I disagree with Rowling on trans-issues *and* I think Rowling's critics are dishonest

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Respectfully, OP, you have no idea how bad things have gotten in Scotland for natal women. Rowling lives in Edinburgh. Scotland (until finally the government backed down a few days ago because of public pressure) put convicted rapists in women’s prison based only on prisoner self-id as a woman. Rowling self-funded a rape crisis center staffed only by natal women because she herself is an assault survivor and the trans woman head of Scotland’s biggest rape crisis center said that rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises need to “reframe” their trauma and have a “more positive relationship” with that trauma, and she referred to rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises after they have been raped as “bigots.” Links below:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19509343.outcry-plan-educate-bigoted-rape-survivors-trans-rights/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-63943766
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-64586523
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotlands-original-rape-crisis-founder-28737168


Rowling has received innumerable death and rape threats for doing this.

Exactly! Thank you for mentioning this. The trans and nonbinary use rapey language (as a gay woman, I've been told that I should accept sexual advances from transwomrn). They also gaslight you and say YOU are the one who is "obsessed with genitals" and making it a big deal, not them.

Something tells me that the trans lobby is narcissistic and they're happy to invade everyone's boundaries with no regard for anyone's safety. I don't want biological males in the changing room of a shop, or in a public female restroom, if there are 14-year old girls in there who feel vulnerable. Female-only spaces are NECESSARY - just look at the above story from Scotland. And I certainly will not put myself or other women at risk of being assaulted, or gaslit about how we share our spaces and bodies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Respectfully, OP, you have no idea how bad things have gotten in Scotland for natal women. Rowling lives in Edinburgh. Scotland (until finally the government backed down a few days ago because of public pressure) put convicted rapists in women’s prison based only on prisoner self-id as a woman. Rowling self-funded a rape crisis center staffed only by natal women because she herself is an assault survivor and the trans woman head of Scotland’s biggest rape crisis center said that rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises need to “reframe” their trauma and have a “more positive relationship” with that trauma, and she referred to rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises after they have been raped as “bigots.” Links below:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19509343.outcry-plan-educate-bigoted-rape-survivors-trans-rights/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-63943766
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-64586523
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotlands-original-rape-crisis-founder-28737168


Rowling has received innumerable death and rape threats for doing this.

Exactly! Thank you for mentioning this. The trans and nonbinary use rapey language (as a gay woman, I've been told that I should accept sexual advances from transwomrn). They also gaslight you and say YOU are the one who is "obsessed with genitals" and making it a big deal, not them.

Something tells me that the trans lobby is narcissistic and they're happy to invade everyone's boundaries with no regard for anyone's safety. I don't want biological males in the changing room of a shop, or in a public female restroom, if there are 14-year old girls in there who feel vulnerable. Female-only spaces are NECESSARY - just look at the above story from Scotland. And I certainly will not put myself or other women at risk of being assaulted, or gaslit about how we share our spaces and bodies.

And so what if you are obsessed with genitals? Its your right to not have sexual contact with penises. Even if you feel that obsessively.

It's all so rapey to suggest women owe people sex, regardless of circumstances. If it makes me bigoted to say women shouldnt be coerced into sex, okay, I accept the title.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

I have a child with ASD and depression and I am fearful of a gender clinic convincing them to change their gender.

You should be. This is what happened to mine.

I feel for both of you. It almost happened to me. Autistic, early 20s female, no self-esteem due to the dysfunctional family I was raised in. Nearly brainwashed into transitioning by my extremely woke Pagan community. Its nice that the Pagan community is so supportive of LGBTQ+ members, but I had friends in the community who mindf--ked me, because they were trans or non-binary and seemed to see cis-het identities as primitive, misguided, or "conditioned".

