“Heated Rivalry” author Rachel Reid on J. K. Rowling - “the bar is pretty high in how evil you have to be,” “ I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes”

[YankSplaining]

Well, this is disappointing.

”[Reid] has a keen desire not to disappoint her fans, especially when they’re sending her photos of freshly inked tattoos of her words on their skin. ‘I know of another author that a lot of people got tattoos of but then wanted them gone. Like, J. K. Rowling,’ she says. ‘The bar is pretty high for how evil you have to be, but I don’t want to let a single person down.’ I ask if she’s a TERF. ‘No, I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes,’ she replies.”

Well, too late, she let me down. “Extremely the opposite of everything she believes,” huh? I guess Rachel Reid thinks teenage girls should be forced to undress after PE in front of naked male classmates who gawp as their dicks get hard. Or that female inmates should be locked in cells with male inmates serving time for serial rape.

I don’t expect Reid to agree with Rowling on trans issues. It’s the monstering of Rowling that I take issue with - the “evil,” and the framing of Rowling as so extreme that Reid feels the need to be extremely the opposite of everything she believes.

Edit: title should read “on how evil you have to be”

You don't seem to understand how statistics work. A comparison group needs to be verified so just because trans crimes might be higher doesn't mean its at the same or higher rate that male violence.

The fact is, we don't know.

So, YOU don’t know. Therefore everyone else is wrong and everyone else should STFU about discussing male sexual abuse and violence because it might, what, make male people look bad in general?

Or do you think that most other people have the understanding that there are ‘some’ male people in the world who will sexually abuse and be violent towards women and that they are the exception. Yet even so. ALL male people above about 8 years old should be excluded from female single sex provisions not just based on their risk to commit such crimes but for the needs of those female people using those provisions?

I never said any of that. I said we do know that male violence is a larger problem because of underreporting & that we have ways of confirming its even a much larger problem than incarceration reflects. As such I'm quite comfortable with people bringing attention to this fact. My problem is the inaccurate attempt to map this on groups within the group.

I have to go to work now.

According to Government figures, as of February 2024 more than 70 per cent of transgender prisoners in British jails were serving sentences for sex offences and violent crimes.

At least 181 of the 244 transgender inmates, more than 74 per cent, were in jail for crimes including rape, forcing under-age children into having sex, grievous bodily harm and robbery.

And more figures:

Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019:

76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%

125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%

13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison =16.8%

Ah, so you agree that transwomen using women's bathrooms without disclosing their true sex is lying (by omission)to women and serves to decieve and unconsentually use them for 'gender validation', and that this is morally and 'objectively'* wrong? Or is that logic only okay when you use it? Don't bother answering, I already know your response. Denial, denial, denial is the pattern amongst you lot.

*(a word you TRAs do not know the meaning of, alongside the term 'bigotry')

Male violence is a problem. Agreed. And trans women are male.

So what would the reason for rape by men to be underreported and rape by trans women not to be underreported? Rape victims are transphobes?

Your point is acruelly irrelevant for making safeguarding policies that exclude all male people above the age of about 8 yrs old from female single sex provisions. That exclusion is needed for privacy as well as safety.

However, if the only reason for exclusion was safety, the only risk that needs to be established is whether a group of male people commit sex and or violent crimes at the same rate or lower than female people. That is not the case. The conviction rates for female people is far lower than for male people with transgender identities.

Also, your argument about low reporting rates applies to BOTH sex categories for sex and violent crimes. Your attempt to make a case that somehow conviction rates are not representative is not relevant because the same can be said about female crimes as well.

There will never be perfect reporting of those crimes, therefore we use the information that we do have. It is a failure of safeguarding to assume that a group of male people do not carry the same risk of committing sex and violent crimes as the general population.

So you have nothing.

You have created a special group of male people and treated them as different based on nothing.

You cannot even admit that the same under reporting is just as likely across all groups. You just regurgitated someone’s very prejudiced interpretation of JK Rowling’s tweets without critical thought and you declared that she should adhere to your personally set very high standard of adding a disclaimer about her statements that no news outlet does to demonise her.

Really, you have nothing to support your claim but emotional reasoning. Ok. Great to know.

Whatever next? 😂

We are not talking about terrorism accusations. We are talking about male sex crimes and violence.

