A response to JK Rowling

[Hjft]

J.K. Rowling, like so many others, has recently been accused of transphobia and targeted for expressing some of her opinions on sex and gender. This is a very nuanced issue which many people struggle with, including members of the trans community. Assuming bigotry and shutting down debate is not the way to address these issues. Instead we should engage in reasoned debate in order to better understand the subtitles and find a way to live together with mutual respect.

On 10 June 2020 JK Rowling wrote about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender Issues ( www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ ) . It is a welcome calm voice in what she calls a toxic environment and I commend her bravery for standing up to the bullies. The essay explains eloquently what she believes and why she holds the opinions she does. She opens up about some very personal issues, and I hope all her detractors will read it before shouting her down.

An essay, however well written, carries a bias, and a reasonable author will recognise that bias and be willing to consider that they could be wrong. And so should the reader of an essay. By writing this essay, JK Rowling has exposed some very valid points which the other side of the debate wish to brush aside. However, she has also indicated a bias which I hope to address.

She conflates sex and gender, and she conflates the law and medicine. Firstly she worries that trans activism is ‘pushing to erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender’. This legal definition is for the protection of the civil rights of trans people and has no bearing on biology. Trans people still receive healthcare appropriate to their individual biological truths. Every trans person is acutely aware of their biological sex because it is incongruous with their gender. Remember when Harry Potter uses Polyjuice potion to take on the form of Goyle in ‘Chamber of secrets”. He does not stop being Harry. Now imagine if Harry had got stuck, and had to live his life with everyone believing he was Goyle. It would be intolerable for him and would likely lead to mental illness or worse. This is what it’s like for trans people, and why the law is in place to protect their right to be their authentic selves. Being Harry is ‘not a costume’.

This conflation is further illustrated when she expresses alarm that ‘A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law’. Again, this demonstrates a conflation of law and medicine. If a trans person can find relief from their gender dysphoria by permanently expressing themselves in an authentic manner then why should we expect them to accept medical intervention in order to get legal protection. Imagine you have a migraine. If sitting in a dark room with a glass of water provides you with sufficient relief, then you shouldn’t be expected to take strong pain killers or accept brain surgery. The ‘man’ she describes is not masquerading as a woman - she is living her authentic identity as a woman. The law protects her rights to do so. She is not a predator, and it should not be assumed that she is. Without these rights, her transgender status would be revealed every time she tries to hire a car, or open a bank account, and it is her safety that is in danger. A man masquerading as a woman is not able to legally get a Gender Recognition Certificate - because they are a man.

[redacted*] I hope JK Rowling’s essay will mark a turning point in the tone of these discussions, and people can start to properly address them.

• [edited by MNHQ to remove inflammatory content - we're allowing the challenges to this section of the OP to remain]

For those who have rightly questioned the research evidence put forward - it's quite right to do so but then also right to allow other people, such as myself who doesn't agree with the views & evidence put forward by Rowling or anyone else for that matter, to disagree & question it's assertions.

No. Categorically No.

A young girl should not have to consider there could be a man in her changing area.

And I have not said a trans person would be a threat because of that but because they have male biology and the penis that goes with it. She will not be raped by a woman but by a man so there's a likelihood it may be someone who identifies as a woman.

Jesus even my DH and male relatives give her 100% privacy and dignity.

Are you saying if she is collateral damage?

@merrymouse I really didn't mean to upset anyone or trigger an angry response - I was simply putting forward a view as someone asked me to respond personally to a question that they had asked. Those are my views & yes agree that it's not simple or straightforward but not sure if I ever said I particularly wanted a shared space, only that I don't feel threatened either way, and this is not based on experience but feeling that men, women or trans, doesn't matter to me any or either could be harmful. And yes I have experienced male violence but don't allow that to prejudice me. And that should be ok actually.
I agree though that a safe space for all women who are recognised in law should be provided for those who need it. And no I am afraid I can't prescribe to the idea that a trans women should not be recognised as a woman in totality.

@Chocolate50

Lots of characterisation of trans people. Which might well be incorrect actually. Being transgender is complex but recognised in law. I honestly feel that taking the group as a whole, and when Rowling discusses this group, to suggest that the first thing you might think is 'rapist' or sexual predator is pretty worrying to someone like me.

Can we just leave transpeople aside for one moment while I ask a question.

