Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Rosie51

Elegran

What JK Rowling said has by no means been forgotten, because she speaks for far more than a small minority. I don't think I have heard one woman say that she was wrong to speak up. Many have said that they agree with her.

It's wishful thinking. I see posts elsewhere that say the majority of women accept transwomen as being every bit as much women as themselves. In fact they're very often more woman than real women. I think there's a belief that if it's said often enough it will become true. A bit like the chant of old, TWAW no debate.

You see that said on other social media sites?

GrannyGravy13

Rosie51 I find your post saddens me, it signals the demise of the true definition of women, the misogynists are on their way to the finishing line with a win…

I actually think the world is waking up to the insidious creep of the erasing of woman as a sex category that doesn't include men. It may not happen quickly but I do hope there will be a row back. At least some sporting associations are now saying any participant who has experienced a male puberty cannot compete in the female class. Most of the general public can recognise the total unfairness of letting men identify into women's sport. I can't remember exactly which health article it was but I read one recently that used the term woman, and added "and transmen or non-binary" That one always amuses, to say you're non-binary because you don't identify with the binary actually creates a new binary!

GrannyGravy13

I agree Smileless2012

I have asked Glorianny a question several times on this thread to no avail.

I can only draw two conclusions
, 1) to answer truthfully would mean agreeing with me

2) I am being gaslit (which I guess is an achievement in itself)

Yes GrannyGravy. Refusing to respond usually means you can’t, without agreeing or admitting the truth of what has been said. Probably what is happening here.

Rosie51 I find your post saddens me, it signals the demise of the true definition of women, the misogynists are on their way to the finishing line with a win…

Elegran

What JK Rowling said has by no means been forgotten, because she speaks for far more than a small minority. I don't think I have heard one woman say that she was wrong to speak up. Many have said that they agree with her.

It's wishful thinking. I see posts elsewhere that say the majority of women accept transwomen as being every bit as much women as themselves. In fact they're very often more woman than real women. I think there's a belief that if it's said often enough it will become true. A bit like the chant of old, TWAW no debate.

What JK Rowling said has by no means been forgotten, because she speaks for far more than a small minority. I don't think I have heard one woman say that she was wrong to speak up. Many have said that they agree with her.

You can think people can't change sex. You can say people can't change sex. But in the workplace you show respect to others.
It's not just thinking it or saying it, it is scientific fact that you cannot change sex. You can have surgeries that will approximate external sex characteristics of the opposite sex, and take opposite sex hormones but not one cell in your body is changed. No mammal has the ability to change sex, we're not clownfish. Showing respect shouldn't mean I have to pretend that someone has changed their sex, and accommodate them in what were single sex spaces. I will use the preferred name but may avoid third person pronouns as far as possible. Gender always used to be a "polite" way of indicating sex. Against the category "gender" there'd be options to tick M for male, F for female. Hundreds of genders is a nonsense, they're personalities not genders. There are about 4 billion males in the world, about 4 billion females and 8 billion different personalities.

Of course the existence of trans people in 1930s Berlin matters. Do you really imagine there are not people who would willingly send those people to camps again

Talk about getting the wrong end of the stick and beating all and sundry over the head with it!
Clearly and succinctly explained Doodledog with perfect relevance to today.

None of us know the personal circumstances and family loyalties of other posters. Some people make a point in many of their posts of prefacing them with "As a . . . . " or
"Speaking as one who. . . ." Others keep their personal lives as just that - personal - and do not demand special treatment and consideration. That is why it is just not on to voice ad hominem assumptions about what someone would or would not say or do, would or would not support or condemn.

Doodledog

It is fair to say that the meaning of a poem resides in the mind of the reader - certainly some theorists such as Barthes have claimed that. All the same, this poem, regardless of the political history of the poet, is widely held to be about the importance of not allowing the 'creep' of intolerance and totalitarianism, as 'they' will pick off resisters one group at a time.

So if we don't speak out when we first see women called 'cervix havers', it gets harder when we realise that we are no longer mothers but 'birth givers'.

Then the TRAs get women sacked from their careers for saying that it is not possible to change sex, so more people stay quiet and don't speak out.

Then children are taught that there are 101 genders in school, but parents who speak out are called transphobic and ridiculed ('amusing', or 'pathetic' or worse), so they stay quiet.

