Woman's hour 2nd April 2024 JKR's 'hate' thread

[WarriorN]

First item is the Hate bill and JK's tweets - they did invite her on but haven't heard back yet

For women Scotland will be on too.

She's bloody amazing.

Oh, more radio interviews, please! I created an accompanying image of two blokes chatting; the medium really drills down to the chromosomes, doesn’t it…

The EHRC has provided the following paragraph in its latest guidance:

"To establish a separate or single-sex service, you must show that you meet at least one of a number of statutory conditions (set out in this section of the guide) and that limiting the service on the basis of sex is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. For example, a legitimate aim could be for reasons of privacy, decency, to prevent trauma or to ensure health and safety. You must then be able to show that your action is a proportionate way of achieving that aim."

It seems to have completely overlooked the need to keep out DadJoke's bad actors.

The guidance is well worth a read:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/equality/equality-act-2010/separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-guide-equality-act-sex-and

Making lists of people with a protected charateristics who have committed crimes

JKR didn't make a list of trans criminals. There were some criminals on that list, but there were also athletes and a former newsreader. What JKR did do was make a list of people who are insisting on entering women's prisons, sports teams, and swimming ponds whilst male.

the statistics they've cobbled together are correct

By "cobbled together", you mean the ones collected for decades by the Office for National Statistics?

If JKR was using this approach for black people, or gay people, all of you (I hope) would be up in arms against it.

Black women commit no more sexual and violent offences than white women. Likewise lesbians compared to straight women.

Black men commit no more sexual and violent offences than white men. IIRC they commit slightly fewer than white men. Gay men commit no more sexual and violent offences compared to straight men.

Whereas males make up slightly under half of the population yet commit over 95% of sexual offending. And we know that gender reassignment does not alter that.

Facts don't care about your feelings. Facts don't care about your dishonest attempts to compare apples with basketballs.

But no, this is your pet hate group, so you support it.

It's not "hate" to want males to stay out of female spaces and sports. It's merely having boundaries. When women having boundaries is framed as "hate", you know that you are dealing with a misogynist male entitlement movement.

Here's an incredibly weird take from The Guardian in its article on today's developments:
the author and gender-critical activist posted a thread on X saying the legislation was “wide open to abuse” after listing sex offenders who had described themselves as transgender alongside well-known trans women activists, describing them as “men, every last one of them”.

So trans women who are activists are "trans women activists" but trans sex offenders are "sex offenders who had described themselves as transgender."
The actual guardian, refusing to unquestioningly take someone's self-ascription of gender identity as their actual gender identity! What's that all about?
(https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/02/jk-rowling-will-not-be-arrested-under-new-scottish-hate-law-say-police)

@MissScarletInTheBallroom
The EA2010 does not say explicitly that women a right to single sex toilets, but if they are not provided, women may have a claim for sex discrimination depending on the exact circumstances. Miller, a case in the EAT, established the principle that toilet provision which means that you have to effectively share with men, would be discriminatory. A row of unisex, self-contained cubicles with sanitary bins in them would be ok.

The EA2010 is not the only law that governs toilets specifically. The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 (which have the force of law) prescribe separate provision for men and women (or unisex individual, lockable self contained cubicles if there is no space for separate blocks).

There is no evidence (and I mean evidence, not anectdotes) of trans women being any danger statistically to non-trans women. It's a problem invented by transphobes to take rights away from transgender people.

Some of us are living, breathing “anecdotes” and find that statement deeply upsetting.
Surely a bit of consideration for others who have lived through abuse and violence would be better for your cause than alienating them?

It's not "hate" to want males to stay out of female spaces and sports. It's merely having boundaries. When women having boundaries is framed as "hate", you know that you are dealing with a misogynist male entitlement movement.

And you really do have to wonder at the motivations of those who are determined to remove those boundaries.

There is no evidence (and I mean evidence, not anecdotes) of trans women being any danger statistically to non-trans women.
There is evidence (insanely plentiful evidence) of males being a danger to 'non-trans women' and no evidence that their gender identity removes or lessens this danger.

@DadJoke Are you really not going to answer the question about how we keep the "bad actors" out of women's spaces and only let the nice trans women in?

OK then.

Let's give the Scottish government the benefit of the doubt and assume that the reason they did not include the protected characteristic of sex in this legislation is because they are planning to introduce an extra special law to protect women.

What about the other protected characteristics?

Shall we play a game of spot the difference between the protected characteristics in the new Scottish legislation and those in the Equality Act?

What else is missing or changed, and why?

You must have pulled a muscle with all that stretching and word twisting! Trans women are not being excluded from female spaces because they’re trans 🙄 To make that true (discrimination), the comparator would be another male. So, if we let all males into the Ladies except trans women, that would be discriminating against them because they’re trans. But we’re not.

