JKR "An Update to My Essay of June 2020"

I’m speaking on behalf of women as a sex. I respect the rights of other women to have opinions that differ from my own on this and many other topics. But I don’t have to think they’re right.

I think @CoolforKats is saying he’s a wee bit tired from all the shouting into the void, and as it’s very late in the Southern Hemisphere he’s off for a little sleep.

KTS has saved lives - literally in person and regularly through her research, passion and determination to ensure safety in toilets is paramount. That all you can muster in response is a sneery use of an emoji doesn't shock me in the least, in fact, in doing so you just remind us of your inadequacies.

I just don't think that argument will convince the ECHR of anything, and that is your problem, not JKR.

What's the biological sex of the cat that's got your tongue ?😅

That is an impressive response - in one character you have told us so much about you and your arguments...

my commiserations.

All of these discussions end up here, as to what unites women, and simultaneously means no so-called 'transwoman' can ever enter the fold.

Since they don't have anything of substance, the TRAs wander away, and come back to try their luck later when they think the coast is clear🙄

It must be really difficult being lumbered with the dumbest ideology ever.

Exactly. That’s all you’ve got.

😴

It sums up all these threads that when it comes to the practicalities, @CoolforKats isn't able to answer. It’s all poncy language and no substance.

I have looked at everyone views on this - when it comes down to practical details on how to deal with ‘inclusive’ ie free for all toilets, it becomes ludicrous. One way mirrors, weighted floors etc.

We need simple, functional, safe, hygienic so easy to clean toilets that are cost effective and have a high turnover in the shortest time. That is cubicles (with door gaps over and under the doors and partitions as permitted in single sex environments) in a separate sex environment.

Going back to JKR and her discussion on privileged beliefs it also applies to toilet design. The builders tend to think along health and safety lines as do the Health and Safety Executive and Building Safety Regulator. It’s certain trendy architects with an agenda, and people with no experience but with an agenda who do not follow regulations and reinvent toilet designs.

Can JKR speak for all women?

No

Does any women have the right to speak for other women to allow males into women only spaces?

No.

Good, glad we cleared that one up.

I do think it’s a bit rich to suggest that nobody wants to know Rowling’s opinion when her ‘likes’ on social media were forensically analysed before she expressed any opinion on this subject.

When JKR says "That’s why women and girls want separate changing rooms and public bathrooms" she is reflecting the opinion polls, which all show that a majority of women do not want males, including trans-identified males, in their spaces. JKR can see the vicious punishments that have been inflicted on women who speak out and so she is using her position of strength to speak on behalf of those women. Simples.

Women, not being a monolith of experience & understanding...

You're nearly there, Kool. You might even say women differ in every possible way but one - United by our shared biology.

Because that's it. That's the only thing women from the paleolithic, 10th century Japan, the Amazon rain forest, the court of Louis IVX, my daughter and Judith flaming Butler have that united them. Our female biology. Or our sex, to put it bluntly.

And no transwoman ever will.

Women, not being a monolith of experience & understanding means they don't all assess risk in the same way hence the diiference of opinion regarding trans women as a safety risk

When deciding on public policy, assessments of risk are supposed to be based on evidence, not personal opinion.

There is no data to show that trans women are less of a threat to women than other men.

You are right that Rowling’s opinion does not and should not decide public policy and law, so those who disagree with her would make better use of their time if they engaged with the available evidence and proposed how legislation should change.

First, of course, you would have to clearly define ‘trans’ and I don’t think that would be popular in the community.

A lot of this though is a red herring - designed to look so important a discussion that it hides the real underlying issues...

At the core of this is:

• born man or born woman
• can't change sex
• both sexes are allowed (morally / ethically and legally) to have their own spaces

That is it - there is nothing more to this argument than that.

The first two are immutable facts of biology and it doesn't matter whether all women or all men or any combination wants to accept them - they just are...
you could have every person in the world disagreeing with those two statements and it makes no difference - they will carry on being true.

Truth is not changed by perception or belief. The % of agreement doesn't change reality - it can explain tensions and discussions and disagreements - but it makes zero difference to actual biological reality.

The last is our society's decision - and yes that can be changed - it would be a degenerate society that did so, but that is where those who have an agenda can deploy it if they wish - but to change it means doing so legally and through parliament - not the current bullying, lies, deception, pressure, cancelling, etc. which are the current tools of the trade to change a society away from a recognition of truth and reality, and the care for particularly the more vulnerable members of society; to a society based on anarchy and male oppression.

