Daniel Radcliffe responds to J.K Rowling's tweets on gender identity

[EddyF]

Daniel Radcliffe responds to JK Rowling’s tweets: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people”

Daniel Radcliffe Responds to J.K. Rowling’s Tweets on Gender Identity – The Trevor Project

FULL STATEMENT

I realize that certain press outlets will probably want to paint this as in-fighting between J.K. Rowling and myself, but that is really not what this is about, nor is it what’s important right now. While Jo is unquestionably responsible for the course my life has taken, as someone who has been honored to work with and continues to contribute to The Trevor Project for the last decade, and just as a human being, I feel compelled to say something at this moment.

Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I. According to The Trevor Project, 78% of transgender and nonbinary youth reported being the subject of discrimination due to their gender identity. It’s clear that we need to do more to support transgender and nonbinary people, not invalidate their identities, and not cause further harm.

I am still learning how to be a better ally, so if you want to join me in learning more about transgender and nonbinary identities check out The Trevor Project’s Guide to Being an Ally to Transgender and Nonbinary Youth. It’s an introductory educational resource that covers a wide range of topics, including the differences between sex and gender, and shares best practices on how to support transgender and nonbinary people.

To all the people who now feel that their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished, I am deeply sorry for the pain these comments have caused you. I really hope that you don’t entirely lose what was valuable in these stories to you. If these books taught you that love is the strongest force in the universe, capable of overcoming anything; if they taught you that strength is found in diversity, and that dogmatic ideas of pureness lead to the oppression of vulnerable groups; if you believe that a particular character is trans, nonbinary, or gender fluid, or that they are gay or bisexual; if you found anything in these stories that resonated with you and helped you at any time in your life — then that is between you and the book that you read, and it is sacred. And in my opinion nobody can touch that. It means to you what it means to you and I hope that these comments will not taint that too much.

Love always,
Dan

So Willow isn't going to make effort to highlight any posts he/she considers transphobic - because that would be too much work? - while simultaneously expecting everyone else on this board to spoon feed him/her on the topic of 'cis'

Hmm.

You can self identify as any gender you please. I personally reject the innate reality of gender.

Sex, on the other hand, is indisputably real and has consequences.

If so, what is your opinion on the medical consensus around transgender individuals?

willowflower there isn't even consensus on what 'transgender' means or whether being trans is a medical condition.

Just putting this here again. It's only 10 minutes. And pretty spectacular once she gets into her stride.

I'm reminded of the many women who say if you're not angry, you're not listening.

Dan supports sexist, homophobic, imperialistic bullshit.

Its sexist because it treats women as whiners who know nothing. A man knows better what the life of a woman is like. It assumes that women can just identify as they wish to escape prejudice. It supports gender stereotypes which reduce women to liking pink, whilst also dehumanising them to bodily functions or parts such as 'menstrators' and 'uterus havers' whereas the same is not done for men. The point being that men don't have the same type of language placed upon them. They are still just men. Women is NOT an offensive word. Nor is it something you can just decide you are one day. It is not a feeling or because you have a 'pink brain'. Even with hormones and surgery, your body still stays male or female and is identifable as such - both structurally and biologicially even if your cosmetic surgeon is cracking. Nature can still tell the difference.

Its homophobic because the likes of Stonewall have erased the sex bit from homosexual and replaces it with the stereotypes of gender. Therefore if you are gay or lesbian and don't wish to sleep with someone who has different gentials to you, you are transphobic. It removes the language and the protection that lesbians in particular have.

And its imperialist colonal style bullshit because it ignores the impact this language has on non-western parts of the world and the lived experience there. It says that we are 'more civilised' in the West and can have a situation where men are allowed to enter and share toilet and bathing facilities because we have progressed to a point where sex is irrevelant and we don't have sexual abuse/assault etc here anymore. The guidance for the rest of the world is that it is essential for the protection of women to have separate facilities to men for their safety and security. At the moment at least. But the way the things are changing this seems likely to be deemed transphobic at some point thus reversing the process of freeing women from these type of threats and meaning they are trapped in the home or at risk of violence. We also know the very idea that we have progressed to this civilised utopia is utter bullshit, and there will always be people who use this weakness to abuse, exploit and harm women.

