jk rowling and the 3 dementors

SueDonim I'm sorry that is all you see in my posts, perhaps I'm not saying things well. Can I suggest you look at websites like the WIRE one I posted?
This also encapsulates it for me
‘Inclusivism’ as the next step?
^Some might say that this line of thinking constitutes a new, updated and inclusive brand of feminism. And why not?
The belief in solidarity through empathy and a common struggle is the ultimate feminism. Including not just women in the journey towards equality but also seeking to encompass diversity in all its glory is a form of new, inclusive feminism.
Perhaps ‘inclusivism’ is the next step in the battle for equality since it builds upon the feminist struggle – but also transcends it.^

All I can see from your post of 10:33, Trisher is that you are blaming women for the violence meted out against them and putting the onus onto women to solve the problem of male violence.

I don't follow twitter or much social media because of the agression on there but I know many women have chosen not to engage and to ignore those posts. I know many women are also trying to be as inclusive as possible. I know that women working in refuges have said that the risk assessments they do will stop anyone who is a risk to the women in that refuge being admitted. I trust those women.
JRK's post as I pointed out earlier was simply wrong and had she admitted it was wrong perhaps a real consensus could have been reached. If you want me to repeat the facts I will do so. Some people who menstruate are trans men or non-binary and prefer not to be called women, that is their right, therefore the phrase "people who menstruate" is correct and using the term "women" devalues and denigrates those people. It is wrong that anger and abuse are the responses to such a post it might be better to commiserate with her lack of understanding but anger is the most increasing factor in our society.
Finally most agression and rape does not happen in public places like changing rooms or toilets, for the most part it happens in the home, or in a place where women mix openly with men, like the street or bars. The logical outcome of your argument is that the only way to keep women really safe is to completely seperate them. This of course in the view taken by some societies but not one I hope we will see adopted here.
The interesting thing about feminism at the moment is that it has been adopted by some women who are using it as a political weapon. These women are usually priveleged white women who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, they will therefore campaign for women's spaces because by doing so they distract from efforts to change the system and create the divisions which support patriarchy under which they have done fairly well.
Is there discussion to be had about the best way forward? Of course there is. But blaming trans gender people for all the violence, condemning them and not accepting them will not diminish the violence women suffer in any way. Most of us imagined when women's refuges were first set up that they would solve the problem of violence. They haven't because the cause is so deep rooted. Only by really examining and dealing with that can we move on and hate speech by anyone does not help.

Random up there.

Would you show me where women have responded with aggression. I can show you the violent threats because womens organisations are collating them as evidence. Does that way of responding to violence meet your approval because it is an enormous and detailed job that women are doing. JKRs piece was not aggressive, but the responses were.
While we are waiting for this wonderful pie in the sky society you talk about, now many women will you be willing to sacrifice. Women aren't some sort of experiment, whilst you sort out male violence. They need spaces without men, to keep them safe, and so those who have been assaulted are not further traumatised.
One of the ways to help stop male violence is for men to understand that they have no right to womans bodies and that women can decide their own boundaries. It is not for men to decide they can enter womens spaces when women are saying no. This will increase male violence as many men will think womens boundaries are up for grabs.
Actually there would have been less cases of male violence if womens places had been left as women only, the 4 women who were assaulted in a womans prison by a man for example. If you are interested I think womens place are collating the incidents of violence on women in what were once womens spaces.
Using pronouns will have no effect on male violence whatsoever. I am guided by young women as well, as I have said the 14 year old who sued their local authority, the young women in America, I think they are 16, who are suing the sporting authority as they have lost scholarships to men in female races. Scholarships are linked to sporting achievement in America, for those who dont know. I am also guided by the transwomen who stand with us, who clearly state that you cant change sex, and who wont use womens spaces because they respect the consent of women. Fionne orlander (I always get this spelling wrong so sorry if I have) is brilliant on this, perhaps you should look them on twitter. up

