New statesman article: I once agreed with J.K. Rowling

[KookaburraSits]

Sorry if this has already been posted. It's embarrassingly bad.

www.newstatesman.com/comment/2022/03/as-a-victim-of-abuse-i-once-agreed-with-jk-rowling

Highlights of idiocy include:

"It is true that there are no meaningful statistics to suggest transgender women pose a threat to cis women like me. The argument is theoretical — hypothetical even."

"What I did know was that most of the politicians and commentators that I agreed with on every other issue were fighting hard for trans rights. So I understood that I must be missing some piece of the moral puzzle"

"Then I saw how profoundly misdirected her fear was. Because trans women are not the perpetrators but the victims of violence: last year an estimated 375 trans, non-binary or gender non-conforming peoplewere killed across the world."

"They say that sex matters for gender and you cannot call yourself a woman if you haven’t had periods, for example."

As far as I know no man has ever gone through the humiliating process of getting a gender recognition certificate and used that to abuse women in a space they could not have entered before. This scenario only exists in the heads of those seeking to discriminate on the basis of gender identity.

1. humiliating? Have you ever applied for disability benefits?

2. Your argument is that no-one needs a GRC, because they can already abuse self-ID.

Well, let's stop that then.

3. this person, Barbie Kardashian, is in an Irish women's prison, because they have a GRC

On May 1 of last year, the 17-year-old was a backseat passenger in a car when, suddenly and without provocation, he lunged forward and dug his nails into the eyes of the female care worker driving the vehicle. The teen wrapped his “legs around the victim’s head and chest, refusing to let go, and bit the care worker on the hand” while threatening to kill her. The care worker was left with torn eyelids. “Clumps” of hair had been ripped from her scalp. The woman had to be hospitalized. Mr Kardashian expressed regret at having failed to kill the victim, telling gardaí that it had been “music to her ears to hear [the care worker] scream and cry.” He served five months in detention for the crime.

(Continues)

The young man, who began identifying as female at age 15, has often expressed a wish to rape and murder women. Mr Kardashian was the subject of a nationwide bulletin on September 24. The public was warned that he had been released into the community from a secure unit for children, and presented a “grave risk” to women. The youth has “repeatedly expressed intention to take her own life with the date identified as being on her release from Oberstown detention centre.” However, he contended on several occasions before the court that the suicide threats were meant to help him get his way, and were never seriously intended. Continue reading Transgender Teen With Pattern of Violence Against Women “Anxious” to be Jailed With Women | Women Are Human. Read more at: www.womenarehuman.com/transgender-teen-charged-with-making-death-threats-against-two-individuals/

@VestofAbsurdity

That would basically only allow them to get married and die while being recorded as a different gender? Self-id doesn't control access to spaces.

How do you control access to spaces? If someone self-id's as the sex opposite to their birth sex then pray tell which space do they use?

In UK law, access to spaces is controlled by the Equality Act 2010, which specifically lists gender transition as a protected characteristic, i.e. making it illegal to deny someone access to a space on the basis of their gender transition.

Whatever your issue with access to spaces, self-id has nothing to do with it.

Absolutely! white people shouldn't be sacred, cisgender people shouldn't be sacred, women shouldn't be sacred.

How interesting that you group these classes (both real and made up ideological labels) of people together.

"humiliating? Have you ever applied for disability benefits?"

I'm really sorry but you've lost me? Could you explain how disability benefits relate? I have no doubt at all that the process can be humiliating and you have my sympathies if you've had to go through it.

" Your argument is that no-one needs a GRC, because they can already abuse self-ID."

Not at all, my argument is that GRCs are necessary for just a few things (not accessing gendered spaces).

" this person, Barbie Kardashian, is in an Irish women's prison, because they have a GRC "

Where trans prisoners go is controlled by a separate panel on a prison board, a GRC doesn't guarantee where prisoners go. Do you think a cisgender woman prisoner who committed those crimes should go to the male estate?

In this specific case: it's denying trans people the right to self-id because of the hypothetical actions of cisgender men getting a new birth certificate in order to allow them to prey on women more easily somehow (sounds absurd when I put it like that).