This stuff happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Respectfully, OP, you have no idea how bad things have gotten in Scotland for natal women. Rowling lives in Edinburgh. Scotland (until finally the government backed down a few days ago because of public pressure) put convicted rapists in women’s prison based only on prisoner self-id as a woman. Rowling self-funded a rape crisis center staffed only by natal women because she herself is an assault survivor and the trans woman head of Scotland’s biggest rape crisis center said that rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises need to “reframe” their trauma and have a “more positive relationship” with that trauma, and she referred to rape victims who don’t want to be seen by people with penises after they have been raped as “bigots.” Links below:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19509343.outcry-plan-educate-bigoted-rape-survivors-trans-rights/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-63943766
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-64586523
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotlands-original-rape-crisis-founder-28737168


Rowling has received innumerable death and rape threats for doing this.

Exactly! Thank you for mentioning this. The trans and nonbinary use rapey language (as a gay woman, I've been told that I should accept sexual advances from transwomrn). They also gaslight you and say YOU are the one who is "obsessed with genitals" and making it a big deal, not them.

Something tells me that the trans lobby is narcissistic and they're happy to invade everyone's boundaries with no regard for anyone's safety. I don't want biological males in the changing room of a shop, or in a public female restroom, if there are 14-year old girls in there who feel vulnerable. Female-only spaces are NECESSARY - just look at the above story from Scotland. And I certainly will not put myself or other women at risk of being assaulted, or gaslit about how we share our spaces and bodies.

And so what if you are obsessed with genitals? Its your right to not have sexual contact with penises. Even if you feel that obsessively.

It's all so rapey to suggest women owe people sex, regardless of circumstances. If it makes me bigoted to say women shouldnt be coerced into sex, okay, I accept the title.

+1

The whole “obsessed with genitals” language to denigrate lesbians who don’t want to have sex with people with penises is rape culture language, full stop. The entitlement is breathtaking. In Scotland, where JKR is from, some lesbian groups have been forced underground. They meet in basements, in safe houses, and only disclose location to trusted members, because of fear of sexual assault from transwomen. It is a horrific situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there has been a chilling effect on women who are concerned about having transwomen in certain spaces. I want to be sensitive to these concerns, some of which are legitimate. (Other concerns are maybe borne of fear that isn't completely justified but are, nevertheless, sincere and aren't coming from a place of malice.)

Also, I want to be supportive of trans people. Sometimes I'm not at all sure how to reconcile these things.

An (admittedly imperfect) analogy. I think society should be supportive of people with disabilities. But I don't think this means we should eliminate vision requirements for a bus driver.

Similarly, I have no problem forbidding
1. Transwomen working in a rape crisis center (such as that funded by JK Rowling)
2. Transwomen who have committed sex crimes in a women's prison
3. Transwomen in women's sports

Inclusion is important, but it is not the only thing that is important.

Disagree mostly with transwonen in women’s sports. D1 varsity sport’s & professional level stuff, I can see. But at lower levels of competition, I don’t think trans women and girls should be excluded. I know 4 biological boys transitioning to girls and honestly they are unathletic. If they want to get involved with sports, they’d be way more comfortable with other girls & wouldn’t be depriving other girls of very much.

How young do they have to be? There are multiple high school girls who have lost access to university athletic scholarships because they raced against trans girls who are unquestionably faster in high school. That is, in my view, a miscarriage of justice.

Track is literally a zero sum game. When one wins, another loses. And qualifying races start the first year of high school.

The number of girls going to college on an athletic scholarship is a rounding error compared to the number of girls in sports. If colleges want to make girls' scholarships available only to biological girls and women, I wouldn't personally have a problem with that. I just don't think trans-girls should be excluded from girls sports as a matter of course. I think we lose site of the big picture when we focus narrowly on the very top athletes and then use those concerns to make policy affecting the median and lower level athletes who are, nevertheless, getting a variety of benefits from participating in sports.

But the world doesn’t work this way. At the elite levels, which start in middle school, athletics is a zero-sum game. A girl who doesn’t get a spot on the track team does not get the better coaching and exposure that leads to the offer of a position on the regional team, etc. Look, I can tell you have no experience at all with competitive middle school and high school athletes, but what you are saying simply doesn’t work for those ages because athletics is a zero sum game. If a trans girl takes the spot of an otherwise competitive high school runner, that high school runner isn’t getting a scholarship opportunity. And it’s not just college: it’s varsity sports, it’s local scholarships, it’s training for the next level. You think college athletics is this unique independent thing that has nothing to do with teen youth sports, and that is absolutely not tethered to any reality whatsoever.

