The JK Rowling Podcast

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8:09 here again.

I also want to note that I used to stand up for Rowling and try to explain to people that she has never (really, never) said a single thing against trans people, only the idea that there should be no distinction between trans women and those of who were born as women. She argues for a distinction. Some people consider that bigotry. I don't. A trans woman is different than a biological women. Not better or worse, just different -- different lived experience, faced a different kind of discrimination, needs a different kind of support and protection.

Anyway, I now avoid talking about Rowling at all because her name has become synonymous with bigotry and it is actually dangerous to even express a small amount of skepticism about the loathing of Rowling. I am grateful to her that she continues to advocate for what she believes despite the criticism. She doesn't have to. She could stop talking about this stuff, just write books, and let it go. She speaks up because she thinks it's important to do so. You might consider that misguided, but it's also brave.

Being “brave” doesn’t make it less bigoted.

Oh FFS it’s NOT bigoted to have variety of opinion! We are not saying less than. We are saying different than!

I celebrate JK Rowling for what she has done and consider it both extremely brave and extremely foolhardy. She is actually torpedoing an incredible legacy, and destroying the careers of all of the actors that have brought her work to life and putting the amazing people on the cormoran strike series. I don’t give a whit about the Harry Potter actors, they are young and foolish.but ultimately There is no way that her story ends well and no way that the anti-TERF radicals will let her defend the rights of women.

Thank you for trying to do this Jo!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem saying trans women are women, socially speaking. But I strongly disagree with “women period”. Because that is then used to argue that biology doesn’t make us women and womanhood is something that you can declare, and not an intrinsic part of our being. Something is deeply wrong when society asks itself “what’s a woman” and we are being told from the outside - once again - what defines a woman and how we should feel about it.

You are free to define it however you want. Bring a woman means different things to different people.

It should not.

Trans extremists are telling women "trans-women are women and what you thought made you a woman doesn't. In fact, there is nothing that makes you a woman". They are also telling us "you can't use the words that define you and your body because it's not inclusive". Yet trans-women are women, and we aren't anymore. Even when in our most biologically female functions we are not women anymore, we are pregnant people who chest-feed (medically wrong, by the way Cleveland Clinic). Even the violence we suffer is not "against women" anymore, it is "gender-based" now and it sounds much more vague.

Citation? Who are these “trans extremists”?

A prime example is the PPs who are arguing that biology doesn't make someone a woman.

Timestamp?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love it when someone AMAB transplains to me what a woman is or is not, and what I’m allowed to think, and feel, about that.

When did this happen to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What was the context for “ Trans women are women, period”? Who said this? About what?

Keep up. Read the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love it when someone AMAB transplains to me what a woman is or is not, and what I’m allowed to think, and feel, about that.

When did this happen to you?

It’s happened countless times in the last several years. Thanks for your concern!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 was actively supporting LGBTQI rights until they decided to walk all over women's rights, at a time when hard-won gains are being reversed all over the world. Women are being marginalized, quite literally, pushed to the side, told to be quiet and make space. The words to describe us are disappearing from our lexicon, from article, and studies. We have become merely "people". While the violence against us and the hate of women continue to claim our lives and destroy our spirits.

Spot on.

Can't believe how much I was manipulated by this extreme gender ideology for years. Kinda angry with myself for letting them walk all over my boundaries, while also marginalizing my own abuse experiences.

YES. If I read about "pregnant people " anymore I will lose it.

Why? What’s the harm is there being inclusive? It doesn’t affect you. You can still say woman.

It doesn't affect me ? Yes it does affect me. The way people refer to me affects me. I am a woman and would like to be called a woman. People are coming up with all sorts of pronouns they want others to use but women have to suck it up and be called people because it makes others more comfortable?

We are all people. Nothing wrong with that.

This is gaslighting and you know it.

Yes, this is akin to "all lives matter". This inclusiveness nonsense is only used as a tool to deprive women or minorities of their sense of identity.

I like this analogy.

I really think an analogy could be made. Women, like black people and other groups have a sense of identity and belonging that is perceived as a threat by the "oppressor" (for lack of better word).

Transgender women certainly know what it’s like to be oppressed. Just look at this thread.

