacuum but decades of violent oppression as did many brutal historical uprisings. It takes two to tango…

Be the change you want to see? Cue victim blaming as is want in Israel to avoid responsibility.

4, 3, 2, 1….

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299945533_Sexual_Orientation_and_Involvement_in_Nonviolent_and_Violent_Delinquent_Behaviors_Findings_From_the_National_Longitudinal_Study_of_Adolescent_to_Adult_Health

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/019188699090146I

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02902-9

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233019813_Knowledge_About_Heterosexual_versus_Lesbian_Battering_Among_Lesbians#:~:text=Over%20the%20past%20few%20decades,public%20discussion%20on%20the%20phenomenon.

"What I was originally asking about was larger-scale evidence about the threat that some say trans women pose to women in those primary circumstances described by Rowling.
If you have any links to studies or reviews about the threat that trans women as a population pose to women, please can you post? If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence."

Given the numbers of the trans women population is so miniscule (approx 0.5%) its unlikely there's going to be any statistically significant data where meaningful conclusions can be made. As incarceration numbers don't adequately reflect sexual violence offending numbers, offending patterns via self reporting surveys are an indicator of crime but again statistically significant data comes into play as does the unreliability of self reporting. What we can glean for self reporting is generalisations about men offending at a substantially higher rate than women but this is confounded by the categories of men & women who offend at different rates & the circumstances they offend in. Older, wealthier men & gay men offend at substantially lower rates than younger, poorer, straight men. Lesbians offend at much higher rates than heterosexual women with some studies showing lesbians offend at higher rates than gay men for sexual violence. The circumstances indicate that the overwhelming majority of sexual violence by men & women is perpetrated by someone the victim know in the home, workplace, date, friendship group. IE not in public bathrooms.

Given that lesbians are considered a greater risk to women than straight women shouldn't they also be using 'separate spaces' for consistency sake? After all they are a larger population than trans women?

The answer is no because the risk of sexual violence from lesbians just like trans women isn't in public bathrooms. Public bathrooms usually being busy places don't afford opportunities to offenders. Privacy/isolation does.

"What you’ve posted is absolutely alarming. It looks like what I would call ‘secondary content’ - i.e. content where abuse and slurs link to those engaged in the discourse itself, rather than content documenting the experiences of women who’ve been harmed by trans women in situations of concern like those raised by Rowling around female-only spaces. This type of content exemplifies one of my original points about how the inflammatory discourse around this has detracted from and damaged sensible, proportionate discussion like you and I are trying to engage in here."

Inflammatory speech, particularly hate speech on the internet doesn't appear to manifest in direct real world violence on any meaningful scale. Its real harms come about when its so widespread against a particular group that it has the indirect capability of facilitating institutional action as evidenced in numerous genocides so I doubt that a very small pocket of abusive trans people could ever garner any widespread social risk to others. However, that certainly doesn't excuse or condone it & we must work towards eliminating it.

But Musk's free for all on X has normalised demonisation & dehumanisation/hate speech. And that's not just coming from racists & trans people but gender critical feminists. I don't see them calling out Musk for his blind eye to abuse or them lowering the temperature although when pressed will minimise their views as being limited to just 'women's safety'. In fact they laud him for his free speech absolutism. The fact is free speech absolutism & civilised speech are mutually exclusive. And when added to the normalisation of inflammatory rhetoric is going after people's right to self determination, dignity & safety without opportunity for recourse is begging for a back lash of barbaric vigilantism. Injustice breeds injustice. Brutality breeds brutality. We just saw this in Gaza & Israel. October 7 didn't come out of a vacuum but decades of violent oppression as did many brutal historical uprisings. It takes two to tango…

Be the change you want to see? Cue victim blaming as is want in Israel to avoid responsibility.

4, 3, 2, 1….

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299945533_Sexual_Orientation_and_Involvement_in_Nonviolent_and_Violent_Delinquent_Behaviors_Findings_From_the_National_Longitudinal_Study_of_Adolescent_to_Adult_Health

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/019188699090146I

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-024-02902-9

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233019813_Knowledge_About_Heterosexual_versus_Lesbian_Battering_Among_Lesbians#:~:text=Over%20the%20past%20few%20decades,public%20discussion%20on%20the%20phenomenon.

