Telegraph- Whenever people accuse JK Rowling of transphobia, they never quote a single word she’s said.

[MrsJackRackham]

www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/if-it-weren-t-for-jk-rowling-nicola-sturgeon-would-never-have-fallen/ar-AA17wXhl?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=fd3aec318b9242f0a6c57313e19331c3
Apologies if this has already been posted. Nice and succinct.

I've just had a look at Glaad's "accountability project" ( glaad sent 2 open letters to the nyt complaining about their lgbtq coverage, it doesn't pander to trans people enough apparently 🙄) if you click on jkr's name you can see their reaction to some of her tweets ( and retweets🙄) which kind of gives an idea why they think she's transphobic? But not really.

For example they write she "Expressed support for a tax specialist who had sent anti-transgender tweets, and claims her employment contract was not renewed because of it."

So lies basically. Maybe Maya should sue for libel?

It’s thanks to TRA’s being outraged by JKR and her essay and a subsequent argument with my DC that led me to READ JKR’s essay and have my eyes opened to what was happening in Scotland and elsewhere. Up until I assumed TW = gender reassignment surgery i.e. Jan Morris. Was a shock to find out that TW = mostly biologically intact men.

Worryingly, still can’t convince my DC that TWANW though.

@Fairislefandango God only knows. I do wonder if they just mean disclosing their medical history. (Some) seem to talk in some weird kind of nonsensical double speak which we're expected to believe without question.

It's perfectly possible for a transwoman to have their sex markers changed to F on their medical records. They would then be called forward for a smear test. The clinician might be a bit surprised to encounter the last turkey in the shop rather than a vulva but the transwoman would then happily explain their magical biology and suggest how the clinician should conduct the smear.

There are times that I'm glad that I didn't go into medicine.

OK, @Nellle. I’m listening. The floor is yours.

Please provide one statement or other piece of evidence to back your claim that JKR is focusing on a marginalised minority, amplifying only select information to demonise that minority and thus mobilising a movement against said minority.

Thank you.

I take it they wouldn't react well to "you don't have a fucking cervix"?
What do they get out of this time wasting shit?

It's perfectly possible for a transwoman to have their sex markers changed to F on their medical records
^ This is an absolute travesty. Why is this even entertained??
When your body goes wrong and is in need of medical help, what you feel about what sex you are couldn't matter less 🤯

Be interested if you have a link to that as never seen that before. Most claims much like those against Rowling are bad faith takes or have been found to be outright lies like the mutual etc.

*mural

It's perfectly possible for a transwoman to have their sex markers changed to F on their medical records. They would then be called forward for a smear test. The clinician might be a bit surprised to encounter the last turkey in the shop rather than a vulva but the transwoman would then happily explain their magical biology and suggest how the clinician should conduct the smear.

Ffs. What self-indulgent, time-wasting nonsense!

A link to Jeremy Corbyn's antisemitic remarks.

Spot on, howmanybicycles. That is the argument that really opened my eyes to what's going on.

Is there any chance we can drop the Corbyn stuff? It's bit of a distraction.

And what is the lie about the mural? Corbyn said he didn't look closely enough at an antisemitic mural before he questioned its removal. Really, you only needed to glance at it for a single second to see that it was antisemitic. It's a shocker.

The online mob does not care about due process.
It does not believe in burden of proof.
It does not care about a fair hearing.
And it never, ever admits to being wrong.

Good points, but worst Limerick ever.

😃

If one approaches this from the angle of "Everything is transphobic" then, yes, she is, especially as she is of the opinion that TWANW.

If one approaches this from the angle that the meaning of transphobia is a fear and hatred of trans people then no she isn't.

I pinned down a 'JKR is transphobic' woman and made her tell me what she'd done which was transphobic. It was - solely - that TWANW.

If that definition of transphobia (which I think is the common one) were advertised more, those not in the know, could see that the word is being used in a meaningless and unhelpful way. We do actually need a word to describe actual transphobia so those people using it in this way are very, very, very much part of the problem.

Dead right. And all of those are more offensive than recognising someone’s sex correctly.

This

Wow. Does the NHS have sufficient money to pander to this nonsense. Just call up biological women for smear tests and not trans women since don't have the correct body parts to actually require a smear test.

Quoting:

https://www.cufi.org.uk/news/corbyn-did-not-just-call-hamas-his-friends-he-said-much-worse-but-too-many-ignored-it/

Unfortunately, every interviewer who has asked Jeremy Corbyn why he called Hamas and Hezbollah his friends has failed to hold the Labour leader to account for his comments. They have simply repeated the phrase about calling Hamas and Hezbollah “friends”. Because of this, Corbyn has been able to fob off the allegations and weasel his way out of it by saying he was using “inclusive language” and that “we must speak to everyone”.

In truth, Jeremy Corbyn did more than just call Hamas and Hezbollah his friends, he went on to say that labelling Hamas as a terrorist organisation was a “really big, big, historical mistake”.

“The idea that an organisation that is dedicated towards the good of the Palestinian people and bringing about long-term peace and social justice and political justice in the whole region should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake and I would invite the government to reconsider their position on this matter and start talking directly to Hamas and Hezbollah…”

Errr……. Is this sarcasm?

In that case, surely it is up to females to decide who is a woman no?

MishyJDI quoted:

https://katymontgomerie.medium.com/why-what-jk-rowling-said-is-transphobic-42081477afa1

Sex is real. I am a trans woman who knows hundreds of trans people and who is very active in the community, and I’ve never heard any trans person or expert say or imply otherwise even once.

Trans activists may say that they, "don't deny biology", but then they immediately ignore biology and think that gender identity is everything. For example, sports are divided on grounds of biological sex. Why then are they trying to get access to women's sports because of their gender identity?

After all, does a sexist abuser ask to see your original birth certificate before sexually harassing you? No. And if we aren’t allowed to describe that reality then how can we address these problems?

This is correct, but it's hardly a good reason to go along with "TWAW". Rather, it's possible that a trans woman could be mistakenly seen as a woman, and sexually harassed.

The same is true for a guy with long hair if someone is just driving past them. Yes they could be a real victim of sexual harassment aimed at women, but that doesn't make them a woman! And we don't need to pretend that they are a woman, to address the issue.

It's also possible that trans women could be deliberately targeted by some men, say in prison. But again, this shouldn't lead anyone to think that they are really women, or we can only address sexual violence by pretending that they are women.

If those opposing trans rights were to just say “we want to take away the rights and freedoms of trans people” they know it’d sound as heinous as it is

I would put it like, "you shouldn't have special rights just because you identify as something, whether that's identifying as a woman, or a different race etc.".

Why would that be bad? Or sound bad?

So the source is just trying to spin things in a misleading or biased way. If you actually look at the meaning, it's not obviously some bad thing to do.