Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Simple : I don’t feel threatened . I don’t see nor have your viewpoint to what are exaggerated problems . I have seen a transgender person in Victoria Secrets and did not feel threatened or uncomfortable . She was just shopping like I was .

I read an article some time ago now where a lesbian was explaining why she was not attracted sexually to transwomen.

I don't remember the reason for the 'explanation' or even why she felt she had to give one - but it was a strangely moving article because, although I am heterosexual, I could put myself in her place, and feel the dismay she felt.

She mentioned things like the jaw-line which to her was unmistakably male... the Adam's apple, shaved or not, it was still distinguishable - the size of the hands.

... things like that, which left her completely unmoved emotionally / physically. Because she, as a lesbian, was attracted to the "woman-ness" of women - perfectly understandable to me who as a hetero is attracted to the 'manliness' of men.

I believe she'd been coerced in some way into an encounter with a TW, I can't remember, but whatever, it was a very poignant read, and brought home to me how awful it must be for anyone to feel compelled to have sex with someone they are simply not attracted to.

So yes, it's about a heck of a lot more than a man with his penis removed. But this point is raised now and again as if not having one makes a transwoman more of a woman - or less of a threat. So we end up discussing an issue that, whilst it has some relevance to the debate, muddies the waters... it's about the sex chromosomes in the trillions of cells in the body which cannot be modified.

Galaxy

The idea that women are just men with their penis removed is deeply sexist nonsense.

It started years ago in Genesis, Galaxy.

God made man in his own image; women are just made from an old spare rib from a man.
As soon as women start to assert themselves they have to be put back in their rightful place.

The idea that women are just men with their penis removed is deeply sexist nonsense.

Syracute

So all transgender women should use the men’s room ? Many don’t look like men at all ! Many have fully transitioned and no longer have a penis. You think they should go to a men’s toilet ? Those who think trans people are so dangerous don’t seem to be aware of the real dangers transgender people go through on a daily basis. What they have their whole lives. That is being ignored on this thread . They are brave to be their authentic selves yet here they are painted as dangerous and predatory. Ridiculous! The problem with this sort of thinking is that it spreads and gives dangerous influence to those who will go out and use violence against the trans population and feel validated. The occurrence of violence against the trans community is far larger than vice versa. May I also point out that Trump was recently convicted of sexual assault that occurred in a women’s changing room. So I think if there is a predator they will find a way.

May I also point out that Trump was recently convicted of sexual assault that occurred in a women’s changing room. So I think if there is a predator they will find a way.

I'm not sure why you've used Trump to illustrate the point that most of us on here are aware of which is, as you have pointed out, that men will find a way to prey on women (in particular or in general) if that is how they are inclined. A point which in fact supports our argument rather than yours.

The occurrence of violence against the trans community is far larger than vice versa.

I have no statistics to hand - but it is a fact that attacks against and abuse of the trans community are increasing - fortunately, more and more trans people are reporting those crimes so obviously, we are going to be more aware of them.

No one on here, as far as I am aware, is denying this though - nor condoning those attacks. It should also be noted - you obviously read the data so you can see this for yourself - there are reports that up to 80% of abuse (emotional as well as physical) suffered by trans people is at the hands of a partner, or ex-partner, or someone within the family group...Intimate Partner Violence and Family Violence (IPV or FA).

So it is not simply solely random abuse from 'strangers on the street' who you appear to think we here on GN are emboldening because we state that we do not believe TWAW.

As for the rates of trans violence directed towards the non-trans - it will quite obviously be less because the trans community are a minority grouping so one would not expect the attacks to be in excess of those 'vice versa'.

Anyway - it's not a competition, whoever is committing acts of violence against whomever for whatever reason is, surely, to be condemned regardless?

So all transgender women should use the men’s room ? Many don’t look like men at all ! Many have fully transitioned and no longer have a penis. You think they should go to a men’s toilet ?

The majority of transwomen - regardless of any other treatment or procedures to change their appearance opt to retain their penis. For very good reasons. The surgery is drastic, not usually available on the NHS, and very expensive if done privately. It also requires continuous use of medication. Not least, if you read some of the personal experiences of transwomen undergoing or having undergone such surgery - the results are not guaranteed, it's a very lengthy recovery period, and the constructed vagina has to be dilated every week for the remainder of your life if you are not having sex. Other transwomen have said that they prefer to keep their penis because they believe it is or will give them a more satisfactory experience when they have sex with women.

Some transwomen have fully transitioned, most have not. So in answer to your question - we do not want biological men in women's toilets, changing rooms, or other 'intimate' spaces because they are, regardless of how they look - men. We want to keep those spaces for the same reasons they were fought for in the first instance. The logistics of how they are accommodated in toilets and other places is a separate issue - but presenting that as a reason why women should simply roll over and accept the new status quo - because it presents a problem - is not a good enough reason to comply.

And I object to the inference that debating these matters on here might be the cause of others committing acts of violence towards the trans community. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. If someone commits a hate-crime - do you think they can claim as a defence, that other people are responsible for it because they were talking about it? That would not wash in a Court and it doesn't wash on here.