I am ok with trans girls joining purely rec teams and teams of kids under age 8. But I think it is grossly unfair and misogynist to allow trans girls to take spots from natal girls in teen girl competitive sports.

Honestly, this sounds like a problem with how kids' athletics are structured that goes beyond gender issues.

Fine, but that doesn’t change the reality, which is that trans girls in competitive girls sports at the middle and high school level take opportunities away from natal girls. You may not like the system, but it is how it works.

I’m not sure what else you want. You want very competitive kids to not be competitive? Do you prefer the European and Chinese system where kids who aren’t identified at age 8 never have a chance at high-level athletics again?

If you don’t like kids playing competitive sports, I don’t know what to tell you. Some kids like being very competitive athletes, and some of those kids are natal girls. You appear to wish natal girls weren’t competitive athletes so you don’t have to deal with the fact that they are losing opportunities, but they exist.

When you say competitive athletics, are you referring to athletics with scholarships only or are you saying no trans girl should be allowed to play sports in high school? What about something like cheerleading where it's sort of individual as well as team based? Some schools definitely give scholarships for it.

I don’t think trans girls past age 8 or 10 (eg past puberty onset) should be allowed to play in any girls sport where there is a competitive tryout. I am fine with them joining rec teams or no-cut high school teams. But where a team has tryouts or cuts (varsity sports, club teams, select teams, etc.), I think it is grotesquely unfair and morally wrong to allow trans girls who have started or gone through male puberty to take a spot that would otherwise be taken by a natal girl.

Cheerleading is extremely competitive and I would say that the same rule should apply.

What about girls who are naturally stronger or taller than the other girls? Should they get a pass for their biological advantages? How is that fair?

Oh stop with the gaslighting. We see through this nonsense now.

+1000


I'm sick of this. Time was when I earnestly and sweetly over-explained myself to woke, sexist trolls who had no intention of hearing me, and always engaged with me in bad faith. I'm done with that now. You want to push your liberal allies away by galighting and abusing us? You sure succeeded buddy.

[Anonymous]

Wait, JK Rowling has received rape threats because of this?!

Wow, and these activists claim to be the ones who are enlightened about gender and sexuality? How the eff are you in the right if you send threats like that to a woman, that to a woman who is a SA survivor?

I mean...this actually proves our point about the need for cis female-only staff at rape crisis centers. Because God forbid a SA survivor in one of these centers objects to a biological male staffer, and then gets a rape threat because she's a transphobe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While Rowling does herself no favors (why does she maintain a Twitter account, when no mature discussion happens there; why does she say combative things in response to trolls, instead of being more controlled than them?), she raises valid points. I agree with her, frankly.

I used to think this way (that nothing was to be gained by her engagement with trolls on Twitter), but I think I was wrong. She had to go around mainstream media; she raised the issues of self-ID and medical treatment of kids on Twitter when no mainstream media would touch the issue. Her engagement on Twitter effectively forced a conversation that I don’t think would have happened otherwise, or at least would have taken a long time. Her scrapping with trolls on Twitter cleared a path to the investigative reporting on these issues that is long since overdue.

It is crazy to me how long I just accepted blindly that JKR was transphobic. I took it as accepted truth. But when I went and read her essay or read her tweets, I didn’t see it. I saw a woman who could have stayed hidden with her billions but who instead took on a fight for vulnerable children and women that she didn’t have to take on. She spoke up when nobody else had the courage to do so (or couldn’t risk their jobs or livelihoods).

I’m sure I probably don’t agree with everything she says. I rarely agree with everyone anyone says. But I give Rowling credit for bringing forward really critical issues of safety for women and children, in an era where violence against women is increasingly promoted by both the left and the right. It took courage, no doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While Rowling does herself no favors (why does she maintain a Twitter account, when no mature discussion happens there; why does she say combative things in response to trolls, instead of being more controlled than them?), she raises valid points. I agree with her, frankly.