Did you even read what you quoted?

I didn’t deliberately select three Jewish donors; it never occurred to me to think about their religions. Two of the three, it turns out, are indeed Jewish, though that is not something I mention in my book because it is utterly irrelevant.

Thanks very much for responding to me - much appreciated. It’s great to be able to engage in sensible discussion with thoughtful people about this.

That first link isn’t working (I’m getting a website not found message). The second one takes me to a website with screenshots of lots of tweets containing abusive/unpleasant language and slurs about so-called ‘TERFs’ (a divisive term which I really dislike). Can you please tell me if those are posts predominantly from trans women themselves, mainly from other people who for some reason think it’s ok to speak abusively to people who they disagree with, or from a mixture? I can’t see the sources specified anywhere on the website but it would be important to be clear on that before making any further comment. If these posts are significantly coming from trans women without similarly nasty provocation from the ‘other side’ then there’s clearly an issue to be dealt with and (edited to add) could be considered to constitute a secondary threat (either way content like this should be policed and dealt with). Can you please confirm if you’re able to?

What you’ve posted is absolutely alarming. It looks like what I would call ‘secondary content’ - i.e. content where abuse and slurs link to those engaged in the discourse itself, rather than content documenting the experiences of women who’ve been harmed by trans women in situations of concern like those raised by Rowling around female-only spaces. This type of content exemplifies one of my original points about how the inflammatory discourse around this has detracted from and damaged sensible, proportionate discussion like you and I are trying to engage in here.

What I was originally asking about was larger-scale evidence about the threat that some say trans women pose to women in those primary circumstances described by Rowling.
If you have any links to studies or reviews about the threat that trans women as a population pose to women, please can you post? If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence. The #MeToo movement relied a lot on women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and was extremely powerful- if similar anecdotal evidence existed for harms caused by trans women to women in female-only spaces, taking that as just one example of concern, and women can speak out or are speaking out about that en masse on social media, then it would certainly suggest a threat posed at a population level. (To be clear taking just one example, I personally think that transgender women should be housed separately in prisons, for various reasons, but I’m not convinced that there is the population-level threat that many suggest). Naturally I wouldn’t expect there to be the same volume of anecdotes as for #MeToo because of small numbers of trans women as a percentage of the population, but anecdotal evidence of any significance of scale would be useful to see.

I will say that I’m going into hospital today for a period, so will endeavour to check back at in the future to have a look at anything you share, but won’t be able to read anything you post quickly.

All the best.

I recognize there are clearly people who feel they have been born in the wrong sex and wish to transition gender.

but so what? Unless you think such people actually change sex?

If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence. The #MeToo movement relied a lot on women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and was extremely powerful- if similar anecdotal evidence existed for harms caused by trans women to women in female-only spaces, taking that as just one example of concern, and women can speak out or are speaking out about that en masse on social media, then it would certainly suggest a threat posed at a population level. (To be clear taking just one example, I personally think that transgender women should be housed separately in prisons, for various reasons, but I’m not convinced that there is the population-level threat that many suggest). Naturally I wouldn’t expect there to be the same volume of anecdotes as for #MeToo because of small numbers of trans women as a percentage of the population, but anecdotal evidence of any significance of scale would be useful to see.

No, women should not have to continuously show our wounds and scars and prove we're vulnerable in order to have our rights respected. We should not have to tell the world the most intimate details of what has happened to us, for our accounts to be picked apart and judged - was it really that serious? Is she just making a fuss? Why didn't she just ...? It's not like #MeToo solved anything is it? It was a cathartic moment but sexual violence and coercion and abuse continue unabated.

Sandy Peggie and the Darlington Nurses should not have had to disclose details of their previous abuse in order for their basic rights to be upheld. Peggie and Maria Kelly should not have had to describe the lurid details of their perimenopausal symptoms.

I find it so offensive that women are expected to do this over and over again when the law is on our side:

Allowing men into women only spaces violates our dignity and creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment for us, related to our sex.

It's unlawful. Why isn't that enough?