Syracute

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66984843

This article highlights that crimes against transgender people are rising. So it’s really the transgender people that have something to fear .

It’s quite clear that the danger to trans comes because of the actions of some TIM which have brought harm not just to females but to trans.

I know Syracute and others won’t admit that and will keep dragging other things into the discussion, but it’s true.

If, as some claim, TIM have been using female facilities unnoticed, why was that previously able to happen? Whose actions are responsible for the change in attitude?

Those TIM who caused the problems that made it unacceptable are to blame, coupled with the violent activities of TRA who highlighted those actions.

Here’s a suggestion Syracute.

Instead of attacking females who want to protect their safe spaces by keeping them free from males, why not apply your energy to stopping the cheating, threatening, violent TIM from doing what has caused the problems?
Stop them causing incidences that hit the headlines in the tabloids you mentioned.
E.g.
- Stop TIM from abusing lesbians who won’t accept them because they are male.

- Stop TIM from pretending to be female in circumstances where a female has asked for female support.

-Stop TIM from cheating their way into female competitions, depriving females of well earned chances to win.

-Stop TIM from going into female safe spaces -toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards, especially mental health wards and making it quite obvious that they are male.

Stop violent males suddenly deciding they’re TIM and expecting to be housed in female prisons.

Why not put your energy into demanding male, female and unisex facilities and make sure that trans understand they have the right to use the facilities of their birth sex or unisex?
Why do you feel it should be the responsibility of females who want to keep their safe spaces and sports etc to relinquish those things to males?

Why do you protect TIM rather than females?

Aveline

Three changing rooms/toilets. Mens, Women's, Unisex. Simples.

That might work in new builds, but not all older buildings can accommodate it, and not all companies have the funds to install new plumbing systems. It really isn't simple.

Also, there are people like India Willoughby (a transwoman) who refuses to use a unisex loo because that would suggest that IW is not a real woman.

What tends to happen is that the Ladies is colonised as the 'gender neutral' loo, and the Gents continue as is, on the grounds that the presence of urinals is off-putting for women (which it is). This means that men, women and transpeople all use the Ladies, which is also often the Disabled loo and has baby-changing facilities in there as well. Given that women don't just nip in and out, the queues are problematic and it really doesn't solve the problem that males are in there.

This is what happened in my workplace. As the ex-Ladies' is near the door to the building, it is more convenient for passing men to use it on their way in and out than to go to the Gents' along the corridor. Not only that, but the building opens onto a public thoroughfare, so randoms tailgate and use it too. I'm rarely there late these days, but I used to be. I wouldn't be comfortable about going in after dark now that there is nothing to stop males from going in.

Or a trans man and a man

Sorry premature posting.

Syracute

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66984843

This article highlights that crimes against transgender people are rising. So it’s really the transgender people that have something to fear .

I can only assume that the transgender people who have been a victim of hate crime/attacked must be visibly transgender.

If so, this blows Glorianny’s argument out of the water that it is impossible to tell the difference between a TW and a woman.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66984843

This article highlights that crimes against transgender people are rising. So it’s really the transgender people that have something to fear .

Aveline

Three changing rooms/toilets. Mens, Women's, Unisex. Simples.

👍

Three changing rooms/toilets. Mens, Women's, Unisex. Simples.

So all transgender women should use the men’s room ? Many don’t look like men at all ! Many have fully transitioned and no longer have a penis. You think they should go to a men’s toilet ? Those who think trans people are so dangerous don’t seem to be aware of the real dangers transgender people go through on a daily basis. What they have their whole lives. That is being ignored on this thread . They are brave to be their authentic selves yet here they are painted as dangerous and predatory. Ridiculous! The problem with this sort of thinking is that it spreads and gives dangerous influence to those who will go out and use violence against the trans population and feel validated. The occurrence of violence against the trans community is far larger than vice versa. May I also point out that Trump was recently convicted of sexual assault that occurred in a women’s changing room. So I think if there is a predator they will find a way.

Rosie51

Once again Dickens you have said what very many of us think. Thank you for another excellent post.

This was my reaction too, and I couldn't put it better.

Great post Dickens.

Not only does it take more effort Elegran it also gives rise to complaints that rights are being taken away. Some of which like a man self identifying as a woman and having the right to be referred to as she/her by their victim of a sexual assault, should never have been given in the first place.

I agree, Dickens. As I said upthread (and as all of us have said over and over) women's spaces exist for a reason. That does not mean that we think that all men are predators, but most men don't get in a strop and assume that we do think that way - they just use the relevant facilities, as they understand why women's spaces exist.

It's the same with transwomen. I don't for a minute think that all transwomen are rapists in disguise. Of course they aren't. But they are male-bodied, the same as the other non-predatory males who use facilities designed for men.

