The law as it stands on sex, Part 2

Rosie51

trisher

Rosie51

I have, however, heard that one of the Cameron Strike novels (written by JKR as Robert Galbraith) the baddie was a man dressed as a woman/transvestite/transperson (not sure which, as I haven’t read it), and this has been interpreted as transphobic by some hysterics.

I have read it (to be totally accurate listened to Robert Glenister reading it) and the baddie was totally a man, who identified and presented as a man, except when he disguised himself in a woman's coat (and hat?) to take someone by surprise and capture them. No hint of being a transwoman, or transvestite, just a bloke in disguise at night for the purpose of getting his victim.
The outraged clearly had not read the book but gathered their outrage from other outraged souls who had also never read the book., and on it goes.

There are actually two JKR novels with characters who are trans in them, both are agressive and murderous. You do wonder if she is so against transwomen why she has to write about them. I can only think that in making a serial killer a man who dresses as a woman and a transwomen as an agressive character she is trying to influence opinion.
Still I wouldn't want to see her censored.

I listened to all the Strike books, and while I'll admit I do miss bits because I'm usually listening while doing something else I don't recall them. Are you casting the serial killer who does not present as trans, but merely dons a costume for the brief time it takes to lure an unsuspecting victim, as trans? Or does that make 3 characters you're claiming? Have you read them or are you relying on second hand views? I know the 'disguise' killer is in Troubled Blood, which is the other novel?

JKR is not against transwomen, she has stated this many times, she wants transpeople to live their lives in safety and with dignity. Being in favour of defending the language and rights of women does not make you anti trans.

Well sorry but presenting one character who is violent and dresses as a woman might be considered acceptable, but presenting two is bit questionable.

I thought the ACLU had hit rock bottom when they 'adjusted' the statement by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the first anniversary of her death.

The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”

with

“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity… When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”

but The ACLU told the UPenn mother that they will ‘never defend cis women against women’; the word ‘women’ now being exclusively reserved for men. this is even more terrifying. Women really are the bottom of the pile aren't they

But this is typical rude male disrespect for females, whatever he calls himself or claims to be.

He’s proud of himself and no doubt others will be happy to be shown such disrespect, seeing it as ‘woke’ and ‘forward thinking’.

His tweet is like a KS1 child sticking it’s tongue out when you ask them to do something properly.

Rosie51

I will! (even though your 'no comment' speaks volumes ) It specifies single sex, and India is male genetically, but of course would make a point of using female only spaces, when the mixed sex one would be more suitable. Male entitlement runs deep in that one. I even wonder if we can believe it did happen, India doesn't appear to have a close relationship with the truth at times.

Agreed. Making a point of something like that is so childish and disrespectful. Again, it removes agency for women who want to use a single sex space. The sheer arrogance of it makes me angry. It’s not as though there weren’t people going out of their way to accommodate transpeople, is it?

I remember IW in Celeb BB ages ago and she was a massive pain in the arse then. I see that nothing’s changed.

"The mental health of young women is of course entirely disregarded. We didn’t hear a peep in the mainstream media of the brave mother of a UPenn swimmer who said there were tensions behind the scenes when Lia Thomas was competing in the NCAA swimming championship. The woman, who spoke to Women’s Declaration International, was in tears recounting how she had to ask her daughter if she had enough towels to cover her body in the change room.

When the young swimmer told her mother that she just had no choice but to accept she had to undress in front of Thomas, the mother said; ‘I still can’t believe that I had to tell my adult-aged daughter, “You always have a choice about whether you undress in front of a man.”’ What I have in common with the UPenn mother and Deves, is that I absolutely refuse to teach my daughters to over-ride her sexual boundaries with kindness.

Naively, the Pen University mother contacted the premier civil rights organisation in Biden’s America to see if her daughter could find protection in title IX. Title IX is the principal piece of legislation that protects American women and girls from discrimination. The ACLU told the UPenn mother that they will ‘never defend cis women against women’; the word ‘women’ now being exclusively reserved for men."

www.spectator.com.au/2022/04/why-i-stand-shoulder-to-shoulder-with-deves/

Same here DL at the age of 34 and it's been a lot better being a woman ever since.

It doesn't matter if India did do this recently. What matters is his intention.
He does not 'just want to pee'.