Your mention of terrorism is using a catastrophising cognitive distortion to try to support your point.

So, can women discuss male sex crimes and violence without being demonised for making male people look bad?

Actually, this is pretty much equating JK Rowling’s tweets with the reports and the government decisions that led to the Iraq war.

Gosh… isn’t that wildly hypocritical?

You seem to be confusing ‘trans people’ and men.

I don’t know how many times it needs to be repeated but the problem is men.

And you can't map groups neatly on to each other as you think. Younger, poorer, straight men offend at substantially higher rates than older wealthier gay men. In fact gay men offend at lower rates than gay women.

It does often come back to this. ‘Don’t be mean to the men’.

No Aisha.

We have the data we need. We can look at the female prisoner rate for sex offences and calculate the proportion of female prisoners that equates to OR the % of the female population that equates to. Then we can use the same method for the male people with transgender identities using census data where male people with transgender identities were reported.

That is all that should need to be done. If the % is higher than that for the female population, there is the answer. This has been done. Criminologist experts have done the work already.

As it is, those numbers are somewhat irrelevant because it is not just for safety that male people are excluded from female single sex provisions. There is the need for privacy and dignity as well.

Plus we also have the studies that show that male people have physical advantages over female people even after testosterone has been reduced. So, because no publicly accessible single sex provision can have case by case instant risk assessment of any male above about 8 years old accessing that provision, all male people are excluded.

The woman is writing slash fiction that happened to get published/filmed for telly. It's not like she's involved in creating a realistic depiction of gay men, she's writing for all those female shippers out there who like "cute boys kissing UwU" 🙄

So if she wants to keep selling her stuff she has to be extremely & vocally TWAW + Omnicause-supporting because that's who's mostly her audience. Makes sense for her to signal her allegiances via denouncing the traitorous Snowball...erm, I mean JKR.

There will never be perfect reporting of those crimes, therefore we use the information that we do have. It is a failure of safeguarding to assume that a group of male people do not carry the same risk of committing sex and violent crimes as the general population.

Iv'e already demonstrated upthread different groups within the broader group don't necessarily match onto each other so a generalisation can't always apply to everyone. For example heterosexual women offend at a substantially lower rate than lesbians so its inaccurate to apply the same conclusions about their offending patterns.

Ah no. We have nothing in terms of conclusions about trans women offending rates which is the point that you are diverting from.

I have already answered that terrorism is an example of stereotyping & that male violence can be accurately discussed in terms of specific groups of offending.

That JK Rowling has considerable influence on both her audience & government policy is indisputable because of her reach & wealth. That she has a direct contact & influence with Starmer is not news.

And noone is suggesting she has the same influence as global media so save the strawman but she certainly contributes to manufacturing consent from the masses.

Her special 'interest' in Iran is another example for manufacturing consent for Islamophobia & regime change interventions by foreign governments not unlike the demonisation of Saddam Hussain. That's not to say human rights violations aren't happening, rather they are being weaponised for western colonial projects & resource stealing. And if you knew anything about how Iraqi women were plunged into a culture of prostitution following the war because of the poverythat ensued you would know these interventions aren't helpful to women.

If you really believe that her interest that's confined only to Iranian women is exclusively about women's rights, I have a bridge to sell you.

JKR is well ensconced in the global western billionaire elite class & acts accordingly.

You seem to miss the point that sex crimes are almost exclusively the responsibility of males. 99%. That is all the excuse you need to keep males out of places where women are vulnerable. No group is being demonised it applies to ALL males. And transwomen are male. So unless you have evidence that the sexual offending rates of transwomen virtually disappear when they say the magic words 'I am a woman' then they get treated like all males.
Of course you don't have a fig leaf of evidence and what evidence we have shows that the decision is more than justified.

She sounds like a tedious Laurie Penny type.

Yep. And a thousand self important social media nonentities.

Ive often wondered ...if a trans male. to female.presented in the way they did ( for example. make up, high heels, dresses ) but didnt claim female space, or female sport and didnt claim to be a woman, would they be more accepted. I dont have a problem with a male presenting that way but i do get the GC argument.

I think most people have no problem with people presenting however they want if that makes them happy. It's males impinging on women's rights and spaces that they object to.