Eddie Izzard says J K Rowling isn't transphobic

[WallaceinAnderland]

https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-isnt-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-eddie-izzard-12177312#:~:text=Eddie%20Izzard,%20a%20gender-fluid%20comedian%20who%20uses%20both%20male%20and

Wonder why it's taken so long. Does Eddie think the tide is turning?

I don’t give a hoot what it means
I know what it says online re this offensive term. I love Latin; brought up with it
It isn’t necessary to clarify someone who isn’t trans. Not at all
So please; I’m asking very nicely and politely STOP

This question remains unanswered- Graham has issued a threat of violence if he sees Izzard in a woman's bathroom. Graham is ci.. I mean not trans, so what he is he doing in women's toilets?? Who made Graham the official women's toilet inspector?

The original photograph of Izzard rummaging with his man bits in the queue for a women's loo was taken and put online by a (disgusted, understandably) woman in the queue. I presume GL was describing what his reaction would be if a young woman in his family was forced into a position where she could send him a similar image. I'm glad to know he would be prepared to defend women in that situation.

May possibly be worth not providing the fun of the game to a poster who knows perfectly well what other views are, but insists on their pleasure in annoying women with silly labels. Time to drop the rope.

So let's have a quick look at the photo that prompted Glinner's response:

Does Izzard do this for a sexual thrill? Is that part of it? Thats my fear, a man enjoying my discomfort

Awful times 😔

He does it because he can.

Women have no choice in the matter.

Note the difference between the clothes that the women in the photo wear to dress as women, and the clothes the man in the photo wears to dress as a woman..

And there's one right here, on this thread.

Don't feed it. It'll go away.

Yes quite.
There are 2 areas of my life where I find an unnecessary prefix offensive.

One is Cis.
I'm a woman. My friend "Wendy" is a transwoman. If you need to clarify that then Haddy is a Woman. Wendy is a transwoman works perfectly.(Wendy agrees fwiw)

The other is Mum. I'm my DCs Mum. Not their birth/bio Mum. Their mum. Their Dads wife is their Step Mum.
Haddy is Mum. "Sarah" is Step Mum.

(Names have been changed)

And for goodness sake can we stop banging on about "passing". Us women are making it worse for ourselves with that.
Men shouldn't be in female places races or spaces. I don't care what you look like. You could look like Barbie's better looking cousin. It does not matter!!!!!
if you are a man then you go the mens loos, the mens change rooms, in sport you race other men and that's it really. Otherwise do what you want to do and dress how you want to dress ( hint - nobody cares) . Gah Its been sooooo simple for hundreds of years. If you are a transvestite then good luck to you and I sincerely hope nobody is nasty or vicious to you. We have moved on from that surely.

A man running a rape crisis centre though! . Everyone involved in that should be ashamed.

We dont need to use it for someone who isnt trans.
We have

Women
Trans women
Men
Trans men.

There are no other types, except the 879 other "genders " which you obviously dont believe in because you never mention them.

Take furries for example, your either a furry or you are not, no one uses cis furry.
Same with others I cant post because will get post deleted.

If we could trust that when people say women, it was only natal women they were talking about, we could rest easy that they only mean born woman. Of course being ambiguous about what woman means is a way to force team. I'm against force teaming like this.

And finally, if someone is in a bathroom in the UK it's because we let them in our house. Outside of our house they are called
Public toilet which by definition means the public can use them, still sex segregated though.
So if you keep calling them bathrooms, we will keep assuming you are American or Canadian and wondering why you like to comment on a different countries provisions.

I am strongly in favour of using the forms transwoman and transman to make it clear that they are costume or an expression of an abstract belief about gender, not a sort of woman or man as, for instance, a 'young woman' or a 'fat man' would be.

Trans is an integral part of the identity and needs to be tied to the word it is obliterating, for the sake of clarity. See the initial confusion on the thread about transmen in prisons.

I'm not terribly keen on "cisgender" because actually I don't identify very strongly with many aspects of my socially expected "gender", but I don't want to call myself "non-binary" or whatever as that term is heavily associated for me with attention-seekers, controlling behaviour, and people who want to pretend sex isn't real.

Out of all this crap we are going through, one thing that has cheered me up no end is that women especially, can tell who is a man and who is a woman by instinct, without even trying.
It's baked into us by virtue of hundreds of generations and the necessity of keeping women and children safe and reproducing. All the suffering women have been through is not in vain.
They are trying to break this basic instinct by pronouns and dressing up in woman disguise, but I don't think it will work - it just cannot be broken.
We can probably tell who is a man just by smell and pheromones.

To echo a previous poster, the goady chap posting on this thread is doing it because he enjoys attention from women and their reactions

I’m not trying to stop people posting, and many of the replies here have been really good. But just be aware that when you show him that he’s getting under your skin, you’re providing him with pleasure and satisfaction

Tbf Bernard, he’s not under my skin (I’ve worked with teenagers and primary kids so it takes a lot to push my buttons) but I would like it if new posters realised Chris is not just some harmless doofus, he’s got very niche reasons for posting and it’s never worth laughing at someone if they’re, if you pardon the term, gagging for it.

Harder to have a good rummage if you're wearing a pear of jeans and a hoodie.

Who cares what Eddie Izzard thinks one way or another? My view of JKR isn't influenced by anything he says. Nor, honestly, do I see being transphobic as a bad thing. It's not like other -isms where its about an inalienable characteristic that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the individual's actual beliefs, values or behaviour. Trans is a choice that someone makes. Maybe when younger it's a confused choice and deserves compassion. But an adult male deciding to wear a dress and enter female spaces is engaging in a voluntary behaviour and any of us are free to consider that behaviour good or bad as we choose.

"Transphobic" has no power over me.

Next time you are sitting outside a cafe watch people walk towards you from a distance. You will realise that it is really, really easy to tell if people are male or female from the gait (become and women have differently formed pelvic joints) even when they are wearing jeans/trainers hoodies. There is no need to stare at faces, as Cher never sang it's in his step.

That's why (often heavily filtered) photos can be harder to spot because movement is a dead give away.

'... as Cher never sang it's in his step.'

Shakira gave it a good go.

As usual

Cisgender and it's Ancient Roman Latin prefix cis (translates to "on the same side of" and is the opposite of the prefix trans) are not offensive regardless what Elon Musk or JK Rowling say. They're in dictionaries, feel free to look them up.

Slightly OT but as an autistic linguistics obsessed pedant, I'm really tired of TRAs claiming this.

'Cis' barely exists in Classical Latin and where it does it is used overwhelmingly for geographical locations eg Cisalpine Gaul, Transalpine Gaul.

However it would be far more common in Latin to use the ablative or the older locative, which eventually got subsumed into the ablative.

TRAs make these ahistorical claims, in my view, because they want to give the impression that trans people have always existed, even as far back as Ancient Rome guys!

In actual fact this is bollocks. A rarely used locative prefix is not the same as the idea that people can have souls which are gendered differently than their bodies, which there is zero evidence the Romans believed, and plenty of evidence they did not, as they were a strikingly practical people.

It's generally rude to look at a complete stranger you aren't talking to more than a second or two otherwise it would come across as staring. So unless one is going to stare at every stranger they see in toilets (odd thing to do) the best one has is judging people just from a quick glance as you walk past them.

Klaxon, klaxon! The Laurie Penny Defence is being deployed! lololol

It's sad for apples that we have all now seen the rummage pic - as of yet we've had no scolding response to that, more than 4 days on.

judging people just from a quick glance as you walk past was v v easy that time