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’

You can't talk about FGM; child brides; rape as an instrument of war; the high abandonment of girls in India etc, etc without knowing the difference between men and women.

And you can't talk about either contraception or women's rights without offending people's deeply held religious beliefs.

Reminds me of what Chris Rock said about people burning the US flag. He said that's not my flag, that's yours. You paid for it. You're burning your flag.

I agree with her

And actually I wonder if, had she had a religious motivation for them and been able to point to them as being part of a spiritual belief system, the assessment would've differed.

I don't think so. That's part of what "peak-trans'd" me, so to speak. After being a fully paid-up of the "transwomen are women" crew, I noticed suddenly no-one gave a fuck about intersectionality when it came to Muslim women's rights.

I'm sorry but a white, middle class born-male person who identifies as a woman is not more vulnerable and more entitled to attend a women's only swimming session than a teenage girl from a religious background who isn't allowed to attend mixed sex sessions.

I am still absolutely up for upholding the human rights of trans people. I'm not up for trampling on arrangements put in place to widen access for other marginalised groups. The world isn't divided into non-oppressed non-trans people and oppressed trans people. Other groups are vulnerable too.

For all the squawking on intersectionality, it seems many of those objecting to JKR do not understand that other groups are vulnerable too

As for the poster talking about regulatory capture, I have a friend who works in the court system, fairly senior and they were saying that the court service; the crown prosecution service, etc are heavily invested in the Stonewall approach.

Have a look at Stonewall's Diversity Champions namely the section on government and the legal section. Obviously in an employment tribunal, the legal section is more relevant but the government section shows how they've captured the prosecution services too.

YANBU. I agree with her.

The woke crowd don't give a shit about eg Muslim women when they can dick pander instead, but I think the judiciary would've been on weaker ground. Purely because there is already some existing provision relating to freedom of religious beliefs.

As for the poster talking about regulatory capture, I have a friend who works in the court system, fairly senior and they were saying that the court service; the crown prosecution service, etc are heavily invested in the Stonewall approach.

That was me. I'm public sector so I know firsthand how widespread it is - and that's why I say nothing about this on my personal social media and am careful who I talk to about it IRL.

In my opinion, the Judge who read through her Tweets, saw the photos of Pips, and thought they were "before" and "after" thinking Pips was every day pinkly dressed.
Lots of people don't realize or care to know, that pips alternates between the two personas, so it probably clouded his view of that Tweet, and added to his bias.

I agree with JK Rowling and I admire her immensely for choosing this moment to nail her colours to the mast.

For all the squawking on intersectionality, it seems many of those objecting to JKR do not understand that other groups are vulnerable too

I don't think they understand intersectionality. I think they confuse it with the oppression olympics. It is not the same thing.

I agree with JK Rowling.

I have read some of the criticism she has faced on twitter. None of it is challenging what she actually wrote. It's bizarre, almost like no one can actually formulate a reasonable argument against it

Hear, hear Jamie

Bunce and Murray are both clearly male; one of them presents as a man full time and the other presents as a man half the week.

Yet now we have a situation where their dignity is so elevated, all women must disregard the evidence of their own eyes and lie, pretending that one is neither a man nor a woman, and the other can alternately be a man and a woman as it takes his fancy. And if you don't lie...no job for you!

Women's employment is now dependent on their willingness to be subservient to men's subjective feelings.

I can't believe there is any woman on this earth who doesn't stand with JKR!

A pp commented how "many" people have hidden the Feminism board.

Considering there is unanimous agreement (apart from our dearly departed little bridge dweller), then why not unhide it?

Because its basically this. We've been trying to point out this sort of shit for years. If you believe women exist and have rights that need protecting, you are a feminist.

Mauvaisereputation, you misunderstand. Could this be why you have a bad reputation?

I can’t understand how Pips is allowed wearing the clothes that they do to work when no doubt other women would be told to dress appropriately.

I’m with JKR and Maya. The comments show the mentality of a lot of these.

The judgment seems a little misunderstood to me - Maya's views were not deemed unlawful they were deemed as a protected characteristic in themselves.

Or am I missing something?

Sorry that's nonsense now - I meant they were NOT deemed as a protected characteristic in themselves.

That's not what para 84 says, Riddley.

I can’t understand how Pips is allowed wearing the clothes that they do to work when no doubt other women would be told to dress appropriately

One rule for the blokes, another for the women. Pips is brave and stunning, a woman dressing the same is mutton dressed as lamb.

My reply was to your previous post, Riddley. Yes, that was the context, but I think the judge's comments went beyond "this is not protected" to "this is not a legitimate view".

Some TRAs are relentless and probably capable of being quite dangerous when provoked given their threats

And this woman is also relentless. And capable of being very dangerous when it comes to defending women's rights

Of course she's right.