The JK Rowling Controversy

[Left Coast]

6. At least Rowling has gone to the effort of forming an opinion not based on panicky scared mom feelings.

Eh, can't totally agree with you there. I think her opinion of bathrooms post-trans inclusiveness is rooted in fear.

Rowling says "Speaking as a biological woman, a lot of people in positions of power really need to grow a pair...," but really what they need to grow is a heart. Its not fear but a lack of concern. It doesn't affect them personally, so they don't care either way. Therefore they just want to be left alone. JK Rowling has gone far beyond that and has made an effort to understand. Transgender people aren't more dangerous and straight people as far as I know, but its hard to care. What is the minimum that I need to do so that I'm never bothered with these kinds of questions ever again? That's what these people in positions of power are asking.

I don't think she's transphobic in the way some Christian fundamentalist might be, claiming that there is something inherently immoral or mentally wrong with transgender folks. So she has made an attempt to understand them in that sense. But I think her fear has made her irrational on the bathroom issue.

As far as people in power are concerned, I think you're generally right that they need a heart/empathy.

I've never been directly threatened online, but I imagine it must be deeply unsettling and frightening.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I've never been directly threatened online, but I imagine it must be deeply unsettling and frightening.

This is a little off topic, but its pretty stupid to threaten someone who's already got lawyers on retention and millions to burn. Its almost a fantasy of mine to be in that situation. She could do anything to them. Anything at all. What were they thinking?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If I were a woman who had been raped and found a human with a male body in the restroom with me,

Please, do not take this the wrong way, its like being afraid of a granddaddy longlegs or gartwr snake. There are instances of male janitors and other employees doing bad things in women's restrooms. Not so with transwomen. There are fears thatvare unreasonable, and then there are fears where we really can't expect the world to stop and adjust everything. In the case of transpeople, as a whole, there aren't enough of us to make any significant changes. We all have to use the restroom, "mingling minority" fears are very typically misplaced (at least, I cant think of any instances where such policies of fear have actuallybeen justified). It would unreasonable and unacceptable to expect other minorities to cater to those who have been wronged by someone. Such as, how its not acceptable that my mom hates all Latinos because her first husband was murdered by one - understandable, but unreasonable to take it out on all of them. Amd she does (she has it in her mind that California Latinos are somehow fundamentally different). But with trans people, it's even less than that. When it comes to any sort of threat of phalic intrusion or penetration, I pose no threat in that regard. Were chemically castrated, and achieving an errextion is very difficult.Trans people just are not abusing cis people in the restroom. We can mingle with the regulars just fine, without incident. Amd its always someone else, like Rowling, and not us making these fusses and debacles. We just want to get in and pee and leave just as much as she does. And not everywhere is like California. We have tons of family restrooms in addition to regular men/women, so restroom use isnt much a problem here. In other places, the gender neutral restrooms are few and far between, and it may even be illegal to ise the restroom of the gender you identify and present as, and dangerous to use the one your legally required to.

 

[Left Coast]

This is a little off topic, but its pretty stupid to threaten someone who's already got lawyers on retention and millions to burn. Its almost a fantasy of mine to be in that situation. She could do anything to them. Anything at all. What were they thinking?

You're assuming irrational people with internet balls behave in their best interest. Tsk tsk.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I do think she's not transphobic in the way some Christian fundamentalist might be, claiming that there is something inherently immoral or mentally wrong with transgender folks. So she has made an attempt to understand then in that sense. But I think her fear has made her irrational on the bathroom issue.

As far as people in power are concerned, I think you're generally right that they need a heart/empathy.

Thank you. Yes. Empathy is what is needed both from the politicians and the Christians including me.

Eh, can't totally agree with you there. I think her opinion of bathrooms post-trans inclusiveness is rooted in fear.

I have no children and don't use public restrooms hardly. I feel awkward in public showers. It feels unnatural for everyone to be in there naked, and you're not supposed to look. I find the entire subject alien, like I'm trying to make decisions about which foreign food to taste.

 

[rational experiences]

The actuality of human life.

2 human being parents, natural to self an adult male human, and an adult female human have sex and then a baby forms, is born.

So everyone, no matter who you are as a baby comes from that natural history.

Hence no one today owns any complaint to the contrary. All humans are humans...and are given a natural life by the act of human sex if you applied common logic to reasoning.

Then you would question what sort of effect would cause a baby/child to believe in adult living conditions that is contrary to their genetic body inheritance?

