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?)

Do you need a nice cup of tea and a lie down? You seem a bit….. excited.

I despise this concept of "minority". Being a minority does not equate claiming special laws, having to be protected or being good people. Billionaires are a minority. Psychopaths are a minority. Green-eyed people are a minority. People who become teachers after 40 are a minority. And so what?

Do you also know biological women who face a 1 in 4 chance of being raped in their lifetime by biological men.

I cannot help but feel sorry for your daughters. What you are teaching them is that their comfort doesn't matter, that they should set aside their feelings for someone who is born male. How you are viewing your daughters versus male transwomen is still an accumulation of centuries of patriarchy: girls are taught to be kind, boys are taught that girls will be kind to them. I am sure you considered this and still decided to hold to your viewpoint.

Maybe your daughter will meet one of mine, who knows and is friends with transpeople but also knows were to firmly draw the lines. And nice transpeople respect that. These transwomen, especially the dude that wrote this, has zero respect for women who have boundaries.

Her daughters or his daughters it would be easy for @ByShyRaven to clarify.

Article sums it up brilliantly.

How are people of any gender thinking calling people “dolls” is edgy and progressive? Why would a man who wholeheartedly sees himself as a woman call himself a doll?
Oh yeah….

Quite. Jeffrey Epstein was part of a small minority. As is Prince Andrew.

As it is, males, no matter what they wear or how they choose to identify, are not, have never been, and will never be, a minority.

The muscling in to women’s safe spaces and prizes, and the trampling of women’s rights and safety, demonstrates they do not lose their male entitlement if they say they’re a woman. And the pitiful fawning and magical thinking of some women over a male, the minute he says he’s a woman, demonstrates how much further we have to go before internalised misogyny is wiped out if our society.

Also how does @ByShyRaven know they are daughters?

Yes the ‘dolls’ is just so bad as phrasing

Aside from the single sex spaces aspect...There are many things wrong with the provision of health care in the UK. Refusal to accept self diagnosis or provide medication and cosmetic surgery on demand is not one of them. That's not a request for equal treatment given no one else gets it either, it's a demand for special treatment and "rights" no one else has.

I am not going to have sympathy for complaints that their "healthcare" is now better regulated and attempting to be evidence based. I say attempting because I know evidence is limited, and there might be more evidence if only the patients in this demographic hadn't blocked previous research proposals into their treatment options on the grounds they were hateful.

In fact, most women I know would bloody love more care to be given to diagnosis and more research into their medical needs.

I worded that badly, what I meant to say was men, whatever they wear, are not a minority group.

IMO they are appropriating oppression. The group of men photographed for this magazine shoot are the opposite of oppressed. They are demanding additional rights based on their identities without a care of the harm that does to female people.

Exactly. It is MEN who are the oppressor group. Women are the oppressed group.

How you dress or identify, or what you call yourself, does not magically change this.

The fact that this particular group of men on the cover have seen fit to appropriate a female space evidences this.

Yes you are right.

Biological women 'present' in a million different ways. Yesterday, I was dressed down in DH's rugby shirt with no make up and bad hair. Today, I'm wearing velvet leggings with a cosy jumper and light make up. I rarely look identical three days running.

So why do TW always, always, always 'present' as uber glamorous, over sexualized, push-up bras, drag make-up, heels and dangly earrings?

It. Is. A. Festish.

Shame she wasn't on the cover then. She had actually attained something.

This!

Yep, right again as she so often is

But all I can feel about it is sadness

Because they are men.

And as men, they have no idea what being a woman actually is, and they never can.

I'm so sick of shitty "artists" and "creatives" grabbing on to JKR to boost themselves using her profile. It's parasitic and vampiric.

It's also incredibly transphobic of the magazine to be supporting the dolls and not the bricks (both terms came from the trans community). They should educate themselves, the nasty bigots.

Still men though, they are a subset of men, trans identified men. Never female, no matter what they change or how they dress.

@CunningLinguist2 sorry what? You haven’t bought glamour women’s magazine in years but now there are men on the front cover you will?

So I totally misunderstood what you meant by ‘Barbican had a transwoman with a tiny part’.

Same question for you @VioletandDill you don’t normally buy it but you will if there’s men on the cover????? Huh?

And they don’t just demand to compete against the girls, they insist on being naked in the girls’ changing room and whinge about transphobia if the girls refuse to get naked in front of them.