Galaxy Nor does it help anyone threatened with violence in tweets or other social media to simply answer that with aggression. One of the aims of an agressor is to create conflict, recognising that is part of dealing with such comments. You then have a choice, respond by joining in and complying with their agenda, completely refuse to engage at all (which is valid and the way many choose) or respond with a comment which engages but refuses to comply with their agenda.
As for the passive agression read the comments where it has been suggested that I would make rapists a cup of tea, that suggesting not complying with agression is misogyny. Then ask yourself how far along the road of accepting agression as the norm have some women come? Of course agression is commonplace, of course we all battle with trying to create discourse rather than simply entering a battle. We have been raised in a patriarchal society where this is the norm. But imagining agression is going to be stopped by simply stopping trans women using women's loos or changing rooms is so short sighted. We have had women's refuges, we have moved into spaces once reserved for men, we have in a few cases managed to break the glass ceiling and yet the agression and violence remain. It's time now to stop messing with things on the periphery and address the root of the whole problem which is the agressive and divisive society we inhabit. It doesn't mean accepting rape or violence it does mean looking at the whole picture demanding better ways of doing things and trying always to reach agreement rather than just creating conflict. I don't have all the answers this is very much a learning curve for me and I am mostly guided by my young friends whose ways I sometimes have difficulty reconciling myself to (they as a pronoun for example) but who seem to me to be far more accepting of differences.

There are young people fighting this too, like the 14 year old I mentioned, having to fight to gain rights that we thought we had won 50 years ago.

It's not passive aggressive to say that if we are threatened with rape or violence, we will not examine the pain of those threatening us. Woman after woman is being threatened, women arent responding with violence, we are terrified, but brave women like JKR and Martina Navratilova (those well known bigots) are standing firm despite the threats. The screenshots of the threats to JKR were unbelievable, I am sure you could find them if you looked. I believe those women, not that I need to, the evidence is all over social media. You are right separating women is not the answer, separating men and women however is.proven to.provide some protection. It's why mixed sex changing facilities are much more dangerous than single sex.

Anyone who doesn't believe violence and warfare are glorified in our society should look at the films, TV programmes and computer games aimed at young people.
It isn't accepting violence to refuse to enter into a violent discussion or suggest that violence is never the answer to violence. I have tried very hard to explain my position without resorting to the passive agression vividly illustrated on this thread by people who refuse to consider that perhaps there is a different way to look at things. Non-violence has a long history of resistance and has always been associated with feminism.
I will always stand with someone who rejects violence be that violence against individuals whatever their gender, or violence against groups or sections of society. But to imagine that violence will be prevented by castigating other people or by seperating women in some way is to buy into a system which has historically blamed the victim of violence. It isn't enough to change things within the system the system itself needs to change. Fortunately I think there are young people who are fully aware of this and who are embracing it.

sooziewoozie - to clarify, and apologise for a hasty post. No, I don't support the right of self ID transwomen to compete in sports with biologically born women. I hope I haven't used the incorrect terminology here.
I don't have a problem with eg having a smear test or sensitive physical examination by a self ID trans woman. I support the right of other women to refuse intimate examinations by male doctors, whether they're trans or not.

I have a much loved family member, who is struggling with identity and exploring trans, as well as gay, issues. I know, in some circles I'd be dismissed as a TERF. I agree with Far North, not all male violence can be attributed simply to hormones. I don't believe that we live in a society where violence and warfare are glorified. Those aggressive, drunken, old enough to know better thugs that attacked anyone in their way, including police officers and their horses this weekend, don't represent me, or anyone I know.

Yes but she's smashing the patriarchy. When they threaten you with rape make them a cup of tea.

So when someone makes a threat or posts something unacceptable perhaps we should reply with concern for the pain they are feeling and not be drawn in to an argument which fuels the aggression.

We should appease the aggressors? Wow! Misogyny writ large!

If there is no difference between sexes with regard to sports then we should open all sports to both sexes and see what happens. After all it's a grey area. Except it's not. The record for under 4 minute mile was set in the 1950 s by Roger Bannister. Women have never run under a 4 minute mile. What could possibly be stopping them.