Then children who don't conform to stereotypes are told they are in the wrong body, and some are given hormones, and by now it is more difficult to speak out as more agencies are involved.

Then we have to declare pronouns on our emails and screens.

Then men are allowed into so many spaces that some women are unable to attend for religious reasons.

Then women are attacked outside of cinemas showing feminist films, or on marches that don't comply with the TWAW mantra.

Then more, then more, then the law is changed so that it is a criminal offence to say that men cannot be women, however much they hate being told no.

Who is left to speak for women then? (luckily, JKR is speaking for us)

Of course Pastor Neimoller wasn't talking about trans issues when he wrote the poem, but to suggest that that matters is missing the point entirely, as is the existence of trans people in 30s Berlin.

Of course the existence of trans people in 1930s Berlin matters. Do you really imagine there are not people who would willingly send those people to camps again?

JKR does not speak for all women. She speaks for a small minority.
She is still entitled to do so as the law has shown. (I think she hoped for more of a reaction. Except on GN it has largely been forgotten)

The people who wanted cervix haver were transmen who didn't want to be called women but have a cervix. Why would you deny them that. You can still be a woman with a cervix (although some women don't have one). Just as you can be a mother, and a transman who gives birth can be a birth giver. Why do you see the extension of language as a problem? I think it's rather wonderful that all people can be accommodated.

You can think people can't change sex. You can say people can't change sex. But in the workplace you show respect to others. You may think your boss is an idiot but you don't call him it to his face.

There are no stereotypes for children now. Do you know any? They are more diverse than they have ever been. Thank goodness.

Teaching more genders can only open people's eyes to diversity is that bad?

Men and religious spaces is a strange thing to introduce. Religions with such restrictions tend to be restrictive about sex and gender.

Any physical attack by anyone is wrong.

Hate speech which is intended to hurt damage or otherwise provoke such attacks is also wrong.

If you find something unpleasant then you should say Glorianny because posting something unpleasant in response does nothing for your argument.

I think it is unpleasant to post a poem about Nazi atrocities on a thread about trans issues. The trans community being one of the first to be eliminated. It shows a lack of knowledge about such things.

You are far from reticent when it comes to posting about Nazis and imply that anyone speaking out for women is potentially supportive of their ideology. You have even suggested that my posts are worthy of the KKK, which has to take first prize when it comes to personal attacks. Talk about double standards!

Smileless2012

I can't remember how long ago I asked that question for the first time, or how many times I've asked it since Rosie.

You and so many more of us! I have to wonder if the reason it's never answered is because there aren't any? We list time after time the areas where we want men-free zones which includes transwomen but wait endlessly for the reciprocal list.

Smileless2012

I can't remember how long ago I asked that question for the first time, or how many times I've asked it since Rosie.

Same here. It must be years. And the same applies to the other questions I asked for the millionth time unthread. But as long as we're talking about leggings and/or the irony of 'First They Came' being seen as supportive of the creep of trans totalitarianism those questions can be ignored.

Divert, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.

Smileless2012

If it was 10 years ago so unlikely to be trans related, then why mention it at all Glorianny? Oh I know why, because that was the best you could come up with in response to my post @ 14.32.

That's a very unpleasant thing to say that Katek or anyone on this thread for that matter, wouldn't speak out for one of the following: communists, the trans and gay communities and the disabled in relation them being sent to concentration camps. Very unpleasant indeed.

Sorry Smileless2012 it just came into my head as an example of someone obviously wanting something in a women's changing room changed and doing something about it. I never considered if it was trans related. I thought it was an example of a woman stopping something because she didn't like it. I didn't realise there were restrictions about that.

I think it is unpleasant to post a poem about Nazi atrocities on a thread about trans issues. The trans community being one of the first to be eliminated. It shows a lack of knowledge about such things.

It is fair to say that the meaning of a poem resides in the mind of the reader - certainly some theorists such as Barthes have claimed that. All the same, this poem, regardless of the political history of the poet, is widely held to be about the importance of not allowing the 'creep' of intolerance and totalitarianism, as 'they' will pick off resisters one group at a time.

