Why do anti trans people support JK Rowling?

[TaylorMia]

I'm a gay detransitioner who stopped taking hormones simply because I ended up not liking the idea of being on hormones and getting surgery. My insecurities aren't gone, but there's been some freedom in not being nervous about the increase of cardiovascular issues from hormones. I was also aware of Rowling's comments and never thought of her as being against trans people.

Over the past few weeks though, I paid attention to a lot of the people following her on Twitter who support her most, and I noticed that a large amount of them don't agree with a single thing Rowling has said about trans people. Rowling is on record for saying that she has no problem calling trans men he/trans women she, supporting adults having fairly easy access to hormones/surgery, saying that she considers most trans people 'vulnerable' and even saying she knew a trans woman that she could barely see as anything other than a woman. In contrast, a lot of 'gender critical' people say the opposite of those things. They get triggered by the idea of calling a trans woman a she and vice versa, sometimes don't even use their legal names, mock their appearances, think that trans people don't have their own specific needs, and in some cases, saying that the mere concept of being transgender is a capitalistic 'white male' misogynistic scam that manipulates mentally ill people, and that even adults shouldn't be allowed to transition. You can deny it if you want, but I can safely say I have seen all of these things said in 'gender critical' Twitter and forums. The word disingenuous doesn't really cover the attitudes of people who say that the whole concept of being trans is bad, bigoted and a capitalist scam, while simultaneously saying "We aren't anti trans". I am fully against gender ideology, but seeing these people's sentiments made me realize they don't really agree with what Rowling has said.

Indeed it would, otherwise why start the thread?

For me it is a bit like the Brexit dilemma.

With brexit you had a load of people who said we must change this because what we have now is Bad.

So you would ask a really practical question like 'so how do we tackle the issue of NI?'

And you'd get a hostile response about elitism or not being interested in Ni and it was for other people to sort as it wasn't their problem. They were only interested in a different particular aspect of Brexit and they just wanted their own way.

That ultimately led to years of problems but the question of NI didn't go away. Its persisted for years. And even now the most ardent of Brexiteers are far from happy with the outcome whilst middle grounders have become completely pissed off over the whole thing.

It's ultimately down to a very narrow perspective on life with a poor understanding of the subject when the subject is incredibly complex and crosses a whole pile of other subjects that weren't on your radar and you aren't really interested in.

You can't ignore them though, because those issues create problems.

This is why when proposing significant change you have to address concerns and deal with problems. They don't go away because it's not your area of special issue or because you aren't really bothered about that particular issue on a personal level.

All things are connected. You have to acknowledge problems and find solutions.

TRAs are not acknowledging problems therefore we get conflict because we can not find solutions.

Exactly @RedToothBrush 👏

Indeed! Found a "red toothbrush on fire" video, but not at all appropriate for this situation. So I'll just have to express my admiration in writing again.

👏👏👏👏👏

This.

I agree. It’s become (like a lot of things) very polarised and more extreme. I have seen a lot of hideous things said on mumsnet about trans people. Some of it is ridiculous.

I think you have a skewed idea of what free speech and hate means. "People who hate certain groups usually like to claim freedom of speech." What a staggering generalisationd and it appears to be an attempt to under mine the very concept of free speech by association with "people who hate". When actually you just seem to be reserving the right to call people you don't agree with names by inference.

I've spent enough time reading political articles, books, posts, messages and tweets to know that lots of activists rummage everywhere looking for something they can, however laboriously, link to their own cause. That's all this probably is.

Doesn't mean that the individual referred to shares the other beliefs of that activist, or even that the examples quoted are about the same thing. It gets tiresome after a while.

JK Rowling is on the left in terms of her overall politics, after all.

Another way to express that is that it's yet more forced-teaming which trans activist do all the time, only this time it's from a different political group. Trying to piggy-back on something different if that 'something different' has a large enough base of supporters.

Women's rights tend to get that done to them all the time, probably because women are not expected to have boundaries and because women are expected to be kind.

Agree totally. I think there is also the issue that many people have changed their views. Many people were very, very supportive of trans people but have become less so the more they know about it and the more they see the effects (see the trans widows thread for example) and then the more they see of the agressive, misogynistic behaviour of some of the trans activists and the way that many are using trans ideology to shut women up. This is why many women have started to object to drag - because of the idea of womanface and the use of sexual features to mock women. All of this has made women more and more defensive and suspicious which is frankly very understandable. The pushing of extremes of gender ideology under the no debate banner has caused many women to become less supportive but even that does not make them transphobic.