It also removes power and agency from women. The very act of Radcliffe, a man, telling Rowling she's wrong and apologising on her behalf illustrates it. Then we have women having to budge up in terms of representation, whilst men don't. Women are told they have to accept that their sexuality has changed to homosexual if they husband transistioned and if they don't convert they are bigoted.

It removed educational, career, political and sporting opportunities from women, which have always been more limited for women.

We see it. We call it out.

We are called bigots for stating our reality.

Now thats blindness. Thats ignorance, arrogance and uneducated bullshit born of privilege and power.

Dan can fuck off. And fuck off some more.

And so can every other fucker jumping on the trendy unthinking bandwagon with him. Every fucking last one of them.

Sex can not change. Gender is a chain around women's necks to control them and maniplate them.

Made the mistake of posting on the DR love in on the Harry Potter subreddit. Am now banned from said subreddit 🤣 (After being called a terf obviously)

Willowflower. Why are you being so patronising?

You don’t need my permission to engage on this thread and I don’t need yours

I do think that part of the problem is the emotional investment that many people have in this issue.
It's understandable (and in some cases unavoidable) but it makes debate difficult.

A few people have pointed out the new 'cancel culture' of shutting down discussions before they can begin on the basis that they are 'offensive' and that's something I, too, have a really big problem with.
The issue is that it works both ways.
Perhaps I exist in a bubble, but the level of emotion in discussions of transgender individuals on mumsnet is worlds away from anything I've encountered in real life.

Thanks to the people who've taken the time to reply to my questions- some of your points have given me a lot to think about!

I am WFH today (this is my late lunch break!) but I appreciate anyone else who shares their views and will read them this evening :)

The effrontery of a mediocre actor apologising for Rowling - doesn’t that just mirror the whole transwomen/women appropriation debate.

YY.

If so, what is your opinion on the medical consensus around transgender individuals?

Willow, even transgender organisations, like GIRES, WPATH will all say that gender is society's expectations and roles. A detail that gets conveniently glossed over.

There is no medical evidence for being born in the wrong body.

If there was, we could all get tested. Job done.

And even if there was, sex is a description of your body, not the way you think.

Women aren't routinely victims of sexism because of the way they think.

If sexism was based on the way you think, then segregating by the way you think might make sense.

Periods, pregnancy, menopause, abortion, miscarriage, cervical cancer. Even if all sexism went away, those things would remain, none of which will ever be experienced by a trans woman.

Yes, you don't even need to be overtly sexist to discriminate against women. All you need to do is remove access to birth control (perhaps by replacing the NHS with private healthcare).

How could this possibly be sexist? The people previously defined as men don't have access to birth control either and the people who would be affected can no longer be identified.

Can somebody please explain why some women have such a visceral reaction to being called a cis woman?

By cis I presume mean you mean the transideological idea that women ‘identify’ with their ‘gender’; in other words ‘cis women’ identify with being paid less, being treated as sex objects, being under-represented in Parliament, being the victims of sexual harassment, with not taking leadership positions or doing stereotypically male jobs. You are saying that women must accept the 1950s sex stereotype of ‘womanhood’ and that we are oppressed because we are choosing to be. How is that not incredibly offensive?

Applause for Posie Parker. That video was immense. And yes, Posie, I'm going to summon my ovaries of steel, and support JKR publicly under my own name in a public forum. Despite being a public sector worker.

In other news, my version of the onion headline for this is:
"Mediocre young man tells talented older woman responsible for his fame and fortune that she has no right to political opinions of her own."

[quote Datun]Just putting this here again. It's only 10 minutes. And pretty spectacular once she gets into her stride.

I'm reminded of the many women who say if you're not angry, you're not listening.

[/quote] It's brilliant. I felt her anguish watching it. Painful stuff.

And "cis" can just fucking do one.

I am not a member of a subset of my own sex.

I do not have a "gender identity" which "aligns" with my sex, because I don't fucking identify with my own oppression.

The fact he apologises for pain her words have caused but then fails to acknowledge the despicable misogynistic abuse she's been receiving is completely unforgivable. Disagreeing on the politics is one thing, but there is no excuse at all not to condemn the disgusting language people are using towards her.