If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence. The #MeToo movement relied a lot on women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and was extremely powerful- if similar anecdotal evidence existed for harms caused by trans women to women in female-only spaces, taking that as just one example of concern, and women can speak out or are speaking out about that en masse on social media, then it would certainly suggest a threat posed at a population level. (To be clear taking just one example, I personally think that transgender women should be housed separately in prisons, for various reasons, but I’m not convinced that there is the population-level threat that many suggest). Naturally I wouldn’t expect there to be the same volume of anecdotes as for #MeToo because of small numbers of trans women as a percentage of the population, but anecdotal evidence of any significance of scale would be useful to see.

No, women should not have to continuously show our wounds and scars and prove we're vulnerable in order to have our rights respected. We should not have to tell the world the most intimate details of what has happened to us, for our accounts to be picked apart and judged - was it really that serious? Is she just making a fuss? Why didn't she just ...? It's not like #MeToo solved anything is it? It was a cathartic moment but sexual violence and coercion and abuse continue unabated.

Sandy Peggie and the Darlington Nurses should not have had to disclose details of their previous abuse in order for their basic rights to be upheld. Peggie and Maria Kelly should not have had to describe the lurid details of their perimenopausal symptoms.

I find it so offensive that women are expected to do this over and over again when the law is on our side:

Allowing men into women only spaces violates our dignity and creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment for us, related to our sex.

It's unlawful. Why isn't that enough?

If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence. The #MeToo movement relied a lot on women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and was extremely powerful- if similar anecdotal evidence existed for harms caused by trans women to women in female-only spaces, taking that as just one example of concern, and women can speak out or are speaking out about that en masse on social media, then it would certainly suggest a threat posed at a population level. (To be clear taking just one example, I personally think that transgender women should be housed separately in prisons, for various reasons, but I’m not convinced that there is the population-level threat that many suggest). Naturally I wouldn’t expect there to be the same volume of anecdotes as for #MeToo because of small numbers of trans women as a percentage of the population, but anecdotal evidence of any significance of scale would be useful to see.

No, women should not have to continuously show our wounds and scars and prove we're vulnerable in order to have our rights respected. We should not have to tell the world the most intimate details of what has happened to us, for our accounts to be picked apart and judged - was it really that serious? Is she just making a fuss? Why didn't she just ...? It's not like #MeToo solved anything is it? It was a cathartic moment but sexual violence and coercion and abuse continue unabated.

Sandy Peggie and the Darlington Nurses should not have had to disclose details of their previous abuse in order for their basic rights to be upheld. Peggie and Maria Kelly should not have had to describe the lurid details of their perimenopausal symptoms.

I find it so offensive that women are expected to do this over and over again when the law is on our side:

Allowing men into women only spaces violates our dignity and creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment for us, related to our sex.

It's unlawful. Why isn't that enough?

Thanks very much for responding to me - much appreciated. It’s great to be able to engage in sensible discussion with thoughtful people about this.

That first link isn’t working (I’m getting a website not found message). The second one takes me to a website with screenshots of lots of tweets containing abusive/unpleasant language and slurs about so-called ‘TERFs’ (a divisive term which I really dislike). Can you please tell me if those are posts predominantly from trans women themselves, mainly from other people who for some reason think it’s ok to speak abusively to people who they disagree with, or from a mixture? I can’t see the sources specified anywhere on the website but it would be important to be clear on that before making any further comment. If these posts are significantly coming from trans women without similarly nasty provocation from the ‘other side’ then there’s clearly an issue to be dealt with and (edited to add) could be considered to constitute a secondary threat (either way content like this should be policed and dealt with). Can you please confirm if you’re able to?

What you’ve posted is absolutely alarming. It looks like what I would call ‘secondary content’ - i.e. content where abuse and slurs link to those engaged in the discourse itself, rather than content documenting the experiences of women who’ve been harmed by trans women in situations of concern like those raised by Rowling around female-only spaces. This type of content exemplifies one of my original points about how the inflammatory discourse around this has detracted from and damaged sensible, proportionate discussion like you and I are trying to engage in here.

