JK Rowling: Profoundly Misunderstood

[Augustus]

I think it's entirely different when someone with her reach and influence does this on a public platform. On RF, posts have little to no consequence in the grand scheme of things, and no high-profile figures or politicians are reading what we have to say. This isn't the case with Rowling, and it seems to me that it should have especially been a reason for her to be mindful when the positive thing she said was specifically about the anti-trans movie.

The tweet was critical, not supportive. It was a back handed compliment.

People can find a way to 'problematise' just about anything, so it's basically saying public people cannot have opinion on political issues or they will be misrepresented, most often by bad-faith actors doing so for their own personal benefit.

That's the nature of social media, so I suppose you lie in the bed you make, but I'd put far more blame on those milking the situation to enhance their status.

I'm referring to her criticism of "gender identity theory" as well as her defense of a gender-critical person (Maya Forstater) as defense of anti-scientific beliefs.

What degree of support did she offer?

All I've seen is she said people shouldn't be fired for saying sex is real, although she may have done more that I'm not aware of.

Do you think people should be able to hold the position sex is real without social sanction?

(Note: MF won her employment tribunal, so JKR was supporting someone who was legally judged to have been the victim of discrimination)

I don't see this as an issue of competing rights unless it is evidenced that a disproportionate number of trans women are identifying as such in order to gain access to women's restrooms for nefarious purposes. Otherwise it's the same as with every single group who are bound by specific laws where the vast majority who are law-abiding shouldn't be tarred with the brush of the fringe bad actors.

What would you expect a disproportionate number of rapists to 'transition' rather than spend time in a men's prison where bored psychopaths spend their hours thinking of ingenious ways to maim sex offenders?

Scottish ministers say they did not know trans rapist was put in women’s jail


Do you think that there are differences between ciswomen and transwomen that, in some cases, may justify different treatment?

If so, where would you draw the line, and what is an acceptable range of latitude around this 'line' that people may disagree on without being "transphobes" or bigots?

 

[SomeRandom]

"If you agree with JK then you agree that transwomen aren't really women, just men in women's costumes. Is that really what you think?"

What defines someone as being a woman?

Well that depends on who you’re talking to.
I mean if you ask a biologist I suspect the answer you’ll get is some variation of
“Typically an individual with sex organs (inside and/or outside) that are female. Aspects that are associated with the gender of female can be altered through the application of medical science, however.”
Or something along those lines

If you’re talking to some guy on the street I suspect the answer will be some form of “person with XX chromosomes and born with a vagina and breasts.”
Even though technically speaking those don’t always necessarily match up in biology
(A person can be born with external and even internal female sex organs despite also having a Y chromosome. And even vice versa. Just for example.)

I’m cis and I honestly couldn’t care less.
But I refuse to be some shield for folks who want to deny others gender affirming care

 

[We Never Know]

Well that depends on who you’re talking to.
I mean if you ask a biologist I suspect the answer you’ll get is some variation of
“Typically an individual with sex organs (inside and/or outside) that are female. Aspects that are associated with the gender of female can be altered through the application of medical science, however.”
Or something along those lines

If you’re talking to some guy on the street I suspect the answer will be some form of “person with XX chromosomes and born with a vagina and breasts.”
Even though technically speaking those don’t always necessarily match up in biology
(A person can be born with external and even internal female sex organs despite also having a Y chromosome. And even vice versa. Just for example.)

I’m cis and I honestly couldn’t care less.
But I refuse to be some shield for folks who want to deny others gender affirming care

I prefer biology over psychology.

 

[SomeRandom]

I prefer biology over psychology.

Well just for example it used to be that diagnosis of trans individuals were based more on brain scans. The trans individuals brains literally had more in common with the cis brains of their “self identified” gender.
Iow a trans woman’s brain (remember, this means born male then transitioned to female in context) was found to have far more in common with an actual cis woman’s brain than a cis man’s.
Meaning the diagnosis was technically based more on biology than anything else.
I mean we’re talking about studies on the actual physical brain here

This changed because such diagnosis would rely on the brain becoming fully developed (age 25 right?) So since intervention is typically preferred in the medical field across the board, other ways for diagnosing earlier soon caught hold.

(Full disclaimer I am a layman. But this is, to the best of my knowledge, what would occur in the medical field.)

Besides biology itself distinguishes between sex and gender and indeed recognises the existence of intersex, hermaphroditism and pseudohermaphroditism as biological phenomenons in humans

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

What legislation has she funded or backed? I knew she had made public statements that were problematic, I didn't know about legislation.

In addition to what was mentioned, she directly donates to the Labour Party and is openly critical of them supporting Transgender Rights. Tony Blair was even quoted as saying that the Labour Party would not be able to retain influence if they openly criticized her views.

I prefer biology over psychology.

You do realize that even biology is a spectrum, and there is not a true "binary"?

 

[Left Coast]

FYI: Rowling's article in October providing her reasoning for opposing the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act:

My article for the Sunday Times Scotland on why I oppose Gender Recognition Act reform - J.K. Rowling

There are a million ways I could critique her reasoning, but there it is.

 

[We Never Know]

In addition to what was mentioned, she directly donates to the Labour Party and is openly critical of them supporting Transgender Rights. Tony Blair was even quoted as saying that the Labour Party would not be able to retain influence if they openly criticized her views.


You do realize that even biology is a spectrum, and there is not a true "binary"?

As it been said, try to get milk from a bull and eggs from a rooster see how you fair.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

As it been said, try to get milk from a bull and eggs from a rooster see how you fair.