He couldn't without facing the wrath of transactivists and woke commentators, because apparently she deserves all the abuse and threats she gets because "people are broken" 🙄 as I heard some unknown Twitter blue tick say. It's deliberate cowardice, because he'd be accused of "both sidesing" it. He's a snivelling craven sell out.

A couple of days ago Kenny Ethan Jones, who is a trans man, was tweeting that JK was a TERF, calling for her to be cancelled quite vociferously. I would have thought that they would have shared something about Daniel Radcliffe 'apologising' for what she said and DR standing up for trans people in such a brave way.

Except Daniel didn't mention trans men at all, didn't mention people like Kenny, did he? Only that 'trans women are women'. And there is nothing on Kenny's social media about it, no thanking DR for standing up for them and helping them in their plight.

And I just wonder if Kenny, and others like them, will come to realise that actually, you can't ever identify out of being female. Because, despite what they claim to the contrary, everyone knows exactly who are the males and who are the females.

On the race comparison in terms of "identifying", I'm a white Brit whose childhood was deeply influenced by my Hispanic aunties and uncles (close friends of my parents, not actual relatives). I speak some Spanish (spoke it better when I was younger), and I regard the kids of my aunties and uncles as sort of quasi siblings. The auntie I was closest to growing up has called me mija ("my daughter") for as long as I can remember. Some of my nostalgia foods are the foods of the Spanish diaspora.

If I were to claim to identify as Hispanic as a result of this every single one of the people mentioned above would roll their eyes and tell me that they thought they brought me up better than that. And they'd be right to do so.

"Identify as" means "am not" and we all know it. Nobody gets a choice about how they're seen by others, and it's how we're actually seen by others that influences the course of our lives, in addition to the basic biological realities that shape how we interact with the world. I can't identify as tall and athletic enough to slam dunk a basketball either, because reality.

The apologising for her piece is the worst! I wonder will she pull him up on that? So bloody patronising!!

'Cis' can fuck the fuck off.

The category of female humans is being colonised and renamed as cis and mentruators, we are told we are the privileged category of 'women' and we are supposed to be fucking happy about it?

Do you think the people in a country invaded by colonisers would be happy about their country being renamed? No, that would be appropriation for anyone else other than women

@CuppaTea86

Long time lurker on FWR, have never posted here before. I've just read a PP upthread mention about pushback against the term FGM. Are we not even allowed the use of the word 'female' as a replacement for 'woman' (the actual xx kind)?

Would the TRAs and allies resist if we continued to talk about "issues affecting females" e.g FGM, female cancer screening, female sex trafficking etc, without having to state 'ciswomen and transmen and non-binary' but just stating Females as a collective noun.

FWIW I absolutely don't think we should have to give up 'woman' as a word to describe adult human females or conduct linguistic gymnastics when we all know which sex class is being affected by these issues.

The Guardian has started removing 'female' from FGM. They now refer to 'forced genital mutilation', as in this article (about girls).

Covid-19 school closures have exposed children around the world to human rights abuses such as forced genital mutilation, early marriage and sexual violence, child protection experts say.

www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jun/01/many-girls-have-been-cut-how-coronavirus-global-school-closures-left-children-at-risk

You can self identify as any gender you please. I personally reject the innate reality of gender.

Or species. I did enjoy Blaire White’s video on transpecies people. But you know, you can graze on he front lawn as much as you like, but you’re still not a deer.

I do think that part of the problem is the emotional investment that many people have in this issue.

Posters on MN are emotionally invested in protecting women's rights. This is a current topic because of TRA attempts to make changes to the Equality Act and the GRA and attempts to impose transgender ideology (sex doesn't exist, everyone must fit in a gender box) on schools and public bodies.

It's the difference between believing that women should be free to wear the veil, even if you don't agree with their reasons, and being forced to wear the veil yourself.

What we have is a man, person born without a vagina, lecturing a woman, a mother, about menstruation, and recommending she better inform herself about menstruation by reading the words of other people born without vaginas who are greater experts on the subject of menstruation than either of them.

Also I wouldn't say my reaction to being called cis is "visceral" so much as, again, rolled eyes. It's an concept so daft that everyone would handwave it away if there wasn't an implied threat behind it.