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]

PMK to read the definition of a gender transition

• in popular perception
• under the current law
• under the Canada style proposed law

If you see what I would assume to be a man (based on looking like Paul Gascoigne, for example) following a teen girl into an empty toilet, would you assume it's a man or a self- identified transwoman? Would you change how you acted if you made the opposite assumption?

I'll just mention that my (now deceased) ex colleague had an ex-partner (male) stalk her incessantly and took delight in trying to come up with ways to get around the restraining order (or just ignore it and pop up on places she wouldn't expect). It took a lot of his time and effort yet he still did it.

If it was socially acceptable for him to turn up in her swimming pool changing room he would've, I have no doubt. Luckily this was at the time where there were separate female changing rooms.

@TorkTorkBam I would expect to have a fully involved consultation forum where my voice would be 1. Only part of decision making & 2. Informed by other perspectives & voices.

[quote Chocolate50]@TorkTorkBam I would expect to have a fully involved consultation forum where my voice would be 1. Only part of decision making & 2. Informed by other perspectives & voices.[/quote]
Do you think natal males should legally become females by deciding for themselves that they are?

@bishopgiggles that's mental health issues you are describing there
A whole new forum - lack of provision, lack of understanding & the right kind of support lack of proper policy guidance in law to meet need.

@Chocolate50

I understand you feel defensive so you're engaging with posters who have gotten under your skin but I asked a genuine question (politely!) and would still appreciate your thoughts on it.

Do you think I am transphobic to want only a female doctor to perform intimate examinations on me due to my experience as a rape victim?

I'm aware you've said a number of times you don't have the fears and ptsd some rape victims do, so I understand you wouldn't feel how I do. I'm asking if you think I am transphobic for only wanting a female doctor to do that?

I love men, I have lots of wonderful men in my life and always have. Unfortunately due to my past experience of rape I do not want anyone other than a natal female to perform intimate examinations on me.

I do not hate men. I do not assume they are all attackers. I am not a man phobe. I do not want a male doctor for that kind of treatment.

I do not hate trans women. I do not assume they are all attackers. Not all trans women are attackers. I am not a trans phobe. I do not want a trans woman doctor for that kind of treatment.

Do you honestly think that there is any benefit to me not being able to request a female doctor only?

[quote Chocolate50]@TorkTorkBam I would expect to have a fully involved consultation forum where my voice would be 1. Only part of decision making & 2. Informed by other perspectives & voices.[/quote]
and funnily enough the voices of one side who will be affected and wish to have input into the decision making are the ones that are aggressively trying to be silenced.

When the Government initially ran the consultation on reform to the GRA guess which group was initially refused input then grudingly allowed a minimum input and then ignored? Hard work at great cost had to be undertaken to enforce a review where the voices of all those who would be impacted were heard hence the stopping of GRA reforms for further consultation.

Shebashimmy - there is a whole process to go through before someone can legally become member of opposite gender. If someone were to say I am a woman but have no compelling medical evidence from specialist etc to back up the claim then I would question motive & authenticity.
The men I know who are transitioning and start to live as female (this is a long ass process) only receive letter enabling them to get passport in different gender when they have been properly evaluated by a specialist over about 2 years & this is on top of the average 2-3 year waiting list.
So yes I do think that people have agency but that choice should be properly monitored & part of an ongoing assessment process.

@Chocolate50

Shebashimmy - there is a whole process to go through before someone can legally become member of opposite gender. If someone were to say I am a woman but have no compelling medical evidence from specialist etc to back up the claim then I would question motive & authenticity. The men I know who are transitioning and start to live as female (this is a long ass process) only receive letter enabling them to get passport in different gender when they have been properly evaluated by a specialist over about 2 years & this is on top of the average 2-3 year waiting list. So yes I do think that people have agency but that choice should be properly monitored & part of an ongoing assessment process.

Ok, so you don't think natal males should be considered women in law merely by declaring themselves female? Is that correct? You would oppose any such change to the law?

@backseatcookers I'm so sorry that this happened to you.
No I don't think that makes you transphobic if you want to be examined due to your own personal history. I guess that if you were to impose this on every or all women or people then this would be different. Some people for whatever reason might feel that they don't mind or that they'd rather go with expertise rather than gender of doctor.
The difference is you are talking about an individual - yourself - would you want every woman or man or trans person to be examined by a female doctor? I'm curious.

@ShebaShimmyShake ok so the law already recognises trans people as gender they prefer. I don't know what I would oppose or not depends on content & context. Is there such a proposed law that you are aware of?

[quote Chocolate50]@TorkTorkBam I would expect to have a fully involved consultation forum where my voice would be 1. Only part of decision making & 2. Informed by other perspectives & voices.[/quote]
What is your voice though?

Imagine, the consultation panel is deciding what to do about the javelin and prisons. They want to hear the voice of a woman who believes transwomen are equal to women. They want to make good policies for society as a whole. They ask you for your opinion.

Choc how will we modify our policies in the javelin event? Btw, males have different shaped shoulder joints to females. What would you say?

