JK Rowlings latest tweet. Just wow!

[Imnobody4]

I've copied it in full.
https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1918747065460420745?t=bPXQ2pY9VAwPPqFR26_vvw&s=19

In light of recent open letters from academia and the arts criticising the UK's Supreme Court ruling on sex-based rights, it's possibly worth remembering that nobody sane believes, or has ever believed, that humans can change sex, or that binary sex isn't a material fact. These letters do nothing but remind us of what we know only too well: that pretending to believe these things has become an elitist badge of virtue.

I often wonder whether the signatories of such letters have to quieten their consciences before publicly boosting a movement intent on removing women's and girls' rights, which bullies gay people who admit openly they don't want opposite sex partners, and campaigns for the continued sterilisation of vulnerable and troubled kids. Do they feel any qualms at all while chanting the foundational lie of their religion: Trans Women are Women, Trans Men are Men?

I have no idea. All I know for sure is that it's a complete waste of time telling a gender activist that their favourite slogan is self-contradictory nonsense, because the lie is the whole point. They're not repeating it because it's true - they know full well it's not true - but because they believe they can make it true, sort of, if they force everyone else to agree. The foundational lie functions as both catechism and crucifix: the set form of words that obviates the tedious necessity of coming up with your own explanation of why you're one of the Godly, and an exorcist's weapon which will defeat demonic facts and reason, and promote the advance of righteous pseudoscience and sophistry.

Some argue that signatories of these sorts of letters are motivated by fear: fear for their careers, of course, but also fear of their co-religionists, who include angry, narcissistic men who threaten and sometimes enact violence on non-believers; back-stabbing colleagues ever ready to report wrongthink; the online shamers and doxxers and rape threateners, and, of course, the influential zealots in the upper echelons of liberal professions (though we can quibble whether they're actually liberal at all, given the draconian authoritarianism that seems to have engulfed so many). Gender ideology could give medieval Catholicism a run for its money when it comes to punishing heretics, so isn't it common sense to keep your head down and recite your Hail Mulvaneys?

But before we start feeling too sorry for any cowed and fearful TWAWites who're TERFy on the sly, let's not forget what a high proportion of them have willingly snatched up pitchforks and torches to join the inquisitional purges. Call me lacking in proper womanly sympathy, but I find the harm they've enabled and in some cases directly championed or funded - the hounding and shaming of vulnerable women, the forced loss of livelihoods, the unregulated medical experiment on minors - tends to dry up my tears at source.

History is littered with the debris of irrational and harmful belief systems that once seemed unassailable. As Orwell said, 'Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.' Gender ideology may have embedded itself deeply into our institutions, where it's been imposed, top-down, on the supposedly unenlightened, but it is not invulnerable.

Court losses are starting to stack up. The condescension, overreach, entitlement and aggression of gender activists is eroding public support daily. Women are fighting back and winning significant victories. Sporting bodies have miraculously awoken from their slumber and remembered that males tend to be larger, stronger and faster than females. Parts of the medical establishment are questioning cutting healthy breasts off teenaged girls is really the best way to fix their mental health problems.

One seemingly harmless little white lie - Trans Women are Women, Trans Men are Men - uttered in most cases without any real thought at all, and a few short years later, people who think of themselves as supremely virtuous are typing 'yes, rapists' pronouns are absolutely the hill I'll die on,' rubbing shoulders with those who call for women to be hanged and decapitated for wanting all-female rape crisis centres, and furiously denying clear and mounting evidence of the greatest medical scandal in a century.

I wonder if they ever ask themselves how they got here, and I wonder whether any of them will ever feel shame.

if a woman identified as a man, could she forgo making the bread, uncover her hair and sit on the men's side of the temple?

They are men whether “regular” or not. Just like a man who has lost his penis in an accident is a man, not a woman.

No. It doesn't.

And just because a male person chooses to sit with women, cover hair does not mean that this male person should be accessing female single sex spaces.

It's a tradition that's rooted in culture and history. It's not about discrimination. Neither sex gets a better or different experience in the temple.

I did, above: Well, in my culture, a TW would come and sit on the women's side of the temple, no longer the men's side. And she would have to learn to make challah bread. And also cover her hair in the temple. Quite different to living as a man.

But how does this apply to a non-sexist culture where we don't assign roles based on sex?

That's the point - equality law in the UK has abolished the "social woman" role.

It does not exist. Any attempt to enforce it is illegal.

So any claim that a man is a "social woman" is, legally, meaningless.

Anyone of either sex can perform any role or enter any space, unless there is a valid reason why it should be sex-specific. Those exceptions exist, but they logically have to be based on actual sex. Because social "sex" roles are obsolete.

Perfectly put!

Medieval Catholic church was horrendous! It's a matter of historical record.

Why? Are you saying a man who takes some drugs and cuts his penis off should have access to women’s spaces as a prize for effort? How are you to stop any man claiming to have had surgery and taking drugs? The only answer is no males in female spaces whatever body mods they have done.

if a woman claimed to be a man in your culture, could she h go and sit on the male side of the temple? If not, why not?

