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?

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

• of course we should and of course there need to be safe places for trans and agender folx to change and use the toilet. I think the solutions to this make sense regionally and culturally so trying to do an all inclusive internet wide decision causes more issues for everyone. I.E in Canada new built spaces have mainly individual and family cubicles for each, and so it’s safe for everyone. There are also lots of nursing rooms being added which gives another safe space and the only one where it makes sense to me that trans men and cis women would want to use the same space.

That women should retain female-only rape crisis centres?

Fully agree

That men don’t belong in women’s sport? I think athletes and doctors are the ones who can decide who gets to play what, and that under 12 it doesn’t matter

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

I assume this is in response to people who commit a violent crime and then transition? Using a MtF example then I’d say yes, at some point in transition (definitely started hormones and presenting female) they should change prisons. Like all prisoners I think they should get generous mental health support and risk assessments. I also think they should have their own cell. And that any trans persons in prison are probably safest with their own cell.

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

That language should reflect reality rather than ideological jargon, especially in a medical context?
completely strange statement. So I think in medicine, words are more specific than in normal speech and that we should separate sex and gender

That women shouldn’t be harassed, persecuted or fired for refusing to pretend humans can change sex?
No, but unless they are a medical provider or in a romantic relationship they only need to know someone’s gender and it is perfectly possible to change gender

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

That freedom of speech and belief are essential to a pluralistic democratic society?
Yes but. I don’t think being free to promote hate speech is necessary. Many of my friends in America believe in that. I don’t.

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?
They should get mental health support and reversible drug treatments and support to wait until age 18 to proceed or not.

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?
no one should pressure anyone about dating

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

What does this have to do with anything above - I think tossing this in conflates trans rights and fetishism

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.

I think that both the delusional TRA and delusional TERFS who each push the extremes of their beliefs rather than find common ground have broken the left, and suspect both are being pushed (without their knowledge) into these positions by foreign powers and the far right. If you agree with everything I’ve said above but think that I go too far by saying teens can have access to puberty blockers, or not far enough by discouraging top and bottom surgery on minors, I think we should still vote the same and socialize together and learn more about each other.

If I was gender critical I think it would serve my cause better to set aside the rare cases and focus on making safe spaces for everyone without taking away safe spaces - 20 years ago I was at an old University and they solved some bathroom issues in buildings by alternating everyone bathrooms and m/f bathrooms. In newer buildings they can make single stall bathrooms instead or as well. Our swimming pools have one or two mens only and women’s only swims and yes, it’d be hugely inappropriate for a trans person to use those. But there are also safe spaces for everyone but cis men and we need those too.

The vast majority of trans people are not in anyway a danger and deserve safety, medical treatment and privacy. The horrible trans people should not be the face of transness

This stood out to me too. Whilst I actually think this is the truth, it comes across as vindictive rather than factual, which the rest of her points are. It just gives ammunition to her opponents. They will hone in on this one comment as proof positive of her "transphobia"

I'm falling behind, i haven't pre-ordered.

I did, however, purchase a crate of cigars and a barrel of whiskey.

You need to order all formats prior to publication - kindle for accessibility at all times, audio for times when you can’t read, and hardback for veneration.

Where to even start with this nonsense?

Perhaps it might be helpful to remind everyone that in 2019 she tweeted the following:

"Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill”

She was immediately set on by an angry mob with metaphorical pitchforks. That was what started all the rape and death threats.

Then there was the tweet objecting to women being called "menstruators". And again, the trans activists lost their shit.

Then there was her famous essay which in my opinion is perfectly measured and reasonable, and which was nonetheless cited as evidence of her bigotry and hatefulness, mainly by people who, when pushed, will admit to not having read it.

There were the people who claimed that she had written a "transphobic book", apparently based on the factually inaccurate and arguably defamatory review in the Telegraph in which Jake Kerridge he/him alleges that the moral of the story is "never trust a man in a dress". Quite how one could arrive at such a conclusion having actually read the book is beyond me, but nevertheless, a lie gets halfway round the world before the truth has time to put its pants on, and some people will still insist today that Troubled Blood is a book in which the murderer is a trans woman.

All of this happened long before she ever tweeted anything as inflammatory as "cross-dressing male heterosexual fetishists".