I used to think this way (that nothing was to be gained by her engagement with trolls on Twitter), but I think I was wrong. She had to go around mainstream media; she raised the issues of self-ID and medical treatment of kids on Twitter when no mainstream media would touch the issue. Her engagement on Twitter effectively forced a conversation that I don’t think would have happened otherwise, or at least would have taken a long time. Her scrapping with trolls on Twitter cleared a path to the investigative reporting on these issues that is long since overdue.

It is crazy to me how long I just accepted blindly that JKR was transphobic. I took it as accepted truth. But when I went and read her essay or read her tweets, I didn’t see it. I saw a woman who could have stayed hidden with her billions but who instead took on a fight for vulnerable children and women that she didn’t have to take on. She spoke up when nobody else had the courage to do so (or couldn’t risk their jobs or livelihoods).

I’m sure I probably don’t agree with everything she says. I rarely agree with everyone anyone says. But I give Rowling credit for bringing forward really critical issues of safety for women and children, in an era where violence against women is increasingly promoted by both the left and the right. It took courage, no doubt.

Girl, same. I'm the PP you're replying to. I was a super guilty cis-het woman who wanted to be the Best Ally Ever, and decided to hate Rowling automatically because I swallowed what my trans friends said without question. Over the past 2 years, its like I have been coming out of a fog. I have seen formerly trans friends detransition. I have witnessed their tears, confusion and suicidal ideation. I have seen how my lack of boundaries, which attracted violent men into my life, extended to how I was willing to give up my rights to placate loud trans activists...its all one big people-pleasing pattern. And they expect it from women.

[Anonymous]

The tide is turning. Anyone read the defense of JK Rowling that the New York Times just published, by Pamela Paul? A year ago, it would've been unthinkable. And the NYT hasn't bent the knee to complaints either.

That, and this week's take down of She Who Must Not Be Named by South Park, make me feel like my sanity is being restored.

[Anonymous]

I encourage people to sub to the New York Times and read Paul's article, but I'd like to add some excerpts here.

Other critics have advocated that bookstores pull her books from the shelves, and some bookstores have done so. She has also been subjected to verbal abuse, doxxing and threats of sexual and other physical violence, including death threats.

Now, in rare and wide-ranging interviews for the podcast series “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling,” which begins next week, Rowling is sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says in one of the interviews. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”

But nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic. She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.

Take it from one of her former critics. E.J. Rosetta, a journalist who once denounced Rowling for her supposed transphobia, was commissioned last year to write an article called “20 Transphobic J.K. Rowling Quotes We’re Done With.” After 12 weeks of reporting and reading, Rosetta wrote, “I’ve not found a single truly transphobic message.” On Twitter she declared, “You’re burning the wrong witch.”

Despite media coverage that can be embarrassingly credulous when it comes to the charges against Rowling, a small number of influential journalists have also begun speaking out in her defense. Here in America, Caitlin Flanagan of The Atlantic tweeted last year, “Eventually, she will be proven right, and the high cost she’s paid for sticking to her beliefs will be seen as the choice of a principled person.”

Her interviewer on this podcast is a former member of the Westboro Baptist Church, who says she recognizes cult tactics in the rhetoric and attacks that people make on JKR. Seriously, I feel like I'm also coming out of a cult. I was brainwashed by gender ideology too. Can't wait for this podcast now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really empathize with parents with gender dysphoric kids. They are told by one side that if they dont transition their kids, the kid will kill themselves.

By the other side, they are told that if they do transition the kid, they are mutilating them and chopping off their body parts and sentencing them to a life of infertility, lack of a functional sex life, and ongoing medical intervention.

This is too much for parents. Something has to give. And the science seems to be on the side of transition skeptics.

Kids don’t really get surgery. If you’re worried about this, then that’s fine, push to ban surgery under 18. Once they are adults, obviously they can do what they want. If you’re concerned about fertility, some women freeze sperm so you could help pay for that. Some trans men stop taking hormones temporarily in order to regain fertility, get pregnant, then go back on HRT. That’s why the term pregnant man exists. There’s also the option of freezing eggs. The truth is though, most trans men just don’t want to get pregnant. You can’t force someone to get pregnant, fertile or not.

