Jk Rowling/Transphobia

[Anonymous]

Stop it already. JK Rowlings is the opposite of transphobic. She has some perfectly well-reasoned arguments that are respectful of the trans community and rooted in support of women. I support her and I agree with her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Stop it already. JK Rowlings is the opposite of transphobic. She has some perfectly well-reasoned arguments that are respectful of the trans community and rooted in support of women. I support her and I agree with her.

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

[Anonymous]

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

[Anonymous]

For reasons I won't get into, I am pretty deeply embedded the trans community, and trans people are not monolith on their reaction to this, so I will let trans people speak for themselves. Internet activists need to stop making "be an ally" mean "become a blunt hammer pushing a narrow set of talking points."

[Anonymous]

Trans women are aggressive about policing women because trans women are men. It’s true and it’s what most people are thinking about men in dresses demanding everyone believe they are exactly like biological women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trans women are aggressive about policing women because trans women are men. It’s true and it’s what most people are thinking about men in dresses demanding everyone believe they are exactly like biological women.

+1000.

I used to be an ally...until one too many terrifying trans “women” stalked and came on to me over and over.

Every bit as aggressive and disrespectful as regular men.

I didn’t even know until those experiences that trans “women” like to have sex with lesbians. Turns out them harassing us for sex is really common.

I’m so done with men in women’s spaces. That Y chromosome always comes through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

+100,000

I want to know what anyone believes is to be gained by quashing meaningful and challenging dialog about ideas.

The same thing happened to the researcher in womens health who dared to ask the question about what is going on with so many teen girls suddenly identifying as trans boys, and could the sharp spike in numbers be something other than just people feeling more free? Its an absolutely legitimate _question_ of public health.

She asked the question, did the research, and paid for it in ways that are totally wrong.

People are being demonized in the same way feminists once were, and on whose shoulders all gender related issues even have been able to reach the light of day. We make enemies of those who could be allies by making them pass a purity test. Huh, kinda like the Republican party is trying to do.

This idea that you must accept a concept, an idea, without dissent is very very dangerous and I am confused as to why the demonization of Rowling is not understood as a sign of something not good.

She is after all entitled to feel and express what she does. She is not hurting anyone with her views, not in any way that can be demonstrated. Is she?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trans women are aggressive about policing women because trans women are men. It’s true and it’s what most people are thinking about men in dresses demanding everyone believe they are exactly like biological women.

+1000.

I used to be an ally...until one too many terrifying trans “women” stalked and came on to me over and over.

Every bit as aggressive and disrespectful as regular men.

I didn’t even know until those experiences that trans “women” like to have sex with lesbians. Turns out them harassing us for sex is really common.

I’m so done with men in women’s spaces. That Y chromosome always comes through.

OUCH, never thought of it that way, but there may be something to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stop it already. JK Rowlings is the opposite of transphobic. She has some perfectly well-reasoned arguments that are respectful of the trans community and rooted in support of women. I support her and I agree with her.

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

[phone]
I’m sick of people making her seem anti-Trans. I agree w/ the above PP...in that her arguments were insightful and nuanced, which I really appreciated. By the way, she can have an opinion different that yours OP. We are not all trying to become brainless soulless opinionless human beings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

+100,000

I want to know what anyone believes is to be gained by quashing meaningful and challenging dialog about ideas.

The same thing happened to the researcher in womens health who dared to ask the question about what is going on with so many teen girls suddenly identifying as trans boys, and could the sharp spike in numbers be something other than just people feeling more free? Its an absolutely legitimate _question_ of public health.

She asked the question, did the research, and paid for it in ways that are totally wrong.

People are being demonized in the same way feminists once were, and on whose shoulders all gender related issues even have been able to reach the light of day. We make enemies of those who could be allies by making them pass a purity test. Huh, kinda like the Republican party is trying to do.

This idea that you must accept a concept, an idea, without dissent is very very dangerous and I am confused as to why the demonization of Rowling is not understood as a sign of something not good.

She is after all entitled to feel and express what she does. She is not hurting anyone with her views, not in any way that can be demonstrated. Is she?

Okay I know this is an old-ish issue but I want to respond.