No one is disputing that. Instead PPs are disputing if transwomen are oppressed in exactly the same way as biological women and whether it therefore make sense to see the same groups as identical in all respects.

Nobody sees them as “identical in all respects” so…

They don't? I think you're the one who is confused.

Who sees them as “identical in all respects”? Even cis-women aren’t all “identical in all aspects”.

Transwomen are women. PERIOD. What does that mean to you? Kind of like women, but not really?

Sure, the kid raised as a privileged male who goes off to college, changes their name and starts wearing dresses totally gets the experiences, the attitudes, the expectations, the hormonal events that have shaped my life as a woman. Totally.

There isn’t one universal experience for women.

Going through female puberty is pretty close to universal and the implications are far reaching.

No it’s not.

How so? How would a biological woman who identifies as a woman in adulthood not have gone through female puberty?

My niece, to give you one elementary example, did not go through puberty on her own. An endocrinologist had to intervene because of an autoimmune disorder.

My cousin never had puberty due to chemotherapy as a child, they had hormone replacement therapy that never really worked.

But these are medical anomalies due to medical conditions or treatment. That's not the same as a biological woman who simply never menstruates. Your niece received treatment for her autoimmune disorder that enabled her body to go through puberty. Your cousin was receiving a treatment that causes all kinds of abnormal physical consequences, including disrupting puberty. These are exceptions that prove the rule.

Are they still women if they don’t have the “typical” experience with puberty?

Yet another straw man. When did anyone, including Rowling, argue that all women have a "typical" experience? Rowling's arguments are almost entirely rooted in her experience as a sexual violence survivor, an experience that no one would ever call "typical".

Trans women and biological women are both women and have shared concerns and experiences. But they are also distinct, and just as an example, biological women have female reproductive organs therefore, with very few exceptions, go through female puberty, menstruate, must factor risk of pregnancy into all sexual choices, etc. Are there some exceptions? Sure. Is there a great deal of variety in how biological women experience this aspect of womanhood? Absolutely. For instance, some biological women are also trans men. They are men in all ways EXCEPT that they have the experience of a biological woman. Which matters, since they can get pregnant, give birth, and are vulnerable to medical issues specific to biological women.

But it is also the primary difference between biological women and trans women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and trans women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

Right. So there are no universal experiences and the context is important.

DP. So then what exactly was problematic about what JK Rowling wrote/said?

[Anonymous]

For all the PPs who are saying "they're not 'less than,' they're just different" and "it's just recognizing biology!" would you be ok replacing "transwomen" in your statements with "infertile women?" For example:

it is also the primary difference between biological women and infertile women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and infertile women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

and

Infertile women are their own category, I will honor their right to protection safety and the right to a great life but stop snatching and stealing what is not yours! Women are different from infertile women, it’s NOT the same and we are NOT bigots to take and claim our rights and fight off those who will erode them!

If not, why not?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 was actively supporting LGBTQI rights until they decided to walk all over women's rights, at a time when hard-won gains are being reversed all over the world. Women are being marginalized, quite literally, pushed to the side, told to be quiet and make space. The words to describe us are disappearing from our lexicon, from article, and studies. We have become merely "people". While the violence against us and the hate of women continue to claim our lives and destroy our spirits.

Spot on.

Can't believe how much I was manipulated by this extreme gender ideology for years. Kinda angry with myself for letting them walk all over my boundaries, while also marginalizing my own abuse experiences.

YES. If I read about "pregnant people " anymore I will lose it.

Why? What’s the harm is there being inclusive? It doesn’t affect you. You can still say woman.

It doesn't affect me ? Yes it does affect me. The way people refer to me affects me. I am a woman and would like to be called a woman. People are coming up with all sorts of pronouns they want others to use but women have to suck it up and be called people because it makes others more comfortable?

We are all people. Nothing wrong with that.

This is gaslighting and you know it.

Yes, this is akin to "all lives matter". This inclusiveness nonsense is only used as a tool to deprive women or minorities of their sense of identity.

I like this analogy.

I really think an analogy could be made. Women, like black people and other groups have a sense of identity and belonging that is perceived as a threat by the "oppressor" (for lack of better word).

Transgender women certainly know what it’s like to be oppressed. Just look at this thread.

