Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

JKR Didn’t Have an Opinion. She Poisoned the Well

1000 replies

CSIRCP · 28/08/2025 14:32

This post will likely be a little too long for most, but if you can spare the time and have a cuppa handy let's sit down and have a chat, shall we?

Firstly, let’s stop calling this a debate. It’s not. This isn’t two sets of ideas clashing. This is one woman’s fear and confusion being weaponized against an entire community.

What J.K. Rowling has done is not just share an opinion. She’s poisoned the well. And that poison is spreading through politics, education, the media, and even the courts.

At the beginning, it might have looked like a tweet. Then a blog. But what she wrote in that essay was revealing: “If I’d been born thirty years later, I too might have tried to transition. The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge.”
That’s not neutral. That’s projection. It was a confession, repackaged as concern. She projected her own dysphoria and personal battles onto the entire trans community and used it as the foundation for a movement built on suspicion and fear.

She said she cared about women’s rights. Then aligned herself with those who believe all trans women are predators.
She liked racist and Islamophobic tweets. She repeated antisemitic tropes. She cast activists as violent men in dresses. She accused anyone who challenged her of misogyny while branding herself the face of feminism.
All the while she built up a devoted audience that now includes some of the most extreme anti-trans voices in Britain and beyond.

This “gender critical” movement is not about safety, and it’s certainly not about truth. It’s about control.
Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull (Posie Parker), one of Rowling’s ideological allies, has welcomed neo-Nazis to her rallies. Actual Nazis. The kind of people Rowling once wrote villains about.
In one case, people connected to this movement were linked to the satanic terror group 764 — a group that has influenced teen suicides and violent attacks in UK schools. Let that sink in. This is who she’s empowering.

She didn’t just turn away when that started. She doubled down. She gave this movement a gloss of legitimacy. She used her fame to funnel people toward disinformation, fear, and cruelty—and dressed it all up as feminism. But it isn’t feminism when it excludes, vilifies, and harms other women. Especially trans women. Especially intersex people. Especially anyone who doesn’t fit into the narrow fantasy of who is acceptable.

Rowling’s language now echoes in government documents. Her phrases like “gender ideology” have been lifted from far right sources, including the Vatican and authoritarian regimes, and mainstreamed into British law. Her influence helped set the stage for the UK Supreme Court to redefine the word “woman” based on sex assigned at birth, stripping rights from trans and intersex people under the Equality Act. That’s what happens when the well is poisoned. People stop thinking. They start reacting.

Meanwhile, her cult chant her slogans as though they are scientific fact. But science says otherwise. Peer-reviewed studies show that trans people’s brain structures do not align with their sex assigned at birth. They show that gender identity forms in the womb, shaped by hormones and biology not ideology. Large-scale DNA studies have found gene variants linked to gender incongruence. And intersex people exist. That is biological fact. Not one of these truths can be erased by Rowling’s fiction.

What makes this so dangerous is how calm it all sounds. Rowling doesn’t scream. She whispers. She calls it “concern.” She says she’s “just asking questions.”
But it’s never neutral to question someone’s right to exist. It’s not a debate when one side is simply trying to live and the other is trying to strip away their legal recognition and healthcare.

This isn’t just a disagreement. This is a slow campaign of erasure, led by someone with a global platform and millions in the bank.

She’s not some deluded soul from MN; she’s a multi-millionaire author whose words shape global policy. She’s not being silenced. She’s being echoed by judges, by pundits, by politicians trying to climb the ladder by stepping on the backs of trans, non-binary, and intersex people.

And let’s not pretend it stops there. Her influence has allowed people to feel safe expressing open homophobia, biphobia, and hatred toward anyone who challenges gender norms. Some of the same people aligned with her have mocked survivors, denied racism, and claimed slavery was “fine” if it was “kind.”
This is not a group grounded in empathy. It’s a movement that thrives on exclusion and resentment. Some of them now openly identify as neo Nazis. That’s where we are.

So next time someone says “she’s just worried” or “she’s not anti-trans” or “can’t we just disagree,” consider these words. Show them what poison looks like. Not just hateful speech but the deliberate seeding of doubt, division, and cruelty, all wrapped in a soft voice and a smug smile. J.K. Rowling didn’t protect anyone. She infected people. And when she’s gone, her legacy won’t be literature it will be the damage she left behind.

You don’t need to cancel her. You just need to see her clearly.
And if you blindly follow Rowling and her ideas then you need to reflect on what you’re really endorsing.

Because ignorance is not an excuse. Not anymore.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
34
murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:48

ImGoingUpstairsToTakeOffMyHat · 29/08/2025 00:46

We should just call ourselves no-tails and be done with it (for the League of Gentlemen fans out there)

Edited

He's my wife now, Dave.