Reincarnation is one theme....a human taught story to state when you re inherit DNA in a pattern that was pre lived or owned genetically by twinning, as proven...then you think and feel for that person.

Now if a DNA body ownership was owned by a previous male adult...and then a female baby inherits the DNA pattern as a human....then if a lot of other humans today are DNA males...that female life mind would then believe itself male and begin to be mind coerced/mind contacted which is proven in AI scientific studies.

As an effect and control above that and beyond that of natural self chemical DNA life body ownership.

The proven reason AI science conditions caused it....fission ground face of God O the stone planet changed.

For we see ourselves through and via the face of GOD....O its held fusion.

Change it in nuclear, the effects were taught to be a statement of AB OMENS...changes to the natural life given to everyone by the female life...a woman/women.

Now the man/men and male own science...and he is proven to be the cause of changes to life behaviour on Earth in unnatural radiation radio wave attack on our natural chemical behaviours in Nature.

It was a known and stated pre existing medical study in the sciences in ancient times...it was taught to be known and understood to be relative to OCCULT/UFO changes to Earth fusion/held cold radiation mass in stone.

History said the MEDICAL Church building was founded on the rock/stone fusion remaining non changed...and the governing body back then forbade alchemical changes to the minerals of the face of Earth. But was ignored. Yet they already lived through the sacrificed experience and gain of homosexual behaviours.

How an organization in medical sciences/biology became involved historically about a review of natural life....and why the group of occult scientists who practiced homosexuality in their groups in science, and belief that it gave them the power of God the Earth, was real to the history of why they were not allowed entry into the CHURCH building...….for it was against science/occult practice.

It was never against the self...for the documents said that all children are born innocent, and if you change the face of God the Earth fusion....then the life of humanity also changes its natural spiritual balances/expressions.

For we are chemically affected and also mind/acutely aware of everything...which science already proved to itself as a human.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

JK Rowling, author of the famous Harry Potter series, has recently gotten herself in hot water over some comments she made on Twitter (where else?).

Replying to an online opinion piece titled, "Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate," Rowling wrote, "‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?"

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling

The online backlash against her has been harsh and swift. A summary of the situation can be read here:

'Harry Potter' author J.K. Rowling's tweets blasted for being anti-transgender

She has not backed down from her comments, and has now written fairly lengthy reply on her blog:

J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues - J.K. Rowling

I have several thoughts about this whole thing:

1) Twitter is a toxic dumpster fire and society should abandon it as quickly as possible.

2) Reading through her entire piece, I find some areas where I agree with her and some where I don't. For one, anyone threatening her with violence or death obviously must be condemned. I also sympathize with the fact that she is a domestic violence survivor and that surely shapes part of her thinking here.

3) She's also right that women continue facing misogynistic backlash against the strides they have made in Western society, and are often shouted down with epithets whenever they dare speak up on behalf of their sex.

4) It's also true that sex (not gender) is biological. That doesn't mean it's 100% binary (intersex people exist), but to deny that the vast majority of folks are biologically either male or female, it seems to me is just putting one's head in the sand.

5) However, the fact that trans women don't have ovaries or XX chromosomes doesn't make them any less subject to the sexism or misogyny that any other woman faces.

6) Rowling is also just wrong about the alleged threat faced by women when societies allow trans people to use the public bathroom of their choice. There is simply no evidence I've seen that these policies result in more women being harassed, assaulted, etc. Such behaviors were illegal before, and they remain illegal when we give trans people the dignity to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. The truth is, trans people, particularly women, are disproportionately victims of violence, not perpetrators.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks for posting, I found it an interesting read. At once I found myself having conflicted thoughts about the whole piece, but for whatever it's worth here are my thoughts. I'll preface by saying that I'm offering these as an outsider, and am not for a moment suggesting I understand the issue in a 'walk in my shoes' sense. But still...

1) Twitter...and her comments around 'unnuanced conversation' is a super important point in not all only, but ALL issues with a modicum of complexity. I don't use Twitter, but if I did it would be to make pithy comment on basketball trades, or something of similar unimportance. Anyone taking to Twitter to comment on important issues...including seemingly all politicians...is doing that same issue disservice. Anyone trying to shut down conversation (rather than expand it) would be my ideological enemy. Please note, I'm a peaceful, (too) calm type of personality. My version of 'ideological enemy' is a person who I find distasteful and of no value to furthering complex issues in a positive way. I cannot overstate how destructive and small I find these types of people.