Nice reductionism. Here's some light reading.

 

[Estro Felino]

FYI: Rowling's article in October providing her reasoning for opposing the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act:

My article for the Sunday Times Scotland on why I oppose Gender Recognition Act reform - J.K. Rowling

There are a million ways I could critique her reasoning, but there it is.

May I be blunt and outspoken, as usual?
Why isn't there such a discourse in Italy?

Because there are no trans women who crave for having access to female facilities.
Trans women are really refined and picky people here, they don't like using public facilities-

And by the way, when you discover that in UK and in US the trans women who want to gain access to female facilities are into women...well...things become incredibly suspicious.
Because here there hardly are trans women who are into women, they are into men.

And I do support this lesbian person for saying it. Because in UK and in US there is no criterium to identify a trans person, whereas in my country there are countless criteria.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Trans is an identity and an umbrella to many people. And monolithing everyone as having a different perspective than you as 'political radicals' (including entire psychology institutions like those that went into making DSM V criterium) is unconstructive and obtuse. You disagree, that's fine. But people like non-binary transgender people or people who experience things like gender euphoria but not gender dysphoria are tired of sections of the community gatekeeping the term by decades out of date information. And they're just as entitled to that frustration as you are to yours. Congrats, gender is a spectrum and you occupy one part of it according to your own experiences.

And those people aren't transsexuals. We're not the same. Get over it. People like me deserve our own spaces. Transsexualism is a medical condition. It's not an identity. I don't "identify" as anything. I just am. Gender benders, cross dressers and androgynous people are different things, and they don't need to be on cross-sex hormone therapy and having surgeries.

Like I said, if you don't have dysphoria, you're not trans/transgender/transsexual/etc. If you don't want to live as the opposite sex and these perceptions didn't occur before puberty, there's likely something else going on, and it doesn't have to do with social gender roles. For example, many teenage girls hate developing breasts and female curves during puberty because of the male attention it brings. But that doesn't mean they're trans, should lop their breasts off and get on testosterone. More vetting needs to be done. It's a lifelong decision for adults to make, as you have to be mature, stable and informed to make such decisions. I lived for 5 years, starting when I was 19, as a man before starting starting testosterone at 24, and I still had to get a mental health professional's letter before my doctor started me on testosterone (the original doctor who handled it, as see a different one now). The "real life test" is something that should be brought back as a requirement.

And the political radicals are those promoting things that are the opposite of biological reality and now they're reaping what they've sown. The Tavistock gender clinic for youth in the UK has already been shut down after an official inquiry, and other European gender clinics are following suit. The pendulum has swung too far one way, and now it's swinging the other.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Nobody said that transgender people are the same as transsexuals. What's being said is that transsexual is not the only experience, and you don't get to decide other's life experience for them. Get over it and get over yourself.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I would like to learn more about this, since it's not something I have close familiarity with as a cis person. When I look up whether gender dysphoria is a requirement to be considered under the transgender umbrella, medical sources say that it isn't. For example:



Expert Q&A: Gender Dysphoria

But then I have also heard arguments from trans people that dysphoria is the distinguishing factor, so why do medical professionals no longer see it as a requirement for being trans?

Because they're following a certain ideology that throws biological reality out of the window. Many doctors, therapists and "experts" are quacks, you know.

And if it isn't, what is a more accurate way to describe non-cis people who also don't have gender dysphoria?

Men and women.

 

[We Never Know]

Because they're following a certain ideology that throws biological reality out of the window. Many doctors, therapists and "experts" are quacks, you know.

Men and women.

"Men and Women"

Why can't we just refer to cis people as men and women?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

"Men and Women"

Why can't we just refer to cis people as men and women?

Go ahead. I don't go around calling myself a trans man. That's my personal medical business that no one has the right to know outside of those I choose to tell.

 

[JDMS]

"Men and Women"

Why can't we just refer to cis people as men and women?

Do it then. I'll even help you remove the "cis" prefix.

Why can't we just refer to people as men and women?

Uh oh... which people? All people? I'm all for it

Oh, I see. You only meant cis people. Well, what a surprise... It seems the prefix has some use after all...

 

[Augustus]

She also funds women's crisis centers which actively exclude transwomen.

Do you believe there are any legitimate reasons for a rape crisis centre to exclude a transwoman with a penis?

 

[We Never Know]

Do it then. I'll even help you remove the "cis" prefix.



Uh oh... which people? All people? I'm all for it

Oh, I see. You only meant cis people. Well, what a surprise... It seems the prefix has some use after all...

Not really. IMO....

In biology of humans there are male and female,, no cis label needed.

Anything different needs/has/etc a label to extinguish their differences.

 

[We Never Know]

Do you believe there are any legitimate reasons for a rape crisis centre to exclude a transwoman with a penis?

"transwoman with a penis"..

IMO that says it like it is.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

In biology of humans there are male and female,, no cis label needed.

Oh my sweet summer child. Firstly I advise you to read the link I posted to you; there is a lot more out there biologically. Secondly the "cis-" prefix indicates that your biological sex aligns with your gender, as those are two different things.

 

[We Never Know]

Oh my sweet summer child. Firstly I advise you to read the link I posted to you; there is a lot more out there biologically. Secondly the "cis-" prefix indicates that your biological sex aligns with your gender, as those are two different things.

"your biological sex aligns with your gender"

Yes.. Male and female.. Man and woman, Men and women.. No label needed.