Do you accept that for many, many women, most men read as potential rapist or sexual predator? I’m not asking whether that’s the case for you; just whether you believe women when many of them they say they are afraid of men.

I’m not especially bothered about the toilets/changing room thing though the entitlement pisses me off

I’m far more concerned about male bodied people in sport

Ppl socialised as males transitioning in middle age taking up spaces on programmes designed to improve the under representation of women in E.g business, STEM

Polticians that say if parliament was 50% men & 50% TW that would be ‘representative’ for women

And above all to not be compelled to go along with the lie that a man can become a woman

Men are not women

Re sport, this is Hannah Mouncey. Hannah was allowed to play Australian Rules Football with women. Look at this photo and tell me this is fair, or even safe.

Sexual violence or attacks I think are the least of our worries.

What of our Muslim and other religions women? Their male relatives and spouses that won't allow women to participate in ladies classes, or go to ladies leisure facilities now because there is a chance if a male body?

Is that fair to those women?

What if TW making up "quotas" or taking places in scholarship or STEM programmes?

Is that fair to those women?

What of women in sport who may now need to compete against male biological bodies and get hurt or at a disadvantage immediately?

Is that fair tho those women?

How many women need to be disadvantaged for people to realise there is a issue here.

@MaleficentsCrow

Sexual violence or attacks I think are the least of our worries.

What of our Muslim and other religions women? Their male relatives and spouses that won't allow women to participate in ladies classes, or go to ladies leisure facilities now because there is a chance if a male body?

Is that fair to those women?

What if TW making up "quotas" or taking places in scholarship or STEM programmes?

Is that fair to those women?

What of women in sport who may now need to compete against male biological bodies and get hurt or at a disadvantage immediately?

Is that fair tho those women?

How many women need to be disadvantaged for people to realise there is a issue here.

Yes, these are my concerns. Toilets and changing rooms, not really; I've probably shared those with dozens of transwomen over the years and never known. This is more the issue.

@TheProdigalKittensReturn

Re sport, this is Hannah Mouncey. Hannah was allowed to play Australian Rules Football with women. Look at this photo and tell me this is fair, or even safe.

Actually, while I totally agree with the point, s/he played handball with the women's handball team and has since been "stood down" from it, much to Hannah's dismay.

I fundamentally disagree with laws that require me to lie.

Every transwoman on the planet could be the nicest person ever, could voluntarily recuse themselves from women's sport, women's programmes, women's awards, women's prisons, women's statistics, etc. All the AGP males could voluntarily choose to stop using women for their sexual kicks.

I would still object vociferously to being required by law to say that a male is a woman.

I regard it like theocracy.

Don't tell me I have to go to your church and pray to your god in your way. Don't make it illegal to be an atheist or express belief in another religion. No.

@WiseUpJanetWeiss tricky question. I can only say that I believe that you believe that many women are frightened of men & that they are potential rapists.
But many of my women & male friends, trans friends, and my children, no this isn't the case & I'd be really upset if my children held the belief that all men are potential rapists and not to be trusted.
That's not to say that I don't believe in safeguarding, & as I've already said awareness that sexual predators of any gender are potentially harmful and important to ensure children and adults are fully aware.
I was abused by a female babysitter. I'm not the only one. And no I was too ashamed to tell anyone, and there are many more such as me who don't show up in stats but are there anyway.
I don't believe that sexual predators are male or exclusively male. That said, could posters please respect that I have a different perspective than many of you, (but certainly don't believe that I am the only one to challenge male abuser stereotypes) but that I have shared something personal & would like not to be attacked for doing so.
Also, I don't feel frightened every time I'm in a changing room when other women are present, nor did I feel that my children should not have female babysitters, because I'd be simply projecting my own experience onto them and that would feel wrong. Equally I don't feel that men are automatically going to sexually assault me or my children either if I share a changing room with them.

It is interesting that there have been mixed changing rooms in our local swimming pool for at least 10 years, I am in the UK & quite honestly I didn't think it was new!

Males are males. Doesn't matter what they lop off, or insert into their chests, they start as males and they remain males, long after they're dead and gone.

I'm female.

If I don't want to share sports, changing rooms, gyms, toilets, refuges, hospital wards, even a fucking table at a fucking pizza restaurant with a male, then I shouldn't have to.

Where's MY fucking choice?

@TorkTorkBam that view you have there is transphobic. Just thought I'd point it out.

Report the post then Chocolate. Let Mumsnet decide.