2) It's always surprised me when I've mixed with minority groups that they sometimes target subset minorities in similar ways to how they appear to be targeted. I'm not talking about the specifics of trans-gender, as I'll readily admit it's an area I have limited exposure to. But as a ham-fisted and over-generalised example of what I mean, some of the tension between the homosexual and bisexual communities struck me as...well...odd. I can understand it, to some degree, and obviously my views lack the depth of understanding that someone who is actually involved in this would have, but...

I was raised blue collar and traditional. A family is a mum, dad, and 2.5 kids. It's not that I was ever taught that single mothers were 'less' or that gay people were bad. It was just a gentle but constant reinforcement of what was 'normal'.
(I'll steer clear of race, since my father was actively racist...with the strange ability to treat the person directly in front of him in a reasonable manner. Again, pretty cliched, I guess)

I unpicked all that over the years. It wasn't difficult, and it didn't take me long, but it took some active reflection, and it was sped along by moving from a rough, blue collar high school to university. Suddenly there was a lot more diversity in all senses, and a lot less mullets. (Example, my high school was approx. 66% male, and 4 of us got to Uni in my year. My first year teaching course was comprised 104 females and 18 males).

If I try to distill down the basic theory I work to (somewhat risky, but nevertheless) it would be as simple as suspending judgement on people who are not actively causing harm to others. It was somewhat liberating. Instead of trying to decide if gay couples were going to harm the institution of marriage, or were the 'thin edge of a wedge', I simply suspended judgement, and tried to treat all people as individuals.

That makes it easy for me to deal with transgender people. I simply 'don't care' in any judgemental sense, what gender someone identifies with. I'm not in their shoes, and their decision is their own.

Obviously, that is an over-simplification. I have to be careful to ensure this starting point of non-judgement doesn't lead to apathy on issues. I also have to be careful a starting point of non-judgement doesn't simply become 'no judgement', since I think it's important as a society he consider the overall impacts of things.

But I think that is a far, far healthier starting point for considering others who are different to us than alternatives.

My long-winded point here is that there is some nuance, and some attempted context and justification given by Rowling for her position. Some of it I disagree with. But I've never been in her shoes, and I can imagine I might have similar positions if I had been. I'll happily listen to any and all who disagree with her views, and on this general topic area I would say my views are somewhat immature and loosely held. But those howling her down, trying to 'control the narrative', or otherwise judging the position of others without having walked a mile in their shoes...well...it confuses me. What is it that they are expecting from other human beings that they seem so unable to accomplish themselves?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Definition of a Twit - A person with an attention span of 40 characters. They now allow 80, but it is beyond their attention span. Tweet tweet.

I will probably be the last person earth to never use Twitter.

Only if you outlive me.

*nods*

I'm right there with ya.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Please, do not take this the wrong way, its like being afraid of a granddaddy longlegs or gartwr snake. There are instances of male janitors and other employees doing bad things in women's restrooms. Not so with transwomen. There are fears thatvare unreasonable, and then there are fears where we really can't expect the world to stop and adjust everything. In the case of transpeople, as a whole, there aren't enough of us to make any significant changes. We all have to use the restroom, "mingling minority" fears are very typically misplaced (at least, I cant think of any instances where such policies of fear have actuallybeen justified). It would unreasonable and unacceptable to expect other minorities to cater to those who have been wronged by someone. Such as, how its not acceptable that my mom hates all Latinos because her first husband was murdered by one - understandable, but unreasonable to take it out on all of them. Amd she does (she has it in her mind that California Latinos are somehow fundamentally different). But with trans people, it's even less than that. When it comes to any sort of threat of phalic intrusion or penetration, I pose no threat in that regard. Were chemically castrated, and achieving an errextion is very difficult.Trans people just are not abusing cis people in the restroom. We can mingle with the regulars just fine, without incident. Amd its always someone else, like Rowling, and not us making these fusses and debacles. We just want to get in and pee and leave just as much as she does. And not everywhere is like California. We have tons of family restrooms in addition to regular men/women, so restroom use isnt much a problem here. In other places, the gender neutral restrooms are few and far between, and it may even be illegal to ise the restroom of the gender you identify and present as, and dangerous to use the one your legally required to.

This post made a lot of sense to me, and I found it informative. Thanks!

 

[SomeRandom]

Orson Scott Card / Ender's Game all over again.

Omg true!!!

 

[SomeRandom]

Touché.

