JKR asking similar questions to what I have been asking for years on here.

[DialSquare]

Copied from Nitter

J.K. Rowling@jk_rowling29m
As another man who once worked with me declares himself saddened by my beliefs on gender and sex, I thought it might be useful to compile a list for handy reference. Which of the following do you imagine makes actors and directors who aren’t involved with the HBO reboot of Harry Potter so miserable?

Is it my belief that women and girls should have their own public changing rooms and bathrooms?

That women should retain female-only rape crisis centres?

That men don’t belong in women’s sport?

That female prisoners shouldn’t be incarcerated with violent men and male sex offenders?

That women should remain a protected class in law, because they have sex-specific needs and issues?

That language should reflect reality rather than ideological jargon, especially in a medical context?

That women shouldn’t be harassed, persecuted or fired for refusing to pretend humans can change sex?

That women should not be threatened with violence and rape when they assert their rights?

That freedom of speech and belief are essential to a pluralistic democratic society?

That troubled minors, especially those who are gay, autistic and trauma-experienced, should be given mental health support instead of irreversible surgeries and drug treatments on non-existent evidence of benefit?

That gay people shouldn’t be pressured to include the opposite sex in their dating pools, nor should they be smeared as ‘genital fetishists’ when they don’t?

That cross-dressing heterosexual male fetishists aren’t actually oppressed, but having the time of their lives piggybacking off gender identity ideology?

That said ideology, and the privileged, blinkered fools pushing it because they suffer zero consequences themselves, have done more damage to the political left’s credibility than Trump and Farage could have achieved in a century?

Let me have your thoughts.

This sums up the views of the majority of posters on this board, however, we often have other posters tell us they don’t agree with us, but never what views they don’t actually agree with.

So, those of you that don’t agree with the majority view on here, what is it about the above that you don’t agree with?

The fact is that a man who enters a female toilet has no right to do so.

If he is having problems within the toilets provide for him he needs to man up and speak out and if needed call the police.

He has no right to abuse women by deciding they should have no rights.

Now on evidence.

Whats evidence are you able to provide for your subset of male on male harm?

Or an MRA/incel who views feminism as a personal insult.

No Cailin. Not me as you say.

I believe I interpreted what she said as intended. But I think that if people are arguing that they didn’t understand then ‘they’ could say she wasn’t as clear as she could be. Of course, I didn’t word that as well as could have either but by that stage I was only engaging part of my brain and not focused.

Can you show me your evidence please.
A list would be useful particularly in the U.K.
Not anything you have mentioned before from other countries.

Howabout this good enough?

"The microsystem refers to transphobic interactions between individuals. In 2018, more than half of young trans respondents to a national Stonewall survey had experienced a hate crime in the past year 22]. Since then, estimates of police-reported transphobic hate crimes have increased by 200% 23]. Hate crimes based on gender minority status are more likely to involve enacted or threatened physical violence than crimes motivated by other minoritised characteristics 23]. Moreover, the results from a TransActual UK survey demonstrated that interpersonal transphobia is alarmingly commonplace, with experiences of transphobia from strangers (e.g., on public transport or when accessing goods and services), colleagues and family, each reported by a majority of respondents 21]."

https://equityhealthj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12939-025-02509-z#:~:text=The%20microsystem%20refers%20to%20transphobic,majority%20of%20respondents%20%5B21%5D.

Wow….

You are arguing that UK toilets should allow men in so why would the UK import US attitude problems?

Did you miss the little bit in the Cass report which detailed the examination of the UK system by benchmarking against other countries.

Your do tend to fall back on personal attack in an attempt to hide your lack of substance failing imo to realise your abuse does not make it less evident rather it highlights it.

Here you go, I'll do your work for you….

