“Heated Rivalry” author Rachel Reid on J. K. Rowling - “the bar is pretty high in how evil you have to be,” “ I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes”

"Could it have something to do with the power difference between male and female people combined with vulnerability in domestic situations? Meaning it is rare that female people attack male partners because female people will rarely overpower that male partner."

It's actually not rare that females attack their male partners in fact the numbers are comparable in studies. The difference is in the severity of violence. But Lesbian partners? There's significantly more severity between them and straight women. Why would that be? I suspect masculine behavioural patterns that more aligns them with male violence. Conversely that gay males are less violent than lesbians might therefore be related to effeminacy.

Cue trans identification?

"Do lesbian women have a greater rate of committing general female on female violence outside of domestic situations?

I'm not aware of studies that show that. From my understanding the studies done are more about intimate partner violence.

"And do lesbians also commit violence at the same rate as the male population in general? By all means, please show those rates.)"

Irrelevant to the point that lesbians are not representative of all women as trans women are not representative of all men.

"You didn't demonstrate anything that was useful to making safeguarding decisions.

I didn't need to as that isn't relevant to the point of false stereotyping by JKR being discussed on this thread.

"The point is also that even if there were sub groups within that segregation characteristic that had a lower rate of risk of committing violence or abuse towards female people, it should not also be up to female people to have to check if the male person accessing a female single sex provision is part of that sub group or not. Hence, ALL people in that segregated characteristic are excluded with no exceptions. ie. all male people above the age of about 8 years old are legitimately excluded."

Irrelevant to the discussion on this thread.

Why Iran?

I think maybe you missed the state of emergency where no western media was covering the actions of the Iranian regime in the beginning. Did you also then miss how media agencies were not allowed in to report and that one of the ways news spread around the world was because of social media used by people posting from Iran?

Most of her posts at the time were reposts from the rare few posts coming from within Iran when media outlets were still attempting to get confirmation about what was happening before reporting. It must be someone hard of thinking who cannot understand why she would do this.

She posts and reposts about the women and children in Afghanistan too. Or did you miss those? She also posts about women and children in other countries.

Are you so hard of thinking that you don’t understand why she recently ‘upped’ her posts about Iran at a time when protesters were being killed and it was not being reported in the world’s media?

"Could it have something to do with the power difference between male and female people combined with vulnerability in domestic situations? Meaning it is rare that female people attack male partners because female people will rarely overpower that male partner."

It's actually not rare that females attack their male partners in fact the numbers are comparable in studies. The difference is in the severity of violence. But Lesbian partners? There's significantly more severity between them and straight women. Why would that be? I suspect masculine behavioural patterns that more aligns them with male violence. Conversely that gay males are less violent than lesbians might therefore be related to effeminacy.

Cue trans identification?

"Do lesbian women have a greater rate of committing general female on female violence outside of domestic situations?

I'm not aware of studies that show that. From my understanding the studies done are more about intimate partner violence.

"And do lesbians also commit violence at the same rate as the male population in general? By all means, please show those rates.)"

Irrelevant to the point that lesbians are not representative of all women as trans women are not representative of all men.

"You didn't demonstrate anything that was useful to making safeguarding decisions.

I didn't need to as that isn't relevant to the point of false stereotyping by JKR being discussed on this thread.

"The point is also that even if there were sub groups within that segregation characteristic that had a lower rate of risk of committing violence or abuse towards female people, it should not also be up to female people to have to check if the male person accessing a female single sex provision is part of that sub group or not. Hence, ALL people in that segregated characteristic are excluded with no exceptions. ie. all male people above the age of about 8 years old are legitimately excluded."

Irrelevant to the discussion on this thread.

If anyone is getting a hard on it’s you, over JKR.

Not sure why you think she owe’s you an opinion on Gaza, Iran, who’s going to win an Oscar or if pineapple belongs on pizza.

Ask yourself why Iran? Why not the multitude of other countries that practice human rights violations of women? I noticed she's recently upped the posting on Iran….& here we go again off to war & regime change. How 'coincidental'.

Ah no. We have nothing in terms of conclusions about trans women offending rates which is the point that you are diverting from.

Your grasp of white women in western countries gnashing their teeth having any impact on Iranian women is subpar. Outcomes?

Other than manufacturing public consent for war/regime change? NIL

There's a movement in Iran who's slogan is Women, Life, Freedom, they've been campaign for years, at great personal cost.

She's been highlighting their justifiable cause. She's following the lead of women in Iran and showing her support for their fight not trying to cause a 'regime change'.

Your grasp on geopolitics really is subpar.

She's posted about the situation in Sudan, Afghanistan and many other places. Iran is in the process of arresting, beating and murdering it's citizens, especially the female one's, why wouldn't she highlight the concerning situation?