No one is disputing that. Instead PPs are disputing if transwomen are oppressed in exactly the same way as biological women and whether it therefore make sense to see the same groups as identical in all respects.

Nobody sees them as “identical in all respects” so…

They don't? I think you're the one who is confused.

Who sees them as “identical in all respects”? Even cis-women aren’t all “identical in all aspects”.

Transwomen are women. PERIOD. What does that mean to you? Kind of like women, but not really?

Sure, the kid raised as a privileged male who goes off to college, changes their name and starts wearing dresses totally gets the experiences, the attitudes, the expectations, the hormonal events that have shaped my life as a woman. Totally.

There isn’t one universal experience for women.

Going through female puberty is pretty close to universal and the implications are far reaching.

No it’s not.

How so? How would a biological woman who identifies as a woman in adulthood not have gone through female puberty?

My niece, to give you one elementary example, did not go through puberty on her own. An endocrinologist had to intervene because of an autoimmune disorder.

My cousin never had puberty due to chemotherapy as a child, they had hormone replacement therapy that never really worked.

But these are medical anomalies due to medical conditions or treatment. That's not the same as a biological woman who simply never menstruates. Your niece received treatment for her autoimmune disorder that enabled her body to go through puberty. Your cousin was receiving a treatment that causes all kinds of abnormal physical consequences, including disrupting puberty. These are exceptions that prove the rule.

Are they still women if they don’t have the “typical” experience with puberty?

Yet another straw man. When did anyone, including Rowling, argue that all women have a "typical" experience? Rowling's arguments are almost entirely rooted in her experience as a sexual violence survivor, an experience that no one would ever call "typical".

Trans women and biological women are both women and have shared concerns and experiences. But they are also distinct, and just as an example, biological women have female reproductive organs therefore, with very few exceptions, go through female puberty, menstruate, must factor risk of pregnancy into all sexual choices, etc. Are there some exceptions? Sure. Is there a great deal of variety in how biological women experience this aspect of womanhood? Absolutely. For instance, some biological women are also trans men. They are men in all ways EXCEPT that they have the experience of a biological woman. Which matters, since they can get pregnant, give birth, and are vulnerable to medical issues specific to biological women.

But it is also the primary difference between biological women and trans women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and trans women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

Right. So there are no universal experiences and the context is important.

No. Context does not change the fact of biological sex.
Context changes the gender roles/expectations ascribed to biological sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What was the context for “ Trans women are women, period”? Who said this? About what?

Keep up. Read the thread.

I did. Someone just randomly pulled it out of the blue:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/150/1114952.page#24426148

What was the context for that statement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all the PPs who are saying "they're not 'less than,' they're just different" and "it's just recognizing biology!" would you be ok replacing "transwomen" in your statements with "infertile women?" For example:

it is also the primary difference between biological women and infertile women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and infertile women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

and

Infertile women are their own category, I will honor their right to protection safety and the right to a great life but stop snatching and stealing what is not yours! Women are different from infertile women, it’s NOT the same and we are NOT bigots to take and claim our rights and fight off those who will erode them!

If not, why not?

Were infertile women born as men?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 was actively supporting LGBTQI rights until they decided to walk all over women's rights, at a time when hard-won gains are being reversed all over the world. Women are being marginalized, quite literally, pushed to the side, told to be quiet and make space. The words to describe us are disappearing from our lexicon, from article, and studies. We have become merely "people". While the violence against us and the hate of women continue to claim our lives and destroy our spirits.

Spot on.

Can't believe how much I was manipulated by this extreme gender ideology for years. Kinda angry with myself for letting them walk all over my boundaries, while also marginalizing my own abuse experiences.

YES. If I read about "pregnant people " anymore I will lose it.

Why? What’s the harm is there being inclusive? It doesn’t affect you. You can still say woman.

It doesn't affect me ? Yes it does affect me. The way people refer to me affects me. I am a woman and would like to be called a woman. People are coming up with all sorts of pronouns they want others to use but women have to suck it up and be called people because it makes others more comfortable?

We are all people. Nothing wrong with that.

This is gaslighting and you know it.

Yes, this is akin to "all lives matter". This inclusiveness nonsense is only used as a tool to deprive women or minorities of their sense of identity.

I like this analogy.