"The microsystem refers to transphobic interactions between individuals. In 2018, more than half of young trans respondents to a national Stonewall survey had experienced a hate crime in the past year 22]. Since then, estimates of police-reported transphobic hate crimes have increased by 200% 23]. Hate crimes based on gender minority status are more likely to involve enacted or threatened physical violence than crimes motivated by other minoritised characteristics 23]. Moreover, the results from a TransActual UK survey demonstrated that interpersonal transphobia is alarmingly commonplace, with experiences of transphobia from strangers (e.g., on public transport or when accessing goods and services), colleagues and family, each reported by a majority of respondents 21]."

PS Did anyone spot the "he pined tail on the donkey" moment??

A woman saying 'no' to a male is considered a 'hate crime'. A strange look to a transwoman is considered a 'hate crime'. There is zero evidence there has been any increase in assaults on transwomen. In fact, the increase has been transwomen/TRA physical assaults on females. A 'survey' of transwomen being upset that females so no to them or do a double take look is not evidence of an increase in assault or 'hate'.

Just for anyone seeing this link posted again, you might find this useful.

williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

I believe this document discusses those crime statistics

escholarship.org/content/qt7c3704zg/qt7c3704zg.pdf?t=qqfomk&v=lg

It refers to 369 trans people vs 435 061 people who were not trans identified in a study.

How strange that the sample size was not mentioned at all in the press release!!

I might have forgotten most of what I learned from my Statistics module at uni but 0.0008 is not a population that you could draw many confident conclusions from. And it would be ridiculous to make the comparison.

Think about this from the point of view that women around the world admit they don’t bother to report their sexual assaults and rapes. Because they have no confidence that they will get justice AND not be vilified in the process.

What % of females actively reporting their attacks vs current trend of not bothering to report would decimate that 369 figure?

And that number cannot be accurately depicted in this point either;

”About half of all violent victimizations were not reported to police. Transgender people were as likely as cisgender people to report violence to police.”

Sure this 'maybe'. However, I believe the huge number of women telling us they don’t report.

This article is misrepresenting the reality.

I also bring to your attention this as it is relevant to your claim:

”Transgender people are over four times more likely than cisgender people to experience violent victimization, including rape, sexual assault, and aggravated or simple assault”

Including! Notice it says ‘including’!

Not ”Trans people are 4 times more likely to experience violent attacks including rape and sexual assault.”

What was NOT included was a handy breakdown of what constituted the crimes against trans people were. What was the bar for a hate crime being committed for instance? Misogyny? Does that fit the definition that holds for transphobic hate crimes?

And based on 369 people, I am not going to delve into that national dataset to look for it. I don’t have the will. Maybe if you wish to prove your point, you could link to that data with the breakdown of the actual crimes reported for those 369 people.

“One in four transgender women who were victimized thought the incident was a hate crime compared to less than one in ten cisgender women.”

How many females being taught how to accurately assess the motivation against them as to whether it constituted a hate crime, or indeed using the very same frames of reference as trans people do but based on sexism, and then reanswering that same survey would again make that point meaningless? Is misogyny a ‘hate crime’ for instance?

Do people understand the significance of what centuries of oppression of females has done on being able to accurately assess the motivation of crimes against our sex?

I am beginning to. The trans lobby groups are informing my learnings. Because of what they classify as ‘transphobic hate crimes’ when I look at what I have experienced as a female… wow! I sure have overlooked a huge amount of what I just waved away as crap from males.

And that the group who are trans could include many of those reporting abuse that includes misgendering and perceived micro-aggressions. Gosh, imagine if women reported all the hateful things said and done to them on a daily basis.

Crimes that cause harm and pain to anyone should be fully investigated and justice served.

But if a claim such as ”Trans people are 4 times more likely to experience violent attacks including rape and sexual assault.” is going to be made by any institution or poster, it needs to be based on some very robust data.

And this link keeps being posted by a poster who repeatedly dismisses other statistics for being ‘not significant’.

In 2018, more than half of young trans respondents to a national Stonewall survey had experienced a hate crime in the past year.

Well that's not self-selecting at all, is it?

Or based on what the respondent perceives to be a hate crime, as opposed to something actually recognised as a crime?

