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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^do you agree that trans people should only be allowed to receive healthcare based on their biological sex or not? If you agree with that and you support providers withholding healthcare from individuals who are trans based on their biological sex, it’s hard to see how you’re pro-trans. You might not be anti-trans but you can’t claim to support trans rights while also being okay with them being denied healthcare.

Pp never said anything about denying healthcare.

No one has. Some angry person on here is seeing so red, they are not reading what people are saying. They are projecting opinions held by anti-trans people in the general public on to the PPs here that support the arguments of JKR.

They are basically saying if you refuse to say that a trans woman is EXACTLY the same as any other (biologically-born) woman and to allow all trans women into ALL spaces that were traditionally reserved for (biologically born) women, then you are anti-trans. Which is false. Even if you would otherwise support protections for trans women, services for trans women, rights for trans women, happily call them by their chosen names and pronouns etc, they don't care. To them, you must say there are no differences or you are the devil.

Nobody said that.

Then I suggest you go back and reread this thread. PP just summed up exactly what a lot of those trans activists are saying. There is no wiggle room here. You either support 100% or you are anti trans.

No. Saying “I support them” but also saying their parents shouldn’t let them transition and that biological sex should be used to determine whether someone receives healthcare or rights isn’t really supporting them. In the words of James Baldwin. “I can’t believe what you say because I see what you do.” You cant claim to support when the support only extends to surface things and not the real stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

[Anonymous]

No one is obligated to support trans rights or gay rights, and people who don't support trans activism aren't necessarily opposed to your lifestyle. Calling people transphobic and resorting to name-calling because they don't agree with your views about gender identification seems very childish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^do you agree that trans people should only be allowed to receive healthcare based on their biological sex or not? If you agree with that and you support providers withholding healthcare from individuals who are trans based on their biological sex, it’s hard to see how you’re pro-trans. You might not be anti-trans but you can’t claim to support trans rights while also being okay with them being denied healthcare.

Pp never said anything about denying healthcare.

No one has. Some angry person on here is seeing so red, they are not reading what people are saying. They are projecting opinions held by anti-trans people in the general public on to the PPs here that support the arguments of JKR.

They are basically saying if you refuse to say that a trans woman is EXACTLY the same as any other (biologically-born) woman and to allow all trans women into ALL spaces that were traditionally reserved for (biologically born) women, then you are anti-trans. Which is false. Even if you would otherwise support protections for trans women, services for trans women, rights for trans women, happily call them by their chosen names and pronouns etc, they don't care. To them, you must say there are no differences or you are the devil.

Nobody said that.

Then I suggest you go back and reread this thread. PP just summed up exactly what a lot of those trans activists are saying. There is no wiggle room here. You either support 100% or you are anti trans.

I feel like that’s exactly what you’ve been saying emoji poster

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

I know that the standard of care has changed recently. I disagree with it, as do a few outspoken doctors.

But my opinion means as much as any other uninvolved person's, which is not much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^do you agree that trans people should only be allowed to receive healthcare based on their biological sex or not? If you agree with that and you support providers withholding healthcare from individuals who are trans based on their biological sex, it’s hard to see how you’re pro-trans. You might not be anti-trans but you can’t claim to support trans rights while also being okay with them being denied healthcare.

Pp never said anything about denying healthcare.

No one has. Some angry person on here is seeing so red, they are not reading what people are saying. They are projecting opinions held by anti-trans people in the general public on to the PPs here that support the arguments of JKR.

They are basically saying if you refuse to say that a trans woman is EXACTLY the same as any other (biologically-born) woman and to allow all trans women into ALL spaces that were traditionally reserved for (biologically born) women, then you are anti-trans. Which is false. Even if you would otherwise support protections for trans women, services for trans women, rights for trans women, happily call them by their chosen names and pronouns etc, they don't care. To them, you must say there are no differences or you are the devil.

Nobody said that.

Then I suggest you go back and reread this thread. PP just summed up exactly what a lot of those trans activists are saying. There is no wiggle room here. You either support 100% or you are anti trans.