So if we don't speak out when we first see women called 'cervix havers', it gets harder when we realise that we are no longer mothers but 'birth givers'.

Then the TRAs get women sacked from their careers for saying that it is not possible to change sex, so more people stay quiet and don't speak out.

Then children are taught that there are 101 genders in school, but parents who speak out are called transphobic and ridiculed ('amusing', or 'pathetic' or worse), so they stay quiet.

Then children who don't conform to stereotypes are told they are in the wrong body, and some are given hormones, and by now it is more difficult to speak out as more agencies are involved.

Then we have to declare pronouns on our emails and screens.

Then men are allowed into so many spaces that some women are unable to attend for religious reasons.

Then women are attacked outside of cinemas showing feminist films, or on marches that don't comply with the TWAW mantra.

Then more, then more, then the law is changed so that it is a criminal offence to say that men cannot be women, however much they hate being told no.

Who is left to speak for women then? (luckily, JKR is speaking for us)

Of course Pastor Neimoller wasn't talking about trans issues when he wrote the poem, but to suggest that that matters is missing the point entirely, as is the existence of trans people in 30s Berlin.

I can't remember how long ago I asked that question for the first time, or how many times I've asked it since Rosie.

I agree Smileless2012

I have asked Glorianny a question several times on this thread to no avail.

I can only draw two conclusions
, 1) to answer truthfully would mean agreeing with me

2) I am being gaslit (which I guess is an achievement in itself)

Glorianny

Still waiting for a clear explanation of the poem I don't understand

I've been waiting (along with others) for a list of the rights I and others enjoy that are denied to transpeople. Once we have that detail we can campaign for these universal rights to include transpeople.

I wonder which of us will have to be the more patient?

There is a prayer that asks for strength to fight and not to heed the wounds. A lot of wounds are sustained by those in public life (like JKRowling) who say what they believe, in the face of strongly lobbied movements like the Stonewall-backed pro-trans campaign.

If it was 10 years ago so unlikely to be trans related, then why mention it at all Glorianny? Oh I know why, because that was the best you could come up with in response to my post @ 14.32.

That's a very unpleasant thing to say that Katek or anyone on this thread for that matter, wouldn't speak out for one of the following: communists, the trans and gay communities and the disabled in relation them being sent to concentration camps. Very unpleasant indeed.

Glorianny
No one can identify transwomen anyway. Some people may claim they can but really can't this is from your post of 4th at 17:12:38 .
At least you've diluted this down to of course you can't always identify a transwoman with which I'd agree.
Some transwomen do pass especially at first glance, but the vast majority who don't have the celebrity finances for extensive and expensive surgical procedures do not. Those are the transwomen the woman on the Clapham omnibus is likely to encounter. Of course some transwomen are just fetishists who enjoy making women uncomfortable by clearly displaying their maleness.
Transmen on testosterone do pass more often. The voice drops and facial hair grows, while male pattern baldness will often kick in eventually. Testosterone doesn't make bones grow longer to increase height and wingspan or change the shoulder/hip ratio to that of a typical male however.

And I fight for those rights for trans people - but also for the rights of nontrans people to say what they think without being demolished by those assiduously fighting against them.

Quite how it is dangerous to say what you have said I don't understand.

Elegran

Glorianny

Still waiting for a clear explanation of the poem I don't understand

No-one has come for the trans people to herd them all into prisons and death camps. They have legal rights to exist, to look, act and think as they wish.

It is those who want safeguards to be in place who are in danger of being ignored - those who want places for vulnerable women that are safe from the men they have previously been threatened or attacked by, those who don't want people whose male physiques were honed by testosterone but who choose to compete against women, those who want to be able to use the "ladies' room" as a refuge where they can let their hair down without men with intact sexual equipment standing around watching them, and others who feel that women have had thousands of years defending themselves against a male-focussed hierarchy and they had hoped that in this "civilised" age that had at last reached a point where they no longer had to be eternally vigilant.

But it seems that "speaking truth to power" is still needed, and is still dangerous.

You are free to say all those things. No one is stopping you.
The Nazis did stop Communists, trans people, gay people and the disabled. The poem asks you to speak up even for those you disagree with. It is not about complaining those people are wrong. It''s about saying fine I disagree with you but I will fight for your right to say it.