J.K. Rowling’s post on trans-identity and modern misogyny

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sienna and Linda are both misogynist insults and have no place here. Also, the horrific ageism isn't helping.

Sadly DCUM is never short on misogyny.

Do trans women really know what they're getting themselves in to? How much time have they spent on DCUM?

Bahahahahahahaha

Hahaha no they do not. Because they had the privilege of growing up male and didn't experience sexism first hand until transitioning.

DP. I do think a lot of them experienced tangential crap about being sissies etc. but it’s not the same thing, agreed.

You’re assuming most transwomen are formerly gay men. That’s really no longer the case. A large portion of the population are rather formidable former straight men, who now identify as lesbians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it harm trans women to call them trans women?

Because they’re deluded men and need to usurp and undermine women in any way possible, and feel entitled to do so.

This hateful crap is exactly what fuels my anger.

I don’t see any of the JKR-minded people denouncing this.

I posted a few pages back specifically saying I did not support language like this. And I’ll reaffirm that I think this poster does sound hateful and bigoted

Thank you.

Can the question be answered? What is the harm caused to trans women by calling them trans women?

None as long as you acknowledge that being trans is part of their identity but they are also women. They’re women. If you can agree to that basic fact, then saying they are trans is fine because you aren’t using it to diminish or deny their womanhood.

NP. I don’t want to agree with that. I don’t agree. I will call anyone whatever name or pronoun they want, I don’t care what bathroom they use or what they wear. I support publicly funded reassignment surgery for those with dysphoria. I will always decry violence against trans people and support trans advocacy. But privately, I do not acknowledge their womanhood. The only thing that makes me a woman is my biological femaleness and the way I have been treated and socialized because of it.

This is a major point in my disagreement with activists. There is a vociferous point of view that there is no difference between growing up as a boy or as a girl that can lead towards a unifying experience of manhood or womanhood and this just doesn't fit with my lived experience.

Sounds like you had a very gendered childhood. I’m sorry.

My childhood was less gendered than what I see today for my sons and daughter. There is more token acquiescence at the fringes ... girls can wear clothes from the boys section! boys can wear salmon colored shirts! but at it's core, girls and boys are treated differently from before they're able to sit up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP, and I've read your responses, and they just don't hold together. You seem to take it as a given that it would be too confusing to advocate for women if you have to account for trans women in the definition, but you don't explain why it would be confusing, or how, or give any examples. And it isn't as obvious as you seem to think.

DP.

For a biological woman, having or not having a period can be a serious thing. If we reduce women to "menstruators" we hide that issue. A young woman who's gotten to be age 16 or 17 without having a period may well assume she's just not a menstruator. She may have no idea that's an issue she should bring up with a medical professional. Girls and womens health concerns are undervalued. We are ignored from research to implementation. And now we're supposed to avoid centering womens health and health issues, because a tiny minority of people might possibly have to deal with the fact that their biology is different from the biology of people they'd like to align themselves with.

We don't avoid pushing for prenatal care because of a minority of women who can't get pregnant - even when it causes them serious distress to deal with this knowledge. Why? Because making sure women have access to care before and during pregnancy is critical to the health of those women and the resulting infants. But perhaps we should prioritize women who are dealing with infertility, and just leave it to all other women to make sure they know exactly what they'll need, and that they're effective self-advocates.

No one is saying anything of the sort. We can talk about more than one thing at once. We can advocate for women's health and health issues, and we can include trans women, just like we include women who have had hysterectomies. And just like we advocate for health professionals to actually listen to black women's pain even though that isn't an issue that generally affects white women. We can hold more than one thought in our head at once. We can do all of those things. It's actually quite easy: just don't be a d!ck. As it were.

Yes, people are saying exactly that. If we no longer have a word for girls, or women, if we're reduced to "menstruators" then we are not, and cannot, be centering womens health issues. We've removed the ability for girls to know what is normal as they grow, that periods are normal, that if they're having a different experience, it's not that, oh well, they're just like those other-women-who-don't-menstruate.

