£1 million prize offered for anyone who can provide a clear example of a transphobic J.K. Rowling quote

[miri1985]

As the title says, a million pounds is being offered by Distance Magazine https://www.thedistancemag.com/p/we-will-award-steve-wardlaw-1-million?r=uglk&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

"To win the Steve Wardlaw Prize™, an entrant must demonstrate that the cited statement by J.K. Rowling does not involve a rights conflict. That is, the cited statement must materially detract from the human rights of ‘transgender people’ without simultaneously arguing for the rights of another group, such as women, children, or people with faith traditions."

They've named the prize after Steve Wardlaw who I've never heard of but his pinned tweet is an apology to Alison Bailey

😍 I love you lot

Johnny Marr

Joe le Taxi

She wrote an entire book with a transphobic premise.

The thing is, us infidels are unable to see the transphobic words and undertone; because they are not there. They are only apparent to true believers, who are blessed with the Eye of Faith.

And there was me thinking the inspiration was Green Eggs and Ham....

Me too

Maybe Dr Fell inspired Green Eggs and Ham.

I’ve just read the whole thread & I still haven’t seen Whatsthepoint1234’s examples of transphobia. Although to be fair I can understand them not sharing them on here, somebody might nick them & win the prize.

Fabulous, a million pounds for you then! All you need to do is give the specific quotes and the money's all yours. You do have the specifics, right?

Thats true. God, I could do with a million pounds. Sadly, I've read all JKRs books, her essay, follow her on twitter and I've not found anything yet.

Some people are no fun are they. Keeping all those transphobic quotes to themselves.

TRA Plopper : you are all in an echo chamber and have no logic or free thoughts, probably because you're simple minded and don't do any research

Also TRA Plopper : blah blah something I read on the internet but never cross-checked, it's just obviously true because we all agree that we agree that we agree that it's the truth. Do your own research I am not going to do your work for you.

It is always the same bez. And they wonder why we laugh at their ‘hot tales’!

Transphobia and antisemitism seem to be the two most socially accepted forms of discrimination

Purely anecdotal but on twitter/X I've come across accounts with the trifecta of Jeremy Corbyn support, blatant antisemitism and calling everyone transphobes level transactivism an awful lot lately.

And this post is a sub par GCSE attempt at analysis. More holes than Swiss cheese.

Trans women are male - by definition. you have to be male to 'identify as a woman' for starters.

When you attempt a reasoned argument you'll get some reasoned responses.

Look at the time line. She is responding to Simon Edge's post about Pink News pile-ons.

It's all language, isn't it?

We're using the long standing definition of women. E.g. adult female humans.

Transwomen are males who wish to appear as feminine/female-like. Humans cannot change sex.

Transwomen literally cannot be women.

In order to believe that transwomen are women (as opposed to a fictional metaphor for kindness/acceptance) you have to either:

1. Believe that humans can change biological sex - an extraordinary claim that requires evidence. And you'll need to explain at what point this sex change occurs e.g. at first declaration/hair and clothing change/GRC/ hormones/surgery etc. And how the sex change could be independently verified e.g. DNA swab.

Or

1. You need to redefine the word woman to no longer mean adult female human. This sounds easier but the problem is that if you include adult male humans in the definition then it becomes absolutely meaningless, any and all humans are women. Alternative criteria like "feeling feminine" might include both some females and some males, but it also excludes many females, and I'm not just talking about transmen, non binary females or even butch lesbians. Loads of regular women don't identify with the gender stereotypes/roles/expectations associated with our sex, not least because they were used to control women and prevent us having power in society

Women who don't have stereotypically feminine interests/hairstyles/hobbies/careers/clothing are not somehow sub-women or part-men. We are female, and are just as affected by, female bodies, sexism and women's rights issues as more feminine women.

Defining womanhood on regressive gender stereotypes isn't enlightened, liberal or progressive. It doesn't make people more free.

Yes, we can't change our biology, and it will always have consequences for our lives, especially healthcare. But it doesn't have to limit our careers/hobbies/personality.

I don't believe any redefinition of the word 'woman' could be applied retrospectively either. So, for twanw to be transphobic, you'd have to prove that the word woman included men and the person making the statement knew that at the time they made it.

I don't believe any redefinition of the word 'woman' could be written down, even. No-one's managed it yet.

She wrote an entire book with a transphobic premise

was the “transphobic premise” that serial killers sometimes cross-dress?

That wasn’t the premise, it was a couple of sentences in a brick thick book.

And anyway I hate to break it to you but real life has a “transphobic premise”: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.457.3731&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Not even that serial killers sometimes cross-dress. That one fictional serial killer sometimes cross-dressed.

I don't think I'd get a million quid for that, mores the pity, I could do with some dosh.

Actually, was it that one serial killer cross dressed once?

I wish all the people making claims about this book would give us the title, and if possible some page references.

Dean, if they did that, then people would point out what a gross misrepresentation it is.

It wasn't even 'cross dressing' - they put on a woman's coat as far as I remember. As already discussed on this thread, there is a different Robert Galbraith book with a specifically transwoman character throughout who is written sympathetically. I don't know why, if they want to prove 'how JK R writes actual trans characters' they don't use this as an example rather than a character who has never mentioned being trans/gender etc?

Or use it to win the £million!

I always go a bit quiet round cross dressing, what with wearing blokes' pyjamas (nice and roomy, pure cotton, dirt cheap), blokes' socks (less than I used to now that the women's sizes sometimes go above 41), my dad's old gardening fleece (quite comforting, reminds me of him) and any nice cotton charity-shop shirt in a colour I like - even -gasp Hawaiian shirts.

Lord knows what the true believers would think that makes me.

Short hair too, and unadorned fingernails.