[Anonymous]

Only women can get pregnant. Stop spreading this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really empathize with parents with gender dysphoric kids. They are told by one side that if they dont transition their kids, the kid will kill themselves.

By the other side, they are told that if they do transition the kid, they are mutilating them and chopping off their body parts and sentencing them to a life of infertility, lack of a functional sex life, and ongoing medical intervention.

This is too much for parents. Something has to give. And the science seems to be on the side of transition skeptics.

Kids don’t really get surgery. If you’re worried about this, then that’s fine, push to ban surgery under 18. Once they are adults, obviously they can do what they want. If you’re concerned about fertility, some women freeze sperm so you could help pay for that. Some trans men stop taking hormones temporarily in order to regain fertility, get pregnant, then go back on HRT. That’s why the term pregnant man exists. There’s also the option of freezing eggs. The truth is though, most trans men just don’t want to get pregnant. You can’t force someone to get pregnant, fertile or not.

Did you really post that?

Stop and think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I encourage people to sub to the New York Times and read Paul's article, but I'd like to add some excerpts here.

Other critics have advocated that bookstores pull her books from the shelves, and some bookstores have done so. She has also been subjected to verbal abuse, doxxing and threats of sexual and other physical violence, including death threats.

Now, in rare and wide-ranging interviews for the podcast series “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling,” which begins next week, Rowling is sharing her experiences. “I have had direct threats of violence, and I have had people coming to my house where my kids live, and I’ve had my address posted online,” she says in one of the interviews. “I’ve had what the police, anyway, would regard as credible threats.”

But nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic. She is not disputing the existence of gender dysphoria. She has never voiced opposition to allowing people to transition under evidence-based therapeutic and medical care. She is not denying transgender people equal pay or housing. There is no evidence that she is putting trans people “in danger,” as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist.

Take it from one of her former critics. E.J. Rosetta, a journalist who once denounced Rowling for her supposed transphobia, was commissioned last year to write an article called “20 Transphobic J.K. Rowling Quotes We’re Done With.” After 12 weeks of reporting and reading, Rosetta wrote, “I’ve not found a single truly transphobic message.” On Twitter she declared, “You’re burning the wrong witch.”

Despite media coverage that can be embarrassingly credulous when it comes to the charges against Rowling, a small number of influential journalists have also begun speaking out in her defense. Here in America, Caitlin Flanagan of The Atlantic tweeted last year, “Eventually, she will be proven right, and the high cost she’s paid for sticking to her beliefs will be seen as the choice of a principled person.”

Her interviewer on this podcast is a former member of the Westboro Baptist Church, who says she recognizes cult tactics in the rhetoric and attacks that people make on JKR. Seriously, I feel like I'm also coming out of a cult. I was brainwashed by gender ideology too. Can't wait for this podcast now.

Now they're going after the NYTimes for publishing the article. Activists on Twitter are using this article as an example of how transphobic the Times are and people are canceling their subscriptions because "trans-rights are human rights".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:England’s transphobia is worse than America. I don’t know why this is suddenly a thing. Trans people are such a tiny percentage of the population! I am talking just transgender folks, not drag queens which is an entirely different thing. It makes me very sad that there is so much vitriol these days towards trans people. I grew up with someone who is trans. She is just a lovely person. She is very kind and wouldn’t hurt anyone. I knew her when she was a child. When I told my Republican mother that he was transitioning to a woman, my mom said, “oh it all makes sense!” My mom knew him in grade school and could sense there was something up. Many people are making decisions for others that they don’t even know! They fear something they know nothing about!

I have a child with ASD and depression and I am fearful of a gender clinic convincing them to change their gender.

You should be. This is what happened to mine.

I feel for both of you. It almost happened to me. Autistic, early 20s female, no self-esteem due to the dysfunctional family I was raised in. Nearly brainwashed into transitioning by my extremely woke Pagan community. Its nice that the Pagan community is so supportive of LGBTQ+ members, but I had friends in the community who mindf--ked me, because they were trans or non-binary and seemed to see cis-het identities as primitive, misguided, or "conditioned".

This stuff happens.

I’m glad you avoided it. Often times, drugs are involved as well