How the erosion of LGBT rights effects female sex based rights.

[needatalk]

I've been reading various discussions and articles on this topic for some time and the conclusion that keeps popping up in my mind is the worry that my female rights will be as much eroded as LGBT rights in law.

I've seen a push in America especially Florida from activists and lawmakers, combining female and LGBT rights in the same grouping. In the UK, politicians are taking American policies. They are calling for diversity and equality to be dismantled in law. It's like time is going backwards in just on LGBT rights but on female sex based rights. Where less rights will exist for us females in the future to do subjects such as STEM or be Astronaut because of the stereotyping happening from suppose feminists who's concepts are the old typical stay at home leave the male to do the dangerous or go to work mentally.

My daughter is 8 years old and and I worry for her, to not able to have the right to do express herself as bisexual or lesbian because of erosion of LGBT rights. We all know homosexuality a long time ago was illegal and that can happen again for all LGBT rights. I worry that my daughter who loves space won't able to follow Rosemary Coogan become an astronaut which is something she dreams of because in the future people will say the radiation of space is too dangerous for females as they will get deformities in that area to prevent them for having babies or healthy babies. Science has disprove this but people are dismissing science now.

As much as I care and support about sex based rights, I can't forget the thought in my mind that my and my daughter's female rights are in as much danger of being taken away not by activists but by lawmakers who enforce sex based past stereotyping and us females lose equality which has been hard to fight for in the first place.

I'm so worried for the future for us females.

Of course I don’t expect physicians to take any notice of my posts on a forum. I do expect physicians to follow GMC ethical guidelines on off label prescribing and evidence based medicine. I don’t expect you to understand the difference.

I may have lost track of the thread with so many replies, but just to check - "Well it is a leap if you're just assuming that they're not also formula feeding their child".. is this still referring to men taking drugs to allow them to to feed babies from their male nipples? Because the tone of your reply seems like you're telling off some sticky beak for getting involved in other people's personal medical care.

I don't think you lost track. I think you didn't have have responses to the discussion you and I were having about the number of GC "feminists" who have nothing to say about right wing groups and religious zealots sticking their beaks into women's healthcare but if you're about to argue that you have the right to stick your beak into a trans persons healthcare that's no surprise I suppose.
Also is there a reason why you keep selectively quoting sentences from my posts so you can remove the context? You could always respond to the entire question Y'know.

@Lampy123678
don't think you lost track. I think you didn't have have responses to the discussion you and I were having about the number of GC "feminists" who have nothing to say about right wing groups and religious zealots sticking their beaks into women's healthcare..

I think i did respond several times but it was hard to pin down what your accusation actually was. IIRC when we finally got to what you referring to it was that JKR at one point believed Depp when (pre-trial) he told her he hadn't been abusive to Amber Heard. And from that we can deduce that JKR isn't a feminist doesn't care about women's rights and we can extrapolate that to all other GC women who now also arent feminists.That was the gist right?

but if you're about to argue that you have the right to stick your beak into a trans persons healthcare
I don't think chemically helping a man lactate into a babies mouth is healthcare. No one is being made more healthy in this situation.

Also is there a reason why you keep selectively quoting sentences from my posts so you can remove the context?
Yes it's so when you make a post with multiple points, you and others can more easily see which part I'm responding to or disagreeing with.

I think I very clearly stated that JKs stance of supporting and believing women and her concern for women being physically or sexually assaulted seems to not apply to men she is friends with. I think threatening to sue when someone asks if you believe a woman's court submitted evidence which included photos of her injuries is an odd stance when you publicly campaign for the protection of women. Especially when you're friendly with more than one man accused of physical or sexual abuse, it gets a bit suspicious no? So my question was, does she give trans people accused of abuse the benefit of the doubt or is that just reserved for her rich and famous friends?

I also asked why you think she doesn't use her massive platform to address any of the right wing attacks of women's rights that are having very real consequences for women, even when antichoice religious senators publicly quote her.

