Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Glorianny

It is interesting that the very behaviour that has always been criticised in women is the same behaviour that is now being criticised in transwomen. Keep your head down, behave yourself, don't be an activist. The only acceptable transwoman is a quiet one. Oh dear misogyny or what?

Not misogyny at all. That would mean that transwomen are women, which is absolutely not the case. Or has the word 'misogyny' been co-opted too?

The misogyny is committed by those who defend the situation in which a woman speaking against a transwoman is guilty of a crime, but a transwoman denouncing a woman is not.

You asked people to examine why they find the behaviour of TWA's unacceptable so I did Glorianny. You responded by saying what I listed was questionable and not a debate you're prepared to enter into, so why did you ask?

I said (what is so difficult to understand) that transwomen are not easily identifiable and those who think they can tell necessarily put more butch women at risk.

If we accept that sex and gender are not the same thing and that transwomen are transwomen and therefore cannot use women's toilets or other spaces, because biologically they are men... then so-called "butch" women would not be at risk of anything.

I realise that the logistics would be complicated and would need to be addressed - perhaps men would have to accept transwomen in their spaces and vice versa.

Those who are transgender make up a small section of the whole population, and now they want to shift the dynamics of that whole to accommodate themselves. And in so doing, deny the rights of millions of women who, at present, are not protected by any specific legislation other than that of human rights which everyone has.

So millions of women are not protected from the crime of misogyny, but a few thousand of transgender individuals are protected from the hate crime of transphobia, and the loudest of them are men who are TWAs insisting that their 'feelings' take precedent over the biological reality of women.

Elegran

Aveline

Elegran I had a go at the consultation but it's a typical Scottish government clunky format. They really don't want to be disagreed with.

They can't even draft a consultation document. I have spent two hours trying to fill it in, but I give up.

If this gets through without a lot of revision, we will all end up in clink for 7 years. See you in Saughton. Bring the tranquillisers, we'll need them.

This made me laugh. Very witty!
But it’s what it’s coming to unless we are careful who we chat with! One article this morning said Scots would become snitches - reporting private (or overheard) conversations. Not nice.

From BBC Scotland.
Police Scotland has received more than 3,000 hate crime reports since a new law was introduced on Monday, the BBC understands.It creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" over protected characteristics.
A large number were about a 2020 speech by First Minister Humza Yousaf - then justice secretary - highlighting white people in prominent public roles.
Community Safety Minister Siobhian Brown said people were making "fake and vexatious complaints".

Police Scotland said complaints about Mr Yousaf's speech were assessed at the time, with no crime committed and no action taken. The new law will not apply retrospectively.

Aha! Back to the butch. How can you tell? Are they the strong, tall, muscular, deep voiced friends from the past?
You can presumably tell the same way as others find TIM identifiable.

Rosie51

^The bill isn't bad. JKR has been judged not to have broken the law. That means it is a storm in a teacup.^ The constant cry of the TRAs was that on April 1st to deliberately "misgender" someone (aka correctly sexing them) would result in prosecution for hate speech. JKR tested that assertion, and it proved to be false. That has cleared up that lie.

We judge who is a woman in our everyday life. We do so by appearance. Whoah, aren't you the one who said judging by appearance was wrong and has caused problems for butch women? Now you appear to be endorsing and approving of judging by appearance.

I said (what is so difficult to understand) that transwomen are not easily identifiable and those who think they can tell necessarily put more butch women at risk.

I'm not endorsing anything just saying that's how it happens.

So trans activists were wrong. What's the fuss?

The bill isn't bad. JKR has been judged not to have broken the law. That means it is a storm in a teacup. The constant cry of the TRAs was that on April 1st to deliberately "misgender" someone (aka correctly sexing them) would result in prosecution for hate speech. JKR tested that assertion, and it proved to be false. That has cleared up that lie.

We judge who is a woman in our everyday life. We do so by appearance. Whoah, aren't you the one who said judging by appearance was wrong and has caused problems for butch women? Now you appear to be endorsing and approving of judging by appearance.

That’s another non answer G.
🪱🪱🪱

Smileless2012

I find the actions of trans activists unacceptable because they use threatening and abusive language. They think men should be allowed into women's safe spaces simply because they identify as women. They support men competing against women in sports and 'winning' due to their physiological advantage. They support rapists and the perpetrators of sexual assault being referred too as she, their crimes being recorded as having been committed by women and their desire to be housed in women's prisons. They support the eradication of language that pertains to biological women ie people who bleed, people with a cervix and chest feeders and they threaten those who state the biological truth that a man cannot be a woman and a woman cannot be a man.

This absolutely!

fancythat

Glorianny

Mollygo

Protection against hatred is something we all deserve. said Glorianny.
No one disagrees with that.
So why do you support a bill that deliberately doesn’t protect women from the hatred of TRA and the hatred displayed by lying, cheating and behaving in a manner by some TIM, ^that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive?^

Because the bill provides protection for other minorities . Complaining that it doesn't support something you believe in is fine, denigrating it because you simply disapprove of one of the minorities it does protect is illogical. Should the other minorities simply be ignored? Would you oppose a 30mph speed limit simply because 20mph is safer?
If you read the paper I linked to you will see there is some legal protection for misogyny already, although it isn't widely used. Opposing or denigrating protection for others does nothing to protect women.