I really think an analogy could be made. Women, like black people and other groups have a sense of identity and belonging that is perceived as a threat by the "oppressor" (for lack of better word).

Transgender women certainly know what it’s like to be oppressed. Just look at this thread.

No one is disputing that. Instead PPs are disputing if transwomen are oppressed in exactly the same way as biological women and whether it therefore make sense to see the same groups as identical in all respects.

Nobody sees them as “identical in all respects” so…

They don't? I think you're the one who is confused.

Who sees them as “identical in all respects”? Even cis-women aren’t all “identical in all aspects”.

Transwomen are women. PERIOD. What does that mean to you? Kind of like women, but not really?

Sure, the kid raised as a privileged male who goes off to college, changes their name and starts wearing dresses totally gets the experiences, the attitudes, the expectations, the hormonal events that have shaped my life as a woman. Totally.

There isn’t one universal experience for women.

Going through female puberty is pretty close to universal and the implications are far reaching.

No it’s not.

How so? How would a biological woman who identifies as a woman in adulthood not have gone through female puberty?

My niece, to give you one elementary example, did not go through puberty on her own. An endocrinologist had to intervene because of an autoimmune disorder.

My cousin never had puberty due to chemotherapy as a child, they had hormone replacement therapy that never really worked.

But these are medical anomalies due to medical conditions or treatment. That's not the same as a biological woman who simply never menstruates. Your niece received treatment for her autoimmune disorder that enabled her body to go through puberty. Your cousin was receiving a treatment that causes all kinds of abnormal physical consequences, including disrupting puberty. These are exceptions that prove the rule.

Are they still women if they don’t have the “typical” experience with puberty?

Yet another straw man. When did anyone, including Rowling, argue that all women have a "typical" experience? Rowling's arguments are almost entirely rooted in her experience as a sexual violence survivor, an experience that no one would ever call "typical".

Trans women and biological women are both women and have shared concerns and experiences. But they are also distinct, and just as an example, biological women have female reproductive organs therefore, with very few exceptions, go through female puberty, menstruate, must factor risk of pregnancy into all sexual choices, etc. Are there some exceptions? Sure. Is there a great deal of variety in how biological women experience this aspect of womanhood? Absolutely. For instance, some biological women are also trans men. They are men in all ways EXCEPT that they have the experience of a biological woman. Which matters, since they can get pregnant, give birth, and are vulnerable to medical issues specific to biological women.

But it is also the primary difference between biological women and trans women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and trans women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

Right. So there are no universal experiences and the context is important.

No. Context does not change the fact of biological sex.
Context changes the gender roles/expectations ascribed to biological sex.

Context matters.

For specific situations where biology actually does matters, Pap smear or prostate exam, sure.

For other situations, not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all the PPs who are saying "they're not 'less than,' they're just different" and "it's just recognizing biology!" would you be ok replacing "transwomen" in your statements with "infertile women?" For example:

it is also the primary difference between biological women and infertile women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and infertile women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

and

Infertile women are their own category, I will honor their right to protection safety and the right to a great life but stop snatching and stealing what is not yours! Women are different from infertile women, it’s NOT the same and we are NOT bigots to take and claim our rights and fight off those who will erode them!

If not, why not?

Were infertile women born as men?

Why is that relevant? Infertility is biology, just as being "born a man" is biology.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 was actively supporting LGBTQI rights until they decided to walk all over women's rights, at a time when hard-won gains are being reversed all over the world. Women are being marginalized, quite literally, pushed to the side, told to be quiet and make space. The words to describe us are disappearing from our lexicon, from article, and studies. We have become merely "people". While the violence against us and the hate of women continue to claim our lives and destroy our spirits.

Spot on.

Can't believe how much I was manipulated by this extreme gender ideology for years. Kinda angry with myself for letting them walk all over my boundaries, while also marginalizing my own abuse experiences.

YES. If I read about "pregnant people " anymore I will lose it.

Why? What’s the harm is there being inclusive? It doesn’t affect you. You can still say woman.

It doesn't affect me ? Yes it does affect me. The way people refer to me affects me. I am a woman and would like to be called a woman. People are coming up with all sorts of pronouns they want others to use but women have to suck it up and be called people because it makes others more comfortable?