So if you are going to allege that it is not what she says but the way in which she says it, perhaps you could give your considered opinion on why the nice rainbow people were threatening to rape and murder her long before she said it in that way.

Finally, if you object to women being defined according to their reproductive role, could you suggest a more progressive definition for us please? And, while you're at it, tell us what terminology we can now use when we actually want to refer to members of the childbearing sex, or if you don't think we need a word for this group, explain why you think that and how you propose to protect this group against illegal discrimination if we have no way of identifying what it is and who is in it?

The Tone Police in the absence of an actual counter argument are fascinating aren't they?

If you believe it's true, why do you say it's vindictive rather than factual?

I don't think we can be too judgmental about cross-dressing male fetishists. These are the people who are a real danger to society. They're the ones who force other people, particularly women and children, to participate in their fetish. It's not vindictive to want to protect women and children from predatory males.

Why would anyone see this as transphobia? Unless they see no distinction between cross-dressing male fetishists and 'genuine trans people'.

"They should get mental health support and reversible drug treatments and support to wait until age 18 to proceed or not."

and

"I go too far by saying teens can have access to puberty blockers, or not far enough by discouraging top and bottom surgery on minors"

Do you understand that puberty blockers used for gender affirmation purposes have irreversible negative side effects?

Why do you think those drugs are 'reversible'?

Bone density issues, causing menopause issues in female children, calcification within testes rendering the boy likely to be sterile, and long term issues that have been discovered with the use of lupron for precocious puberty that appear a decade or two after - significant ligament and connective tissue issues, pancreatitis and so one.

Part of it is breaking the spell of what can and cannot be named, and perhaps Rowling is uniquely equipped, intellectually, to have seen that - it is not an act of bottomless vitriol to call a male, a man. Anyone who thinks about it for a bit realizes that it's a made-up offense to try and manipulate the discourse. 'Man' is obviously not a slur, particularly when accurately used to denote adult males. Likewise, calling a heterosexual male, who cross-dresses and calls himself a lesbian a 'fetishist', is not beyond the pale. In fact one thinks, why wouldn't it be extraordinarily to offensive for a homosexual women to be forced to accept an intact male's claim to be lesbian? How did we arrive at the point where it's JKR who's being perverse?

How many times have we seen that in the face of clear language, even ideological supporters of trans rights are not able to keep from misgendering - which gives lie to the fact that these people really believe the person in question is the 'gender' they claim to be? I think JKR has been more than vindicated that her language is accurate, not derogatory, and what's more to the point was necessary - change could not have been accomplished by being nice and playing by the imposed rules of linguistic sacred cows.

Using a MtF example then I’d say yes, at some point in transition (definitely started hormones and presenting female) they should change prisons.

This is a non starter because you can’t make human rights dependent on sterilisation and there are already court cases that make this clear.

and reversible drug treatments and support to wait until age 18 to proceed or not.

If you are talking about puberty blockers, they are not reversible. The drugs were developed to treat hormone sensitive cancers. They are sometimes licensed for other uses e.g. treatment of endometriosis, but only for short term use.

What does this have to do with anything above - I think tossing this in conflates trans rights and fetishism

We know that many trans widows report that their husband’s identity is grounded in fetish. Are you saying these men aren’t trans?

focus on making safe spaces for everyone without taking away safe spaces

I think you are posting in good faith, but you need to read posts by @keeptoiletssafe
Toilets are public/private spaces and a lockable room that is completely enclosed can’t be easily checked if somebody is in distress or a crime is being committed.

But there are also safe spaces for everyone but cis men and we need those too

What is a cis man? How can you tell?

It's such a dumb take isn't it?

Some people have female reproductive systems, female bodies. That brings social and physical consequences that people with male bodies don't experience. Those experiences, like all human experiences, are part of what shapes us.

Those facts remain true whether someone agrees the name for these people is "women" or not.

So the degree to which our existence aa female people is "defined" by our sex also remains the same regardless of whether "woman" is the name for us or not.

Pretending changing what the word "woman" means changes any of that for female people is laughable. We are still as defined (or not) by our sex as we always were.

The only people it changes anything for are the men who could not otherwise access this "womanhood" they crave.

Neo-sexists like Howie like to claim, and maybe even believe, they are freeing us from sexism by disconnecting "woman" from sex but the reality is that they are doing this only to benefit men. For women what they are actually doing is taking away recognition of the reality of our existence as female people and just leaving us with the sexism.

