Trans people are more obsessed with JK Rowling then they think she is with them

[BlueSkiesAndSunshiiine]

It's strange, isn't it? They really can't keep her name out of their mouths. Very baffling.

Can I just be clear my actual postition is:

The word “TERF” originated in a hostile context and is now deeply controversial. JKR choosing to publicly embrace it was, in my view, an unwise strategic decision — not because her views are wrong, but because it’s a word that generates instant conflict and derails everything else. She has an enormous platform and could use it for countless things. Watching paint dry would be more productive than wading into that particular semantic swamp. If she were my friend I’d tell her that with love.

Please tell me how I’m tone policing?

@butterfly231 I think I’m with you on this one
I find JK Rowing marvellously witty, an inspiration for putting your money where your mouth it, she’s very articulate about important things and fights the good fight for asex being real and isn’t afraid of engaging with people online who have slightly different views
i will always enjoy the image of her with a cigar April 2025
But
Occasionally I think ‘you’re really not going to win hearts and minds or get any one change their way of thinking’
I suppose it’s whether she’s writing to persuade argue advise or describe GCSE style or if she’s having fun and revelling in being a hag

I don't think that is true. All the HP franchise stuff is so wildly popular that it's going to generate a stir no matter what.

But as I said upthread, no one in the media reports anything JKR says on any other subject, they just over-amplify anything on this topic only. That's all they want of her.

That's not offensive though, just factual no?

Yes funnily enough I think I’m very similar in regards to the arguing with people online thing 😂
I think she embraced the villain role like you said. But I’d love her to go back to questioning why we need her to do this work in the first place

Uses the word Terf and responds to reality denying loons on Twatter. Can someone let me know when she does something actually controversial?

It is offensive. Transwomen are not biologically the same as CIS women, but they deserve respect and it damages nobody to refer to them as she/her. They do not deserve to be ridiculed by being called a man in a dress.

There are cases of men calling themselves trans and committing crimes against women. These men should be subject to the full force of the law and should, of course, go to a men’s prison. Using the existence of these men to cast shade on transgender women is very much not ok.

I believe that the language used by JKR and her deliberate misgendering “allow” other women to express anti- trans views and create a climate in which it is even more difficult to be trans.

How do you tell the difference between transwomen and men calling themselves trans?

I am obsessed with her, not because I am trans but because she is my hero, and a pillar of bravery which I aspire to.

When I see her witty ripostes on Twix I just think of Samuel Johnson exchanging barbed comments with others. I’ve never seen her make snarky comments about people who haven’t poked the bear - her comments are literally ripostes.

And calling men women does do damage. As we have all seen so vividly, you cannot defend women’s rights unless you can define women. If you’re asking what harm it does then I would remind you of the rape victim denied compensation and rebuked by the court because she had refused to call her male rapist by female pronouns. We have the right to use clear, factual language, even if it makes some people sad, and that right underpins every other democratic right. Read your Orwell.

To be clear, I'm saying you're tone policing her, not me.

Nobody is disagreeing that you can say what you like, so that doesn't need to be continually stated. Just don't pretend your only options are to tone police or agree, and don't complain that people disagree with you.

Is that Bananarama I can hear tuning up in the wings?

It ain’t what you do…….

compelling people to lie and obscure the truth absolutely does cause damage

compare this about a TW - customers complained that a man was in the woman's changing room
with
customers complained that a woman was in the woman's changing room

the first one is very clear what the issue is, the second makes it sound like there is no issue at all

Trans women have been using those bathrooms for years and have gone unnoticed

Off the top of my head, I've noticed a man in traditionally feminine clothes in a female loo, and another in a pharmacy, and one at DH's work, and one serving in the women's shoes section of a clothing store, and two in the local orchestra, and one delivering parcels. I didn't ask their gender identity. In the case of the one in the loos, my daughter and I just briskly left.

I've quirked an ear at many a male voice on the radio and correctly noted the speaker as a transwoman.

How do you know that transwomen have mostly gone unnoticed? It sounds unlikely.

Transwomen are not biologically the same as CIS women, but they deserve respect and it damages nobody to refer to them as she/her. They do not deserve to be ridiculed by being called a man in a dress.

Correct, these men often dont even put a dress on.

But they are biologically the same as what you might call 'cis men' or what I would call 'men'.

JKR’s failings include

1. being amazingly rich
2. being a hugely successful author
3. being a woman

All and any of these things will make people bitch about her. If she gave up commenting on transgender issues tomorrow she would still 100% be in the firing line

But that's just the old be kiiiind chestnut again. And where did it get us, using people's pronouns and being respectful? Men muscling in on our rights.

it damages nobody to refer to them as she/he

Ok, my assumption we're all familiar with the Mumsnet legend Barrackers essay was clearly wrong. Sorry, I've been here too long (under various names).

It definitely does damage and affects others if we refer to male people as she or her. There's the Stroop effect and there's the obfuscation of material reality by saying "she is banned from women's sport" (which sounds unfair) rather than "males excluded from women's sport" (which sounds not only fair but entirely rational).

We can agree to differ. Several people asked for an alternative view so I gave said how I feel about JKR. I was, of course, aware few would agree with me on MN! I won’t continue to debate as I have other things to do!

The men she misgendered (or correctly sexed) were chosen specifically by her. They were activists or taking opportunities or prizes away from women and she was highlighting it. She herself said she would be happy to refer to people any way they choose. Grifters excepted. I think everyone of those men she misgendered richly deserved it.

I suspect she is WAY too busy writing books for all her fans waiting for the next instalment of the Strike series to care too much about what people think about her views.
She is entitled to them as are we all.

That’s a real stretch because
a. She’s not here
b. That’s not tone policing. I’m not telling trans rights activists to calm down. I’m not telling JKR what to believe. I’m expressing a personal opinion that a specific word choice was unnecessary and counterproductive, with affection for her.
c. You have conflated “I wish she’d made a different strategic choice” with “I’m policing how marginalised people express anger” — which are completely different things.

Entitled misogynist men who believe women's purpose in this world is to support their needs and whims are sadly not a minority group.

That some of these men have started calling themselves "women" doesn't make them actually a different group to the rest.