We are all people. Nothing wrong with that.

This is gaslighting and you know it.

Yes, this is akin to "all lives matter". This inclusiveness nonsense is only used as a tool to deprive women or minorities of their sense of identity.

I like this analogy.

I really think an analogy could be made. Women, like black people and other groups have a sense of identity and belonging that is perceived as a threat by the "oppressor" (for lack of better word).

Transgender women certainly know what it’s like to be oppressed. Just look at this thread.

No one is disputing that. Instead PPs are disputing if transwomen are oppressed in exactly the same way as biological women and whether it therefore make sense to see the same groups as identical in all respects.

Nobody sees them as “identical in all respects” so…

They don't? I think you're the one who is confused.

Who sees them as “identical in all respects”? Even cis-women aren’t all “identical in all aspects”.

Transwomen are women. PERIOD. What does that mean to you? Kind of like women, but not really?

Sure, the kid raised as a privileged male who goes off to college, changes their name and starts wearing dresses totally gets the experiences, the attitudes, the expectations, the hormonal events that have shaped my life as a woman. Totally.

There isn’t one universal experience for women.

Going through female puberty is pretty close to universal and the implications are far reaching.

No it’s not.

How so? How would a biological woman who identifies as a woman in adulthood not have gone through female puberty?

My niece, to give you one elementary example, did not go through puberty on her own. An endocrinologist had to intervene because of an autoimmune disorder.

My cousin never had puberty due to chemotherapy as a child, they had hormone replacement therapy that never really worked.

But these are medical anomalies due to medical conditions or treatment. That's not the same as a biological woman who simply never menstruates. Your niece received treatment for her autoimmune disorder that enabled her body to go through puberty. Your cousin was receiving a treatment that causes all kinds of abnormal physical consequences, including disrupting puberty. These are exceptions that prove the rule.

Are they still women if they don’t have the “typical” experience with puberty?

Yet another straw man. When did anyone, including Rowling, argue that all women have a "typical" experience? Rowling's arguments are almost entirely rooted in her experience as a sexual violence survivor, an experience that no one would ever call "typical".

Trans women and biological women are both women and have shared concerns and experiences. But they are also distinct, and just as an example, biological women have female reproductive organs therefore, with very few exceptions, go through female puberty, menstruate, must factor risk of pregnancy into all sexual choices, etc. Are there some exceptions? Sure. Is there a great deal of variety in how biological women experience this aspect of womanhood? Absolutely. For instance, some biological women are also trans men. They are men in all ways EXCEPT that they have the experience of a biological woman. Which matters, since they can get pregnant, give birth, and are vulnerable to medical issues specific to biological women.

But it is also the primary difference between biological women and trans women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and trans women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

Right. So there are no universal experiences and the context is important.

No. Context does not change the fact of biological sex.
Context changes the gender roles/expectations ascribed to biological sex.

Context matters.

For specific situations where biology actually does matters, Pap smear or prostate exam, sure.

For other situations, not really.

^^ AND this is true for differing biologies of cis-gender men and women as well. Not everyone has the same biological configuration/needs.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 was actively supporting LGBTQI rights until they decided to walk all over women's rights, at a time when hard-won gains are being reversed all over the world. Women are being marginalized, quite literally, pushed to the side, told to be quiet and make space. The words to describe us are disappearing from our lexicon, from article, and studies. We have become merely "people". While the violence against us and the hate of women continue to claim our lives and destroy our spirits.

Spot on.

Can't believe how much I was manipulated by this extreme gender ideology for years. Kinda angry with myself for letting them walk all over my boundaries, while also marginalizing my own abuse experiences.

YES. If I read about "pregnant people " anymore I will lose it.

Why? What’s the harm is there being inclusive? It doesn’t affect you. You can still say woman.

It doesn't affect me ? Yes it does affect me. The way people refer to me affects me. I am a woman and would like to be called a woman. People are coming up with all sorts of pronouns they want others to use but women have to suck it up and be called people because it makes others more comfortable?

We are all people. Nothing wrong with that.

This is gaslighting and you know it.

Yes, this is akin to "all lives matter". This inclusiveness nonsense is only used as a tool to deprive women or minorities of their sense of identity.

I like this analogy.