Not to mention the fact that trans people are one of the super special groups of people who can be victims of a hate crime, i.e. a crime committed against them is considered more serious than the same crime committed against the rest of us mere mortals.

Spray painting "I hate trannies" on a trans person's front door is a hate crime, but raping, murdering and dismembering a woman and then telling the police that you did it because you hate women is not.

Somewhat unsurprisingly, a group which can, as a matter of law, experience a hate crime is going to report a much higher incidence of hate crimes than a group which is not recognised as deserving any such special consideration in law. Funny, that.

I really resent the idea that a crime committed against me is automatically considered less serious than the same crime committed against that prick India Willoughby.

Says the one at 3.30am harassing women on a women's forum for saying no to males undressing with them and saying that women and girls being raped is fine because the transwomen will feel accepted.

The answer remains no, and the more you talk at us (note not with us) the firmer and louder than no gets.

NO.

Aaah bless someone edited out the penis section from woman

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman

The Venn diagram tightly overlaps.

A woman saying 'no' to a male is considered a 'hate crime'. A strange look to a transwoman is considered a 'hate crime'. There is zero evidence there has been any increase in assaults on transwomen. In fact, the increase has been transwomen/TRA physical assaults on females. A 'survey' of transwomen being upset that females so no to them or do a double take look is not evidence of an increase in assault or 'hate'.

Oh dear, check out the police recorded violence stat agains trans! Hope you're proud of yourselves!
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023

You walked into that one…😂

Dastardly DH never stepped up even once ????

L. T. B.

Is that the same Stonewall survey which revealed that no less than fifty percent of respondents self identified as disabled, but no one paused to think 'huh, hang on a second, that figure suggests that there's something very wrong with this survey and there's something else significant going on here too".
?

If it is, the only thing that survey is good for us demonstrating a significant link to autism and poor mental health.

But not because of 'hate'.

It doesn't list what these so-called 'hate crimes' are. So another one of your meaningless links with zero data. 🙄

Personal abuse to cover lack of substance

"Well that's not self-selecting at all, is it?

Or based on what the respondent perceives to be a hate crime, as opposed to something actually recognised as a crime?

Does the same go for women reporting sexual assault too? See where this goes Einstein?

Not to mention the fact that trans people are one of the super special groups of people who can be victims of a hate crime, i.e. a crime committed against them is considered more serious than the same crime committed against the rest of us mere mortals.
Spray painting "I hate trannies" on a trans person's front door is a hate crime, but raping, murdering and dismembering a woman and then telling the police that you did it because you hate women is not.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, a group which can, as a matter of law, experience a hate crime is going to report a much higher incidence of hate crimes than a group which is not recognised as deserving any such special consideration in law. Funny, that.
I really resent the idea that a crime committed against me is automatically considered less serious than the same crime committed against that prick India Willoughby."

Oh dear, check out the police recorded violence graph for trans! God save the UK?
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2022-to-2023

So you've spent all day harassing women who are mainly on the other side of the world because you've got a chip on your shoulder about the UK having it's own political discourse and independent and you don't like it.

And you are still a creep who thinks women and girls should be collateral damage and should be raped so that transwomen can get everything they want?

It's not sounding any better mate.

And guess what. Our law still says transwomen are men despite your desperate attempts to intimidate, smear and deride us. And it will be the same when you wake up again in the morning.

Every time you speak to accuse us of hate, you help with the process of solidifying our law because all your doing is showing up just how much this movement has in common with incelism.

Transwomen are men and transcels are incels.

Do carry on.

With no reference to what 'hate crime' it was.

Zero data and zero relevance. You're getting desperate now.

"It doesn't list what these so-called 'hate crimes' are. So another one of your meaningless links with zero data. 🙄"

Oh yes it does:

Figure 2.8: Percentage of selected offences resulting in charge/summons, by hate crime strand, offences recorded in the year ending March 2023, England and Wales, 30 forces

Again it doesn't actually list the offences. And further, it states; "the figures for disability and transgender hate crime were lower."