If 4 parts of a Bill are "good", and 1 part "bad", that makes the whole Bill bad.

The bill isn't bad. JKR has been judged not to have broken the law. That means it is a storm in a teacup. No doubt instigated because trans issues have been pretty quiet lately. Heaven forbid people should just get on with their lives.

fancythat

If 4 parts of a Bill are "good", and 1 part "bad", that makes the whole Bill bad.

True. And Glorianny is still wriggling.

Smileless2012

I find the actions of trans activists unacceptable because they use threatening and abusive language. They think men should be allowed into women's safe spaces simply because they identify as women. They support men competing against women in sports and 'winning' due to their physiological advantage. They support rapists and the perpetrators of sexual assault being referred too as she, their crimes being recorded as having been committed by women and their desire to be housed in women's prisons. They support the eradication of language that pertains to biological women ie people who bleed, people with a cervix and chest feeders and they threaten those who state the biological truth that a man cannot be a woman and a woman cannot be a man.

All of those assertions are questionable. It's not a debate I care to get into again because the basis of using biological sex to identify who is a man and who is a woman is not only impossible to apply, it is positively dangerous for all women, and damages some women.

The basic idea behind all of those is in fact don't stick up for your rights if they conflict with my ideas. By all means challenge the ideas, but refusing to accept a transwoman unless she lives quietly (and that has been said on this thread) is an entirely different matter.

Glorianny

Mollygo

Protection against hatred is something we all deserve. said Glorianny.
No one disagrees with that.
So why do you support a bill that deliberately doesn’t protect women from the hatred of TRA and the hatred displayed by lying, cheating and behaving in a manner by some TIM, ^that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive?^

Because the bill provides protection for other minorities . Complaining that it doesn't support something you believe in is fine, denigrating it because you simply disapprove of one of the minorities it does protect is illogical. Should the other minorities simply be ignored? Would you oppose a 30mph speed limit simply because 20mph is safer?
If you read the paper I linked to you will see there is some legal protection for misogyny already, although it isn't widely used. Opposing or denigrating protection for others does nothing to protect women.

If 4 parts of a Bill are "good", and 1 part "bad", that makes the whole Bill bad.

I dont say that though and have never said that. I don't care if people are lovely or not, we dont segregate spaces by how lovely people are, we segregate by sex. I am not one of the 'let the nice men in' people, I am very clear, no men, no matter whose friend they are or how kind they may be.
I dont play that game.

she is one brave woman who will have countless women behind her. Thank goodness she will never be force fed like other brave women

I find the actions of trans activists unacceptable because they use threatening and abusive language. They think men should be allowed into women's safe spaces simply because they identify as women. They support men competing against women in sports and 'winning' due to their physiological advantage. They support rapists and the perpetrators of sexual assault being referred too as she, their crimes being recorded as having been committed by women and their desire to be housed in women's prisons. They support the eradication of language that pertains to biological women ie people who bleed, people with a cervix and chest feeders and they threaten those who state the biological truth that a man cannot be a woman and a woman cannot be a man.

There is a Petition started online yesterday by ipetitions.com signed by 32,482 people in solidarity with JKR many of them authors and media, such as Susan Hill, Anthony Horowitz, Jenni Murray and thousands more. Do take a look. 👍

Galaxy

Lives like a woman is sexist nonsense from the 1950s, I am not going to embrace sexism in the same way I dont embrace racism. They can speak in whatever way they want, I am not going to pretend they are women.

The same cop out. We judge who is a woman in our everyday life. We do so by appearance.
This is just avoiding the issue that those who say they accept transwomen only do so on the basis that they live quietly and don't protest, which is basically the same way women have always been considered acceptable.
No one is asking you to pretend anything. Just saying that people should examine why they find the actions of transactivists so unacceptable.

It still puzzles me that anyone thinks lying is right.
Presumably that’s how they live their life.
I’d really like to know how people decide which lie is unacceptable, which lie they are keen to tell and how others are supposed to know.

Am just catching up on the thread and I agree Baggs that Paul Embery has been articulate and brave on this subject as well.

Lives like a woman is sexist nonsense from the 1950s, I am not going to embrace sexism in the same way I dont embrace racism. They can speak in whatever way they want, I am not going to pretend they are women.

Well said, your posts, galaxy.

Galaxy

If you try and enshrine a lie into law you are going to eventually run into trouble.
It is not kind to tell people they can change sex, it is deeply unkind.

True. It is also deeply unkind to make a law that says if you tell the truth, you will be punished. Ergo if a TIM demands that I lie that he is a woman, who will be in the wrong? Crazy world.

Galaxy

I dont care if men are quiet or loud, they remain men whatever their level of noise.

That's a cop out. If someone looks like a woman and lives like a woman and is told to shut up, do you judge their right to speak out by examining their biology? Of course you don't!