Why do some people view JK Rowling as transphobic?

[Backwardsbinn]

Where do people get the idea that JK Rowling is transphobic from? Where? I’m having this argument with an acquaintance who tells me she’s the most transphobic person on earth but cannot point to one single thing that she’s done or said that’s transphobic. Is this the widest held totally bullshit view ever?

When some men say they’re biological women, do they actually believe that have changed their sex chromosomes to XX?

I've seen the "pigeon chess" phrase used more frequently in various places recently, and also the claim that "terfs" are desperate for attention 😄

No, we really do just want to live our lives - without any stealing of our stuff

Well, I don't know if they believe it really deep down but I've seen it said. Along with growing a cervix.

Dr Upton said it, as he was a biological human being not a robot, and a woman, therefore....

Problem is, he's not a woman.

And frankly I'm disappointed he's still a doctor.

Thanks, I’ve heard about “growing a cervix!”

How can you trust his diagnosis? I would refuse to be examined by him.

Well exactly. He said he would treat a female person if they asked for a same sex doctor. Now I'd be ok, ish, if he said he was trans, because then he'd be being honest, so for a non gynae related issue, unless a life or death emergency, it'd be ok. But while he's claiming he's a woman, lying about biology and lying to patients, I wouldn't trust him to cut my nails.

You can read his testimony on the tribunal tweets of the Sandie Peggie case. It also included a senior nurse who claimed not to know her own sex.

Thanks, I will have a read.

It very much looked like the massive broo smarmy git was also caught out with a poorly done photoshop in the ET, but that was never quite nailed down so we'll have to leave it at that.

My overwhelming impression is a person who is no doubt clever, but not nearly as clever as they think they are. Being the best at playing Warhammer in high school and getting through medical degree at a top ten Scottish university are surely achievements that few ever attain.

But as we would say in Fife when hearing tales of someone who thought much of themselves.

"Ah kent es faither"

(I didn't but yanno, mebbe The Fifer did...)

How is defending the right for RAPE SURVIVORS to have female only spaces 'spreading hate and misinformation' @SassyFawn ? How is defending women and vulnerable girls HARD WON sex based spaces and rights for our safety, privacy and dignity 'hate'?

Where is the hate in this, here, what she says about trans? Have you even bothered to read what she has said, at all? Or are you only going on hearsay?

Of course they should have to abide by the law that recognises womens basic civil human rights! You really don't see the female sex as human, do you? Nothing matters to you other than Male Privilege and Male Supremacy.

Males are people too, that does not mean we allow males into female only safe intimate single sex spaces where women, little girls, and RAPE SURVIVORS LIKE ME are in a state of undress and vulnerable!!!

They are MALE. The MEN'S is COMPLETELY the right toilet for them. They are male.

The female toilet is completely the wrong toilet for them. This is obvious to anyone who is reasonable, rational, and compassionate to the needs of others.

Women are not human shields for males. Our spaces are based on sex. We don't want specimens below in where RAPE SURVIVORS like me are, have some common sense and compassion! We offered them third spaces as a compromise 10 years ago. They said no! So this is all on them. Fact is, they belong in the males, and guess what? The males have cubicles! They as males, have no need to enter the female space. How about that? You don't put a fox in the henhouse.

And the whole 'oh but now what about trans men' bs is done at least 20 thousand times a day. The response is the same. We know the difference between a male and a female. Trans men look like small hairy butch women. There is a huge difference, and we do know. So it's not the 'gotcha' you think it is. In fact, it is an incredibly lame flail out of desperation to defend destroying every female only space our fore feminists achieved for us.

Where it's not practical or feasible, converting all facilities to unisex is arguably the fairest and most sensible option.

No it is not. Unisex is incredibly dangerous for women, and it is not fair or sensible to remove safe spaces for 100% of women to cater to 1% of males. The fairest and sensible thing is in absence of third spaces, males using the .....MALE facility is the safest, fairest and sensible thing. We will not re-order society for 1% of males. Know this: women won't tolerate it. No matter how much you MRAs want to erase feminism and female only spaces from society. It's a war you will never ever ever win. Feminism back centuries proves that feminists have staying power and will always defeat meninism.