Words are important. When you remove the ability of groups to describe their experiences, you remove the ability of groups to center those experience, and demand equity.

We do not remove all public talk about pregnancy to accommodate those who are traumatized by it, because it is important even in its own right, while ALSO being challenging for some people to deal with.

This is one of those areas. If trans men are traumatized by public discussion of womens health issues, I'm sorry. I truly am. But girls and womens health is too important to tip toe around, we will never have our health concerns treated as legitimate concerns if we are not blatant about them, and too many girls and women are dying because of it. Trans men are never going to be able to escape the fact that they were born biologically female, and it's not the responsibility of the world around them to erase every aspect of womanhood in order to make it easier. Just as it's not the responsibility of the world around infertile people to hide every aspect of pregnancy, and it would be irresponsible to suggest it is.

You can either choose to be a dick to trans people and people facing infertility. Or you can choose to not be a dick.

Sounds like you’ve made your choice.

[Anonymous]

Up above there were trans activists who were insisting no trans folks want to force dating partners to date trans folks. But there are articles/commentary online saying exactly that. Here is one, for instance: https://link.medium.com/4hoCDsSDe7

As a woman who has been sexually assaulted, I found this article horrifying. Consent is something women have fought for for years. And yet, here is someone insisting that not allowing access to another person's body is transphobic. People get a right to say no and to exercise consent regardless of the reason. There should be NO entitlement at all to another person's body. None.

It's articles like this that I find very, very difficult to absorb. It absolutely feels like this is the point of view of someone who doesn't understand or care about the history of rape and violence against women at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does giving Trans women rights diminish biological women's rights?

We're all in the same group as "female." I don't care if trans women want to join. The more the merrier.

THIS

I guess you were never an athlete.

I played a D1 sport. I have no problem being inclusive.

Such a small %, right?

I'm glad you were capable. I'm an average athlete. I only got to compete in HS because sports were sex segregated. Sports were sex segregated to give girls the opportunity to compete, because women are generally at a physical disadvantage to men.

College athletics have requirements about trans people before allowing them to compete, which may help level those differences. HS athletics do not have consistent standards, which is why you have situations like Connecticut, where trans girls not taking hormones, trans girls biologically identical to male athletes, competed, and won, against biological girls.

Remember, were it not for sex segregated sports, none of us ever would have heard of Flo Jo. She was far too slow compared to the male runners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP, and I've read your responses, and they just don't hold together. You seem to take it as a given that it would be too confusing to advocate for women if you have to account for trans women in the definition, but you don't explain why it would be confusing, or how, or give any examples. And it isn't as obvious as you seem to think.

DP.

For a biological woman, having or not having a period can be a serious thing. If we reduce women to "menstruators" we hide that issue. A young woman who's gotten to be age 16 or 17 without having a period may well assume she's just not a menstruator. She may have no idea that's an issue she should bring up with a medical professional. Girls and womens health concerns are undervalued. We are ignored from research to implementation. And now we're supposed to avoid centering womens health and health issues, because a tiny minority of people might possibly have to deal with the fact that their biology is different from the biology of people they'd like to align themselves with.

We don't avoid pushing for prenatal care because of a minority of women who can't get pregnant - even when it causes them serious distress to deal with this knowledge. Why? Because making sure women have access to care before and during pregnancy is critical to the health of those women and the resulting infants. But perhaps we should prioritize women who are dealing with infertility, and just leave it to all other women to make sure they know exactly what they'll need, and that they're effective self-advocates.

No one is saying anything of the sort. We can talk about more than one thing at once. We can advocate for women's health and health issues, and we can include trans women, just like we include women who have had hysterectomies. And just like we advocate for health professionals to actually listen to black women's pain even though that isn't an issue that generally affects white women. We can hold more than one thought in our head at once. We can do all of those things. It's actually quite easy: just don't be a d!ck. As it were.