Choc how will we modify our policies in the prison system? What shall we do with male sex offenders who say they are female? Btw, our budgets are at breaking point, so anything costly won't be possible or will be at the expense of something else big.

Third spaces - good or bad?

Is there such a proposed law that you are aware of?
I call bot

@bishopgiggles that's mental health issues you are describing there

Was this a reply to this question, Chocolate?:
I'm confused. What do you think a gender transition is, chocolate? People seem to be talking at cross purposes.

Chocolate of course I wouldn’t want to force anyone to be treated by any doctor, and of course individuals should be allowed to choose their specialist according to their own preference, or to state that they don’t mind. The important thing here is choice.

Are you saying that backseatcookers should be allowed to insist upon being examined by a natal female? If so then I think you and I are probably occupying a very similar position.

Or the man going into the toilets question? I can't tell.

@TorkTorkBam I'm not going to be drawn into giving an opinion on an imaginary forum.
I've given answer as much as I can at present, given forum is imaginary & would need full consultation.
If you want to draw someone into this type of dialogue suggest you go to Twitter or Tumblr. You'll find lots of willing participants on there. Meantime safe here I guess without too many challenging voices.

listeningquietly

I don’t think so. But pointedly ingnoring anything that challenges anecdotal experience. If a poster who has spent time on threads discussing this issue is not aware of the current Scottish guidance that has been released despite acknowledging significant pushback on self identification, they perhaps are simply not interested in the realities of what is happening. Just like minimising the experience of the many abused people from predators who have jumped through many hoops to get access to victims in the past.

@bishopgiggles stalking: behaviour of stalker. Mental health.

[quote Chocolate50]@TorkTorkBam I'm not going to be drawn into giving an opinion on an imaginary forum.
I've given answer as much as I can at present, given forum is imaginary & would need full consultation.
If you want to draw someone into this type of dialogue suggest you go to Twitter or Tumblr. You'll find lots of willing participants on there. Meantime safe here I guess without too many challenging voices.[/quote]
Will you be drawn into stating simply and clearly whether you believe natal males should become legal females solely by declaring themselves to be so?

[quote Chocolate50]@ShebaShimmyShake ok so the law already recognises trans people as gender they prefer. I don't know what I would oppose or not depends on content & context. Is there such a proposed law that you are aware of?[/quote]
The call for self-ID as the only requirement is the entire point of this general debate. It's already the case in Scotland, though apparently it doesn't extend to allowing transmen to inherit masculine titles...funny that.

So you in fact have no opinion on this? You don't know whether you think this is a good idea? In which case it might be better if you stop talking and just listen to the discussion, because for most people, this is probably the crux of it. If you've no opinion on the matter, perhaps listen to why many women don't like the idea?

I'm so sorry that this happened to you. No I don't think that makes you transphobic if you want to be examined due to your own personal history. I guess that if you were to impose this on every or all women or people then this would be different. Some people for whatever reason might feel that they don't mind or that they'd rather go with expertise rather than gender of doctor. The difference is you are talking about an individual - yourself - would you want every woman or man or trans person to be examined by a female doctor? I'm curious.

Thank you

I appreciate you showing empathy on this, truly. Im confuses as to why you're concerned with me not imposing my choice onto other women. Why would I?

I don't think women should only be treated by men, I think that women who are only comfortable being treated by women should have the right to request that without fear of being labelled transphobic.

Of course I don't, I understand that it's a personal choice for me. I understand not all women need the assurance their doctor will definitely be a female doctor.

But I have been told a number of times that I am transphobic for my personal stance on this.

That I would be denying a trans female doctor their identity by saying I am only comfortable with a female doctor. Thus literally being told my mental well-being as a woman is less important than that a trans woman.

It's so good to hear you understand my thought process on this issue. Hopefully you can apply that thought process a little more widely then and see that this isn't all that different from the safe spaces debate.

It's vulnerable women and young girls who need a safe, single sex space at times. (In the same way that it's vulnerable women like me who need a female doctor)

I don't want trans women to be unsafe either.

I am not willing to give up the right to safe space I currently have to shield trans women from the risk of male violence.

If you are comfortable in a mixed space then I think you should be vocal about that - rather than being so vocal about women's spaces incorporating trans women.

When it comes to single sex spaces, you don't seem able to empathise in the way that you did with me re doctors and say yes, I think it's fair and correct for women to defend their right to single sex spaces even if I don't personally feel I need them.

Couldn't you campaign for a safe third space rather than asking women to be the ones to accommodate change when they are more vulnerable than men? The fact you believe trans women are as vulnerable as women (despite this not being backed up statistically) doesn't make women any less vulnerable.

We can't shoulder the risk and burden for everyone, it's not fair to ask us to.

@bishopgiggles stalking: behaviour of stalker. Mental health.

Oh - well yes, obviously, that wasn't in doubt to anyone. He could still go where he liked. My point was that, mental health or not, he chose to spend a great deal of his time and effort solely to harass one woman - you've said you didn't think this would happen.
And he would have had more opportunity to do so had it been as socially acceptable as it is now to have extremely male-appearing people in female changing rooms.

What were your answers to my previous questions?