What sort of warped and bitter mind must a person have to criticise her for doing so. 🤢

FYI there is no genocide in Gaza, which might be why she hasn't posted about it.

She's been exclusively on Iran for ages. To what end? Her twitter supporters knowledge 'saving' Iranian women? Or manufacturing public consent for regime change.

The proof is in the outcomes.

Not in that record time of a few months & not on a population half of which are children.

God, I knew Gaza would be brought up, not Sudan, or China (Uighurs) or Burma (Rohingya) or Yemen or any of the other places where far more people have died.

She's posted about the situation in Sudan, Afghanistan and many other places. Iran is in the process of arresting, beating and murdering it's citizens, especially the female one's, why wouldn't she highlight the concerning situation?

What sort of warped and bitter mind must a person have to criticise her for doing so. 🤢

FYI there is no genocide in Gaza, which might be why she hasn't posted about it.

And yet she's so silent on a genocide in Gaza. Selective 'attention' betrays all.

'We' do have conclusions that can be legitimately drawn from male people's prison rates. We can conclude that male people with transgender identities are convicted and imprisoned at a rate that is greater than the rate of female people generally. With that, we can conclude that they continue to commit sex offences at a male rate in the UK and not at a female rate of sex offences in the UK.

You have not presented any evidence that explains why that group's prison statistics should not be considered as an indication that with transition they don't commit sex offences at a rate similar to all other male people.

Ask yourself why Iran? Why not the multitude of other countries that practice human rights violations of women? I noticed she's recently upped the posting on Iran….& here we go again off to war & regime change. How 'coincidental'.

Which other government has recently killed 30K+ of its own citizen for demonstrating for their democratic rights and is killing more?
Personally I think you have to be an utter fuckwit to criticize someone who is drawing attention to the situation in Iran.

Ask yourself why Iran? Why not the multitude of other countries that practice human rights violations of women? I noticed she's recently upped the posting on Iran….& here we go again off to war & regime change. How 'coincidental'.

Ah no. We have nothing in terms of conclusions about trans women offending rates which is the point that you are diverting from.

What part of JK Rowling's actions in regard to Iran is not specifically about protecting female people? Are you about to tell us that she doesn't sponsor programmes which are open to Muslim women and children? Didn't she assist in helping a group of female lawyers escape from Afghanistan?

With this post you do seem to be saying that JK Rowling should STFU about anything that you, personally, deem she should not discuss. Which could be twisted to be about anything using the bad faith arguments you have used here.

'she certainly contributes to manufacturing consent from the masses.'

It really is clear that you hold her to a much higher standard than anyone else and any media agency so that you personally feel justified in demonising her. Your prejudice is clear.

Apparently, she is personally responsible for influencing Kier Starmer as well you say? Yet, somehow Starmer makes decisions that she doesn't agree with. Remarkable, isn't it? That she demonstrably doesn't seem to have any additional power that any other person in the UK doesn't have to influence Starmer who is also ultimately responsible to his constituency as well as his party members.

You used a statement about lesbians committing more domestic abuse than heterosexual women. (By the way, would you like to think about 'why' that might be? Could it have something to do with the power difference between male and female people combined with vulnerability in domestic situations? Meaning it is rare that female people attack male partners because female people will rarely overpower that male partner. Do lesbian women have a greater rate of committing general female on female violence outside of domestic situations? And do lesbians also commit violence at the same rate as the male population in general? By all means, please show those rates.)

You didn't demonstrate anything that was useful to making safeguarding decisions. The safeguarding principles used for policies around accessing publicly accessible provisions are applied equally across the characteristic that is being segregated. Because no one using the provision at the time should have the onus of carrying out an instant case by case risk assessment if someone of the excluded characteristic enters the provision.

The point is also that even if there were sub groups within that segregation characteristic that had a lower rate of risk of committing violence or abuse towards female people, it should not also be up to female people to have to check if the male person accessing a female single sex provision is part of that sub group or not. Hence, ALL people in that segregated characteristic are excluded with no exceptions. ie. all male people above the age of about 8 years old are legitimately excluded.

The point there is 'legitimately'. Because the discrimination has to be legitimately applied. Applying the exclusion to publicly accessible single sex provisions based on sexual orientation where it unfairly excluded a group within that sex class would not be appropriate. Hence, exceptions such as excluding lesbians from female single sex publicly accessible provisions would not be legitimate.

As I also said, it is not just based on risk to safety. It is also based on privacy and dignity. That privacy and dignity does not apply within a sex class for the purpose of accessing a provision, only between the sex categories.

So, even if the statistics were wrong and male people with transgender identities were proven to commit sex crime at the same rate as the general female population, that they are male people means they are excluded based on the privacy and dignity needs of female people.

People with transgender identities have not changed sex therefore they are treated as all the rest of the people in their sex category for the purposes of being excluded from the opposite sex single sex provisions.