Help - waded in to JKR row on fb

[crunchermuncher]

A friend on fb has posted something about Fantastic Beasts. One of his friends (who I don't know) has commented that 'The author is a bitch'.

I would really like to say something that stimulates people to think, rather than just blindly swallowing the 'she's a hateful transphobe' line. I also know that this is a particularly woke audience, so any replies need to be minimalist and carefully crafted.

So far I have replied 'why?' And got the predictable reply about her views on trans people. I have asked what specifically she has said. I'm now trying to step away from the conversation for a day or so in case I become enraged by the inevitable nonsense and say something I will regret!

Any tips on a) what to say and
b) how to not lose my shit?

I hate seeing a woman being abused online by another woman, just for standing up for women's rights. It's depressing.

@crunchermuncher I don't think it's right for someone to be called a bitch in any case, but both sides are going to think they're completely 100% right so it just seems to be like talking to a wall from either side. I'm by no means saying you shouldn't debate it by the way, you do you, it just seems so obsolete from both sides at this point.

@crunchermuncher

Ooh, all great responses thank you.

I agree about the mud wrestling with a pig / playing chess with a pigeon thing. I'm sure I won't change that person's mind, but hoping someone lurking will see it and maybe think twice. Just maybe. Sowing the seeds of critical thinking.

You make others brave. That alone is worth you doing this. Thank you.

@ErrolTheDragon I'm not referring to what JKR has said and whether or not that should be debated, I'm referring to the conversation of whether or not JKR is transphobic or not. There are plenty of valuable discussions that should be debated within what both sides are saying. I'm merely talking about the whole "She is transphobic", "No she's not prove it" "Here is the proof" "I don't agree with that proof" that goes round in circles and distracts people from bigger issues.

We never know who our words have touched, and that works in both a negative way and a positive way.

For example, I think that being kind in the true sense (rather than the 'shut up women with an opinion' sense) is important, because we never know who could be hurt by our words, espcially in a public sphere.

Similarly, although you might think this issue has been done to death, as indeed may the person on whose thread I was commenting, there are bound to be lurkers who will read and who may just question their thinking in reponse to a pertinent question that they havent encountered before.

(I do this with all kinds of political issues, not just feminism. If you want to highlight the holes in someone's bad arguement, a well placed 'why?' can be all you need).

For clarity, I meant being kind as in considering how we say things (for example 'I disagree with x' rather than 'x is a bitch'), not that we shouldnt have an opinion on this, or anything else.

I do not believe, and many transgender people agree, that recognising that sex and gender are different things and that recognising there are times when sex not gender matters is fundamentally transphobic

@crunchermuncher 100%, hence the "you do you", I simply think the "Is she or isn't she transphobic" has become a red herring that takes the focus off the subjects that are more valuable/important to talk about. But I fully admit that is a personal opinion that others may not share :)

I think the debate over whether JKR is transphobic or not is very valid.

Firstly, it makes people think about what that means. What qualifies as transphobia? Because if it’s a basic understanding that humans are male and female then she, I, you and everyone who has ever been born are probably transphobic. It sets the terms of debate.

Secondly, it keeps the conversation flowing and, God love her for it, JKR is an excellent lightning rod of bravery. She makes us all braver.

Thirdly, every time she pops back into the news, it reminds me to make another donation to her charity, Lumos now that’s doing a good thing.

Good luck, Op. gentle questioning, don’t let anyone wind you up and remember there are 100% loads of people lurking who agree with you and will tell you so, just not on social media.

But as we've understood with racism, homophobia etc there isn't necessarily one definition of it. I'm straight and white, therefore if I said something that a gay person or black person deems offensive and homophobic/racist to them then I'm not going to question it, I'll simply apologise and not say it again. I don't understand why it isn't the same rule for transphobia. Some people think what she says is, some people think what she says isn't - I'm inclined to listen to trans peoples opinions on it as they're the ones concerned and as that can differ from person to person, I dont find it my place to call it transphobia or not.

In the present climate, any discussion of what transphobia means is very useful. Anyone looking on who is uninformed about the debate would no doubt be very surprised to hear that saying that sex is an important characteristic to have in mind in specific situations is transphobic. The more people who get exposed to this the merrier.