What is so superb about the current discussions is that reality and truth have not just been established in the country (that has been a continuous part of our history for centuries), but that they have been acknowledged and cemented in as indisputable truths.

It makes these discussions a bit pointless - because the battles are won, the war is won - truth has triumphed and as most people are decent, so gradually the clouds are lifting and people are reverting to normality - and we are seeing a clearer and clearer understanding of the lies and deception that led us into this place - and rejecting them.

JKR has been a superb part (alongside many others) in moving this along - the only reason anyone argues against her is in a desperate attempt to hold back truth and reality - however it won't matter what they do, all she has to do is keep reiterating truth - there is no flaw to truth and it can not be brought down - it just is.

So, continue to dive down into the weeds and make claims around % of people who someone speaks for - it is irrelevant - JKR is not creating her own philosophy or agenda - she is simply highlighting truth - and anyone who stands against truth and reality, well a) they have already lost this battle and b) we have to question their motives - they can not be good or healthy for society.

Yet in building regulations and standards and legislation the designs for men, women and unisex facilities are set. Thousands of pages on toilet design throughout the years. Dictated to by health and safety and biological differences.

Unless we are to scrap all the above and have a free for all, all toilets will have to become universal rooms. No more cubicles. It would cost millions. Who is to fund it?

I used to frequent a different board and there was a very dull poster who always got terribly indignant whenever anyone referred to 'we' thinking/doing anything (random but real examples, Irish people wrt funeral practices or proportional representation), demanding to know who 'we' were and was there any documentation to prove their opinion was completely united, not something that had been claimed.

I came to the conclusion that he had few friends and little social experience, but also noted that he was ex-army (UK) and wondered had he been trained to reject expressions of general opinion on principle. He did go in for divide and rule games.

For me, 'we' is the many people I know and read and hear to share a specific state or experience.

@CoolforKats

You don’t believe women should use their experiences to shape how they view the world or assess the risks and disadvantages caused by men who wish to access women’s spaces. Can I double check that’s what you mean?

’Like JKR your'e conveniently making the false equivalence of women's experiences with cis men & trans women. Clearly the women who don't agree with JKR aren't hence they don't clock trans women as a risk.’

No. I am stating my belief which is supported by evidence which you may easily when you search VAWG statistics, rates of sexual offence by TIMs in prison, and from a basic knowledge of women’s history.

I don’t wish to make any assumptions about you, your intentions, or your level of knowledge in these subjects; please don’t make assumptions about me.

or b) that life experience should be allowed to shape how they view the world and, in this case, assess the risks and disadvantages caused by men trying to access women’s spaces.
Is this an accurate reading of your position?

Yes.

Are there areas where it is permissible for women to share their experience and knowledge, or is it only in relation to ‘trans rights’ that they should keep quiet and put up?

I never suggested they shouldn't. I simply said they as in the Gender critical movement don't get to speak on behalf of all women as if we agree when we clearly don't.

With that commonality and history comes shared experiences that are familiar to more women than not.

Like JKR your'e conveniently making the false equivalence of women's experiences with cis men & trans women. Clearly the women who don't agree with JKR aren't hence they don't clock trans women as a risk.

Like JKR says experience matters but not quite in the way she imagines it does.

@CoolforKats you said to @socialdilemmawhattodo ‘Well as a woman you don't get to speak for all women which is the fundamental flaw of JKR's reasoning particularly given she asserts experience gives her authority to do so. ’

I understand that to mean you don’t think women should either; a) share their life experience with other people, especially if they can command a large or influential audience, or b) that life experience should be allowed to shape how they view the world and, in this case, assess the risks and disadvantages caused by men trying to access women’s spaces.

Is this an accurate reading of your position?
Are there areas where it is permissible for women to share their experience and knowledge, or is it only in relation to ‘trans rights’ that they should keep quiet and put up?

You’re right women aren’t a monolith, but we share a common biology and a very long history of oppression that is recognized by our rights in law to single sex spaces and protection from predatory men (sigh, yes, not all men or TIMs).

With that commonality and history comes shared experiences that are familiar to more women than not.

To be fair, is there any evidence he didn't say that?

A lot of famous quotes are attributed to Churchill.

“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”

But it's quite possible some have been overlooked.

.

Most women see males as a safety risk. 99.99999999% of women see males as a safety risk.

Strange how none of you can ever explain in your own words any arguments. You c/p misogynistic MRA 'essays' but when asked to explain, you don't even understand what you read. You realise you are making a fool of yourself on here. Right?