Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

JK Rowlings latest tweet. Just wow!

1000 replies

Imnobody4 · 03/05/2025 20:36

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.

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1918747065460420745?s=19&t=bPXQ2pY9VAwPPqFR26_vvw

OP posts:
Thread gallery
36
mrshoho · 04/05/2025 11:29

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 04/05/2025 11:16

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.

Yes, this was a deliberate ploy of the TRAs to cause incoherence and upset the centuries old world order. It's been scary times seeing how far they got to with this madness but all those sane, calm and rational voices pushing back knew it was only a matter of time before truth and logic and facts won out.

Thatcannotberight · 04/05/2025 11:30

Keeptoiletssafe · 04/05/2025 10:42

The problem with third spaces is that even the girls that wanted them, hate them.
This is a quote from a pupil whose school have a ‘third space’ gender neutral toilet on every floor (it’s an American article but it’s the design system the DfE have now on their latest spec) :
‘I consider everything in the third floor bathroom a biohazard. Almost every time I make the mistake of going in, I leave trying to purge my mind of the horrors I just witnessed. Whether it is people having sex, poop smeared on the walls, or the toilet being clogged with an entire roll of toilet paper, horrible things have happened in that bathroom.’

It’s the privacy that’s the problem. When you have complete privacy in a public space, it is a problem.

Edited

My son's school ( Cornwall, completely captured) has boy's, girl's and gender neutral toilets. None of the pupils without a special identity want to use the Gender Neutral, fully enclosed cubicles. They are, occasionally, bullied by teachers to use them if they happen to be the closest set, but the students don't like it. One girl refused outright because she " isn't a Gender Neutral ".

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:30

Helleofabore · 04/05/2025 11:27

If they have no testes, why are they suppressing testosterone?

You seem to not be able to defend any of your stated position.

Edited

I don't know - I mean, women make oestrogen in other parts of their bodies than the ovaries.

Helleofabore · 04/05/2025 11:30

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:28

Yes, so I would only give GRCs to TW who had fully transitioned.

But now that only biological women can go into female spaces, it doesn't matter anyway.

Third spaces are the way to go.

So again, what you have stated here this morning would be considered as transphobic because you, personally, are arbitrating who is and is not transgender based on your personal criteria.

Do you see this?

Judashascomeintosomemoney · 04/05/2025 11:30

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:25

Right, but I'm not aware of any disease that involves the removal of penis and testicles and the same hormone treatment as trans women have, which is what you were describing. So that would be testosterone suppressant as well as oestrogen.

Right, so you've stated, unequivocally, that self IDing transwomen need to stay the hell out of women's spaces. No penises for you. Got it. We all agree on that then.

But you're also saying that those who have had their genitals removed and are on a very specific hormone regime are absolutely fine by you.
Can you now explain how you are going to tell the difference?
And then, what the next logical step is to keeping those of the biological sex Male, out of women's spaces?

spannasaurus · 04/05/2025 11:32

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:28

Yes, so I would only give GRCs to TW who had fully transitioned.

But now that only biological women can go into female spaces, it doesn't matter anyway.

Third spaces are the way to go.

It's against international human rights laws for sterilisation to be a condition for gaining any rights so you can't only give GRCs to men who have had their genitals removed.

Do you agree that no ones rights should dependent on them being sterilised?

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:32

Espressosummer · 04/05/2025 11:20

Do you believe the same thing about race? When white people say they were born in the wrong body and really they are black/Asian. Do you think that is not a mental health problem? Do you think it's okay for these people to put on black face because it reflects better how they feel about themselves? What if they want to go for scholarships for BAME people? You're happy for men to take from women based on how they feel.

Do people say they want to change race? I'm not aware of that.

I don't see how TW take from women, if they have third spaces.

thirdfiddle · 04/05/2025 11:33

Yes, so I would only give GRCs to TW who had fully transitioned.

You can't do that. You'd be offering people things they desperately want but only if they agree to have potentially crippling and sometimes life-threatening surgeries. It's immoral, and the ECHR has said it would be a breach of human rights.

Allotmentblackfly · 04/05/2025 11:33

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 04/05/2025 11:23

You are confusing sex with gender here, there are only two sexes, male and female. Gender is a social construct that has absolutely no meaning in reality.

