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?

Ummm yes yes they do. Now I’m sure you’ve got loads of data about trans identified men being attacked in men’s toilets and changing rooms. Loads. So you can give a few examples. Also it’s time to change your typing hand. You don’t want to get RSI.

Yes they DO.

Male-on-male violence does not justify males being placed in female toilets.

There has never been 1 (one) recorded incidence of a transwoman attacked in a male facility.

There are around 50 accounts of transwomen attacking females in female facilities.

Incidences MAKE UP STATISTICAL DATA.

Even one incidence is ONE TOO MANY.

Gosh vox magazine.

That totally is going to be high quality and prove that you can tell the difference between a beardy wanker and a beardy wanker.

"This is from the US (where they don't give a shit about women's rights) and not in any way relevant to what happens in the UK.
In the UK we have had Karen White sexually assaulting female prisoners in a women's prison, Katie Dolatowski sexually assaulting pre-teen girls in women's toilets, and trans activists threatening to rape and murder gender critical feminists thousands of times per day.
So yes, there is a very obvious risk.
I would say that letting men who don't claim to identify as women use women's toilets would actually be less risky than letting trans identifying men use them."

Isolated instances don't qualify as significant statistical data.

Hate crimes based on gender minority status

How does anyone know that somebody has a ‘gender minority status’, if as suggested previously, that would require a chromosome test?

Meanwhile the eyes have it.

Incidences MAKE UP STATISTICAL DATA.
Even one incidence is ONE TOO MANY.

The 'data' in your links individually, are 'isolated incidences' too.

Ahhh, so the crimes that have been committed against women by trans identifying men are statistically insignificant, are they?

I'd like to know what number of women or girls being harmed would be statistically significant, in your opinion, and over what time period.

I'd also point out that the crimes committed against trans identifying men by men in men's toilets appear to be statistically non-existent, and yet you want to put women at actual risk to spare trans identifying men from a hypothetical risk.

Oooh so then your proof of males with a trans identity being attacked in male spaces can also be ignored. So therefore there is no reason to let males into female spaces. I knew we’d get there in the end. Don’t forget your antibacterial wipes before you change hands. 😙

Honestly

TRAs: we'll rape and kill you if you don't give us access.

Also TRAs: we're absolutelyyyy no threat, so you must give us access.

Btw one of the transwoman I know calls himself 'John' (basically a very male name which he hasnt changed) and uses female pronouns whilst wearing eyeliner and nail varnish.

And yes he does have a beard.

He's a nice guy as it goes. But he's definitely still a dude.

@Howseitgoin Why do you think we need significant statistical data to justify trans identifying men being excluded from women's toilets, but no data whatsoever to justify them being allowed in?

Incidences MAKE UP STATISTICAL DATA.
Even one incidence is ONE TOO MANY.

So women perps = women unsafe ergo individual loos only? See where this impractical nonsense is going?

Women in with women is different to men in with women. Your nonsense is irrational. Female only spaces have been practical for over a century.

Women are women.

Trans identifying men are men.

What is your justification for trans identifying men being treated as though they are women?

Please back it up with statistically significant data.

I could see where your nonsense is going from a satellite in space. 🛰️

'Impractical nonsense'

😁

Can I just ask… why are we engaging with this swivel eyed buffoon? @Howseitgoin men are not women, never will be. No means no. Women are saying no. Now please run along do
dear.

** Why do you think we need significant statistical data to justify trans identifying men being excluded from women's toilets, but no data whatsoever to justify them being allowed in?

The data already exists in both cases as provided . They are both more likely to experience violence from men as the links provided show. The don't have to be proven where for this to be relevant.

They are both more likely to experience violence from men as the links provided show.

Mens violence is not a problem for women to solve.

Quite. I know Mumsnetters do occasionally like playing with their food, though.

I think this thread has become fully derailled.
You're just bangging your heads against a brick wall now.

You should bake a cake or something @Howseitgoin. It might chill you out. I'm sure the wims on here could provide some excellent recipes.

Remember to wash your hands first, though. Hygiene and all that.

It's not relevant in toilets, because men have to stay out of the ladies here. Including you.

Job done. We did it.