To be oblivious to the issue people have with JKR? I thought she was a feminist. What have I missed?

[laughingnow]

People have warned me not to state the view above as ‘it’s more complicated’

It's all such a load of bollocks, isn't it?

Someone please explain why confirming that biologically male people who wear women's clothes shouldn't be using women's single sex spaces would make women's single sex spaces hostile places for biologically female people who wear "men's" clothes.

Nobody is getting these two groups of people mixed up.

point of order - woman and look butch without being a lesbian - a mixing of sexuality style and physical appearance isn’t helpful

Did he not lose his job for this?

This thread is mostly interesting if somewhat irritable at times. There are so many terms and abbreviations that we are supposed to be on top of (I’m not) but I’ve had quite a few straightforward answers to my AIBU which I appreciate. I’m pleased to feel better informed and I’m definitely staying off Twitter. I will happily now wade into pro JKR debates face to face.

Nobody is getting these two groups of people mixed up.

Exactly!!! They're literal opposites, in terms of both sex AND clothing!

Exactly

Did you mean "women can look butch without being lesbians"? Yes, that is true, but I don't think it's incorrect to state that most butch women are lesbians. That is not offensive to either butch women or lesbians, because there's nothing wrong with being either of those things.

My thoughts exactly. I can’t see that comment as being anything other than derogatory.

I disagree that butch women are usually lesbians

many older women look more masculine as they age - their sexuality does not change

i think there is a certain dress style that many lesbians favor but I wouldn’t call that butch

Not sure if anyone else has suggested this yet but it’s worth listening to an excellent podcast called ‘the witch trials of JK Rowling’. It’s a few years old now but offers a really interesting look at the whole thing, with loads of interviews with her too.

I am 100% in agreement with her views but I sometimes find the way she speaks online wearisome and unhelpful to her cause. But I also think she’s past caring about any of that.

Do you think that it is 'unhelpful to her cause', or just that she is rather blunt and that makes you uncomfortable?

I guess I am asking what is it that she is saying that you find unhelpful? Is it information that she is giving out, or her reaction to some of the abusive tweets that she has directed at her, or is it the particular language she uses about issues that she highlights?

I'd call it comfy middle age myself.

I don't have very short hair, as I find it more hassle than hair long enough to pull into a pony tail (chin-length-ish). But I wear jeans, a t-shirt and a jumper every day pretty much, rarely makeup, trainers or boots. So butch? Not exactly (potentially soft-butch, but the pictures I see for that are way more feminine and young and pretty than me!), mainly due to the hair, but certainly practical and not catering to the male gaze.

So I'd agree. I think most butch women are 60 +/- 15 years and just can't be bothered with all that shit any more, rather than making a style choice to flag their sexuality.

This is absolute horseshit for a number of reasons, and it is offensive.

Women arent a minority group. They're the majortity.

Ever since the Supreme Court clarified that woman in law meant adult human female, becuse trans rights activists can no longer screech "what about the men and their feelings?" they have had to adapt, and think up some other reason that clarity in law is tragique - and they've decided that gender non conforming women are their new "whatabout"

They have NEVER given a shit about us before, (except to call us sexual racists and failed transmen) but now we are apparently useful tools to campaign for men in womens spaces. Fuck that.

Masculine lesbians have, on occasion, been treated to "ah sorry this is the womens" for decades, and because 99.99% of us are not gender fanatics, its met with a grin and a "yes im a woman", people apologise, everyone moves on.
There is rarely any further debate, the questioner is usally a bit embrassed, but the reality is that the minute we pause or turn and speak our sex is apparent.

It is not the supreme court clarification that has made it more difficult for GNC women, it was the TRA when policy followed their ridiculous demands and started putting men in womens spaces which made women feel less safe, less comfortable, less secure, more vigilant, and more likely to query anybody including GNC women.

It is offensive, because the overeaching thrust of the argument is that gender non conforming women / masculine lesbians are indistinguishable from male interlopers.

We arent.

horseshit was your word wasn’t it? Yep everything about this post is certainly that.

Exactly. In 1996 or so, when it was rare to have internet at home, and maybe even before Google existed, there was a “book of stupid lists”, which listed stupid reasons for going on the internet. One of them was “you don’t care if the information you get is right or wrong”. How prophetic the book was!

