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.

The issue is that there's a ECHR court ruling which says you can't make a distinction between a male who has had his bits chopped up and a male who just says he's female.

So you are a bit stuck there too.

That's not JKRs fault.

If you want to make a distinction on the basis of a certificate, that still may mean women are unfairly disadvantaged on the basis of their sex because they aren't then allowed privacy and dignity on the basis of sex. And this would require a law change anyway. Good luck getting that through parliament now.

And this also assumes this would be compatible with other laws. It may well not be - freedom of thought is contained in human rights. So you could well end up with legal challenges on this basis and having to repeel any such changes to the law to reflect this.

The problem is that in order to force women to believe you can change sex, you have a whole pile of other legal obstacles and you risk undermining human rights in their entirety.

It's very much a case of understanding that there really are limitations here in what you CAN do legally even with the best intentions.

This is genderism 'Good Friday Agreement' in practical terms. You can promise the earth and say it's not fair but every option you look at ultimately comes back to the reality which is immovable without bringing the whole house crashing down on human rights.

What disease requires removal of testicles and penis AND hormone treatment at the same dosages as TW get? I'm not aware of any such disease.

He’s a man.

JKR is consistently wonderful. So eloquent and powerful.

Agree with all of it. It's all fucking awful and I lay the blame firmly at the TRAs door. The whole thing is batshit. On both sides unfortunately, but I know who started it.

So rather than answer the question, you are now trying to deflect.

Do you see the logical inconsistency in your position?

Hello
I work in child and adolescent mental health. We have a huge increase in under 18's saying they have swapped gender. I am very concerned that this is a fashion for many who are using it to try to make sense of their problems which are often neurodivergence/ abuse / mental health. It makes me sad. Also I'm always getting muddled about what gender people are and am in constant anxiety about being in trouble for misgendering. Biology being what it is I am sure that there are a small number of people who truly are wired so that they are a different gender cognitively than biologically, and they should be treated with respect and given appropriate medical advice - it must be a terrible situation to be in.

No. The pedantic nitpicking just shows the infinite wish of humans to make things difficult and to put down for other humans and dress it up as somehow intellectual or having meaning. If you can't respect someone just fucking say it. This constant you can't be this/ that because I say so is just playground bullying. I'm sure a whole swathe of people want to go back to 'the good old days' where if someone wanted to express themselves they'd get a beating and everyone else would look the other way, for their own safety. This whole situation is just the ugly truth that humans will continually take sides, other and ultimately wish harm on others.

She doesn’t want to use the girls bathroom as she doesn’t feel like she’s a girl.
This is another quote:
‘The gender-neutral bathrooms are both horrible and amazing. I am so glad we have them, but they are disgusting, mostly because of the way students treat them. The issue mainly comes from how small and how few they are, and it’s not uncommon that the four small bathrooms are filled with sex, drugs or vaping. We need to address these problems, or the gender-neutral bathrooms will continue to be the most disgusting in the school.’

These (above) are the private one toilet plus sink design.

The private cubicle designs with shared sinks are also scary for queer women who feel worried when cis men come in (their wording).

Single sex toilets with door gaps should be the default. It’s safest for everyone.

If there has to be a mixed sex ‘third space’ toilet, the progressive thing would for that to have door gaps too. And for it to be heavily scrutinised. That would actually be the best for safety. But I really don’t think that would happen.

I totally agree. Of course people who are suffering from a delusion can otherwise operate quite normally in their work and daily life.

It's a very interesting illustration of one of many of the poorly constructed arguments put forward by the trans lobby, it doesn't make stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever!

For anyone who wants to know what should be considered for evaluating risk of this sub group of males to show that they have a risk level not less than any other male in the UK of committing sex crime, have a read through the statistics for males who have transgender identities who commit sex crimes in the UK

Firstly, This was a question answered earlier this year:

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-16/20298.