For actual women, if "woman" isn't based in sex we have no use for the word. It serves no purpose for us. It is just a false limitation on who we are.

Our bodies are constrained to be the sex they are and we accept that, but why on earth do we need a word that constrains us to being only a subset of the diversity of the human mind?

"I assume this is in response to people who commit a violent crime and then transition? Using a MtF example then I’d say yes, at some point in transition (definitely started hormones and presenting female) they should change prisons."

What happens to a male person if they start estrogen and have their penis / testes removed?

What is the difference between a male person who is getting treatment for illness with oestrogen and has had their penis and testes removed versus one who chooses to have this extreme body modification for identity purposes?

What changes happen to that male person having it for identity purposes exactly? What makes them suddenly safe to put into a female single sex space?

Loss of violent tendencies? Really? Considering Sarah Baker and all the extreme activists who supposedly have had surgeries, I don't believe that has reduced their violent tendencies/

Loss of ability to sexually abuse / assault? Again, there is no evidence that this is true. Not only that, there are so many ways to sexually abuse a women. And shared shower spaces in prisons have already been shown to be an issue.

Losing male physical advantage meaning that a female person could defend themselves as if the person was another female person? No. I am happy to provide you with about 5 studies that show this would be a flawed expectation.

Losing male body cues? No. This does not happen either. Just like male physical advantage, male people do not lose their male body cues that are irreversible and not removable. Skeletal proportions, q angles, hip alignment, musculature is just a few.

So, why should any male person be accessing female single sex spaces? Why should any male person be moved into a female prison?

Looking forward to finding out why.

The lengths some people will go to to condemn JKR always surprises me.

It really bugs the life out of them that she can, and does, say what she likes.

The only people it changes anything for are the men who could not otherwise access this "womanhood" they crave.

And men who don’t want to be inconvenienced by legislation and policies that they don’t need - maternity leave, female specific healthcare, rights to contraception. No more analysis of women and their boring rights.

"unless they are a medical provider or in a romantic relationship they only need to know someone’s gender and it is perfectly possible to change gender"

This is a surprise.

So, women and girls don't need to know who they are sharing spaces with, who they are participating in sport with, who they are receiving intimate care and service from, who they are in groups with where they might be needing to heal away from any male presence, this is just a few occasions but are pretty comprehensive.

Because there aren't any statistics on it. Nobody can say with impunity that a man is wearing a dress for sexual arousal rather than "living as a woman" for the purpose of transitioning. At least, not at this point in time anyway. I do agree with everything you say, in fact the whole thing makes me want to throw myself on the ground and weep with rage. And for that reason I don't want to play into the hands of the TRA's and the otherwise "captured". This is the one comment on that list which will lead to an unabating argument whilst diminishing the other irrefutable statements.

Goodness knows how anyone in Afghanistan knows which people shouldn’t go to school.

Not even when they've got an erection?

Or how gay men know who to rent a womb from.

So we deploy "erection police". Good plan.

I am in the same position. I don’t feel my rights as an asexual to be under threat. I do feel that my rights as a woman are under threat. And JKR is fighting for those, so I applaud her.

+1

The suffragettes must have felt so stupid when they realised that all they needed to do was claim a male identity all those hunger strikes for nothing!

It's not and never has been about vetting individuals and deciding whether they're good or bad ones.

We don't keep men out of women's spaces on that basis, we keep all men out because there's a minority who can't be trusted and we don't know which ones they are.

The same with transwomen. There's no way of distinguishing the cross dressers from the trans identifiers, or the fetishists and the violent from the harmless, at the door. The fetishists certainly exist, some of them are quite open about it themselves. So do the violent. But we can't separate them out from the others, so it has to be no to all of them.

Which is unfortunate, but hardly a unique and unreasonable way of proceeding. Most people who walk past our doors are probably honest, but we lock our doors just the same.

I am wondering still just what people or communities this refers to:

"Her sneering, spiteful punching down comments against certain groups in society is not."

And I really would like to see these 'punching down comments' that are not directly related to her responding to people who directly abuse her or who abuse other women.

I am beginning to think the lack of people's ability to produce the tweets is a feature of these people who wish to mischaracterise her and who expect her to act as the penultimate activist when she is an author and philanthropist and not just one person making unreasonable claims.