I think you will find that it is discrimination if men and women are treated differently. This is you adding judgement about discrimination. Discrimination can be positive, neutral or negative in outcome. However, segregating by sex is sex based discrimination.

That's two of us who have asked StuckUpPrincess.

Can women identify as men and sit on the other side?

There is a rational argument that could have been made by organisations like Stonewall that for some people, with proper safeguards, they should be accepted as members of the opposite sex.

But until the representatives of trans people start coming up with arguments that they can actually defend properly and stop demonising their opponents there isn't any scope for people to push for a "moderate" position for the other side. As someone who's been blocked on Bluesky for being "anti-trans" and on Twitter for being "pro-trans" I can say there really is very little room at the moment not to be wholly on one side or the other.

As for your child I haven't been in your position but I'd probably suggest they seek out on social media those trans people who do accept material reality in some way. Those who say things like " I know I'm still female but the world sees me as male and I'm happy like that". It's noticeable that these trans people always seem more at peace and happier than those who adopt a more "genderist" position.

Best wishes to you - it can't be easy.

What is the difference between a male person who has had their penis and testicles removed because of injury and disease and are on the same hormones for health reasons and one who has had extreme body modification and hormones to fit their own personal philosophical belief about themselves?

Why is one to be accepted into female single sex spaces and the other not?

@StuckUpPrincess Out of interest, are you allowed to be homosexual in your culture?

It is literal discrimination, and a very clear difference in experience. That's surely the whole point?

'Discrimination' isn't necessarily morally wrong, nor does it necessarily involve moral judgement (although in practice it often does). It just means treating someone differently. So, men and women are treated differently in temple -.that's discriminating.

To be clear, in the UK we now have years of evidence to suggest that transwomen, as a class, behave very much like other men.

Obviously the vast majority of today's transwomen retain their penis and are sexually attracted to women. And sadly the government figures make it clear that they exhibit the same likelihood of male pattern violence as other men.

Right now there are around 200 transwomen rapists, sex offenders or violent criminals in prison in the UK. Given that most abusive men have multiple victims, there are many hundreds of women and girls who have been abused by transwomen.

We segregate sexes by sex because a tiny proportion of men, however they identify, demonstrate male pattern violence. It's not discriminating against men, however they identify, to keep them out of women's spaces. It's simply protecting women and girls.

Below is from the Telegraph in Feb 24. By December 24 they reported that the number of trans rapists in prison in the UK had gone up by 10%.

"More than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners in British jails are serving sentences for sex offences and violent crimes, government figures have revealed.
At least 181 of the 244 transgender inmates, more than 74 per cent, are in jail for crimes including rape, forcing under-age children into having sex, grievous bodily harm and robbery."

More than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners are in for sex offences or violent crimes

Your child needs the appropriate counselling, not affirmation of something that logically cannot be true. Why would you be so against them being mentally ill if that’s what they are? There should be no stigma attached to MH issues.

The solution is to get your child off all forms of social media, teach them to live in reality, not some harmful, regressive, fantasy land. The plain fact is they CANNOT become the opposite sex, no matter what you’ve been told.

If that sounds harsh then I don’t know what you want me to tell you, you need to direct your anger towards Stonewall and all the other organisations that have been selling this lie. JK Rowling cares more about your child than they ever have. Don’t turn on her, and those of us that are pointing out that the emperor has no clothes.

Yes, although she/he would have to do other things, like wear a different kind of head-covering, be part of a special prayer group, teach the kids swimming, and would have to study a lot more. Women can study too just the same, but they have a choice, whereas the men don't really have any choice. They're compelled to study a lot of old texts.

So male people wear exactly the same head coverings? Male people get to make bread there too?

And female people are allowed to sit in the male section?

I'm really very interested to hear how other cultures deal with the issue of trans people.

And how far they extend the blurring of the gender roles.

That's really interesting.

Are there any roles that are traditionally male that women wouldn't be allowed to do if they identified as a male?

And do the women have to have had surgery? You seem to think the surgery is quite important.

Discrimination would be if one sex received a poorer quality service. That's not the case. Both sexes receive the same service, but they are separated in order to focus better on their spiritual experience, per tradition. What they receive is the same though.

As a former historian who wrote PhD on women’s role in the Church in the Middle Ages, I can concur that, despite a few outliers, it sucked for heretical thinkers and women in general.

@StuckUpPrincess thanks for answering about female to male. What about Homosexuality? Is it permitted?

You are describing 'negative' discrimination.

Discrimination can be neutral or positive too. However, it is the very definition of discrimination for one sex to be treated separately in the situation you describe.

Sex segregation is sex discrimination.

You're unlikely to convince many women here that separating the sexes isnt based in discrimination

But, specifically, in this country, which is the one we're talking about, we don't have sex segregated roles in that same ritualistic way.

Just in a practical way and a sexist way. So men trying to live in a woman's role a) don't really do it, and b) just reinforce sexism by the very concept.

edited to add and c) aren't actually living as a woman. Inhabiting stereotypes isn't living as a woman