Question from Rebecca Paul (MP Reigate): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the HMPPS Offender Equalities Annual Report 2023-2024, published on 28 November 2024, how many of the 50 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as female were convicted of a sexual offence.

Answer from Sir Richard Dakin (MP Scunthorpe): 23 December 2024
Of the 245 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as male (i.e. those who now identify as women, non-binary or gender-fluid) on 31 March 2024, 151 were convicted of a sexual offence. This includes both contact and non-contact sexual offences. Offence data was not available for 1 individual.

Of the 50 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as female on 31 March 2024, the number convicted of a sexual offence is five or fewer. We do not provide exact data for such small sample sizes as it risks identification of individuals. This approach is in line with our standards on data disclosure.

To put this into perspective with what we already knew from FOI information. I posted the information to a regular poster from FWR on another thread, who did not acknowledge the information at all, so it seems sticking the info here is appropriate:

Here is data from the MoJ

Here is an FOI request from 30 April 2024

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/populationoftransgenderoffend/response/2641337/attach/html/7/FOI%20240322022%20Annex%20A.xlsx.html
Up to the 31st March 2023, the MoJ stated that of the 88 male transgender prisoners with one or more sexual offences.

The breakdown was
48 rapes,
0 attempted rapes,
10 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
13 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity,
0 indecent assault or gross indecency
6 sexual activity with a child under 16
0 other

77 listed here.... BUT there is a total of 88 in the total so there is 11 crimes not noted.

Possessing or making indecent photographs or pseudo photographs of child has not been recorded in this FOI.

However, there is are further discrepancies in the data of the following when you look at TOTAL NUMBER OF TRANSGENDER PRISONERS SENTENCED FOR A PRINCIPAL SEXUAL OFFENCE.

1 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity
3 rapes
2 sexual activity with a child under 16
3 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,

This equals 9 additional... however the sum for TOTAL NUMBER OF TRANSGENDER PRISONERS SENTENCED FOR A PRINCIPAL SEXUAL OFFENCE is 99.

Therefore 2 more sex crimes have been hidden from this data.

There were 203 males who were declared as transgender in the prison at the time.

There were 24 NB who were not segregated into male and female. What is key here, is that THIS IS NON-GRC HOLDERS. And we all know that males holding GRCs have increased and they are excluded from this data. NO female people with transgender identities were sentenced to a principal sexual offence. There were 41 female people with transgender identities in UK prisons at that time.
As a comparison, I have stats that say as of April 2019 that the general male MoJ data for male sex offenders was just 16.8% of the male prison population.
And there were 3.3% of female people in UK prisons were sex offenders.

I will leave you to do your own sums. But... even using the figure of 88/203 is 43.3%. (And that doesn't include making or possessing indecent photographs of a child remember.)

By the way this exercise was done in 2021. And I checked this data myself from the data source and it was correct at the time. So, it will give some back ground to the above.

The ones that say that in the March/April 2021 data collection period, the MoJ stated that of the 97 transgender prisoners with one or more sexual offences.
The breakdown was
40 rapes,
8 attempted rapes,
31 possessing or making indecent photographs or pseudo photographs of child,
32 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
20 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity,
10 indecent assault or gross indecency
9 sexual activity with a child under 16
27 other
The 97 sex offender transgender prisons collected 177 sentences between them.

And that according to that FOI 197 prisoners are transgender.

This is why NO SUB GROUP OF MALE PEOPLE SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM RISK ASSESSMENT. This group of male people still retain the same male pattern of committing sex and violent crime, at ANY STAGE OF TRANSITION.

The reference to Starbucks and Waterstones and ability to post throughout the night has my Spidey senses tingling...

I will be back, but unless I get off here and switch on that washing machine there will be no clean underwear for tomorrow.

This is for any poster who believes that female people should not be excluding any male above the age of about 8 years old, from female single sex spaces.

This is for any poster who believes that it is transphobic to exclude male people from female single sex spaces.