FrippEnos · 29/08/2025 00:49

ImGoingUpstairsToTakeOffMyHat · 29/08/2025 00:45

Well yes that’s what I was getting at , albeit not perfectly worded - Snug for example is protected under the Act as a trans person, and a man. But not as a woman, because he isn’t a biological woman.

I do understand what you are saying.

But I think that especially in the case of the trans debate which apparently doesn't exist we need to use the full/correct terminology.

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:51

BeLemonNow · 29/08/2025 00:45

We did have those rights till the ruling and that is how the act was intended to be. As literally stated by somebody who worked on the Equality Act.

No that's not how the law works. Not a lawyer disclaimer but had relevant experience. There was never any right - a legal concept.

One person who worked on the article is claiming Parliament's intent was to include trans. A huge number of issues...but for starters Parliament intent is only one factor behind an interpretation of a law.

SC explained the other factors in the judgement - the coherence of the overall act (such as that it makes no sense for transmen not to have pregnancy protection) and the ordinary meaning of the words "sex" unless defined otherwise.

As explained by the judges it does fulfill the intent to give trans protection as if you a transwomen was hypothetically discriminated against believing to be female then that would be illegal sex discrimination. Which the policy maker claims is the intention in the Guardian.

At any rate you presumably don't have a GRC and the legal debate was only about whether trans 'legal' sex granted by GRC aligns with sex used for the purposes of the Equality Act.

Sigh going through legal stuff at this hour makes my brain ache. Never liked that job.

Edited

I fully Intend to apply for a GRC as soon as I’m able. However due to an unsupportive loving situation I wasn’t able to change my name until last year. Next year I will begin the process of obtaining a GRC considering I will have my two diagnoses of Gender Dysphoria. Getting a GRC is not easy you know. Not that having one seems to mean anything more to most people here I assume?

MarieDeGournay · 29/08/2025 00:51

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:36

What’s the alternative to not wanting to be a man but not being allowed to be a woman? Non-binary did not feel right to me either I tried to just say I’m not a man or a woman but it still felt wrong as wrong as being a man. Just as much as non-binary people don’t feel right as a man or a woman.

Look, I don't want to be rude, I've engaged with you in a very personal way, talking about my experience of hating being a girl and how I managed to get through.. which you haven't responded to at all I notice.

You're a man who is very unhappy about being a man. We get the message. You believe you have the right to appropriate the identity 'woman' to make yourself feel better. You are going to continued appropriating the identity 'woman', despite all the objections that have been raised here, and explained in great detail to you, because it makes you happier.

So while not wanting to be rude, I have to suggest to you that your main concern is yourself and your happiness and to hell with what women think. Nothing anybody has said here has put the slightest dent in your attitude to your needs being more important than women's.

Maybe other posters will want to continue engaging with this, but I've had enough of your relentless defence of appropriating our identity just because you are not happy being a man.

FrippEnos · 29/08/2025 00:51

Just as a thought but.

The OP's post is very reminiscent of what the TRAs tried to push when this all started with #Nodebate.

Its just another attempt to shift the window, and DARVO everyone again.

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:52

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:51

I fully Intend to apply for a GRC as soon as I’m able. However due to an unsupportive loving situation I wasn’t able to change my name until last year. Next year I will begin the process of obtaining a GRC considering I will have my two diagnoses of Gender Dysphoria. Getting a GRC is not easy you know. Not that having one seems to mean anything more to most people here I assume?

It still won't permit you to use the Ladies though, you do realise that?

Boiledbeetle · 29/08/2025 00:52

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:51

I fully Intend to apply for a GRC as soon as I’m able. However due to an unsupportive loving situation I wasn’t able to change my name until last year. Next year I will begin the process of obtaining a GRC considering I will have my two diagnoses of Gender Dysphoria. Getting a GRC is not easy you know. Not that having one seems to mean anything more to most people here I assume?

Nope. GRC or no GRC still not a woman

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:52

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:46

If you believe that, why are you trying to mimic female external characteristics while acting entirely like a man?

You don’t know me personally you’d argue given this debate that everything I do is male.

BeLemonNow · 29/08/2025 00:53

Oh dear I spent all the time explaining the law and you knowledgeable bunch got there first!

@SnugPeach you have gender dysphoria, okay.

You could and can choose to identify as a woman, however you will never literally be one.

You can call yourself what you like but the meaning of the SC judgment is clear: sex is biological sex/sex assigned at birth.

Your "I am a transwomen. Transwomen are women. Therefore I'm a woman".

Is a classic logical fallacy. You might claim a gender identity of women but gender isn't sex, they are distinct concepts.

I'm not sure why you are on here. Do you want us to talk you out of what you are planning?