There is not one peer reviewed study that backs up that.

@SassyFawn Still does not have the guts to answer why being in male spaces is wrong for males, especially when those male spaces have enclosed cubicles, and transwomen themselves have admitted they safe there and men don't look at each other in the men's anyway. Probably because they know they have absolutely no answer. Except hateful misogyny and promoting Male Supremacy.

And when you consider that some women cut the queue to the ladies and go in to the men's, with no problems at all, it further proves that transwomen are 'in danger' is a complete and utter lie and fabrication. And they know it. Otherwise the women who enter the men's would be in danger. They're not. Micdrop there. It's only about validation and using the women in the women's space as validation. That's the TRUTH of it. It never, NEVER was about safety. Ever. They know it, we know it, they know that we know that they know it.

“Lived experience “ is another way of describing a “point of view” in truth.

Numerous studies about a point of view, have no more value than a straw poll of people who all agree with each other.

I don't get any anyone would defend her after today.

Her ableism and profound ignorance about non-verbal and autistic people is right there, on full display.

Saying Jason Arday was a 'fabulist' when he was highly qualified, very experienced in his field and a published writer who had a proven track record teaching PhD and postdoctoral students. Who became a Professor at his previous university.

All her posts about him are reprehensible, ignorant and self-centering. Implying that his intelligence disproved his autism, and that he invented being non-verbal - even though it's well-documented that he was.

Saying Cambridge lowered their standards by accepting him, as if he was some PE teacher who happened to be black rather than a respected professor.

Her patronising ableism is very dangerous. It affects every autistic person in academia when she intervenes on a subject she demonstrably has no expertise or experience in.

Kind of transparent she's covering her own arse for reposting Jo Bartosch's despicable comments about Arday last week. Plus most of her anti-trans allies were busy being racist shits about him last week, notably Stock and Bartosch.

What is it with her and people who are different? Minorities don't owe her a performance of their difference, and she doesn't get to pronounce on who's real or not. Horrible bigotry, but unsurprising given her transphobia.

it is true to say that we need to see to it that universities, in pursuit of intellectual elite should pursue a goal that does not have a class, colour, or sex bar from said intellectual elite.

But what has happened here, is the universities have recruited a mediocre individual, for no other reason than his skin colour, lack of societal privilege and apparent learning difficulties.

Just to tick a bunch of equality boxes. And then allowed him to make public outlandish claims about himself, without any control for fear of exposing their actual racism.

Everybody is barking up the wrong fucking tree.

Which is JKR point.

Saying Jason Arday was a 'fabulist' when he was highly qualified, very experienced in his field and a published writer who had a proven track record teaching PhD and postdoctoral students. Who became a Professor at his previous university.

You forgot the bit about the marathons and the millions raised for charity. What a guy. And such a shame about the pig's head. And all those knife wielding attackers.

BRAVO!

What people don't realise is the issue here is the despicable double standard that was applied to Arday which wasn't to another white professor at Cambridge who did much worse. This is really well articulated in below video at minute 25.50.

The British media coverage being saturated with racism including JKR doesn't reflect well on them.

highly qualified

Well he wasn’t though, was he? His PhD was plagiarised and poorly supervised and that was just one of his lies. As such, how highly qualified he actually was is highly questionable. Highly qualified and highly appointed are not the same thing.

Cambridge investigated Arday for plagiarism when the initial allegations were made & found he did not meet the standard for academic plagiarism because all he did was fail to cite a some paragraphs of another writer but did cite the same writer in other paragraphs in his PHD so it was considered just a poor citation error which happens often & isn't a hanging offence as opposed to another white professor there who tried to pass off the work of a student as his own & was found guilty by Cambridge….kept his job as well as it wasn't a news story let alone a an archaeological dig into his past.

Double standards.

Yes, double standards. Which means that Arday was “highly qualified” does it? Because another person did the same?

The fact that Cambridge dismissed the concerns only reinforces the problem. He was only “highly qualified” because plagiarism was taken seriously.

Even with the PhD, what makes him “highly qualified”? If the PhD hasn’t been awarded as it shouldn’t, would he have still be “highly qualified”?

Highly qualified in what, exactly?