No. Saying “I support them” but also saying their parents shouldn’t let them transition and that biological sex should be used to determine whether someone receives healthcare or rights isn’t really supporting them. In the words of James Baldwin. “I can’t believe what you say because I see what you do.” You cant claim to support when the support only extends to surface things and not the real stuff.

Previous point proven beautifully. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

Ven diagram poster here who is primarily concerned with language.

I think both of you on this argument are being obtuse. The answer clearly lies in the middle.

Children should not be allowed to physically alter their bodies without extensive consultation and evaluation. But for the most part that is what happens. This is a fabricated problem. Trans children getting not enough medical counseling and support is a far greater problem then getting too much intervention. There are, assuredly, outliers but overall I think the bar to transition is quite high and involves many steps over years. You do not tell your mom you are trans in January and become a boy/girl by June. It just doesn’t happen that way and it’s disingenuous to say it does. These kids are frequently very depressed and/or confused as they work through this and we should actually trust doctors and parents to work together while certainly shining a spotlight on abuse and malpractice where it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

Yes! They just did with the protests! Remember how staying at home was protecting them? How we all needed to SIP? Until the protests started and all of a sudden, it’s totally cool to gather is large spitting, screaming groups of people.
It went from the Hippocratic oath to the Hypocrisy Oath because of "social pressure".

[Anonymous]

Doctors have changed from very conservative treatment for minors to the opposite. I'm not in agreement with that.

Please be aware of what people are discussing, what the current state of treatment for trans children is. It's aggressive, not conservative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is obligated to support trans rights or gay rights, and people who don't support trans activism aren't necessarily opposed to your lifestyle. Calling people transphobic and resorting to name-calling because they don't agree with your views about gender identification seems very childish.

What lifestyle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

Yes! They just did with the protests! Remember how staying at home was protecting them? How we all needed to SIP? Until the protests started and all of a sudden, it’s totally cool to gather is large spitting, screaming groups of people.
It went from the Hippocratic oath to the Hypocrisy Oath because of "social pressure".

Doctors aren’t changing those policies, politicians are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^do you agree that trans people should only be allowed to receive healthcare based on their biological sex or not? If you agree with that and you support providers withholding healthcare from individuals who are trans based on their biological sex, it’s hard to see how you’re pro-trans. You might not be anti-trans but you can’t claim to support trans rights while also being okay with them being denied healthcare.

Pp never said anything about denying healthcare.

No one has. Some angry person on here is seeing so red, they are not reading what people are saying. They are projecting opinions held by anti-trans people in the general public on to the PPs here that support the arguments of JKR.

They are basically saying if you refuse to say that a trans woman is EXACTLY the same as any other (biologically-born) woman and to allow all trans women into ALL spaces that were traditionally reserved for (biologically born) women, then you are anti-trans. Which is false. Even if you would otherwise support protections for trans women, services for trans women, rights for trans women, happily call them by their chosen names and pronouns etc, they don't care. To them, you must say there are no differences or you are the devil.

Nobody said that.

Then I suggest you go back and reread this thread. PP just summed up exactly what a lot of those trans activists are saying. There is no wiggle room here. You either support 100% or you are anti trans.

I feel like that’s exactly what you’ve been saying emoji poster

Timestamp?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^do you agree that trans people should only be allowed to receive healthcare based on their biological sex or not? If you agree with that and you support providers withholding healthcare from individuals who are trans based on their biological sex, it’s hard to see how you’re pro-trans. You might not be anti-trans but you can’t claim to support trans rights while also being okay with them being denied healthcare.

Pp never said anything about denying healthcare.

No one has. Some angry person on here is seeing so red, they are not reading what people are saying. They are projecting opinions held by anti-trans people in the general public on to the PPs here that support the arguments of JKR.

They are basically saying if you refuse to say that a trans woman is EXACTLY the same as any other (biologically-born) woman and to allow all trans women into ALL spaces that were traditionally reserved for (biologically born) women, then you are anti-trans. Which is false. Even if you would otherwise support protections for trans women, services for trans women, rights for trans women, happily call them by their chosen names and pronouns etc, they don't care. To them, you must say there are no differences or you are the devil.