Her statements are hurting people. Trans people. Pointing out the problems with what she is saying is not demonizing her, nor is it suggesting you have to accept something without dissent. She is free to contribute to the dehumanization of trans individuals, and we are free to stop supporting her. It’s not cancel culture, it is a simple consequence of something she is currently doing.

I agree that people shouldn’t threaten her though. That was wrong too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

+100,000

I want to know what anyone believes is to be gained by quashing meaningful and challenging dialog about ideas.

The same thing happened to the researcher in womens health who dared to ask the question about what is going on with so many teen girls suddenly identifying as trans boys, and could the sharp spike in numbers be something other than just people feeling more free? Its an absolutely legitimate _question_ of public health.

She asked the question, did the research, and paid for it in ways that are totally wrong.

People are being demonized in the same way feminists once were, and on whose shoulders all gender related issues even have been able to reach the light of day. We make enemies of those who could be allies by making them pass a purity test. Huh, kinda like the Republican party is trying to do.

This idea that you must accept a concept, an idea, without dissent is very very dangerous and I am confused as to why the demonization of Rowling is not understood as a sign of something not good.

She is after all entitled to feel and express what she does. She is not hurting anyone with her views, not in any way that can be demonstrated. Is she?

Okay I know this is an old-ish issue but I want to respond.

Her statements are hurting people. Trans people. Pointing out the problems with what she is saying is not demonizing her, nor is it suggesting you have to accept something without dissent. She is free to contribute to the dehumanization of trans individuals, and we are free to stop supporting her. It’s not cancel culture, it is a simple consequence of something she is currently doing.

I agree that people shouldn’t threaten her though. That was wrong too.

No. What you are trying to do is PERSUADE other people to stop supporting her as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been reading the thread in the entertainment forum. OP, I'm genuinely interested to understand if it is your view that all spaces that are currently designated as "women only" should also be open to trans women? I'm not talking specifically about bathrooms, but taking two examples raised in that thread:

1. A rape crisis center - is it acceptable to insist that only biological, or female-presenting women work directly with victims?

2. The Vagina Monologues - should this now be banned as being offensive to women who do not have vaginas?

It’s disturbing to find out rape crisis centers only employ cis women... wtf?!?

That can’t be true. What about when men and trans get raped.

Rape crisis centers frequently have a blanket policy that only women can volunteer and work with rape victims. This is common sense.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think she’s an anti-trans monster but I’m perplexed about why she keeps wading in. (Im definitely not anti-trans however the idea that it’s wrong to not be open to pre-surgery trans men is absolutely appalling and nuts.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1
Stop trying to demonize her.

+1000

+100,000

I want to know what anyone believes is to be gained by quashing meaningful and challenging dialog about ideas.

The same thing happened to the researcher in womens health who dared to ask the question about what is going on with so many teen girls suddenly identifying as trans boys, and could the sharp spike in numbers be something other than just people feeling more free? Its an absolutely legitimate _question_ of public health.

She asked the question, did the research, and paid for it in ways that are totally wrong.

People are being demonized in the same way feminists once were, and on whose shoulders all gender related issues even have been able to reach the light of day. We make enemies of those who could be allies by making them pass a purity test. Huh, kinda like the Republican party is trying to do.

This idea that you must accept a concept, an idea, without dissent is very very dangerous and I am confused as to why the demonization of Rowling is not understood as a sign of something not good.

She is after all entitled to feel and express what she does. She is not hurting anyone with her views, not in any way that can be demonstrated. Is she?

Okay I know this is an old-ish issue but I want to respond.

Her statements are hurting people. Trans people. Pointing out the problems with what she is saying is not demonizing her, nor is it suggesting you have to accept something without dissent. She is free to contribute to the dehumanization of trans individuals, and we are free to stop supporting her. It’s not cancel culture, it is a simple consequence of something she is currently doing.

I agree that people shouldn’t threaten her though. That was wrong too.

No. What you are trying to do is PERSUADE other people to stop supporting her as well.

Not me personally. But if some trans person is personally harmed by what she said and wants to persuade people to not support j k Rowling, they should go for it. It’s not like JK Rowling wont wind up just fine, regardless.