I will! (even though your 'no comment' speaks volumes ) It specifies single sex, and India is male genetically, but of course would make a point of using female only spaces, when the mixed sex one would be more suitable. Male entitlement runs deep in that one. I even wonder if we can believe it did happen, India doesn't appear to have a close relationship with the truth at times.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202204/medium-233593-fqyrbdqxoaa8pod.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202204/medium-329212-fqyrcb-xsaemhfg.jpg

No comment.

trisher

Rosie51

I have, however, heard that one of the Cameron Strike novels (written by JKR as Robert Galbraith) the baddie was a man dressed as a woman/transvestite/transperson (not sure which, as I haven’t read it), and this has been interpreted as transphobic by some hysterics.

I have read it (to be totally accurate listened to Robert Glenister reading it) and the baddie was totally a man, who identified and presented as a man, except when he disguised himself in a woman's coat (and hat?) to take someone by surprise and capture them. No hint of being a transwoman, or transvestite, just a bloke in disguise at night for the purpose of getting his victim.
The outraged clearly had not read the book but gathered their outrage from other outraged souls who had also never read the book., and on it goes.

There are actually two JKR novels with characters who are trans in them, both are agressive and murderous. You do wonder if she is so against transwomen why she has to write about them. I can only think that in making a serial killer a man who dresses as a woman and a transwomen as an agressive character she is trying to influence opinion.
Still I wouldn't want to see her censored.

I listened to all the Strike books, and while I'll admit I do miss bits because I'm usually listening while doing something else I don't recall them. Are you casting the serial killer who does not present as trans, but merely dons a costume for the brief time it takes to lure an unsuspecting victim, as trans? Or does that make 3 characters you're claiming? Have you read them or are you relying on second hand views? I know the 'disguise' killer is in Troubled Blood, which is the other novel?

JKR is not against transwomen, she has stated this many times, she wants transpeople to live their lives in safety and with dignity. Being in favour of defending the language and rights of women does not make you anti trans.

Wouldnt be the first time an author or compsny used a currant issue to make profit, as evidenced by the watch advert.

I have a cervix, it no longer functions after having pre cancerous cells removed. I had to have a c section with my last pregnancy.

Plenty of women out there of the opinion or belief that a c section is the easy option but personally i would rather do my first 4 births back to back.

You're right DiamondLily, there's better ways to enjoy being a woman but you get what you're given and just have to deal with it I suppose.

Hope your early hysterectomy wasn't too traumatic for you.

trisher

Rosie51

I have, however, heard that one of the Cameron Strike novels (written by JKR as Robert Galbraith) the baddie was a man dressed as a woman/transvestite/transperson (not sure which, as I haven’t read it), and this has been interpreted as transphobic by some hysterics.

I have read it (to be totally accurate listened to Robert Glenister reading it) and the baddie was totally a man, who identified and presented as a man, except when he disguised himself in a woman's coat (and hat?) to take someone by surprise and capture them. No hint of being a transwoman, or transvestite, just a bloke in disguise at night for the purpose of getting his victim.
The outraged clearly had not read the book but gathered their outrage from other outraged souls who had also never read the book., and on it goes.

There are actually two JKR novels with characters who are trans in them, both are agressive and murderous. You do wonder if she is so against transwomen why she has to write about them. I can only think that in making a serial killer a man who dresses as a woman and a transwomen as an agressive character she is trying to influence opinion.
Still I wouldn't want to see her censored.

I was uncomfortable with the author using real people as part of a murder plot.

I haven't read the books you refer to, but I assume they don't write about identified people?

I'm not sure fiction influences anyone well balanced, but when using real people (and JKRs already getting death threats), I think it could trigger the more unstable members of society.

I just don't think it's a good idea.

Rosie51

^I have, however, heard that one of the Cameron Strike novels (written by JKR as Robert Galbraith) the baddie was a man dressed as a woman/transvestite/transperson (not sure which, as I haven’t read it), and this has been interpreted as transphobic by some hysterics.^

I have read it (to be totally accurate listened to Robert Glenister reading it) and the baddie was totally a man, who identified and presented as a man, except when he disguised himself in a woman's coat (and hat?) to take someone by surprise and capture them. No hint of being a transwoman, or transvestite, just a bloke in disguise at night for the purpose of getting his victim.
The outraged clearly had not read the book but gathered their outrage from other outraged souls who had also never read the book., and on it goes.

There are actually two JKR novels with characters who are trans in them, both are agressive and murderous. You do wonder if she is so against transwomen why she has to write about them. I can only think that in making a serial killer a man who dresses as a woman and a transwomen as an agressive character she is trying to influence opinion.
Still I wouldn't want to see her censored.