I definetely feel, on a personal level, like I've lost a part of my childhood over the last couple of years.

Transphobia, I have to say, is not the only negative stance she has taken in the face of widespread criticism. She has also misappropriated and caricatured Native American culture.

Britain, though, is not a very hospitable place for transpeople in general. We have a deep-seated cultural problem with this prejudice.

Indeed, in 2017 a transwomen was granted asylum in New Zealand and was not returned to the UK out of concern for her safety and well-being:

British transgender woman given residency in 'safer' New Zealand

Tribunal says it would be ‘unduly harsh’ to force her to return to the UK after living discrimination-free in her adopted country

​

Also, on this "single-sex spaces" issue: repeated studies, in other countries where GRA reform has already been implemented years ago, demonstrate that this is also greatly alarmist:

Gender Identity Nondiscrimination Laws in Public Accommodations: a Review of Evidence Regarding Safety and Privacy in Public Restrooms, Locker Rooms, and Changing Rooms

Indeed, research undertaken by The Guardian found that: “there was no evidence of the legislation leading to individuals – in particular teenagers – being pressured to undertake medical transition, or men falsely declaring themselves female in order to invade women-only spaces, as some feminist activists have feared.”

“Scottish Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis Scotland have become trans-inclusive without any problems occurring, demonstrating that improving trans equality is fully compatible with improving women’s equality, and avoided misunderstandings about legal reform,” James Morton, manager of the Scottish Trans Alliance told the newspaper.

So, the arguments that JK Rowling is advancing are spurious so far as the actual empirical evidence is concerned.

I have given up defending Rowling. I have already gone through the “grieving process” the first time she did this. Though I am happy to say that I have witnessed more support for trans rights from the HP fandom. The series will always be a part of my reading identity, but I will not support Rowling anymore.

 

[Altfish]

Needless to say, our tabloid press supports domestic abuse

 

[Notanumber]

It has become a thought crime to think differently from the Left.

 

[SomeRandom]

Needless to say, our tabloid press supports domestic abuse

Whoa! Wtf?

 

[HonestJoe]

Needless to say, our tabloid press supports domestic abuse

I'm certainly no fan of the tabloids and see this headline as a bad one, but not for the reason you suggest. How does "Sick taunt of Rowling's violent ex" suggest support? The image they're presenting is one of condemnation and embarrassment, not support.

 

[Vouthon]

Needless to say, our tabloid press supports domestic abuse

Now that is utterly appalling.

 

[Altfish]

I'm certainly no fan of the tabloids and see this headline as a bad one, but not for the reason you suggest. How does "Sick taunt of Rowling's violent ex" suggest support? The image they're presenting is one of condemnation and embarrassment, not support.

He got away with it, he's not sorry, they are publicising it.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I'm loathe to wade into anything I haven't an iron in the fire or any particular knowledge (so generally not being judgmental either way) but (quoting J K Rowling):

'I slapped her - but I did not abuse her':JK Rowling's ex-husband responds to her bombshell claims | Daily Mail Online

From the leader of the free world's long history of sexual assault accusations and his proud boast of 'grabbing them by the *****', to the incel ('involuntarily celibate') movement that rages against women who won't give them sex, to the trans activists who declare that TERFs need punching and re-educating, men across the political spectrum seem to agree: women are asking for trouble. Everywhere, women are being told to shut up and sit down, or else.

What a load-of-b******* - it might be SOME but it isn't the MAJORITY - which is what counts.

The hundreds of emails I've received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn't enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

Hundreds is still just anecdotal evidence, I suspect.

Also, her slap assault (allegation and admission) - would we be as judgmental if a female slapped a male?

 

[Tambourine]

Let us please not forget that a staggerung number of trans women and trans men have suffered from male aggression and male brutality in a similar manner that cis women have, and due to their marginalised status and the sad fact that so few cis people seem to be able to empathise with their plight, are in many cases even more vulnerable to these sorts of attacks than many cis women.

Also, her slap assault (allegation and admission) - would we be as judgmental if a female slapped a male?

Female on male abuse in relationships definitely exists, is underreported, and often not seen as a problem by many people. I think it is important to take care of all victims of abuse. But we shouldn't be led to believe that this erases or excuses the massive amount of male abuse and harassment women, both cis and trans, face in their lives.

 

[HonestJoe]

He got away with it, he's not sorry, they are publicising it.

So the actions of unrepentant criminals shouldn't ever be reported?