To think JK Rowling is a fabulous human being

[TheAdventuresoftheWishingChair]

I just came across her book, 'Very Good Lives' which is all about overcoming adversity. I think it's so important that successful women talk about the times they've failed and how success is about pushing past that. I'm reading it just at a time I need to hear that message. I can definitely recommend buying a copy if you are in need of a boost or have some pennies to spend on something nourishing.

I was also looking into her charity, Lumos, and I had no idea just how much she was trying to help disadvantaged children. I love that she's putting her money and position to good use.

The term 'national treasure' generally makes me want to poke my own eyeballs out with a rusty kitchen utensil but AIBU to say she is an utter treasure and we are lucky to have her. She makes the world a better place.

That's all!

Women who fit her own version of womanhood, that is

What's your 'version' then? What is a woman?

As for JKR - amid a global pandemic, and the biggest civil rights protests for a generation, why did she feel the need to take shots at one of the most marginalised groups of people in society?

So she has talked about the pandemic (a lot) and she has talked about Black Lives Matter, a lot, but you feel - although she is a woman - she should not talk about women right now, is that right?

@yelyah22

I found the definition of 'woman' as: a female human being.

I found the definition of 'female', to clarify, as: "of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes.".

So by this definition, women born without ovaries, that cannot bear offspring, or cannot produce eggs, aren't female. What are they, then? Surely you can see that using very strict descriptions is harmful for the people who fall outside of them?

Did you even read that definition? The key phrase in that definition is of the sex. So women born without ovaries or a womb are still women.

"SHE'S STANDING UP 4 WOMEN!!!!!" - yeah. Women who fit her own version of womanhood, that is

Presumably her 'version of womanhood' is humans who are um.... Women - ie. Adult human female.

What's your 'version of womanhood', how do you define womanhood?

I'm not being disingenuous when I ask why referring to women who were assigned female at birth takes away from the fact that they suffer oppression - I would like to know how that works. As far as I can see, it's just a descriptor to clarify, as there are women who aren't AFAB. Whether or not you personally agree with their designation as women, there exists in many countries legal recognition for trans women to be designated as women. I use the legal recognition as a point here, as it's clear that the biological description of 'female' doesn't even cover all AFAB women, and there's 0 point using your or my personal definition of what a woman is, as it's clearly v different and not a useful starting point.

So by this definition, women born without ovaries, that cannot bear offspring, or cannot produce eggs, aren't female. What are they, then? Surely you can see that using very strict descriptions is harmful for the people who fall outside of them?

Christ on a crumpet, this again? Do you know what 'of the sex' means?

I'm not being disingenuous when I ask why referring to women who were assigned female at birth takes away from the fact that they suffer oppression - I would like to know how that works. As far as I can see, it's just a descriptor to clarify, as there are women who aren't AFAB.

What is the criteria for being assigned female at birth? And who does this assigning?

@Ickabog

Pleased

Please don't eat me!

@yelyah22
So by this definition, women born without ovaries, that cannot bear offspring, or cannot produce eggs, aren't female

Of course they are still women, in the same way that anyone born with only one leg or one arm is still human, but the normal human body has two legs and two arms.

For the continuation of the species, we still rely on the female of the species being able to produce eggs.

Does that help? Again, what is your definition of woman, please ?

Please don't eat me!

Nom nom nom.

I use the legal recognition as a point here, as it's clear that the biological description of 'female' doesn't even cover all AFAB women

It does. Again, what do you think the 'of the sex' part of the definition means?

FFS
Women born without ovaries are still women.

Just as people born without arms, are still human.

This doesn't mean humans don't have arms.

It means these people have been born with an abnormality.

Normal human beings have arms.

Normal women have ovaries.

It's not fucking difficult, don't pretend it is.

I'm not being disingenuous when I ask why referring to women who were assigned female at birth takes away from the fact that they suffer oppression

Because they weren't 'assigned female at birth', their sex was observed. They cannot identify out of that sex, they can't change that assignment. Babies who were murdered at birth for being female weren't 'assigned female at birth' were they?

there's 0 point using your or my personal definition of what a woman is, as it's clearly v different and not a useful starting point.

😂😂😂

Yeah, feminism, women's rights, yeah! Who cares that we can't define woman, it's a mere irrelevant detail, let's just fight for women's rights anyway!

Give me strength...

what is your definition of woman, please

You can't talk about that. You can't talk about women's rights during a pandemic, during Black Lives Matter protests, during Pride month, if you talk about women now you are very bad. If you talk about women without including men who identify as women you are a super bad terf cunt.

What is the criteria for being assigned female at birth? And who does this assigning?

Yes, good question. What are the criteria for being 'assigned female at birth'? How do they know what category to put each baby in?

I wasn't 'assigned' anything at birth. What a crock of old shite.

as there are women who aren't AFAB.
Observed, not assigned. Nobody arbitrarily "assigns" a sex to newborns, it's there for all to see. No mistakes are made, sex is innate and cannot be changed.

@yelyah22 could you also explain how sex is assigned at birth? because I've had two babies so far, currently pregnant with a third, and in my experience, a sonographer was able to observe the sex of my babies on the ultrasound, which was then confirmed by the midwife at the time of birth. It wasn't assigned, which implies almost an active decision on the midwives part, but observed on the basis of genitalia.

Sorry what I meant was, it doesn't mean that people born without arms, are not human beings. Or girls born without ovaries, are not women.

And this:

Stop fucking pretending you don't know what a woman is, when you don't want to do the fucking housework or wipe the arses, you know well enough who to dump it on

Babies who were murdered at birth for being female weren't 'assigned female at birth' were they?

If people are assigned either male or female at birth then the people who assign babies as female should be prosecuted for child abuse imo.

What's your 'version of womanhood', how do you define womanhood?

Women are, in my opinion, whoever says they are. It's not my job to define another person's identity. This is where I think I butt heads with the gender crit crowd, because most I've seen say they're not against people being trans, but when pressed on why trans women can't call themselves women, they either say a) they didn't have formative female experiences (which aren't universal) OR b) this means men will self-identify as trans to harm women which unlikely/very very rare. I can't imagine refusing people who struggle with their identity and suffer enormous hatred by lots of people the right to self define because their experiences don't match yours or the slim chance one of them might be a bad person. Lots of football fans smash things up when they go to Europe for away games, but they're not banned from calling themselves City fans in case it makes one of them do something bad.

The phrase “assigned at birth” is nonsense. Nobody is assigning anything. They take a quick look at your genitalia and you are either scientifically and anatomically male or female.

When they didn't want us to vote, they fucking knew what a woman was.
When they banned us from universities they fucking knew what a woman was

And when they abort female fetuses BECAUSE THEY ARE FEMALE not because they will identify as female, they fucking know what FEMALE means.

And when someone speaks out and says something sensible about trans issues, they know who to subject to an onslaught of irrational, violent threats and abuse. They know who the women are.

Women are, in my opinion, whoever says they are.

That makes no sense. Whoever says they are what? Is this your attempt at a non-circular definition of woman?

Women are, in my opinion, whoever says they are.

What does that mean?

It's not my job to define another person's identity.

But just because you identify as something does not mean you magically become that thing. That's not how it works.

Women are, in my opinion, whoever says they are

Lots of football fans smash things up when they go to Europe for away games, but they're not banned from calling themselves City fans in case it makes one of them do something bad.

Oh, give me a fucking break 🤦‍♀️ That's almost funny, it's so fucking ludicrous.