(I won’t google to find out when Google came into being - Google will probably tell me, 1984-style, that it has always existed. I thought is was ten to the power of a hundred, anyway. Oh wait, that’s a googol…)

Ive seen you around before simping for the menfolk.
Glad you disagree xx

No amount of insulting me will make your opinions any other than what they are, which is totally incompatible with basic human decency .

@laughingnow there is a whole lot more going on in the fight for women to retain their rights. JKR is the most famous, if not the most outspoken, which is why she gets so much pushback from MRA/TRAs. Come over to the feminism boards to find out all about it.

It's not just toilets. It's sport, hospitals, prisons, refuge centres, data recording, children's medical safeguarding, etc. It's everything that belongs to women which has been systematically dismantled over the last 10-15 years, culminating in a male rapist being sent to a female prison and his crime being recorded as committed by a woman. JKR has the temerity to say this is wrong and is helping those of us who care enough to claim back our rights and the rights of our daughters, to protect vulnerable women and children in our society.

Just to remind other readers that in this instance "basic human decency" is defined as giving males and their ladyfeelings full access to women and girls.

giving males and their ladyfeelings full access to women and girls

Yup. It is exactly this type of raging transphobia- specifically trans misogyny- that is incompatible with basic human decency. Perfect example of it right here. It is what it is , and it’s here in black and white for all to see.

It's transphobic not to allow males access to women and girls?

There it is, in black and white for all to see.

I might have to get that printed on a t shirt.

All anyone can see if their eyes are working properly is how ridiculous these statements are. I’m glad you post them for all to see. Women have the right to single sex spaces and sports, this is not transphobic. Raging or otherwise. Trans people have the same rights as anyone else so claiming there’s a lack of basic human decency at play by stating facts also doesn’t wash.

Nice try. This statement is ragingly transphobic:

giving males and their ladyfeelings full access to women and girls

Let’s look at human decency

women want some spaces for women only - for reasons of dignity and feeling safe , for reasons of fairness in sport.

some men want access to those spaces because of how they feel.

if those men get those permissions then the dignity and safety of those women has been overruled in favor of the men

you can’t simultaneously have men in women’s spaces for the male dignity without losing the female dignity - its mutually exclusive

and I will remind people that whilst something like 20 edit PERCENT of male priosoners are in for sex offenses , over half of transwomen are in for sex offences

in other words the evidence is that if we give transwomen access to the female spaces women will be safer going to the men’s spaces

i am not aware of any confounding factors that would mean that was an unjust ( and therefore potentially transphobic ) conclusion to draw

What Verv points out is actually quite relevant. There has been a noticeable pivot where gender non-conforming female people have become much more prominent emotionally manipulative leverage for some posters and some activists. Very quickly we saw a flood of stories about gender non-conforming female people being attacked in female single sex spaces.

There has always been female people who have been politely asked if they are in the correct toilet for them. Over the past two months though, the stories have been that they have been attacked and that they are collateral of the clarification of the Supreme Court judgement.

Verv said:

"They have NEVER given a shit about us before, (except to call us sexual racists and failed transmen) but now we are apparently useful tools to campaign for men in womens spaces. Fuck that."

And this has been the case that I have seen. Male people have indeed found the issues encountered by female people to be useful political leverage. I have seen male people declare that gender non-confirming female people are 'failed transmit' . And Nancy Kelley, as the CEO of Stonewall, made claims that lesbians who rejected male people with philosophical beliefs that they had female gender identities were akin to racists.

https://archive.ph/ubnc5#selection-1305.0-1309.121

She also said:

"It is not the supreme court clarification that has made it more difficult for GNC women, it was the TRA when policy followed their ridiculous demands and started putting men in womens spaces which made women feel less safe, less comfortable, less secure, more vigilant, and more likely to query anybody including GNC women."

This is also correct. It is not the Supreme Court judgement that was the issue.

It is and always was the very deliberate misinterpretation of the EA2010 that extreme transgender activist lobby groups informed organisations and individuals was policy. They often did not make clear that this was their own interpretation of what the Act 'should' say rather than what the Act actually said.

The blame isn't feminists to shoulder. It is those lobby groups and the organisations who did not get a non-biased independent legal advice on their new policies. The policies that they created and published under the guidance of Stonewall, as an example, as part of achieving the highest level that could be celebrated under the Stonewall Diversity Champions programme.