Yes, people are saying exactly that. If we no longer have a word for girls, or women, if we're reduced to "menstruators" then we are not, and cannot, be centering womens health issues. We've removed the ability for girls to know what is normal as they grow, that periods are normal, that if they're having a different experience, it's not that, oh well, they're just like those other-women-who-don't-menstruate.

Words are important. When you remove the ability of groups to describe their experiences, you remove the ability of groups to center those experience, and demand equity.

We do not remove all public talk about pregnancy to accommodate those who are traumatized by it, because it is important even in its own right, while ALSO being challenging for some people to deal with.

This is one of those areas. If trans men are traumatized by public discussion of womens health issues, I'm sorry. I truly am. But girls and womens health is too important to tip toe around, we will never have our health concerns treated as legitimate concerns if we are not blatant about them, and too many girls and women are dying because of it. Trans men are never going to be able to escape the fact that they were born biologically female, and it's not the responsibility of the world around them to erase every aspect of womanhood in order to make it easier. Just as it's not the responsibility of the world around infertile people to hide every aspect of pregnancy, and it would be irresponsible to suggest it is.

You can either choose to be a dick to trans people and people facing infertility. Or you can choose to not be a dick.

Sounds like you’ve made your choice.

Much better to be a dick towards women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I don't understand the emphasis on denying any difference, physical or life experience, between ciswomen and transwomen. I don't understand why it is transphobic to say that growing up female is a formative experience. It seems like in every other area, we (rightly, I think) insist on recognizing and supporting physical differences that lead people to have different life experiences and needs.

+1

And it seems like women are always the ones who are told to ignore their needs (both medical and mental) in an effort to be inclusive. When there is nothing wrong with advocating that certain issues are inherent only to women (menstruation, pregnancy, menopause, etc.)

Women are not being “told to ignore their needs”.

Yes, we are. The ejaculators get to keep their word for themselves. The menstruators have to shut up and sit down. Again.

Once we remove "men" as often as we remove "women" maybe I'll believe you.

Tell that to the trans people who are so horrified about using the word "woman" that they'd rather poor, marginalized girls and women not have access to health information and knowledge they need, than to possibly be made to consider that they're biologically different in some way from other women.

To insist that women sit down and shut up is what ejaculators tend to do.

You don’t need to sit down. Just realize that many people who menstruate have challenges and open your arms to them instead of callously turning your back.

We are all better off if we lift each other up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
NP, and I've read your responses, and they just don't hold together. You seem to take it as a given that it would be too confusing to advocate for women if you have to account for trans women in the definition, but you don't explain why it would be confusing, or how, or give any examples. And it isn't as obvious as you seem to think.

DP.

For a biological woman, having or not having a period can be a serious thing. If we reduce women to "menstruators" we hide that issue. A young woman who's gotten to be age 16 or 17 without having a period may well assume she's just not a menstruator. She may have no idea that's an issue she should bring up with a medical professional. Girls and womens health concerns are undervalued. We are ignored from research to implementation. And now we're supposed to avoid centering womens health and health issues, because a tiny minority of people might possibly have to deal with the fact that their biology is different from the biology of people they'd like to align themselves with.

We don't avoid pushing for prenatal care because of a minority of women who can't get pregnant - even when it causes them serious distress to deal with this knowledge. Why? Because making sure women have access to care before and during pregnancy is critical to the health of those women and the resulting infants. But perhaps we should prioritize women who are dealing with infertility, and just leave it to all other women to make sure they know exactly what they'll need, and that they're effective self-advocates.

No one is saying anything of the sort. We can talk about more than one thing at once. We can advocate for women's health and health issues, and we can include trans women, just like we include women who have had hysterectomies. And just like we advocate for health professionals to actually listen to black women's pain even though that isn't an issue that generally affects white women. We can hold more than one thought in our head at once. We can do all of those things. It's actually quite easy: just don't be a d!ck. As it were.

Yes, people are saying exactly that. If we no longer have a word for girls, or women, if we're reduced to "menstruators" then we are not, and cannot, be centering womens health issues. We've removed the ability for girls to know what is normal as they grow, that periods are normal, that if they're having a different experience, it's not that, oh well, they're just like those other-women-who-don't-menstruate.