I do see that there are places where transwomen going into a male facility (changing room, loo, whatever) would be putting themselves at risk of ridicule at best and attack at worst. That is undeniable, and would happen because of the fact that a minority of men are violent. The difference between my perspective and that of the so-called 'allies' is that I don't think that the answer is to put women at risk from that minority of violent men in order to protect transwomen from them.

The risk for transwomen using male facilities is not because all men are violent, but because some of them might be, just as the risk for women of having males in our facilities is not because all transwomen are predatory, but because some of them might be. So far then, it's an even risk, except that male-bodied people are generally stronger than women, so if it came to the worst they are better able to defend themselves from attack. To my way of thinking, even if we ignore the fact that women's facilities are for women, and males have no automatic right to use them, that tips the scales.

Dickens

VioletSky

I'd say she is done with this thread and isn't coming back, don't blame her

I often think removing an opposing view would give less opportunity for things to be said that cannot be unsaid

Hmmm

I often think removing an opposing view would give less opportunity for things to be said that cannot be unsaid

Who is saying things that you think would be better "unsaid"?

... and I believe Glorianny is a grown woman who can speak up for herself, I don't think she's scuttled away in fear of anyone on here, which is what your comment implies.

Honestly VS, you do like to give the pot an extra little stir, don't you?

Just reread this. Are we now going to speak for others as if we know exactly what they mean?

Glorianny, just in case you pop back again, I know you’re is very particular the no one tells you what you think or what you meant to say. Will you welcome VS’ intervention on your behalf.

Once again Dickens you have said what very many of us think. Thank you for another excellent post.

YES YES YES to your post of Tue 09-Apr-24 12:23:20 Dickens

If all the complications (that now cause so much disharmony and so many accusations of "hatred") had been thoroughly dicussed by everyone before this country - and many other countries - become concreted into half-considered legislation on such a basic subject, there would have been more data, more research, more input from other sources as well as from those lobbying enthusiastically for immediate wholesale social engineering. More balanced solutions might have been found. It takes far more effort to do that piecemeal after putting new laws into effect than to do it earlier, in the run-up to passing them.

Very well put, Dickens

RosiesMaw 🙂

Thank you, much needed.

RosiesMaw

Every so often a little relief (and sanity) comes along in the shape of a Matt cartoon.
And breathe…..

... Matt always tries to 'soften the edges' - he's a gentle soul with a wry humour. Much needed.

We really do sometimes need to laugh at ourselves and others without malice. Which he does to perfection.

If you think about it, which this thread has compelled me to do - all crime committed against the individual on the basis of his / her difference - is a hate crime no?

Perhaps ethnicity, disability, age, and sex, are unique though - because these are characteristics over which an individual had or has no choice in determining.

If we are going to winkle out the various characteristics for protection on an individual basis which looks specifically at how the person in that particular group is affected - then all characteristics have got to be included, and that means sex in the form of misogyny and misandry must also become hate crimes.

And IMO the reason why misandry - and particularly misogyny - are not included is because 'the-powers-that-be' have got themselves into a pickle. For their own reasons, political or otherwise, they will not admit that medical science and biology has determined that - 'cosmetics' aside, you simply cannot change your chromosomes.

If they were to acknowledge this fact, they would enrage a sizeable number (I assume) of the trans community whose characteristic is now legally protected. Which would then mean that, far from being done-and-dusted, the legislation would continue to throw up anomalies and challenges, creating political, social and legal headaches, probably expensive ones, too.

Hence the delay.

I've also been thinking about the, not-all-transwomen-are-predators issue. I'm willing to bet, along with the belief that most men are not predatory abusers - that that is absolutely true.

However, in spite of this 'truth' - women have fought for, and won, their protected spaces, presumably on the basis that sufficient numbers of men are a threat to sufficient numbers of women.

I don't want to labour this point - it's all been said many times over - but for those of us on here who do not accept that TWAW biologically, then we have to make the same assumptions on the same principles as those made when women's protected spaces were enshrined in law. In spite of the probable fact that the majority of transwomen would not be a threat.

Finally - to those who think (and have said) that I am "blind", need educating, and that I am full of hate and anger (along with others) - if you believe this post is hateful - then report it to GNHQ because hate-speech is most definitely not tolerated on here.

I would ask a question though - why do you Syracute assume that I have not already 'educated' myself? FYI, I read scholarly articles (I don't rely on the sensational tabloids for information), have listened to the voices of the abused in the trans community, and have a well-established relationship with a transwoman who I've know for many years and who - along with other people I like and trust - I would turn to if I wanted 'help' or support in certain matters. However, I have a different perspective to you Syracute and to you VS... but that does not mean I am "blind", uneducated, nor incapable of self-reflection, nor dishonest, nor any of the other failings you might have mentioned, it just means I see things differently. And my anger is not directed at the trans community - it's directed at those who attempt to invalidate (I mean also in the wider community not just on GN) my view with accusations of hate and bigotry. And I am angry at those who would stifle and silence me and others with such claims through the "no debate" trope, threats and abuse, cancelling and no-platforming.

Matt is wonderful! Thanks, RosiesMaw.

Very good RosiesMaw .