To not understand why the 'woman' question is so hard for politicians to answer?

[Themidnightpig]

Genuinely not sure if I'm missing something here.

Constantly seeing it in the news politicians being unable to answer or getting flustered over the 'do women have penises' question.

Surely the answer is as straight forward as 'No, women don't have penises but some Trans Women do and as a decent society we treat them as women in so far as possible'

Why is this so hard for everyone to grapple with?

You're wrong about that. Plenty of TRAs are adamant that trans people change sex.

No, it doesn't.

And no, it isn't.

good for them.
lots of batshit feminsts say ridiculous things too. good and bad in every debate.

You are missing that transwomen ARE women or at least that is what the trans lobby demands.
I know it seems obvious that they are not but they insist and their supporters insist that they are - that is the problem imv. If they were happy to be transwomen who are treated like women that would be ok but they want to be women - so then they get on all-woman shortlists, into women's sports, women's prisons etc.
I know it seems like people are claiming the emperor does have new clothes after all but that is how the world is at the moment.

You will need to back this up by explaining how what you've said is different from what JKR has said. I put my money on you not being able to.

No, it doesn't.

And no, it isn't.

what do you think JKR is saying then?

FoiledByTheInsect

not sure aggressively attacking people is the way to influence people.
Perhaps I should have said Conservative and Labour rather than left and right wing. And I don’t necessarily disagree that it is a capitalist thing - it does seem strange that people such as Billy Bragg are totally for it though doesn’t it?

and I have absolutely no idea why you think calling someone an ‘old school feminist’ is an insult - you seem to be projecting somewhat.
people like Julie Bindel have fought for womens rights for years (especially underprivileged ones) and are now on the pro women side of this fight.

That might be her intention, but it's not what she's saying. Her tweets are incendiary, she isn't expressing herself in a way that makes people understand her points of view.

And before anyone else tells me she doesn't have to "be kind", "women say no", etc etc etc - that's the point.

The reason JKR by your own admission is misunderstood is because of the way she goes about it. Hence the divide.

FWIW< outside the wonderful world of MN, JKR is seen as someone who stepped over the line and bombed her own career for a few characters on twitter. It must be so terribly difficult for her with her millions.

That might be her intention, but it's not what she's saying. Her tweets are incendiary, she isn't expressing herself in a way that makes people understand her points of view.

You'll need some example tweets to back up your point. What is this 'incendiary' material.

Her tweet about menstruation really hurt the trans communit. Not because of her point but because of how flippant it was about it. Now it didn't hurt you, because you're presumably not trans. BUt she had no reason to write it the way she did.

This is food for thought, thank you.

FWIW< outside the wonderful world of MN, JKR is seen as someone who stepped over the line and bombed her own career for a few characters on twitter. It must be so terribly difficult for her with her millions.
You do know Twitter isn't the real world, right?

Her tweet about menstruation really hurt the trans community

In what way though? Presumably only if they think we should pretend that trans women menstruated. I don't see any slight to trans woman here, she's attacking the ridiculous narrative where we are suppose to dance around biological facts.

And, is that it, in terms of this incendiary material you're talking about?

That might be her intention, but it's not what she's saying. Her tweets are incendiary, she isn't expressing herself in a way that makes people understand her points of view.

Have you read her essay explaining it?

And I, and I'd guess the vast majority of women who care, would entirely cease to care if single sex spaces were preserved (especially shelters, rape crisis and prisons), women's sports were sex-specific, children were offered good supports rather than hormones or surgery, and women were allowed to talk about women's issues (rape, FGM, abortion) without being asked to centre trans women. I couldn't give a crap about what people wear, what pronouns they use and if they'd like to change their name. Fill your boots.

If you agree with the above, you agree with most of the 'batshit feminists'.

"is that it" point proven.
It HURT people. Do you understand?

Why do you expect people to give two shits about your opinions on things whe you don't for others?

It will be a sad realisation one day when you realise that the trans community are well nested in our society and you will huff and puff abdou misogyny and woman's rights without any understanding of the fact that you, and people with views like yours, where they mock and sneer, have caused the divide.

But people aren't going to read her essay, because she's been so ridiculous on twitter.

No, but it was certainly a stupid move from someone with such a global platform. She could have used it for good, and she didn't. But she's so terribly RIGHT.

Do you mean the tweet where she said "People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?"?

You might think it's incendiary. I don't. It's clearly pointing out that the word "women" is being erased from medical literature. This is to the detriment of vulnerable women. In the same way the NHS is removing language about women and using terms such as "cervix havers" when 40% of women (especially immigrants, those of lower socio-economic status, women who don't speak English well, women with learning disabilities or poorly educated etc. etc) do not know what a cervix is. It is a completely valid point that TRAs have misrepresented as transphobic.

Trans women, who are biologically male, do not have periods. There is nothing hurtful about refusing to accept the delusion that they do.
Why are you hurt at having reality pointed out to you?

No, but it was certainly a stupid move from someone with such a global platform. She could have used it for good, and she didn't. But she's so terribly RIGHT.

Well she is right. And in standing up for truth and the rights of women she is using it for good imo.

Twitter's a goddamn cesspit, theres no moral implication to getting a good reception there.

It's really not.

I don't read stuff by TRA's. i read the views of real trans people who were hurt.

and i give far more of a stuff about their opinion than I do hers. SHe claims to have trans friends. the 2022 equivalent of im not racist but.

The fact she was written out of her own books and films' anniversary because of her nonsense, I hope she's pleased with herself. Emma Watson manages to be a feminist without bombing her own career. well, at least she's got you lot cheering on for her, eh?

If JKR knew then what she knows now she wouldn't have written that stuff.

It really is.

But people aren't going to read her essay, because she's been so ridiculous on twitter.

I've read long-form Nazis and KKK and IMF and World Bank and IRA and even Tories. If you can't articulate what the person you disagree with is saying, you're not mature enough to use the internet.

And I don't think her tweet about menstruation was even actually about trans people. It was about the utter stupidity of have no word to describe the group of people whose sex is female. And that is ridiculous. Without a definition for the group of people who have, may, can or used to mensurate, you don't have women's rights. You don't have women's anything. It was satirising that.

It HURT people. Do you understand?

Look I'm terribly sorry but we can't go round denying biology and riding rough shod over other people's rights because it hurts certain people's feelings.