Yes, I wasn't being exact. But I think gender is meaningful even if it is a social construct.
Gender is biopsychosocial - it is influenced by your :
-biology (male, female, intersex (it does happen), hormonal status, brain anatomy and physiology),
-psychology (psychological traits vary between male and female - normal distributions which overlap), and
-social constructs - ( the attitudes and expectations of society towards both genders)

So sex (biology ) is a part of gender. Gender gender is a wider entity but no less real.

DefineHappy · 04/05/2025 11:34

Cloudtime · 04/05/2025 10:51

I would be very interested to know if you actually know any trans people ? If you’ve actually even had any conversation whatsoever with any one trans person?
If your opinion that it’s a mental health issue is actually based on?

Are you aware of the main reasons why many trans people don’t have bottom surgery ? The physical risks and financial implications that make it impossible for many?
Have you ever actually been or felt personally threatened by an actual trans person ?
How do you feel about trans men being forced to now use women’s bathrooms?
How do you feel about about masc presenting women being challenged about their use of women’s bathrooms ?
You are very vocal about this topic and I would like to assume that you have at least some knowledge or experience rather than just parroting some opinions you’ve read .

Bingo
Bingo
Bingo
BINGO!

RedToothBrush · 04/05/2025 11:34

Datun · 04/05/2025 10:11

Yes, as other people have noted, you can't reason someone out of a position they haven't reasoned themselves into. And this poster appears to have emoted themselves into this position.

Boom.

This nails it.

Ultimately if you recognise (and believe in) the law, you can't legislate for gibberish.

You cant recognise (and believe in) human rights, if you dismiss the very concept of the law.

And from the responses on this thread that's very much where we find ourselves and this is why I say there is no longer any debate to be had, because we've hit a dead end in options available.

Even changing the EA ultimately risks a legal challenge on the basis of the HRA.

It's a circular argument that can not be squared.

I've been saying for years now, this is the left's Brexit riddle where there is a failure to recognise the practicalities. Brexit blowhards refused from the off to see the Good Friday Agreement. The phrase used on here was 'not my circus' despite being warned that it was an immoveable practical barrier. We have a similar conundrum here. The law can only recognise coherent logic which doesn't also conflict with other areas of law. Human Rights laws are effectively our highest laws in practice because of how they interact with relationships with other nations and other courts. The Good Friday Agreement also referred to the Human Rights Act.

The only way to get around this is to take a Reform / far right position and want to get rid of the Human Rights Act...

Llamasarellovely · 04/05/2025 11:35

No, I think it just plays into the trans fantasy that women are easy prey/frequently abused/passive objects (et bloody cetera). I don't think many of them believe bad things would happen to them, but a fair few seem to want bad things to happen to us and identifying into that is part of the fantasy.
Andrea Chu and the blank blank eyes and expectant arsehole, basically.

WithSilverBells · 04/05/2025 11:35

thirdfiddle · 04/05/2025 11:28

I'd also like to challenge those that are asserting that JKR's is an "extreme" position. It really isn't. It's very middle of the road. Most people agree with her. Even people who say they don't like some posters on this thread, when we dug in they actually did agree with the vast majority of things she has said.

Yes, in fact YouGov polling shows views such as JKR's becoming more mainstream every poll, since they started polling in 2018. Latest results:

JK Rowlings latest tweet. Just wow!
Llamasarellovely · 04/05/2025 11:36

Sorry, that should have been quoting PP about how few TW actually have been assaulted in the men's lavatories.

Helleofabore · 04/05/2025 11:36

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:30

I don't know - I mean, women make oestrogen in other parts of their bodies than the ovaries.

So, you won’t answer the original question but are now full on in deflection mode.

And it sounds to me like you are rather ill informed.

But I now take it that you personally think that hormones are what separates men from those you declare are no longer men. Can I assume that is your answer since you are now so hung up on this?

And yes, if you are a male with particular cancers that feed off testosterone, you tend to take testosterone suppressants as well.

So, in your mind it is the hormones that make one male person a man and one male person no longer a ‘man’?

Shortshriftandlethal · 04/05/2025 11:37

Lostcat · 04/05/2025 01:45

"One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman" - says SdB.

You think she’d be into the JKR simplisms “woman= adult, human, female”.

I highly doubt it.

One is born a baby.......not a woman.