Words are important. When you remove the ability of groups to describe their experiences, you remove the ability of groups to center those experience, and demand equity.

We do not remove all public talk about pregnancy to accommodate those who are traumatized by it, because it is important even in its own right, while ALSO being challenging for some people to deal with.

This is one of those areas. If trans men are traumatized by public discussion of womens health issues, I'm sorry. I truly am. But girls and womens health is too important to tip toe around, we will never have our health concerns treated as legitimate concerns if we are not blatant about them, and too many girls and women are dying because of it. Trans men are never going to be able to escape the fact that they were born biologically female, and it's not the responsibility of the world around them to erase every aspect of womanhood in order to make it easier. Just as it's not the responsibility of the world around infertile people to hide every aspect of pregnancy, and it would be irresponsible to suggest it is.

You can either choose to be a dick to trans people and people facing infertility. Or you can choose to not be a dick.

Sounds like you’ve made your choice.

Discussing womens health is not being a dick.

Trans people who insist it is, are showing us exactly what they think of women. Which is not surprising, since it's what society thinks of women.

Discussing womens health as regards pregnancy is also not being a dick. Even the most emotionally wrecked person dealing with infertility I've known could understand how important it was, while she was struggling with her mental health.

But, of course, she was a woman, she understands what it is to consider her needs in relation to others, and accept that her struggles with infertility, while profoundly awful for her, did not take priority over the importance of providing information about pregnancy to women, especially vulnerable women.

[Anonymous]

Women can still have women's rights. They just need to make sure the emotional needs of past and present male identifying people are met first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does giving Trans women rights diminish biological women's rights?

We're all in the same group as "female." I don't care if trans women want to join. The more the merrier.

THIS

I guess you were never an athlete.

I played a D1 sport. I have no problem being inclusive.

Such a small %, right?

I'm glad you were capable. I'm an average athlete. I only got to compete in HS because sports were sex segregated. Sports were sex segregated to give girls the opportunity to compete, because women are generally at a physical disadvantage to men.

College athletics have requirements about trans people before allowing them to compete, which may help level those differences. HS athletics do not have consistent standards, which is why you have situations like Connecticut, where trans girls not taking hormones, trans girls biologically identical to male athletes, competed, and won, against biological girls.

Remember, were it not for sex segregated sports, none of us ever would have heard of Flo Jo. She was far too slow compared to the male runners.

So a small %.

Someone said that’s a valid reason to not be concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it harm trans women to call them trans women?

Because they’re deluded men and need to usurp and undermine women in any way possible, and feel entitled to do so.

This hateful crap is exactly what fuels my anger.

I don’t see any of the JKR-minded people denouncing this.

I posted a few pages back specifically saying I did not support language like this. And I’ll reaffirm that I think this poster does sound hateful and bigoted

+2
That is hateful and bigoted. And OBVIOUSLY one of the many reasons trans women want to pass fully as biologically female is to reduce their risks of violence. I guess I’m one of the “JK” minded people and I maintain that trans people should be treated as the gender they wish to be.

Trans women are at risk of violence from men.
But they focus their rage on women, which is why there's a word for women who want to retain women-only spaces ("TERF") and not for men who would kill women and trans women.

It's all horrifically misogynistic.

Because that is what men do. Charging into women’s lives, telling us to STFU and demand they know what’s best. This isn’t new, just now these men are wearing dresses and hair extensions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it harm trans women to call them trans women?

Because they’re deluded men and need to usurp and undermine women in any way possible, and feel entitled to do so.

This hateful crap is exactly what fuels my anger.

I don’t see any of the JKR-minded people denouncing this.

I posted a few pages back specifically saying I did not support language like this. And I’ll reaffirm that I think this poster does sound hateful and bigoted

+2
That is hateful and bigoted. And OBVIOUSLY one of the many reasons trans women want to pass fully as biologically female is to reduce their risks of violence. I guess I’m one of the “JK” minded people and I maintain that trans people should be treated as the gender they wish to be.