Transwomen who reduce their testosterone may become less aggressive, I don't know, but the majority of self-id transwomen (men who simply claim to be women) don't have hormone treatment and the statistics for violence by transwomen are similar to those for violence by men.

I cant believe that a woman has just written when women are threatened with violence and rape they should 'reply with concern for the pain they are feeling'. You arent no feminist sister. Bend the knee and bow down.

Body shop now refer to woman as menstrators!!!, can't do links but suggest a read of their response as to why they don't agree with Jk, I certainly will not be buying any of their products ever again, and as a post menopausal woman who no longer menstrated they obviously don't recognise my custom anyway.

trisher

The question of sport is an interesting one and by no means as simple as petunia presents. In fact testing for sex has led to all sorts of unaccepptable practices including surgery already condemned on this thread. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_verification_in_sports
Of course what is most interesting is that sex verification is only ever carried out on women.
Sex verification is not conducted on athletes competing in the male category, and little data are available on their chromosomes or hormone profiles. However, a post-competition study of 693 elite athletes by Healy et al., published in 2014, found significant differences along many variables. The authors found that:
16.5% of men had low testosterone levels, whereas 13.7% of women had high levels with complete overlap between the sexes
Nothing is ever as simple as it seems.

Sparklefizz* It's by no means as clear as that. There is a very grey area as I said .

Btw, some transmen (women) have been surprised to find themselves becoming more aggressive once they were taking testosterone. It's not all down to conditioning.

Yes, this subject came up in that programme that Martina Navratilova did a year or two ago about women's sport no longer being on a level playing field when trans competitors are allowed to compete against women.

She had her testosterone levels measured and compared with a transwoman's level who had been taking oestrogen, and the transwoman's testosterone level was still way above Martina's. As we all know, testosterone gives speed, muscles, aggression and strength,

FarNorth if anyone commits an act of violence be they man woman, trans, gay, binary or any other definition they choose they are breaking the law and should be subjected to the penalty the law imposes. The causes of violence should not be confused with the consequences.
Interesting that I'm belittled for relating my personal experiences when other experiences are considered important. Feminism for me means listening to everyone.
The testosterone question is interesting but actually nothing to do with equality or with combatting violence. We live in a society where violence and warfare are idealised and glorified and we suffer the effects of that. If testosterone was solely to blame then all men would be violent and no woman would.
But it raises the interesting question if transmen take testosterone and become more aggressive do trans women become less agressive as their testosterone level decreases and are they less violent (and therefore less of a threat) than men?
I'm sorry some of you feel unable to accept what I think will be the way society develops. I think if there is one thing we should bring to this subject as women it should be the concept of discussion and not violence. So when someone makes a threat or posts something unacceptable perhaps we should reply with concern for the pain they are feeling and not be drawn in to an argument which fuels the aggression.

trisher how can male violence be tackled if it is brought about by society's expectations of males but we are not allowed to recognise who the males are?

Btw, some transmen (women) have been surprised to find themselves becoming more aggressive once they were taking testosterone.
It's not all down to conditioning.

Granny23 that is not quite what JKR was saying.
She was objecting to the removal of the word 'woman' in situations where the people being referred to are women, and also to the word 'woman' being used for men who wish to call themselves that.

Are you aware of the situation with self-id of sex?

I would hate to think of young girls having to share toilets and changing rooms with men who call themselves transgender.

It is wrong on many levels.

I have sympathy with their feelings but they are not women.

It also belittles women who have cultural reasons for not wanting to share space with male bodies, particularly Muslim and Jewish women.

I think it's the belittling of womens concerns that causes me the most dismay, that other women would mock women and girls for having boundaries. Again really smashing the patriarchy there. It's only a penis, dont be silly. It's fine to get changed with someone with a penis because I say so. People with a penis commit violent 98 % of sexual crimes but it's silly for women to worry about it.

G23 she’s a woman so far as she should be able to go into toilet for women without a person with a penis in there when she needs to change her sanitary protection or perhaps rinse her bloodied knickers