I really think an analogy could be made. Women, like black people and other groups have a sense of identity and belonging that is perceived as a threat by the "oppressor" (for lack of better word).

Transgender women certainly know what it’s like to be oppressed. Just look at this thread.

No one is disputing that. Instead PPs are disputing if transwomen are oppressed in exactly the same way as biological women and whether it therefore make sense to see the same groups as identical in all respects.

Nobody sees them as “identical in all respects” so…

They don't? I think you're the one who is confused.

Who sees them as “identical in all respects”? Even cis-women aren’t all “identical in all aspects”.

Transwomen are women. PERIOD. What does that mean to you? Kind of like women, but not really?

Sure, the kid raised as a privileged male who goes off to college, changes their name and starts wearing dresses totally gets the experiences, the attitudes, the expectations, the hormonal events that have shaped my life as a woman. Totally.

There isn’t one universal experience for women.

Going through female puberty is pretty close to universal and the implications are far reaching.

No it’s not.

How so? How would a biological woman who identifies as a woman in adulthood not have gone through female puberty?

My niece, to give you one elementary example, did not go through puberty on her own. An endocrinologist had to intervene because of an autoimmune disorder.

My cousin never had puberty due to chemotherapy as a child, they had hormone replacement therapy that never really worked.

But these are medical anomalies due to medical conditions or treatment. That's not the same as a biological woman who simply never menstruates. Your niece received treatment for her autoimmune disorder that enabled her body to go through puberty. Your cousin was receiving a treatment that causes all kinds of abnormal physical consequences, including disrupting puberty. These are exceptions that prove the rule.

Are they still women if they don’t have the “typical” experience with puberty?

Yet another straw man. When did anyone, including Rowling, argue that all women have a "typical" experience? Rowling's arguments are almost entirely rooted in her experience as a sexual violence survivor, an experience that no one would ever call "typical".

Trans women and biological women are both women and have shared concerns and experiences. But they are also distinct, and just as an example, biological women have female reproductive organs therefore, with very few exceptions, go through female puberty, menstruate, must factor risk of pregnancy into all sexual choices, etc. Are there some exceptions? Sure. Is there a great deal of variety in how biological women experience this aspect of womanhood? Absolutely. For instance, some biological women are also trans men. They are men in all ways EXCEPT that they have the experience of a biological woman. Which matters, since they can get pregnant, give birth, and are vulnerable to medical issues specific to biological women.

But it is also the primary difference between biological women and trans women. It is a real difference with real consequences, especially consequences related to sex, pregnancy, childbirth, and also motherhood. Acting like there is NO DIFFERENCE between biological and trans women is dangerous because so many of the protections and rights that women have spent centuries fighting to get and maintain are related to these things that only biological women experience.

Right. So there are no universal experiences and the context is important.

No. Context does not change the fact of biological sex.
Context changes the gender roles/expectations ascribed to biological sex.

Context matters.

For specific situations where biology actually does matters, Pap smear or prostate exam, sure.

For other situations, not really.

What about dating/romantic relationships? Are heterosexual men transphobic for not considering transwomen women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem saying trans women are women, socially speaking. But I strongly disagree with “women period”. Because that is then used to argue that biology doesn’t make us women and womanhood is something that you can declare, and not an intrinsic part of our being. Something is deeply wrong when society asks itself “what’s a woman” and we are being told from the outside - once again - what defines a woman and how we should feel about it.

You are free to define it however you want. Bring a woman means different things to different people.

It should not.

Trans extremists are telling women "trans-women are women and what you thought made you a woman doesn't. In fact, there is nothing that makes you a woman". They are also telling us "you can't use the words that define you and your body because it's not inclusive". Yet trans-women are women, and we aren't anymore. Even when in our most biologically female functions we are not women anymore, we are pregnant people who chest-feed (medically wrong, by the way Cleveland Clinic). Even the violence we suffer is not "against women" anymore, it is "gender-based" now and it sounds much more vague.

Citation? Who are these “trans extremists”?

A prime example is the PPs who are arguing that biology doesn't make someone a woman.

Timestamp?

Pps have literally said that biological functions do not define women, that being a woman means different things to different people, that anyone can define themselves as a woman, that here isn’t an universal experience for women.