Trans women are at risk of violence from men.
But they focus their rage on women, which is why there's a word for women who want to retain women-only spaces ("TERF") and not for men who would kill women and trans women.

It's all horrifically misogynistic.

Because that is what men do. Charging into women’s lives, telling us to STFU and demand they know what’s best. This isn’t new, just now these men are wearing dresses and hair extensions.

This may describe trans activists but it doesn't describe any of the trans people I know. Does it honestly describe the trans people you know? Or are you inventing bogeymen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it harm trans women to call them trans women?

Because they’re deluded men and need to usurp and undermine women in any way possible, and feel entitled to do so.

This hateful crap is exactly what fuels my anger.

I don’t see any of the JKR-minded people denouncing this.

I posted a few pages back specifically saying I did not support language like this. And I’ll reaffirm that I think this poster does sound hateful and bigoted

+2
That is hateful and bigoted. And OBVIOUSLY one of the many reasons trans women want to pass fully as biologically female is to reduce their risks of violence. I guess I’m one of the “JK” minded people and I maintain that trans people should be treated as the gender they wish to be.

Trans women are at risk of violence from men.
But they focus their rage on women, which is why there's a word for women who want to retain women-only spaces ("TERF") and not for men who would kill women and trans women.

It's all horrifically misogynistic.

Because that is what men do. Charging into women’s lives, telling us to STFU and demand they know what’s best. This isn’t new, just now these men are wearing dresses and hair extensions.

F U, nasty twot.

Lol. Proud owner of my twat. Jealous?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does it harm trans women to call them trans women?

Because they’re deluded men and need to usurp and undermine women in any way possible, and feel entitled to do so.

This hateful crap is exactly what fuels my anger.

I don’t see any of the JKR-minded people denouncing this.

I posted a few pages back specifically saying I did not support language like this. And I’ll reaffirm that I think this poster does sound hateful and bigoted

+2
That is hateful and bigoted. And OBVIOUSLY one of the many reasons trans women want to pass fully as biologically female is to reduce their risks of violence. I guess I’m one of the “JK” minded people and I maintain that trans people should be treated as the gender they wish to be.

Trans women are at risk of violence from men.
But they focus their rage on women, which is why there's a word for women who want to retain women-only spaces ("TERF") and not for men who would kill women and trans women.

It's all horrifically misogynistic.

Because that is what men do. Charging into women’s lives, telling us to STFU and demand they know what’s best. This isn’t new, just now these men are wearing dresses and hair extensions.

F U, nasty twot.

Lol. Proud owner of my twat. Jealous?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Up above there were trans activists who were insisting no trans folks want to force dating partners to date trans folks. But there are articles/commentary online saying exactly that. Here is one, for instance: https://link.medium.com/4hoCDsSDe7

As a woman who has been sexually assaulted, I found this article horrifying. Consent is something women have fought for for years. And yet, here is someone insisting that not allowing access to another person's body is transphobic. People get a right to say no and to exercise consent regardless of the reason. There should be NO entitlement at all to another person's body. None.

It's articles like this that I find very, very difficult to absorb. It absolutely feels like this is the point of view of someone who doesn't understand or care about the history of rape and violence against women at all.

They don’t. You would think that Transwomen would be horrified at the violence women experience and would want to support women’s shelters, rape centers, and bodily autonomy. After all, don’t they associate as women? Unfortunately, there is a very vocal group that behaves like women’s safety issues are irrelevant. Who would be so narcissistic as to proudly defund a rape center? And demand to ogle women in a DV shower? Millions of women - people with vaginas - across the world are raped and murdered each year because they are female. They’re not at risk because they feel like women. They’re at risk because they have vaginas. I don’t fear walking alone at night because my gender identity is female. I fear walking alone at night because my sex is female. I support trans people and trans spaces but as a woman who has experienced a lot of male violence, I will fight for biologically-female safe spaces.