It is possible for someone to believe nobody is really trans whilst at the same time supporting those who consider themselves trans to equal rights for employment, housing, healthcare etc.

The word transphobic is bandied about far too quickly and easily.

@Animalsoffartingwood

"GC basically describes any human who believes sex is real".

Most people believe sex is real. You can't change your sex. That's a fact.

I agree. It’s become (like a lot of things) very polarised and more extreme. I have seen a lot of hideous things said on mumsnet about trans people. Some of it is ridiculous.
@Newnamenewname109870 Rather than just reading the OP, how about reading the many eloquent and clearly explained posts on the thread and commenting on those. Otherwise you're in danger of becoming one of those polarised people you purport to have no time for. Engage! Debate! Use your words!

Yes I am aware of that. Was my entire point.

Can you point to one that wasn't deleted?

🤔Hmm, I wonder….

This whole debate inscenses me. I have spent a LOT of time trying to unpick what on earth it is that JKR has said that is so damaging. Now admittedly I come from a perspective where I cannot truly ever understand. I was born a woman, I remain a woman. However whatever HAS been said, I frankly struggle to understand how that has resulted in the onslaught of hate against her. The active campaigns to stop her contributing to her own intellectual property. The smearing of her reputation with lies regarding what she has and hasn't said. The threats of violence. Frankly to me this just reinforces her point. God forbid strong women who are vocal. I recommend people look closely into what actually has and has not been said by JKR before they believe the accusations made against her. She says a lot that makes a good deal of sense. And I believe people have the right to be whoever they wish to be before anyone accuses me of being a TERF. as a previous poster has said. On more than one occasion JKR has stated are sees a difference between those who genuinely identify as women, and those who are doing it for their own gain, and believe me they do exist. Cases such as that of Isla Bryson, the serial rapist in Scotland who later changed gender and demanded to be allowed to reside in prison with other women demonstrates this clearly and does more damage to trans rights than anything JKR says.

Animals, but being GC is named as if it's ignorant, stupid, transphobic. But it's not. It's just biological fact.

I haven't read all of the responses but this is a good illustration of how grouping people together based on one fact and assigning a set of beliefs / behaviours / expectations to them is not a valid way of viewing humans because it will be largely false. We interact in society as individuals with free will to come to our own conclusions on many different topics, fashion, behaviours, beliefs, career choices, sexual preferences and opinions about others. Society places expectations upon us but we are free, for the most part, to deviate from that, provided that does not infringe upon the rights of others to do the same. For me, being gender critical, means rejecting many of the expectations society places on us, but not all.. legal restrictions and ethical considerations affevt my behaviour and I allow myself to be constrained by things that I have reflected on and believe to be right. These do not always align with the beliefs of other people and rarely align 100% with any one other person. I am rambling now... because none of this is defined.. those who question deeply, often have the least conviction that their opinion holds for everyone else, the greatest empathy with the need for others to be free to hold contrary positions and the least willingness to enter into a public debate.

Again, my post implied nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite which I thought was fairly obvious.

The point being that most humans believe in sex, so there are bound to be all sorts of people in the 'believe in sex based differences' group.

I mean, it's most people on the planet compared with pockets of woo believers in mostly first world countries who can afford luxury beliefs.

Your claim that they don't agree with a single thing Rowling has said is quite ridiculous. They are going to dissagree with her on some things, perhaps strongly, whilst strong agree on others.

Are you looking for some consistency that we all follow Queen Rowling down to the last word? Keep in mind that the 'gender critical' movement is very broad and you will see a variety of views and perhaps conduct because of it.

Many will be in it because they care about women's rights, some will be interested because of free speech issues, some will be interested because they disagree with how their kids are being assessed, some of them are from lesbian or gay backgrounds, and some are right wing (the right wingers have more interest in keeping traditional ideas about gender mainly because it ensures male dominance, not because they're centring women's rights).

Like most people, I can agree with someone on one issue and disagree on another, without any ill-feeling, let alone hate.

I like and admire JKR enormously. I am deeply grateful for her support of women’s rights. I do not agree with her on certain issues, eg calling people by wrong-sex pronouns.

That's nice you've spent a couple weeks looking into this. Thanks for the insights