Why do they have to be 'cisgender' men? Do you think 'genuine' transwomen (whatever that is) wouldn't do this? Sure some men will take advantage. And there's plenty of evidence that show that some transwomen (who are also biological men) do use women's spaces to prey on them. This is why we have sex segregated space. Not gender segregated space. For women's dignity privacy and safety. Separate from all males, no matter how they identify. It's the only way safeguarding can work, by segregating by sex. Not gender.

making it illegal to deny someone access to a space on the basis of their gender transition.

This is nonsense. Read the law. If I must, I'll have to go and get screenshots, but I'm in the middle of something.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Absolutely! white people shouldn't be sacred, cisgender people shouldn't be sacred, women shouldn't be sacred.

How interesting that you group these classes (both real and made up ideological labels) of people together.

All of these are made up, that's what a social construct is. It doesn't mean that they aren't real or have an effect on the world however.

making it illegal to deny someone access to a space on the basis of their gender transition.

That's not true. There is provision in the equality act to make provisions for single SEX services. Not illegal at all.

"Cisgender" isn't a real thing, it only makes sense in the context of your ideology.

"They say that sex matters for gender and you cannot call yourself a woman if you haven’t had periods, for example.""

Ffs. Literally no one says that.

I think a woman (and can you stop with the cisgender shit - it's offensive) @ElaineFuchs wouldn't commit those crimes.

Men - however they identify - should be incarcerated with men. Women with women

Single sex spaces protect women's safety, dignity and privacy.

The GRA Should be scrapped.

The writer sounds very immature. And very unintelligent.

Males, a group including MTF trans people, commit 98% of sex crime. Not women.

Woman isn't a social construct. Gender is a social construct. Woman is simply the name for an adult female person. Arguably adult is a social construct. But female is not.

@EricCartmansMagicalUnderpants

In this specific case: it's denying trans people the right to self-id because of the hypothetical actions of cisgender men getting a new birth certificate in order to allow them to prey on women more easily somehow (sounds absurd when I put it like that).

Why do they have to be 'cisgender' men? Do you think 'genuine' transwomen (whatever that is) wouldn't do this? Sure some men will take advantage. And there's plenty of evidence that show that some transwomen (who are also biological men) do use women's spaces to prey on them. This is why we have sex segregated space. Not gender segregated space. For women's dignity privacy and safety. Separate from all males, no matter how they identify. It's the only way safeguarding can work, by segregating by sex. Not gender.

I used cisgender here because the person I was originally replying to said "will claim to be trans", trans people don't claim to be trans, they are trans by definition.

UK law makes no distinction between sex and gender.

All of these are made up, that's what a social construct is. It doesn't mean that they aren't real or have an effect on the world however.

White people: real
Women: real
Cisgender: made up.

As far as I know no man has ever gone through the humiliating process of getting a gender recognition certificate and used that to abuse women in a space they could not have entered before. This scenario only exists in the heads of those seeking to discriminate on the basis of gender identity

You might want to make a cup of tea and sit and read through this thread.

You won't of course. It would blow your mind.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread

Ffs. Literally no one says that.

She's either an idiot or a liar. I know what I think, also having read the responses.

UK law makes no distinction between sex and gender.

Yes it does. Maybe you should head back and read the equality act again.

Sex refers to biological reality.
Gender is your ideology.

trans people don't claim to be trans, they are trans by definition

I am glad you are here as you do seem very knowledgeable.

When a man a male person from birth becomes 'trans', what has happened to them in between being a man and being a transwoman? Please explain any changes without it being clothes, hair or make up related. What has actually changed?

Thank you.

UK law makes no distinction between sex and gender.

Yes, it does. You've been swallowing too many alternative facts. "Gender" is only defined in the context of sex, but it is not the same, or there would be no way of excluding trans people from opposite sex spaces. There is.

@Rodedooda

Without reading the article (better things to do, like browse mn) I call bullshit on the author ever being on the side of jkr.

I call bullshit all round, how many heterosexual people with XX chromosomes would call themselves "cis"....

@Ereshkigalangcleg

making it illegal to deny someone access to a space on the basis of their gender transition.

This is nonsense. Read the law. If I must, I'll have to go and get screenshots, but I'm in the middle of something.

Here is the exact part protecting gender reassignment www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7

I've read it many times. Now read the single sex exemptions, and the explanatory notes. Discrimination is legal when it is a proportionate means to achieving a legitimate aim.

Point to the exact text you're making your killer argument on, please?

What is gender reassignment though?