Are atheists who choose not to swear an oath on the bible intolerant of christianity?

Where's MY fucking choice?

Come on BeeGee - look how much progress women have made! We can do all sorts of things - vote, own property. Obvs. we can't become Catholic Priests or leave the house without permission in some countries, regardless of our identities, but you know, baby steps!

[quote Chocolate50]@TorkTorkBam that view you have there is transphobic. Just thought I'd point it out.[/quote]
There are people in my family who just like to point out I am a heretic or an apostate.

The names you create for people who do not adhere to your beliefs are meaningful for you but they hold no power over me.

I don't believe in gods. I don't believe in souls. I don't believe in gendered souls. Heretic. Transphobic. OK. Those words are only insults to believers.

Throughout history it has been the believers who build the bonfires of books and non-believers.

Yeah, I know Merrymouse. Silly me. I thought I might have had a say, that's all.

The biggest laugh is that, according to a pp, the trans community thinks that the women will protect them from the violent males.

I know personally that I have quite a capacity for hurting people if they threaten me. My previous experiences mean I have a bit of a trigger finger if a male doesn't pay attention to the warning growls and back the fuck off. I have absolutely no qualms in making life absofuckinglutely HELLISH for those who threaten me and that includes being in a place they don't belong. I'm happy to be openly hostile. Don't expect a welcome from me.

How did we get to a point where differing opinion equals hate.

Look I don't agree with the pro-life movement.

But their argument that a foetus with a heart beat is alive and growing, I have to accept that as fact, yes because it's a biological fact. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I mean I'm still pro-choice and I am not sending them abusive messages online calling them names though 🙄

How is it transphobic?

@Chocolate50 Do you really truly genuinely believe that men do not physically damage women significantly more often than women physically damage women?

If you knew you had the choice of being trapped in a room for a day with four random men or four random women, no advance knowedge of who they are or where they are from, would you flip a coin to decide which room?

So the only right females would have to refuse their single sex spaces being turned to mixed gender to benefit males - not females, but males - is in your opinion if they could prove beyond all doubt that they would be assaulted in large enough numbers to be unacceptable?

How many would it have to involve? I mean, what is acceptable collateral damage to females in the name of helping males have happier and more fulfilling lives? Are we talking 50? 100? 1 in 5? And reported how in order for female people to be believed? Considering that less than 1% of rapes of females actually get to court, there's obviously no point in basing this on criminal statistics.

But of course to get bogged down in all this, you'd have to believe that

a) females have no right to identify themselves as a class separate to males because this is upsetting to males.

b) females have no right to female provision because this is upsetting to males.

c) female privacy and dignity isn't really a thing and is only uppity females being silly and naughty in a way that they try to use to justify the unacceptable behaviour of saying no to males in a way that is upsetting to males (and all the laws on privacy and dignity and single sex provision shouldn't count anyway when they're upsetting to a male.)

d) the excluded females due to race, culture, faith, disability, trauma etc etc go...…. well, where exactly? As taxpayers they can't exactly just have all provision removed to provide male people with choice of provision, and since male people are not being deprived of provision in an equal way this is direct discrimination on multiple grounds.

All of which places a high value on males, as the privileged and important class whose needs must always trump females, and females as the subordinate and unimportant group, not worth of equal consideration or equal standards.

Good old fashioned male supremacism.

Do you really expect people born female to be keen to sign up for this?

I guess it's proof of my womanhood that this kind of roundabout discussion with someone claiming to be female makes me weep. Literally weep. In frustration at their blindness. In pity at their stupidity. In fury at their complacency. In hatred at their determination to take every other woman down into oblivion with them.

@BigGee Do you think that your view is held by all women or just some? Do you really believe that most women feel the same as you do about men? Because I don't. I may be in the minority on this forum but in normal life I'm certain that I'm not. You aren't listening to another woman's experience, that is not my issue, it is yours.
Again you try to put another woman down because you are pissed that I'm not agreeing with you. That is ignorance, and more than ignorance, it isn't respectful.
And I'm really not needing your pity or gestures. That's just insulting so please don't.

So no answers at all to any of the above, but scolding a female for not agreeing with you - that apparently it's rude of them to not listen to you and accept your experience, while you refuse to listen to them or accept their experience?

It staggers me that those who spend the most time on these boards scolding others for their disagreement are certainly not modelling the tolerance and listening and mutual respect they continually berate others for not showing them.