What I was originally asking about was larger-scale evidence about the threat that some say trans women pose to women in those primary circumstances described by Rowling.
If you have any links to studies or reviews about the threat that trans women as a population pose to women, please can you post? If studies/reviews don’t exist yet (I’m sure others with more expertise may know better than me) then online sharing of anecdotal experiences of women in those situations could also form important evidence. The #MeToo movement relied a lot on women sharing their experiences of sexual harassment and was extremely powerful- if similar anecdotal evidence existed for harms caused by trans women to women in female-only spaces, taking that as just one example of concern, and women can speak out or are speaking out about that en masse on social media, then it would certainly suggest a threat posed at a population level. (To be clear taking just one example, I personally think that transgender women should be housed separately in prisons, for various reasons, but I’m not convinced that there is the population-level threat that many suggest). Naturally I wouldn’t expect there to be the same volume of anecdotes as for #MeToo because of small numbers of trans women as a percentage of the population, but anecdotal evidence of any significance of scale would be useful to see.

I will say that I’m going into hospital today for a period, so will endeavour to check back at in the future to have a look at anything you share, but won’t be able to read anything you post quickly.

All the best.

"In my book I demonstrate that mainstream transactivism is not a grassroots movement, but a top-down one. One part of the evidence is that rich individuals and foundations make large donations to campaign groups that, among other things, lobby to erase biological sex from law and to enshrine gender identity in its place. Some of that money is tied to campaigns for gender self-ID. I discuss the ACLU, HRC and Stonewall in most detail, but there are many others. And I give a sense of the funding that comes from rich individuals by discussing three examples: George Soros via the Open Societies Foundation; Jennifer Pritzker via the Tawani Foundation; and Jon Stryker via the Arcus Foundation.
This is in no sense “dark money”, and I don’t say it is. The information is readily available because all such American foundations and charities are legally required to publish details of where they get their money and what they spend it on. I found the information on their websites. This makes a nonsense of Bilek’s claim that I plagiarised her: that these foundations donate heavily to campaign groups that press for gender self-ID is publicly available information, and she and I are not the only ones to have pointed it out.
I didn’t deliberately select three Jewish donors; it never occurred to me to think about their religions. Two of the three, it turns out, are indeed Jewish, though that is not something I mention in my book because it is utterly irrelevant. Judging by the tenor of conversation on Twitter, Jon Stryker may or may not be Jewish: his religion appears not to be a matter of public record. I have not sought to ascertain it, because—again—I think it’s irrelevant. I also think it’s interesting that the people accusing me of antisemitic dog-whistles are speculating about someone’s religion, when I did not even speculate about it."

'I just happen to only mention jewish donors one of which just happened to be the far right's go to man for 'white great replacement theory'…

George Soros really?🤥

Please. That you believe this is any sort of adequate rebuttal or 'coincidence' is only another example of GC denial of reality.

Here is the Brighton WPUK

Plus a meeting in Grenache where Labour Party women had met to discuss what the priorities were as far as they were concerned for the Labour Party. The protestors let off smoke bombs! In Grenache! After the horrific Grenache tower fire! Apparently, women in the Labour Party should not be meeting to discuss their needs.

https://x.com/AjaTheEmpress/status/1237140747289272325

This is helpful also -

As far as large data sets being required for proof of safety or not, how many records need to be collected for an accurate review.

How about this. There is a growing bank of reported incidents. There are only some

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread?latest=0

There is also https://reduxx.info and a site that MN blocks which is “trans crimes Uk dot com” (all one word)

There are UK prisoner statistics broken down into sex offences, there are Canadian, NZ and some USA state statistics. All showing similar patterns. That male people with transgender identities do not commit sex offences at the same rates or lower than the female prisoner population in that country.

What more data and incident repeats are needed by those declaring there is not enough to say there is an issue and we should maintain strong safeguarding where male people are excluded no matter how they identify?

There are also already reports too of female people coming face to face with their male abuser / assaulter in what they expected to be female only spaces. This includes girls. Those female people are being told they have to accept these male people in the spaces they are vulnerable in, dismissed by others.

Even if it is not their abuser specifically, seeing any male person in that space may distress them.

And for those who claim to not be able to reliably identify the correct sex of a human using body cues that cannot be changed, please don’t assume your experience is the universal experience. It is not. For every single male person who ‘transitions’ in real life and with interaction (even if that interaction is limited to observation of movement) there will be atleast one girl or woman who will correctly identify that person’s sex.