I understand that, but in just the same way that women don't want men speaking for them on what is/isn't sexist, surely it's hypocritical to listen to non trans people over trans people on what is/isn't transphobic?

There are conflicts of rights between women's rights and what is being demanded by significant parts of the trans activism movement. Women should be entitled to discuss this.

That's not equivalent to men talking about sexism when they are not at the sharp end of it. But in my view men having an open and informed discussion about sexism could be useful.

if I said something that a gay person or black person deems offensive and homophobic/racist to them then I'm not going to question it, I'll simply apologise and not say it again. I don't understand why it isn't the same rule for transphobia.

Well, in this case JKR said that forcing women to call their rapists women is wrong. Presumably you think she's wrong just because some people say it's offensive?

Personally I think your point of view is batshit. The idea that you can't have any public policy debate if someone who claims membership of an affected group is offended.

Black, gay and trans people are not a monolith, they disagree with each other too. Also women are just as 'oppressed' as trans people- the idea that they should stop all defense of their rights because another group doesn't like it is juvenile.

Some people think what she says is, some people think what she says isn't - I'm inclined to listen to trans peoples opinions on it as they're the ones concerned and as that can differ from person to person, I dont find it my place to call it transphobia or not.

///////

All well and good. Now what happens when the trans person in this scenario is influential in shaping laws and how the law and justice system respond to allegations? Should their view still be the one that counts above and beyond the others? Because that's where it goes.

So if a woman says something is offensive and misogynistic would you agree and say sorry

Or would you carry on with TWAW ?

Let me guess , if it's from a woman it doesn't count dies it ? Misogyny isn't very important after all

@Blackbird1234 the difference between perceived Tranphobia and racism and homophobia is that banning "transohobia" prevents women talking about their rights and needs in the public sphere. Nobody is legitimately disadvantaged by banning racist comments unless they really are a hate group.

Maybe I'm not explaining myself correctly, apologies. I dont believe at all that there shouldn't be discussions/debates about it at all - JKR and the trans activits both speak about strong subjects that should be discussed by both sides/by us all, they're important discussions. The thing I personally think is pointless to discuss is whether or not JKR is transphobic because I find that it takes away from "real issues" let's say, as everyone has a different opinion on it so I feel it takes focus away.

If it comes down to debating whether a comment is transphobic or not, I will be more inclined to accept the trans persons point of view rather than the non trans persons. However, I fully accept that in the wider scheme of things there are a lot more things at play involving a lot of other demographics of people, of course. I'm speaking in very specific terms here rather than the wider view.

if I said something that a gay person or black person deems offensive and homophobic/racist to them then I'm not going to question it, I'll simply apologise and not say it again. I don't understand why it isn't the same rule for transphobia

If you said something that was massively sexist & misogynistic and women pointed it out to you, would you stop with that too?

"What specifically did she say"

Recently she described transwomen as "penised individuals". Regardless what the context is that particular choice of words isn't going to sit well with many people.

But isn't that turn of phrase the one recommended by the trans community when talking about biology ?

So person with uterus, person who is pregnant ?

@bordermidgebite I'm sorry, I don't think I understand fully what you mean?

So many replies its difficult to keep up, sorry! If another woman pointed out that something I had said was misogynistic then yes, of course I would apologise, I'm not too sure why you think that I wouldn't? Equally, if a trans person said that something I said was transphobic, I would also apologise. Everyone has a preference with how they prefer to be spoken to, I cant speak for everyone so I will go off of what the person I'm speaking to prefers.

Recently she described transwomen as "penised individuals". Regardless what the context is that particular choice of words isn't going to sit well with many people.

///////

And let's not forget the context here was a rapist. A rapist. So let's not make out JKR described a random transwoman as a penised individual

Well if females are now uterus having people then males are penis having people

It used to be the word woman and man would do but trans individuals sometimes find these words upsetting and sometimes people are confused by those words

She does not I think give a toss if the person with a penis is trans or not , which is why it's not transphobic

@MargaritaPie

"What specifically did she say"

Recently she described transwomen as "penised individuals". Regardless what the context is that particular choice of words isn't going to sit well with many people.

No, she didn't mention transwomen. You are wrong. The tweet was about rapists. If you continue to conflate "rapists" with "transwomen" you will be kicked off this board for blatant transphobia.