Why do some people view JK Rowling as transphobic?

Generally speaking, the conflict between the fundamental, inalienable rights of women to single sex spaces, and the fundamental, inalienable rights of trans people to live - and be identified - as they are is a circle you cannot square.*

Of course you can! Trans people are people of one sex, who choose to present as the other sex, and would like to be interacted with as though they were that other sex. As such, in any area where sex is irrelevant, people are perfectly free (though not obligated) to interact with them as though they were indeed the other sex. And in the few areas where sex matters, they must conform to what is expected of them as members of their sex, like is expected from everyone else of their sex.

There's literally nothing complicated in this.

I wish you were wrong, but yeah, I see it everywhere on the internet. It doesn't matter what is said; it can be the most innocuous thing, or even the most obvious, as obvious as "water makes things wet". If it can be made to be about trans people in any way, then accusations and abuse are bound to follow.

And I see the consequences in my real life, in how carefully people tip-toe around me, how they preface any necessary mention of my being trans with excuses, how even old friends or colleagues don't dare to mention my "previous life" - hell, even how shocked people sometimes are when I casually mention some aspect of my trans life, like the fact that it's my ex who's my son's father!

I hate being treated either like some glass sculpture that's gonna break if people say the wrong word, or like a time bomb that's gonna explode at the slightest opportunity 😡But I can't be mad at people, because I sure understand how they got there!

Is that why they carry pads or tampons because they’re women?

Yes I saw that - I also saw a large number of ppl pointing out to the "waaaaah he's dead to me now" crew that they're attempts to shame actors and cancel JKR doesn't work, hasn't worked and won't work in the future so maybe they should pipe down

Exactly - it's so deeply tediously performative dull witted

for example - TW are men and therefore have a prostate. Should they be advised to have their prostate checked or would reminding of this inalienable male biological part of them be transphobic because they are not being regarded and treated as a women at all times by all ppl?

Someone asked if anyone has looked at X/Twitter. Posts like this one from 2022, are very telling. Such a rational response to JKR's post saying 'Merry Terfmus'.

Currently, Nicholas Hoult is in trouble for being cast in the new HP series.

ETA - it looks like the image was denied. I'm not surprised, as it contained threats of bodily harm towards JKR.

Has any person the right to ignore their sex?

Has anyone the right to redefine single sex spaces as for anyone of that sex and them, because their sex doesnt count.

Anyone has the right to live in a fantasy world where they are the opposite sex, or somehow their sex doesnt count. But it can only be in their head.

No one has the right to make anyone else get involved. People in charge of safeguarding have no right to ignore someones sex.

No truly impartial observer of all this comes out with the “but they just want to livvvve that’s literally all it is” line. Like it or not you are exhibiting your own bias and the assumptions you have made.

the fundamental, inalienable rights of trans people to live - and be identified - as they are

This isn’t “triggering”, but adopting your meaning of “as they are”, it’s just not a right anyone has, neither fundamental, nor inalienable, and not a right in any sense of the word.

So there’s really nothing that needs squaring.

Quite.

it’s laziness. They’ve been told by their ‘progressive’ friend who was told by their colleague who was told by their non binary neighbour who was told by face book that she is an evil transphobic witch. When you try to tie them down to find out what she said and what their specific understanding and interpretation of her actual written words are, they just can’t say. Because they just haven’t read any of it first hand.

No, I expect you to see trans rights activism as absurd. That’s the point. What’s fascinating is how quickly you jumped to attack me personally. I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Thanks for confirming my first impression.

"Maybe I just need a better understanding of quantum physics?"

Frankly, I'd settle for people having a basic understanding of biology. 🙄

I see all extremists as fundamentally absurd.

But the fact you've fixated on your misunderstanding of my quoted post and, via a process of mental gymnastics, concluded I see one of your tribes as more absurd than the other is as revealing as it is fascinating.

And, also, part of the problem.

Generally speaking, the conflict between the fundamental, inalienable rights of women to single sex spaces, and the fundamental, inalienable rights of trans people to live - and be identified - as they are* is a circle you cannot square.

*And yes, I am fully aware that that statement is triggering to certain types of poster who I can even now hear spluttering over their tea and preparing to engage in keyboard warfare. Such people neither bother nor interest me.

It's weirder than that.

As far as I can see the belief is that a few spaces should be single sex on the basis that it is sometimes reasonable to object to the presence of the opposite sex, but also you may not object to the presence of the opposite sex.

Maybe I just need a better understanding of quantum physics?

This definitely proves it!! Excellent!

That would be the matter/anti-matter collision of 'transgender' and rational, fact-based objective thought...

I mean, maybe there’s something I’m missing, but people who believe some spaces, sports etc should be for women only, but believe a few men should be categorised as women so they can use them too? On their say so? Weird, right?

Can I ask why exactly, as a supposedly impartial commentator, you don’t see trans rights activism as the fundamentally absurd position?

Anyone can id as trans.

Trans is declared as vulnerable, marginalised, minority.

Its pushing down to critises anyone who is vulnerable, marginalised, a minority.

We've just created a protected class where anyone can identify into who's actions cannot be criticised.

Meanwhile Eddie Izzard is taking any opportunity he can to go into women's toilets.

Its not reasonable, measured or kind to ignore what's going on.

Perfect!😁

Yes, exactly. No clearer is this than on Reddit and BlueSky.

Well, that explains everything.

I sometimes wonder if the the word 'transgender' or 'trans' and rational, fact-based objective thought are like matter and anti-matter, or oil and water, or something.

The knee-jerk accusations of transphobia against JKR, despite the absence of any evidence and the presence of evidence to the contrary is a good example.
The treatment of Sophie Cunningham is another: she has never said anything negative about transpeople either, and has denied any accusations of transphobia, and denied that she has ever taken any political position.

But because the word 'transgender' is involved, the facts don't matter, and a barrage of accusations and abuse appears as if by magic, unconnected to fact or reality.

The appearance of the word 'transgender' also seems to inevitably trigger the automatic release mechanism on a load of clichés including 'culture war' '#bekind' 'toxicity' 'both sides' 'take the heat out of the debate' -
seriously, look at how often those very words appear in statements from people who in other contexts are capable of at least a degree of independent thought and critical analysis.

I'm sure it has happened before in history - witch hunts, 'reds under the bed' scares, religious extremism - but I assume the internet/social media has turbocharged it.