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:54

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:52

You don’t know me personally you’d argue given this debate that everything I do is male.

What are female things to do, please do tell. Was I not female when I was laughing at the football yesterday while wearing no make up and with shortish hair and shorts and a t shirt on?

Boiledbeetle · 29/08/2025 00:54

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:52

You don’t know me personally you’d argue given this debate that everything I do is male.

That would be because you are male. Of course everything you do and will ever do is male

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:55

Also everything you do is male as you are male.

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:55

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:52

It still won't permit you to use the Ladies though, you do realise that?

I’m still applying no matter what.

RogueFemale · 29/08/2025 00:55

RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 29/08/2025 00:36

Well done for your patience and clarity!

Agreed, thank you @SingleSexSpacesInSchools

Boiledbeetle · 29/08/2025 00:56

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:55

I’m still applying no matter what.

It's your time and money to waste, knock yourself out if it makes you feel better, but it won't change reality.

FrippEnos · 29/08/2025 00:57

@SnugPeach

However due to an unsupportive loving situation I wasn’t able to change my name until last year.

So
Your parents didn't support you?
Or your wife/girlfriend/SO didn't want to be with a Transwoman?
Or that your BF/Husband/SO didn't want to be with a Transwoman?

Given the personal nature of you telling all that you are going to medically transition this information is the least of your concerns.

murasaki · 29/08/2025 00:58

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:55

I’m still applying no matter what.

Fine. But it doesn't give you access to spaces that need to be single sex for female people. As said by the Supreme Court. If it makes you feel better, crack on. But you're still male or you wouldn't need one.

Myalternate · 29/08/2025 00:59

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:55

I’m still applying no matter what.

You’ll still be a man just with a worthless piece of paper.
It will not give you the right to enter single sex spaces that are for biological women.

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 01:00

BeLemonNow · 29/08/2025 00:53

Oh dear I spent all the time explaining the law and you knowledgeable bunch got there first!

@SnugPeach you have gender dysphoria, okay.

You could and can choose to identify as a woman, however you will never literally be one.

You can call yourself what you like but the meaning of the SC judgment is clear: sex is biological sex/sex assigned at birth.

Your "I am a transwomen. Transwomen are women. Therefore I'm a woman".

Is a classic logical fallacy. You might claim a gender identity of women but gender isn't sex, they are distinct concepts.

I'm not sure why you are on here. Do you want us to talk you out of what you are planning?

I came here to share my feelings because I believe in trying to talk about differences and issues.

FrippEnos · 29/08/2025 01:01

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:52

You don’t know me personally you’d argue given this debate that everything I do is male.

I know that this is not to me but, I spent years trying to destroy gender stereotypes.
I would argue that with the exception of very few things, there is nothing that you do that is gendered.

It is the Gender Ideology and TRAs that are forcing gender stereotypes back on us all, which is just not healthy.

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 01:01

Myalternate · 29/08/2025 00:59

You’ll still be a man just with a worthless piece of paper.
It will not give you the right to enter single sex spaces that are for biological women.

Again as I stated I’m still going to apply for one. I don’t care what’s it’s legally worth in your eyes. That’s for the government to decide.

GarlicLitre · 29/08/2025 01:03

@CSIRCP

How does redefining the female sex benefit women?

What do women & girls gain by being forced to undress in front of males?

Your infinite knowledge and expertise on this matter will be welcome.

murasaki · 29/08/2025 01:04

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 01:00

I came here to share my feelings because I believe in trying to talk about differences and issues.

Well we've been trying to talk about the difference between you, a man, who seems determined to invade female spaces and has no concept of how to define woman, and most of us, who are women.

And you aren't talking about that. Or how it feels to us when you try to colonise us, or act like a parasite.

So you're not here to talk about that at all, be honest.

Boiledbeetle · 29/08/2025 01:04

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 01:00

I came here to share my feelings because I believe in trying to talk about differences and issues.

And how's that working out for you?

BeLemonNow · 29/08/2025 01:04

SnugPeach · 29/08/2025 00:51

I fully Intend to apply for a GRC as soon as I’m able. However due to an unsupportive loving situation I wasn’t able to change my name until last year. Next year I will begin the process of obtaining a GRC considering I will have my two diagnoses of Gender Dysphoria. Getting a GRC is not easy you know. Not that having one seems to mean anything more to most people here I assume?

Thanks for reading my post. I was just trying to clarify what the Supreme Court judgement was about. It was never about any claims trans had a right to self ID into same sex spaces.

Not that having one (a GRC) seems to mean anything more to most people here I assume? I haven't seen this discussed explicitly. I guess you mean "will they consider me a woman?". Then no.

Unlike many trans rights activists we do follow the law though, we were once famously criticised for being "Conspicuously Law Abiding Women"! Claw!

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread