Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Thanks. I agree, if so .

Wheniwasyourage

I assumed that nanna8 is talking about the TRAs who are trying to take away women's rights in favour of trans rights.

I agree if so. It’s also true that those TRA are doing more harm than good to trans, because their violence is what hits the tabloids and the media.

Absolutely

As I have posted before, I had an excellent GP ( doctor, not grandparent!) for many years, who was a transwoman.
She accepted me as a nine- month pregnant woman wanting a home delivery when few others would.
She did not make any attempt to shout her cause, simply living her life, making no reference to how difficult her journey had been, undertaking, I understand, risky surgery abroad.
All of this was forty years ago.
Her lifestyle did not feature any placard waving or hatred and, consequently, encouraged acceptance and understanding.
The high profile unpleasant trans group, I would suggest, simply provokes a negative reaction. Is this what they want?

I think they enjoy intimidating women, and preventing us from being able to do anything without a male presence. In their world, lesbians (always a threat to INCELS and other inadequate men) can be coerced into sex with males, and gay men can be persuaded to 'transition' to female, leaving the patriarchy intact.

And they might have got away with it too, if not for the pesky feminists.

Iam64

It’s also wrong to make assumptions about people based on what you imagine their age might be Caleo. You may need to have a word with yourself about intransigence as yiu age because it’s clear, that’s where you are right now
You forget that many of us who are posting have lived through and contributed to great social change. Being of what you call advancing age doesn’t mean we’ve lost our campaigning zeal. Just thst we don’t share your views

It’s also wrong to make assumptions about people based on what you imagine their age might be Caleo

It's said that older people are "set in their ways".

However, I've always found this applies more to a type of personality rather than old age. Some are quite inflexible long before they become elderly. I suspect they carry this intransigence with them as they age.

I think what does happen in older people sometimes is that they do not suffer fools gladly (I think this expression can be traced back to the bible). As time runs out, so does your patience - because there isn't enough of it to waste on nonsense. Though I'm speaking generally here and not specifically about this thread matter. Youth can 'afford' to be indulgent, age cannot. So maybe a kind of cynicism creeps up on you, having had to put up with a lifetime of blather and balderdash in the workplace, in various organisations one's had to deal with, and even within the family circle.

Once you retire, you're not dependent on people any longer in the way that you are when you are in school, university, or in the workplace, and you can call out posturing, deceit, dissembling, when you see it!

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Dickens. Another way to look at it is that you are only born with so many figs, and by the time you get to a certain age you have used most of them up, and only have so many figs left to give.

I think I've spelt figs correctly there, but I may be wrong.

Doodledog

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Dickens. Another way to look at it is that you are only born with so many figs, and by the time you get to a certain age you have used most of them up, and only have so many figs left to give.

I think I've spelt figs correctly there, but I may be wrong.

... beautifully expressed Doodledog !

www.huffpost.com/entry/transgender-child-nonbinary-pronouns_n_63ff8de4e4b0bdb99f498a2e/amp.

Worth reading !

It doesn't answer the question of why this happened, and why this sort of thing didn't happen (or happened very rarely) before about 10 years ago. The story begins when Rachel has already decided that 'they are' non-binary, not when Rachel first heard that this was an option, and we are not given any background to the family, the school, or anything that might help to make contextual sense.

The vocabulary makes it read like a propaganda piece (eg I have learned that there are some people whose minds will never be changed when it comes to their bias against transgender people, especially if this bias is ingrained in their culture, and some people who just need a little education.^) and it's clearly Canada based (Canada is ^very captured by the trans lobby).

It tells the story of what happened in one family, without any attempt to contextualise that experience. It may (or may not) be a true story, but it tells us no more about the issues than would any story about the experiences of any one child or any single family.

I don't think it adds to the discussion about whether JKR was wrong to stand by women who may be prosecuted for speaking biological truth.

Dickens - spot on in describing my own figs. I’ve never been quick to anger, always curious about other points of view. None of this has changed much but my basic beliefs remain exactly that. Nothing I’ve experienced or seen changes my desire for society to be a fairer more decent place. If that’s intransigence so be it

Not kean on her books but thoroughly support JKR. Shes very brave speaking up for women, it’s what we want. Reason has gone out if the window, it needs someone high profile to speak out for the safety of women. Years ago I went to see a friend, sadly dead now, recovering on a man’s ward after having her breast removed. She was so upset, she needed other women around her.

Doodledog

It doesn't answer the question of why this happened, and why this sort of thing didn't happen (or happened very rarely) before about 10 years ago. The story begins when Rachel has already decided that 'they are' non-binary, not when Rachel first heard that this was an option, and we are not given any background to the family, the school, or anything that might help to make contextual sense.

The vocabulary makes it read like a propaganda piece (eg I have learned that there are some people whose minds will never be changed when it comes to their bias against transgender people, especially if this bias is ingrained in their culture, and some people who just need a little education.^) and it's clearly Canada based (Canada is ^very captured by the trans lobby).

It tells the story of what happened in one family, without any attempt to contextualise that experience. It may (or may not) be a true story, but it tells us no more about the issues than would any story about the experiences of any one child or any single family.

I don't think it adds to the discussion about whether JKR was wrong to stand by women who may be prosecuted for speaking biological truth.

It doesn’t add to the discussion about JKR, but I don’t think Syracute is interested in that.
I like Huffington Post. Haven’t read it for a while, but it has published some very interesting material on the wrongs of inflicting irrevocable changes on children and teens too young to understand what those changes mean for their future.

It just full of stereotypes, like something out of the 1950s.

Chocolatelovinggran

As I have posted before, I had an excellent GP ( doctor, not grandparent!) for many years, who was a transwoman.
She accepted me as a nine- month pregnant woman wanting a home delivery when few others would.
She did not make any attempt to shout her cause, simply living her life, making no reference to how difficult her journey had been, undertaking, I understand, risky surgery abroad.
All of this was forty years ago.
Her lifestyle did not feature any placard waving or hatred and, consequently, encouraged acceptance and understanding.
The high profile unpleasant trans group, I would suggest, simply provokes a negative reaction. Is this what they want?

How did you know your GP was a transwoman?

My objection to transwomen attending females is when females have asked for female attention and a transwoman appears, pretending to be female.
Otherwise a transwoman is like any other male doctor-though whichever sex, a female is usually required to be in attendance as safeguarding for patient and doctor.

Doodledog

It doesn't answer the question of why this happened, and why this sort of thing didn't happen (or happened very rarely) before about 10 years ago. The story begins when Rachel has already decided that 'they are' non-binary, not when Rachel first heard that this was an option, and we are not given any background to the family, the school, or anything that might help to make contextual sense.

The vocabulary makes it read like a propaganda piece (eg I have learned that there are some people whose minds will never be changed when it comes to their bias against transgender people, especially if this bias is ingrained in their culture, and some people who just need a little education.^) and it's clearly Canada based (Canada is ^very captured by the trans lobby).

It tells the story of what happened in one family, without any attempt to contextualise that experience. It may (or may not) be a true story, but it tells us no more about the issues than would any story about the experiences of any one child or any single family.

I don't think it adds to the discussion about whether JKR was wrong to stand by women who may be prosecuted for speaking biological truth.

It tells the story of what happened in one family, without any attempt to contextualise that experience. It may (or may not) be a true story, but it tells us no more about the issues than would any story about the experiences of any one child or any single family.

I almost gave up on the story when I read this...

...and their classmates ― especially the girls ― don’t know what to do with a long-haired person who wears boys’ clothes and doesn’t seem to have a recognizable gender.

Long-haired 'persons' wearing boys' clothes have been a staple of Western society for decades. Young men frequently have long hair, and young girls with long hair wear jeans / shorts and t shirts, for goodness' sake.

I continued to read - and then this...

The older generation is a bit confused.