You're welcome to believe that but again you're choosing to ignore the question of if you also disagree with biological women using chemicals to induce lactation? And is your issue with the chemicals or not? The previous poster started implying their issue was with the chemicals and then said that actually the concern for baby was insufficient milk supply and therefore babies being neglected through lack of food. So are women with insufficient milk supply also being suspected that they would neglect their child or is this only trans people?

I'm simply asking whether the restrictions suggested being applied to trans people should also be applied to women and whether the caution about trans women (or men as everyone keeps insisting they're referred to) should be applied equally to all men.

@Lampy123678
Re: JKR - I think most people give people they know more benefit of the doubt than strangers, because it's human nature to trust your friends.
I haven't been on twitter for a while, but I'm pretty certain JKR has talked about threats to women's rights from both right wing groups and from trans rights activists. She doesn't need to reply to every random Christian fundamentalist that quote tweets her to say she disagrees with them.

Re: Breastfeeding
I think giving medication to women to help breastfeed a baby that they have already carried for nine months, is a very different ethical question to giving a man the same medication to feed a baby to whom they are either unrelated or the biological father.

I think if you have multiple friends accused of physical and sexual abuse, you should look at who you associate with particularly if women's safety is a passion of yours.

Perhaps you should search her twitter then because I find four tweets (ever) and the last one being in 2022. And those are just saying she supports access to abortion btw..not raising awareness of the persistence attacks to women's rights to an abortion. No mention at all of the abortion bans in several states. She's very active on twitter and she also loves talking about biological reality so I'm very surprised she doesn't get riled up about male politicians suggesting ectopic pregnancies should be reimplanted in the uterus while they're fighting to remove access to life saving abortions.

Again (for I don't know how many times now) she was not quote tweeted. A right wing senator literally quotes her while officially filibustering legislation to protect LGBT people and pushing for religious exemptions. The same.religious exemptions he believes in blocking access to abortion. It was on the news and again she's very active on twitter and she manages to pick up very small accounts that mention her in order to quote tweet them to her millions of followers. You can naively believe this didn't cross her radar if you wish, but I don't.

Perhaps if you didn't keep selectively quoting my posts you wouldn't miss that I clearly asked for thoughts on biological women who are not birth parents. And again is your issue with the chemicals or not please?

And those are just saying she supports access to abortion btw..not raising awareness of the persistence attacks to women's rights to an abortion. No mention at all of the abortion bans in several states. She's veryactive on twitter and she also loves talking about biological reality so I'm very surprised she doesn't get riled up about male politicians suggesting ectopic pregnancies should be reimplanted in the uterus while they're fighting to remove access to life saving abortions.

She's not in America and why should she tweet about what you approve of, you dreary, dreary person.

@Lampy123678 you appear to be so obsessed that JKR isn't tweeting about every harm done to women all over the world and that if she doesn't, she somehow doesn't care about those harms.

Or if she doesn't tweet against any tweet made by right wing nuts then she is in agreement?

Why is all this her responsibility? She has got a few books to write you know...

I think if you have multiple friends accused of physical and sexual abuse, you should look at who you associate with particularly if women's safety is a passion of yours.

Couldn't agree more

https://terfisaslur.com/

And since you seem to be very keen to drag America into a discussion on a UK forum:

@Lampy123678
Incoming selective quote sorry (not sorry).

"Perhaps if you didn't keep selectively quoting my posts you wouldn't miss that I clearly asked for thoughts on biological women who are not birth parents. And again is your issue with the chemicals or not please?"

If you clearly asked this it wasn't in the post I was replying to. I was responding to your question about "biological women using chemicals to induce lactation" if you had meant "biological women who are not birth parents using chemicals to induce lactation" it would have been a different question.

I have never heard the arguments in favour of using medication to help women feed other people's babies. Whether or not I'd agree with that practice, I'm sure such arguments have 100 times more merit than the idea of men chemically inducing lactation to feed babies.

Why is this lunatic thread still here?