Nobody said that.

Then I suggest you go back and reread this thread. PP just summed up exactly what a lot of those trans activists are saying. There is no wiggle room here. You either support 100% or you are anti trans.

No. Saying “I support them” but also saying their parents shouldn’t let them transition and that biological sex should be used to determine whether someone receives healthcare or rights isn’t really supporting them. In the words of James Baldwin. “I can’t believe what you say because I see what you do.” You cant claim to support when the support only extends to surface things and not the real stuff.

Well said. “I support you but not in meaningful ways”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do we know the potential long term effects for hormone treatments in adolescence?

Do we know the potential long-term effects for infertility medications/treatments? New cancer treatments? New coronavirus vaccines/treatments?

Patients work with the doctors to weigh treatment risks for all sorts of serious medical issues.

Why focus on this particular one?

Because these are children. And because doctors are influenced by social pressure. And doctors have been influenced by social pressure here.

You think doctors are going to violate their Hippocratic oath over “social pressure”.

So you know more than the families and their doctors?

Ven diagram poster here who is primarily concerned with language.

I think both of you on this argument are being obtuse. The answer clearly lies in the middle.

Children should not be allowed to physically alter their bodies without extensive consultation and evaluation. But for the most part that is what happens. This is a fabricated problem. Trans children getting not enough medical counseling and support is a far greater problem then getting too much intervention. There are, assuredly, outliers but overall I think the bar to transition is quite high and involves many steps over years. You do not tell your mom you are trans in January and become a boy/girl by June. It just doesn’t happen that way and it’s disingenuous to say it does. These kids are frequently very depressed and/or confused as they work through this and we should actually trust doctors and parents to work together while certainly shining a spotlight on abuse and malpractice where it happens.

Exactly. This is not something people just do on a whim. There is a long process involving multiple doctors to evaluate treatment options and weigh risks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Repeat after me: other people’s gender identity is none of my business and I don’t need to police it. It’s literally not up to you decide when a person can or should transition

x1 million

In our society we protect children. They’re not allowed to drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, get a tattoo, go to a tanning salon. Yet we’re allowing them to surgically alter their bodies and take hormones. A 4000% increase in girls seeking treatment for gender issues is a cause for serious concern. We should be looking at why so many girls want to opt out of womanhood and boys opt out of manhood. It’s not out of line to raise the alarm over this.

You’re very misinformed. Most teens who transition do not have any type of surgery. The medication they take essentially puts hormonal development “on pause” to allow them time to transition or, if necessary, transition back if they decide to do that. Coming off the medication would continue development as usual. They’re not “opting out” of anything - they are opting into living life that is true to who they are. your faux concern is way off base.

The drugs used to “pause” puberty are not without harm. They can cause a lifetime of issues related to bone loss, including brittle bones and painful joints. https://khn.org/news/women-fear-drug-they-used-to-halt-puberty-led-to-health-problems/

There are minors getting hormones and “top surgery”. They’re being given medications rather than the mental heath care they really need. Here’s one psychiatrist’s story. https://quillette.com/2017/10/06/misunderstanding-new-kind-gender-dysphoria/

Look at Jazz Jennings, arguably the poster child for transitioning as a minor. At the age of 19, Jazz has never experienced an orgasm. She has a vagina which has to be dilated daily, which allows her to participate in a sex act she won’t derive pleasure from. She’s been sterilized. She’ll never have children of her own. All this because at the age of 2, she was a little boy who liked dresses and the color purple, and some say was emulating a beloved older sister.

She has bodily autonomy. You don't get a say in what she (and her family and doctors) decide to do with her body.

But women don't get to say who they allow access to their bodies without being labeled transphobic.(see link in this thread). Lesbians are cancelled, harassed, and receive death threats for saying they don't want to have sex with natal men. And I am sure you agree with that.

You absolutely, 100% do not truly care about bodily autonomy. I think you are lying.