Are they? Really? This is the generation that started the 70s wave of Feminism - took part in the radical thinking that culminated in huge changes in society. We campaigned and watched the de-criminalisation of homosexuality, we brought about change in the education systems that allowed children to express themselves instead of being confined by a set formula, we became 'politicised'... demonstrated and marched against injustices, and not only in our own countries...

... this is simply ageism writ large.

As for this - which apparently finally won round the husband...

...your child transgender or nonbinary (or cisgender, for that matter). If your child wants to be called a pronoun different from the one that aligns with their gender assigned at birth, you should honor that. It’s not a phase. There is no “fault.”

... "gender assigned at birth"?

The confusion between sex and gender - again. And sex is not assigned at birth, it is noted. Gender identity develops later.

The whole piece is an exercise in propaganda. If a similar piece was written in the same style as this which supported my thinking, I would shy away from recommending it.

Syracute It was not worth reading. It is an anecdotal piece of agitprop.

And, frankly, it is a well-observed characteristic of childhood that "phases" are part of it. As the child navigates its way through the adult-world - one which it does not have the intellectual capacity to fathom - it snatches those parts of it that make sense to it and adopts them to suit their needs and their wants at that time. Further, as the child develops, those feelings, needs and wants, change... that is why children go through phases.

I do not decry the real and genuine body dysmorphia suffered by a minority of young people. But it really does need to be separated from the feelings of children who simply hate the restrictions that sex stereotypes have imposed on them and which therefore dictate what they are allowed or not allowed to do, and against which they, quite naturally, rebel.

The generation you write about, Dickens, is also the generation in which many young men started wearing their hair long. Nobody, even the old fogeys of the time, thought they actually wanted to become women. In fact it was of some benefit to women, as suddenly it became unnecessary for female swimmers to wear swimming caps - apparently men’s hair doesn’t block drains and so it was impossible to say that women’s hair does. Thank you, Beatles.

A friend’s DGS had his hair waist-length for some time recently, and had certainly no wish to be anything but a long-haired boy!

Oh, is that why shower caps were 'necessary'? Every day's a schoolday on here

I think we all seem to be agreed that the 'article' is a piece of nonsense, on a number of grounds.

Syracute

www.huffpost.com/entry/transgender-child-nonbinary-pronouns_n_63ff8de4e4b0bdb99f498a2e/amp.

Worth reading !

Not really

To elaborate - may be interesting and clearly is to those in a similar position, but has questionable relevance to the new law in Scotland which is what this about.

My DH had gorgeous tumbling locks down past his shoulders when I met him. Not in the least feminine. Luckily he's still got a good head of hair but it's a lot shorter these days.

Google 'The cheif apologises Scot squad youtube' It's hilarious 🤣

Doodledog

Oh, is that why shower caps were 'necessary'? Every day's a schoolday on here

I think we all seem to be agreed that the 'article' is a piece of nonsense, on a number of grounds.

Oh, is that why shower caps were 'necessary'? Every day's a schoolday on here

... it is isn't it!

I thought it was because women's long hair flopped over their face and made it difficult to see.

When I was at school I was very thin with long hair - if I didn't wear a cap, I looked like a sodden floor mop with legs climbing out of the pool.

...^and their classmates ― especially the girls ― don’t know what to do with a long-haired person who wears boys’ clothes and doesn’t seem to have a recognizable gender^.

Long-haired 'persons' wearing boys' clothes have been a staple of Western society for decades. Young men frequently have long hair, and young girls with long hair wear jeans / shorts and t shirts, for goodness' sake.

Sometimes it helped to recognise them if they had a beard as well, as one of my boyfriends did. His hair was longer than mine 😁

Long-haired Lover from Liverpool comes to mind.
Although Jimmy Osmond was offering to identify as a leprechaun if needed.

That cannot be serious.

When I was at school I was very thin with long hair - if I didn't wear a cap, I looked like a sodden floor mop with legs climbing out of the pool

😂😂😂

Remember a series called Blake's Seven? I had my hair cut like the Supreme Commander at one time!
And wore trousers. It was after a disastrous perm I had when I was pregnant, my hair started breaking.

That's not me, btw, it's the lovely Jacqueline Pearce