JK right again

[AngryBird6122]

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1983848989213553091?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

aibu to think she is spot on? shame on glamour magazine (does anyone still read it?)

What do these men need protecting from exactly?

Everyone knows men aren't women and by this point it's hard to see any justification for the insanity beyond thinking that women do indeed exist to serve and facilitate men to any degree even if everyone denies it. Even here, as always, we got the "but my lovely trans friends" stuff as if lovely female friends, or just women in general, don't matter now that a man you like wants to get his knob into the ladies'. Fuck's sake.

The sweet taste of righteousness indignation permeates some of this threads posts with a soupçon of aggression from those talking about their lovely trans friends. Is the aggressiveness born out of a defensiveness that everyone knows men aren’t and can never be women?

When what you're saying is absurd, you have to reach for every form of argument (or rather, coercion) other than "because it's true". When you're trying to make men's wants outrank both women's needs and reality itself, you get this.

Like Sall Grover said, I'm just done with it. Men aren't women. They just aren't. That's a shame for all the nice ones who wish they were but they still aren't. There are plenty of nice women who wish they were men so they didn't have to deal with periods, menopause etc, and that's a shame for them, but they still aren't men.

Horrible and violent men aren't women, nice and lovely men aren't women. Men just aren't women.

Horrible and violent men aren't women, nice and lovely men aren't women. Men just aren't women.

Can I get this on a t shirt?

People may choose to self-define as trans with no gender identity. However, that doesn’t mean that anyone with no gender identity must be trans.

I have no gender identity because I consider gender to be a misogynistic, capitalist tool of a profiteering patriarchy which actively harms women and children. The targeting of children in order to generate profits from a lifetime of unnecessary medicalisation is especially insidious. I refuse to define myself according to an ideology I totally object to.

I don’t have a Catholic identity either - that doesn’t mean I should self-define as a heathen. It’s simply an ideology which does not apply to me.

The $64,000 question. What exactly do they need protecting from? And how does taking prizes meant for women, and having their photo on the cover of a magazine, achieve that?

Maybe one of the posters who are all for this can explain?

And the ‘dolls’ stuff? I’m struggling to think of a way in which that isn’t creepy, misogynist and dehumanising. Any ideas?

Yes, I'm struggling to see what, Steve a 6ft 2" welder from Wigan, needs protecting from exactly? Whether he's in a frock or not.

There isn’t.

‘Protect the dolls’ is misogynistic, objectifying crap. Every time I see it it reminds me of Andrea Chu Long saying that the epitome of woman was “an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank, blank eyes.”

As a woman, when you get to about 50 or 55 you become invisible. You get to do the heavy lifting of still supporting children, looking after aging parents and managing a job, with menopause thrown into the mix.

These men that will never experience the reality of actually being a woman can just fuck off with the dolls crap.

Yes, I think it is.

TransWOMEN. we’re done ;)

That's a surprising answer.

Dustin Hoffman was the clever one realising that. He said he assumed he would be a gorgeous woman, he was not. He turned into a frumpy, invisible, sort of normal woman.

Not a doll, a Karen, with all that comes with that.

So called transwomen are men. You know that.

I think you've just solved the language problem!

Adult human female = "woman"
Trans identifying male = "doll" or "brick" as he prefers.

No more appropriation of the word "woman" or women's things, no need for any "cis" nonsense, TIMs are still recognised as distinct from men.

Trans identifying females can invent a word(s) for themselves too

Sorted!😊

But surely, if trans means opposite side, youre just confirming that those you call”transwomen” are” the opposite of women. Which is men. I’m so glad you’re in agreement that those males with a trans identity are not and never will be women.

No, trans identified men.

I’ll take your shame and raise you a deluded handmaiden. You should be ashamed. The rest of us are realists.

There is nothing feminist about pandering to men. Give your head a wobble.

I agree!

The answer is OTHER MEN.

This is not a problem that women should have to solve or give our single sex spaces over to.

You think men need protecting from TransWOMEN?
You may be right, men DO attack other men

@CunningLinguist2 can I ask why you are so passionate about it? Why it’s so important to you?

Absolutely. But if a Catholic would view me as a heathen within the bounds of their belief system, then in a similar way a trans person might equally see a person who rejects gender identity - what Stonewall (or similar) describe as an agender person - as trans.

They would have to be adhering to a rather contradictory, often circular, and poorly defined belief system, but that's on them, and if they claim to subscribe to it then they should at least attempt to do so consistently and not fight against those who reject gender identity in the name of promoting trans rights.