ECHR? I'm confused - we're not in the EU anymore.

I'm also confused as to how TW having GRCs would disadvantage biological women.

I agree with this.

But do you see that even getting to the point of talking about fair provision has taken years? That first women working in rape crisis centres, studying criminology, global poverty - had to take their employers to tribunal to establish that this kind of analysis was legal? That to even ask an employer to follow health and safety law as it stands could lead to disciplinary proceedings?

Do you understand that women on this thread are fundamentally talking about their concerns about men? That the only real difference of opinion is over whether the rights of people with the protected characteristic of sex and the protected characteristic of gender reassignment should be balanced, or whether its transphobic to even have a protected characteristic of sex?

Bloody hell. Talk about misunderstanding /misinterpreting what SdB was saying by that quote !

A female is born female she can't be male or vica versa.

A female becomes a woman through her life and what being a woman means is experienced through the lens of being seen as lesser than or secondary to men through her life. The reason she is seen as lesser is BECAUSE she was born female.

A male cannot become a woman even if he experiences many of the things a woman does ( as do some gay men or men who are less traditionally masculine in appearance) He was born male so his experience of becoming a man may sometimes feel like that of being a woman in that he may experience fear of and bullying from men because he is not a 'real man' , but he was born male so the reasons behind this experience are different.

Females can't become men either, though there is less angst about this because men don't see women as a threat. I doubt most men see trans men as 'real ' men either. Men probably just accept/ tolerate transmen in their spaces in the same way many women accepted the few ( mostly post operative) trans women who were in our spaces before. All the self ID nonsense then made it impossible for women to continue to do so because men are a threat to women ( and other men) in a way that women just aren't.

If after all this debate you can’t see how a man with a piece of paper which is easy to get/possibly chopped bits off his body/presents in regressive sex stereotypical ways associated with women (dresses, make up) going into women’s spaces is a problem/disadvantage for women then you are a lost cause. All of the above doesn’t change the fact that they aren’t women, they are men. Men.

Oh, so you're saying that the enclosed nature of the trans loos enables people to behave badly in them? If so, then yes, have gaps under the door.

When you say single-sex toilets with door gaps, do you mean individual toilets, not rows of cubicles in a larger room?

Well yes I am still waiting for that consistent and logical definition.

Cos THAT'S HOW THE LAW WORKS ON A VERY BASIC AND FUNCTIONAL LEVEL.

You cant avoid this.

It's impossible.

If you can come up with a definition then you're screwed.

That's not my fault, it's not women's fault and it's not JKRs fault.

That's a literacy and understanding how the world works issue.

The ECHR is separate from the EU.

A wise woman upthread said she lurked for a year before posting. I lurked for several months. If you are new to gender critical arguments then I would strongly suggest lurking until you have the lie of the land. Then do come at us with well-crafted questions and a reasonably open mind and the amazing women on these threads will answer you with respect.

“One is not born, but rather becomes a woman. No biological, psychological, or economic fate determines the figure that the female figure plays in society; it is civilisation as a whole that produces this creature, intermediate between male and eunuch, which is described as feminine.”

She is specifically talking about 'the figure that the female figure plays in society'.

She is not arguing that sex is optional and depends on being 'this creature, intermediate between male and eunuch, which is described as feminine'.

A belief system that leads you to believe in a false (as opposed to an unproven/unprovable) reality IS a delusion.

Unless you think women actually are lesser than men, or think the jury is still out on that one, yes it is a delusion.

I truly am not aware of any such disease, and I think my position is logical.

Laws have to be based on consistent logical definitions. So do policies.

That's literally why FWS won: the judges determined that sex being anything other than biological would lead to "incoherent and unworkable" legal provisions.

The terms "incoherent" and "incoherence" between them appear in the judgement 13 times, by my count.

By demanding that "being trans" trumps biology when defining a woman, you are undermining the rule of law itself.