To agree with JK Rowling?

[StraightenUpAndFryRight]

mobile.twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1207646162813100033

‘Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.
But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?
#IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill’

Good post, Babies.

What is it with the authoritarian impulse in humanity?

Seriously, do the current progressives think that the only problem with the authoritarians of the past is that they were trying to impose the wrong things, and that as long as you're trying to impose what you consider 'good' things, you're golden?

And you clearly aren't bothered about the distress it might cause a trans person to be misgendered.

I wish being misgendered was the worst that could happen to girls who are placed in harm's way when grown men are granted access to their spaces thanks to self ID.

Tellmetruth what a ridiculous comment to say the people who murder trans women should have a special word. A murderer is a murderer simple as that, no special category needed.

And even if 100% of Brits believed that sex is mutable, that males can literally become female, that a GRC literally changes the sex of someone for all purposes, 100% of Brits would still be wrong.

Women, know your place. Your distress is less important than that of the people born with penises.

Well, fuck that for a game of soldiers.

Let's face it, all those societies knew exactly who were the males and who were the females.

Well quite. Just like all societies know the difference between cats and dogs.

Funnily enough, not all facts are culturally dependent. Take biological sex, for example.

And you clearly aren't bothered about the distress it might cause a trans person to be misgendered.

Distress because someone calls you by the pronoun which objectively describes your irrefutable biological sex? Because someone has refused to LIE?

I'm curious why murder is even coming up in this conversation ?

Transpeople in UK are less likely to be murdered than women in the UK, and we don't have a special term for woman-murderers.

Tiny point, but Maya and JKR clearly did not murder anyone, nor is recognising the sex of a person like Gregor akin to murder.

I truly cannot believe the guff people come up with to defend their sex-denialism.

I wish being misgendered was the worst that could happen to girls who are placed in harm's way when grown men are granted access to their spaces thanks to self ID.

Ex-fucking-actly.

Imagine if being misgendered was the worst thing that women had to worry about.

And mr Murray is definitely a mr, not a miss or Mrs. Would any of the women in the Scottish Parliament been happy to share a toilet space with him, I don’t think so. For all their shortcomings at least the SNP dumped him.

The problem I have with this is the attempt to suppress freedom of opinion. It’s like thoughtcrime - who would have thought Orwell’s dystopian 1984 would come true!

Again, ‘misgendering’ does not cause trans people distress. Correctly gendering a male as a man does not CAUSE distress, if a transwomen is distressed by being correctly identified as a man then the cause of distress is their own mind. They need help for that, not a legal route to force the rest of us to tell lies that do cause actual harm to all women and girls. They may not cause you distress currently, but that’s a lot like when women claim they’ve never been raped or beaten when working in sex trade- give it ten years and they will realise the reality of being a woman catches up with all of us.

No, the point you're making is equivalent to arguing that atheists shouldn't be allowed to say that God doesn't exist because doing so might hurt or offend religious people

Let's look at this soundbite more critically.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them? I would like to think most people wouldn't. So why would you purposely misgender someone, just to uphold your beliefs?

To be honest if they believe it so sincerely then it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks should it? The fact that the whole thing relies on everyone else lying and playing along, being 'polite and courteous' in order for it to even work says it all.

It does.

And you clearly aren't bothered about the distress it might cause a trans person to be misgendered.

I accept that this might cause distress.

However, without sex based rights are the thing that stop women being treated as baby making machines owned by men.

and identify as female

I honestly have no idea what this means. How do you identify as female. What are you identifying with? How is your identity different to a non-binary or male identity? Do you believe that if you didn't identify as female you wouldn't need sex based rights?

Answer me this, book burners.

Why is Gregor Murray's distress at being 'misgendered' so important that a woman's speech (which did not incite violence) must henceforth be restricted and punished ?

Why is the value on his distress so much higher than the value placed on Maya's ?

Come on, use some critical thought here (and reduce your reliance on inaccurate or flat our wrong stats and heuristics).

Sorry: without sex based rights are the thing that stop women being treated as baby making machines owned by men.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them? I would like to think most people wouldn't. So why would you purposely misgender someone, just to uphold your beliefs?

What about when the religious colleague tells you you're going to hell? Are you allowed to say anything back or are you just supposed to agree? Context is everything and you are misrepresenting it.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them

Maya didn't do this.

Maya did not walk up to a work colleague and say 'Hey, you're not a woman, you're a man!'

This did not happen. Fake analogy, fake news.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them?
No. But they aren’t trying to tell me I also have to believe in their God and if I don’t it’s discrimination.

Why is the value on his distress so much higher than the value placed on Maya's ?

It's a puzzler to be sure.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them?

No.

But would I walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was trying to compel me to say "God exists", regardless of my beliefs, wishes, right to free speech and objective facts?
Yes, I might do.

Would you walk up to a work colleague who was a committed Christian who was minding their own business and announce 'God doesn't exist' just to offend them? I would like to think most people wouldn't. So why would you purposely misgender someone, just to uphold your beliefs?

This is shifting ground because I don’t think there is any suggestion Maya Forstater did this.

If someone posted on Twitter that they thought religious belief was irrational, no one would bat an eyelid even though some religious people may be offended.

What this ruling says, using said fake analogy, is that women can of course believe in, and speak about their silly new belief that God doesn't exist (an abstract, not a personal concept), but that if they do, and they lose employment as a result, all good, because the idea that God doesn't exist is not worthy of respect in a democratic society, that the only stance that can be respected in a democratic society is one of fervent belief in God, or, at the outer limits of social acceptability, agnosticism.