No I just don't think every accusation that she is using her platform to attract abuse towards people should be defended as being done in defense of her staunch principals of women's rights when she's pretty flakey on defending women. It's also quite literally not every harm mentioned in my post is it ? I'm asking specifically about survivors or sexual assault and abuse and women's rights to abortion
Two major real world issues for women. I proposed she doesn't wade into them because she is aware that a lot of the online support her tweets get is from groups who are misogynistic actually. It's fairly obvious in just a glance at her replies that many people tweeting her support are right wing. You're welcome to offer an alternative reason ? No one has yet except "she can't tweet about everything"..well duh. But she literally tweets about one thing all the time and when people suggest that her focus may be a little obsessed with denying the existence of trans people it's defended as being pro women's rights. Hence the circular argument.

So if you don't know if you agree with it or not what are you quoting me to argue?

I'm not sure why you think the existence of other sexual predators that aren't JKs friends makes it any better that she mingles with rapists and women beaters but you do you I suppose

It's fairly obvious in just a glance at her replies that many people tweeting her support are right wing.

And? People are able to agree on some stuff and not on other stuff. That's normal.

her focus may be a little obsessed with denying the existence of trans people

When did she deny the existence of transpeople? I've seen her saying she knows and loves transpeople and wants them to be safe, I've not seen her denying they exist.

I think you know that I was suggesting that if you are so very keen to judge JKR and other feminists by who quotes them, likes their tweets etc, maybe you should have a look at some of the transpeople you are - what was your phrase ? - cosying up to.

I don't know how you can pretend to care about women, and think that the people on the pic I posted or those quoted on the terfisaslur website should be seen as women or allowed into women's spaces.

But you do you I suppose.

I am quoting you to argue against the thing in that quote, not something that you may have said several pages ago. Specifically to your quote...

"You're welcome to believe that but again you're choosing to ignore the question of if you also disagree with biological women using chemicals to induce lactation?"

I am saying that you are very wrong if you think the following three situations are all ethically equivalent..

1 women taking medication to allow them to feed their own infants
2 women taking medication to allow them to feed other people's infants
3 men taking medication to allow them to feed infants

Whether the medication is safe or not is indeed a matter for medical research. Whether the practice is ethical or not is a question for everyone.

Why have you suddenly pivoted to talking about "trans men" when "trans women" are the problem?

I think it's very clear why @MissScarletInTheBallroom useful to highlight it though. Talking about the actual issue is just so boooring apparently.

Sorry meant to quote you MissScarlett

When did she deny the existence of transpeople? I've seen her saying she knows and loves transpeople and wants them to be safe, I've not seen her denying they exist.

She didn't, but this poster is posting from the Big Book of Hyperbolic TRA Talking Points. Not believing males are literally women equals "denying their existence".

I didn't say they couldn't however my first initial post was sprung on because I suggested that a lot of GCs views have more support from ring wingers than not.

Yeah she made that comment a while ago. The mask has long since come off on that. If she did she wouldn't pick up small accounts from regular trans people and quote tweet them to be attacked by her followers which include a lot of right wing misogynistic men ironically.

It's a matter for their own personal opinions, yes. Which is why I said you're welcome to. If you believe your personal opinion on the ethics of something should be imposed on others then you need to defend how that is carried out without justifying people imposing their ethical opinions on women's rights on women. There's GC feminists who are ethically opposed to abortion and they are entitled to think that but I'd hope you wouldn't agree that their personal ethical opinion should be reflected in law.

Which trans people am I cosying up to can I ask? I provided the information the groups and people I was referencing in my posts so I'd love of you would do the same. You're making a lot of assumptions about me without knowing anything about me in order to not talk about the people there is public information about, no?
Again I'm not solely judging her by who quotes her. I'm judging her by what feminist issues she thinks are deserving of her time which by the looks of it is very little bar women's bathrooms.

Again I'm not solely judging her by who quotes her. I'm judging her by what feminist issues she thinks are deserving of her time which by the looks of it is very little bar women's bathrooms.

That's complete nonsense. She was instrumental in getting a group of female lawyers out of Afghanistan. She is the founder of a children's charity and a rape crisis centre.

https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/harry-potter-author-jk-rowling-helped-afghan-lawyers-flee-the-taliban/#:~:text=He%20said%3A%20%E2%80%9CSome%20500%20people,%2C%20undoubtedly%20saved%20many%20lives.%E2%80%9D