The thing is this: ALL males are excluded from female spaces. This includes gay males, sweet old 95yr old males, your best (male) mate who wouldn’t hurt a fly, my lovely brother, your darling brother-in-law, your friend’s grandad - and trans-identified male persons.

It’s not just about danger. Clearly most men are lovely, but that’s not the point! Males are excluded not just for safety but for the privacy and dignity of women.

This constant envy and anger at women having anything of their own or any time away from men is really starting to piss me off!

I think the implication of his answer was that we need to let all males in if they claim their 'gender identity' makes women's spaces preferable to them.

Except, maybe sports.

First they came for the men called Aiden
Then they came for the men called Owen
Then they came for the men called Graham
...
Then they came for the beardy men
Then they came for the blond men
Then they came for the dark-haired men
...
Then they came for the men who stole borrowed their sisters underwear
Then they came for the men who forgot to steal or borrow any underwear
Then they came for the men who are very interested in your underwear
...
Then they came for the men who said they were women
Then they came for the men who thought they were women
Then they came for the men who just said they REALLY REALLY wanted to be there
...
Then when they came for me,
There were no other men left at all,
And I was out on my ear too.

And now they're just women's spaces.

Dammit.

It's mad that we ave to keep repeating this.

I was rather annoyed with The World at One because I'd like there to have been less time with Katie Neeves - who fair enough may not have stolen his sister's knickers and god knows the Mail are happy to misquote/lie, but he's still a man - who was doing that whole pretence of being reasonable bullshit with added "Oh I just feel sorry for her, all that hate and she's transphobic and all that money and so much hate."

Whatever, Katie. Btw, you're a man. You were born one. You'll die one. If archaeologists dig your body up in however many years they'll be "it's a man" because you're a man. Oh and you sound like a man too. Because you are a man.

I think the very idea that "misgendering" can be considered a hate crime is akin to the end of times. There could be people who are not even slightly interested in the debate (important as it is there are still people who don't care) and could misgender someone through ignorance rather than alleged malice. How is that a crime? Obviously, I don't think it should be a crime at all. If you're pretending to be a woman and I call you a man I'm stating a fact, not commiting a crime and further to that how much does it genuinely hurt someone or make them fearful? I mean really? Thank fuck for JK Rowling. We all know that she did this to put the debate front and centre and she achieved that. I hope she's on Woman's Hour before we lose Emma (who will be missed) but in the meantime I do hope she's having a great holiday!

I do find the she's so rich why does she give a fuck thing a very narcissistic male thought process.

Absolutely we do. Single sex areas for women exist because of bad actor men. Men who sexually assault, rape, assault and murder women. That is the main reason why women have women-only spaces. Transwomen are men and have the same (if not worse) pattern of violence and sexual violence against women and girls.

Why are you so keen to allow potentially dangerous men into places where women and girls are particularly vulnerable @DadJoke ? Do you have daughters? A sister? A wife? A mother? A grandmother? Are you happy to put them at risk purely in order to validate a man's "feelings"? It's so extremely misogynistic. I cannot imagine how any Dad could think it is OK.

Especially if you've ever come across the many, many awful posts of TW who admit to being sexually aroused and masturbating in a toilet cubicle or shower next to women and girls - and worse. Are you really OK with that? Women and girls being used as sexual props for male fetishism? If you think that is an acceptable corollary for allowing TW into women's spaces then that is really, really sick.

The actual guardian, refusing to unquestioningly take someone's self-ascription of gender identity as their actual gender identity!

Gotta be a HATE CRIME!

Actually, a woman said this to me not long ago.

"Like just shut up and enjoy being rich!" were her exact words.

I think she is enjoying being rich!

It gives her the freedom to do what she loves doing - keeping other women safe.

NecessaryScene

brilliant

And therefore it follows that people who are medically vulnerable at risk of collapsing suddenly and also girls/women who are more at risk of getting assaulted are 2 groups now more at risk due to these new designed legal enclosed toilets because of gender ideology.

Gender ideology directly affecting people with disabilities and females. From the toilet consultation men who want to use the ladies matter more than keeping toilets safe by design.

Men can make women fell uncomfortable in spaces in which women do not expect or anticipate them to be.

You can tell you are not female - or if you are, you are very insensitive, because if you had empathy for women you would undersand precisely why we have single sex spaces in the first place, and why they are necessary.

Men who do have empathy respect women's boundaries.

Yes. I think there is a danger that employers may feel that enclosed, self-contained unisex toilet cubicles are the "safe" or compromise option even where they do have plenty of space for separate single-sex blocks of traditional cubicles with a gap top and bottom and communal hand-washing area. Obviously, this is by far the best option for women for all sorts of reasons, but employers have been Stonewalled into thinking that they will be unlawfully discriminating against men who claim to be women if they provide them, and they are now getting the message that they are unlawfully discriminating if they don't provide them. So they may just go for the individual cubicles to be safe. Someone should tell them they may be discriminating against people with disabilities if they do!