I've read De Beauvoir and it was largely shaped in the context of her sexual relationship with John Paul Sartre. She was having to negotiate the social expectations of her sex and also her responses in her relationship with him. Both were people of their time.

"While Jean-Paul Sartre's philosophy is often associated with existentialism and freedom, critics have argued that his views on women are sexist and misogynistic, particularly in his work Being and Nothingness. Sartre's concept of "being-in-itself" versus "being-for-itself" has been interpreted as reducing women to objects of desire, akin to objects or things, while men are positioned as having agency and free choice"

In her relationship with him she found herself drawn into the role/position as described above - and in a very existential way. She realised we are all social creatures and we shape and adapt ourselves to our conditions and to social and familial expectations we encounter.

She was not suggesting that a baby is born without a sex or that she was not born female. Male and female biology are different and our bodies become symbolic as well as literal carriers of archetypes. She was talking about 'woman' as an archetype, not that women are nothing but archetypes.

An archetype is a symbol, a representation........not the actual thing.

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:37

RedToothBrush · 04/05/2025 11:18

Get with the programme.

We ARE still subject to the ECHR.
We DIDN'T leave it. It's not the EU.
TRAs have been banging on about taking the SC ruling to the ECHR all week. I'm not sure how you missed this. So they want to still be subject to it.
If we decided to leave it would potentially have an impact on other things - such as trade deals.

This is why I say, idealism on this, is totally at odds with the reality on this.

You cant do what you want without effectively completely burning down the house of human rights law in the UK. It is impossible.

And this isn't going to help transpeople is it? They'd end up in a worse position than where the SC and JKR say we are - that sex is sex and it's binary and we all know what sex we are by definition. (Including if you are trans because being trans is a state relational and identifiable only by sex).

I didn't read much news last week.

If we are still subject to the ECHR, why did the SC rule this way?

RedToothBrush · 04/05/2025 11:39

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:28

Yes, so I would only give GRCs to TW who had fully transitioned.

But now that only biological women can go into female spaces, it doesn't matter anyway.

Third spaces are the way to go.

It's already been explained to you several times that this has been legally tested and has been deemed unlawful.

Are you having trouble with comprehension skills?

YOU can plan to do whatever you fucking like, but your suggestion is not possible in practice whether you like it or not.

You are going to have to come up with an alternative solution, which unfortunately includes males who have not undergone any medical transition at all. And therein lies the problem for women.

MarieDeGournay · 04/05/2025 11:39

Have we the de Beauvoir quote about being not being born a woman on our bingo card? It's on my own personal one, along with 'intersex people are as numerous as red-haired people'.

When I see either of those I immediately know that the writer has not actually read what SdeB wrote nor checked the source of the 'as numerous as red-haired people' stat. That makes me doubt the rest of what they've written.

BackToLurk · 04/05/2025 11:39

It seems Kathleen Stock was right. IYKYK

spannasaurus · 04/05/2025 11:40

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:37

I didn't read much news last week.

If we are still subject to the ECHR, why did the SC rule this way?

Because the supreme court ruling is not incompatible with ECHR

RedToothBrush · 04/05/2025 11:40

StuckUpPrincess · 04/05/2025 11:37

I didn't read much news last week.

If we are still subject to the ECHR, why did the SC rule this way?

So you haven't got a fucking clue what you are talking about then.

Congratulations.

Good for you, for admitting as much.

Shortshriftandlethal · 04/05/2025 11:40

The ECHR gives guidelines that are based on an understanding of the law. The Supreme Court has now made clear the law...before it was confused and misrepresented. The new guidelines will reflect that clarity.

Waitwhat23 · 04/05/2025 11:41

MarieDeGournay · 04/05/2025 11:39

Have we the de Beauvoir quote about being not being born a woman on our bingo card? It's on my own personal one, along with 'intersex people are as numerous as red-haired people'.

When I see either of those I immediately know that the writer has not actually read what SdeB wrote nor checked the source of the 'as numerous as red-haired people' stat. That makes me doubt the rest of what they've written.

I think we need to add both to the 'we need a new bingo card' thread.

Helleofabore · 04/05/2025 11:41

BackToLurk · 04/05/2025 11:39

It seems Kathleen Stock was right. IYKYK

Yes. She is wise that one.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.