To find it heartening that despite so many famous people being anti JKR, their are still so many who are prepared to work on HP?

[PyongyangKipperbang]

The end credits on the full cast audio takes 13 minutes. Hugh Laurie, Carl Prekopp, Mark Addy, Indira Varma.....and so many many names!

Then the TV series. Nick Frost, Warwick Davies, John Lithgow, Janet McTeer, Katherine Parkinson and (my favourite) Daniel Rigby.

I feel that the actors and crew are saying that they agree with her (or at least, dont disagree), without actually saying that they agree, if you see what I mean.

People want to work on huge projects like HP for the sake of their careers, the pay, the fun etc. Not everyone lives their lives so politically. In fact, this stuff doesn't matter to most people. The trans community is so tiny that most people have never even seen one and never will. Trans issues simply aren't a part of regular people's lives, even though the amount of media coverage makes it seem that they're in every bathroom, changing room, and female sports team going.

I don't know if it's heartening. I'm sure that some don't agree with her views but aren't going to shoot themselves in the foot over trans issues.

Although I feel, maybe wrongly, that the entertainment industry is more captured than most and I imagine there are a few names on there who can cherrypick their projects.
Interested to see Hugh Laurie's name on there, aren't his close friends Stephen Fry and Sandi Toksvig full on TWAW?

I just assume all famous people are anti JKR because they’re cowards.

I'm sure that Hugh Laurie isn't picking his projects based on his friends holding opposite views to the creator of the series!

Like most people, he's probably had enough of all this trans crap and couldn't care less.

That was sort of my point, it is one of the viewpoints that tends to break friendships in the way that cultish views tend to.

A lot of people take the view that everyone is entitled to their opinions regardless of how loathsome they might be.

And it's not as if most people accept employment only on the proviso their employers don't have inhumane views otherwise most of us would be unemployed.

I would maintain civility but can't imagine maintaining a close relationship with a friend who didn't have any empathy for human rights violations. That would be a very bright red flag of a problematic future in my experience. Lack of empathy tends to be a deal breaker in friendships.

But I suspect the very nature of acting requires empathy for those "who know not what they do" & that's perhaps why Fiennes, Knightly & Laurie haven't turned away from JKR.

Hm. Or perhaps their motion of what human rights violations are is different from yours. What are the rights that are being violated here? And while about it do you think that biological women are entitled to privacy and dignity? Are these human rights worth standing up for?

She does know what she’s doing though, and I suspect most of these people know that deep down.

What are the rights that are being violated here?

Freedom to use necessary basic facilities. Self determination & bodily autonomy.

"And while about it do you think that biological women are entitled to privacy and dignity? Are these human rights worth standing up for?"

Cubicles in toilets already allow for that.

You could say the same about racists who rationalise their racism as preventing 'harms' from cultural differences. But when you get down to it, it's usually garden variety ignorance from lack of exposure.

No they don’t. Most women don’t want to share toilets with men. Men are not being discriminated against in being expected to respect women.

You wouldn’t say the same though, because knowing what biological sex is and that in many circumstances it’s important isn’t remotely the same as racism.

Funny how your argument doesn’t stand on its own merits so you have to appropriate someone else’s oppression, isn’t it, “godtierKaren”?

Yes, but biological sex being a relevant distinction in some circumstances doesn't mean its always relevant or that other commonalities don't exist between trans men/women & men & women.

What are the commonalities? Why should I believe men who “identify as women” are women?

Denying psychological, behavioural & cultural commonalities is as silly as denying biological realities so I'm not interested in being drawn into that.

Of course you aren’t 😂

There are zero commonalities between women as a sex and these men that don’t also exist between women and other men. There is no “woman personality” that these men have. HTH.

And no one treats them as women, they treat them as special men.

I know right! It’s why I struggle to maintain relationships with those who believe women don’t deserve the basic human rights of privacy, dignity and safety, and are so misogynistic they believe a male can be a woman. The fact that some people believe denying males access to female spaces is a breach of human rights is laughable and I do worry about the sanity of those that think that.

Oooh didn’t a poster lecture us on this…. It’s crying a lot and being kind and liking shiny, soft things as I recall. So it was decided 90% of the women on this board weren’t actually women. I think that poster left in shame as he hasn’t been back since.

Nobody has been denied the right to use basic facilities, they're just being told to use the appropriate ones.
Self id isn't the same as self determination, and if an adult wants to chop off their bits that's up to them. They don't get to chop off the bits of children, and as it's their choice I don't see why they shouldn't pay for it themselves, why should the rest of us foot the bill.

And there are cubicles in men’s toilets so males with a trans identity will have all the privacy and dignity they want won’t they? I mean, if women’s safety, dignity abd privacy can be cured by cubicles, so can mens. You e just confirmed there is no need for males with a trans identity to use female spaces as the answer is just cubicles in the men’s. Sorted.

Getting your dick out in female only spaces is not a human right.