Nannee49

Most of my cervix was lasered away in order to prevent precancerous cells multiplying into cervical cancer, a condition unfortunately unique to Women.

Quite, and I'm missing the rest due to a full hysterectomy at age 30.

Not all fun being a woman is it? ?

Most of my cervix was lasered away in order to prevent precancerous cells multiplying into cervical cancer, a condition unfortunately unique to Women.

I haven't got a cervix either, but I forgot to mention it...?

Seriously, how big an issue is this?
It's a big issue if you're a victim of rape or assault and, as a consequence are very nervous, frightened or uncomfortable in the company of men.

How many transwomen did you notice when out and about in the last week? How many didn't you notice? I've known a few you wouldn't give a passing glance.
Not noticed any more, or less, than normal. But then I don't have any problem with the ordinary trans man/woman who are just going about their daily lives and minding their own busines and, as far as I'm aware, no one else has a problem with them either.

How many have you ever seen while you were using a public toilet or a changing room?
Quite a few; I worked with a trans man for 8 years until I retired a year ago but he elected to continue to use the ladies cubicles. But where women and young girls are getting dressed and undressed in changing rooms, I would appreciate that a man would respect our request not to be in that space at that time. Common courtesy and decency and all.....

Is it possible that certain elements of the media will pick up isolated examples of idiots taking the piss and make them out to be a burgeoning menace?
All things are possible but it's apparent that these isolated examples are becoming less isolated. The more that we allow men to commit crimes and then seek to mitigate that crime by claiming to be trans, the more it skews crime figures leading to false data collection. If they are housed in the women's prison estates, it means that those women - who are already vulnerable, are having to share their cell with a man who, when convicted of sexually motivated crimes, is now at a far greater risk.

Incidentally, I haven't had a cervix for a good many years now.
I'm pleased for you.

Seriously, how big an issue is this? How many transwomen did you notice when out and about in the last week? How many didn't you notice? I've known a few you wouldn't give a passing glance. How many have you ever seen while you were using a public toilet or a changing room? Is it possible that certain elements of the media will pick up isolated examples of idiots taking the piss and make them out to be a burgeoning menace?

I think you may well be right re the media LadyHonoria. However, the issue is not the examples found or publicised. The issue is the bigger picture of the implications of what is "allowed", who has "rights" where, and the potential consequences within "tge law". That applies across many areas of life.

FarNorth

^What I truly don't understand is that if this author dislikes women as much as he portrays...why on earth does he want to be one?^

He wants to be the one telling women how to behave, and punishing them viciously if they won't kowtow.
He wants unpleasant males' version of women to be in control of biological women.

So, basically, just another abuser? Doing exactly the same as what some men have been doing for centuries?

Subjugating women?

Not really progress then.

DL
What I truly don't understand is that if this author dislikes women as much as he portrays...why on earth does he want to be one? ?

Odd.

He doesn’t, but it’s a way of grabbing attention for his poorly written publication.
If he’d written it as the male he is, with no reference to being a tw, how much attention do you think he’d get.
Buzz words like trans and murder get attention- but using a TW as he’s using it here simply denigrates all those trans who don’t wish to do what he portrays as ‘normal’ trans behaviour.

In a way, this is to the benefit of all AHF and others who express concern about the potential for harm by allowing males into female only spaces like refuges, female psychiatric wards, female prisons, or allowing males to misrepresent themselves as female in situations where a female is considered essential to the person in need.

With all the publicity, what will stick in people’s minds? Will it be the poor downtrodden trans who suffer at the hands of people who say men can’t be female?

More likely what people will recall is

The hatred of trans towards AHF women

The fact that trans are pro murder, especially of celebrities-this week JKR, next week who?

It will also raise concern from the very trans they purport to support who see their trans status being portrayed as evil.

It was even, as I noticed be repudiated by pro-trans.

You're right DL, I hadn't thought of that.

Ahh now that does make sense FarNorth He wants unpleasant males' version of women to be in control of biological women.

What I truly don't understand is that if this author dislikes women as much as he portrays...why on earth does he want to be one?

He wants to be the one telling women how to behave, and punishing them viciously if they won't kowtow.
He wants unpleasant males' version of women to be in control of biological women.

Smileless2012

Maybe he thinks that all biological women are the wrong type of woman DL and that TW are the right type.

But that would mean he only likes and approves of two types of biological males.

Males who stay as males.
And males who identify as women.

Biological women don't seem to fit anywhere on his wishlist..?

Maybe he thinks that all biological women are the wrong type of woman DL and that TW are the right type.