Is JK Rowling pushing the boundaries too far?

Yes to all that, Doodledog! There are others on Gransnet (and off it) who like *Luckygirl3 have a relative who "regards herself/himself as transgender - he/she is someone I love dearly and would wish them to be treated with respect and kindness. But they pose no threat to anyone in any way." - and yet they are facing trouble BECAUSE OF the excessive activism of these transactivists and the aggressive lobbying of Government departments and multinational organisations by Stonewall in the course of their (very profitable) over-support of the trans "cause".

You see this is what happens when I have a day off GN, I miss the opportunity to say I stand completely and utterly with JKR.

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.

Did Professor Sir Gregor Smith have any say in this? What are his views?

Rosie51

^Accusing a man on social media of assault could be regarded as a hate crime if sex were included in this legislation.^ how? For goodness' sake that would mean no woman could ever accuse a man of rape, because rape can only be done with a penis, something only male sex people have. You really are clutching at straws now.

Rape isn't the only form of assault women experience and some of what they do experience is difficult to legally deal with. As indeed is rape. Much of the treatment experienced by women in the legal system could be described as misogynistic and needs a law that can deal with this.

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?

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

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!

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.

Well said, your posts, 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.

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

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.

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.

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. 👍

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

That’s another non answer G.
🪱🪱🪱

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.