J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

Again, your perspective is based purely on MTF. You also disregard any statistics I give you based on trans physical assault numbers (which we've done in the past too) and your insinuation that I'm dismissing your views because you're a woman when you're happy to dismiss and kick down at a small portion of society seems a bit tacky I think.

You said you cannot speak for transgender people because you haven't experienced what they have. Well, are you a woman? If not, why do you feel comfortable dismissing their worries? If the criterion is that you don't criticise what you haven't experienced, then surely the same would hold for women as for transgender people? Yet, you are very comfortable dismissing women. Interesting. And hypocritical.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Sir Oxman wrote: »

That's her new book which came out yesterday?
I haven't read the book and probably won't, or maybe I will, who knows.
Is that someone else's take in their own words from maybe a website like them.us?


Everyone is waiting for you to reveal your evidence of her 'transphobia' and 'hate' in the essays she wrote outlining her own opinions - that's not a work of fiction.

It's pretty clear that won't be forthcoming. :cool:

LineOfBeauty

Gruffalox wrote: »

Now, now, Line of Beauty, if you are going to freely peddle tripe then you can expect that a lady with limited patience for same, like myself, will indeed set loose her Cerberus, and tear that shyte apart. No controlling the responses you get when you fling scutter, I am afraid.

She did not assume a different gender, by the way. That is not how a nom de plume works. Choosing a male name may hark back to a long practice among female writers to take a male name in order to be taken seriously. Eg George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans), The Bronte sisters wrote as Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell. Precisely because female writers were dismissed as frivolous etc. Ironic, now, in this context.
And to find her name homophobic because you have read somewhere that people have madly decided she deliberately chose Robert Glabraith because he is/was some dreadful person who practised horrible experiments on homosexuals really stretches the bounds of credulity and might be considered paranoid in the extreme. There is no way she did any such thing. Absolutely no way.

Ahh OK, thanks for explaining that. You can only assume a different gender if you wish to be taken seriously. And, of course, in the world of fiction the billionaire writer of one of the most successful series of books is not taken seriously so she may assume the gender of a male for this series of books she wishes to write but Joe Soap born into the wrong body cannot? Privilege checked.

Remember that episode of Father Ted (yes, the irony of talking about that here) where the priest has all of this Nazi paraphernalia so he;s probably a Nazi, it's kinda the same thing here, isn't it?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

I did, I'm not talking about locker rooms again. And I'm not doing toilets again either. We've done those.

So, let's go for this one. Just to confirm, this counsellor who has undergone gender reassignment treatment, who is legally recognised as a female, you say that person is not a female therefore should not be referred to females who request a female counsellor?

Well yeah, you are always the biological sex you were born with. There are cosmetic procedures that make people feel more comfortable in their own skin but as of today, there is no medical procedure available that can change biological sex (and that includes intersex conditions before anyone brings that up). 'Male' and 'female' denote biological sex. And we are always being told that nobody is conflating sex and gender so I don't know why my saying that would be a problem. Many women would only be comfortable with a biological female and I don't see why they should have to dance around somebody else's feelings, especially if they are getting treatment because they are traumatised.

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

You said you cannot speak for transgender people because you haven't experienced what they have. Well, are you a woman? If not, why do you feel comfortable dismissing their worries? If the criterion is that you don't criticise what you haven't experienced, then surely the same would hold for women as for transgender people? Yet, you are very comfortable dismissing women. Interesting. And hypocritical.

And are you a transgender person? Then what right do you have to tell somebody they are less than you?

suicide_circus

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

And are you a transgender person? Then what right do you have to tell somebody they are less than you?

Different =/= less than

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

And are you a transgender person? Then what right do you have to tell somebody they are less than you?

Kindly direct me to where I said that, ta. :cool:

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well yeah, you are always the biological sex you were born with. There are cosmetic procedures that make people feel more comfortable in their own skin but as of today, there is no medical procedure available that can change biological sex (and that includes intersex conditions before anyone brings that up). 'Male' and 'female' denote biological sex. And we are always being told that nobody is conflating sex and gender so I don't know why my saying that would be a problem.

While I'm on this roll. Who are you to say somebody is not a male? That somebody is not a female?

And of course, ultimately your defence of Rowling is a defence of yourself. You want to hold views that would be labelled as transphobic by any transgender person, but you don't want that label. Unfortunately you don't get to decide whether you are transphobic or not, it's the people whose views your words and actions would hurt who decide that.

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Kindly direct me to where I said that, ta. :cool:

By your own admission.
Can't go to the toilet (ever! Ludicrous)
Can't go to the hospital
Can't go to the gym (changing rooms, innit?)
Can't go to jail (this one might seem like a plus but I'd like to know the alternate to jail that you have in mind)

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

While I'm on this roll. Who are you to say somebody is not a male? That somebody is not a female?

I thought nobody was conflating sex and gender. How on earth is this controversial? I don't decide who is male and female. Biology decides it.

Christ on a bike.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

By your own admission.
Can't go to the toilet (ever! Ludicrous)
Can't go to the hospital
Can't go to the gym (changing rooms, innit?)
Can't go to jail (this one might seem like a plus but I'd like to know the alternate to jail that you have in mind)

They can still do all those things. There are facilities available to them. Apparently those facilities are NOT SAFE and we must take that very seriously, whilst at the same time dismissing women's safety fears. Have I got this right?

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I thought nobody was conflating sex and gender. How on earth is this controversial? I don't decide who is male and female. Biology decides it.

Christ on a bike.

And yet even if somebody has gender reassignment surgery anbd legally changes their gender you don't recognise their gender?

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

While I'm on this roll. Who are you to say somebody is not a male? That somebody is not a female?

And of course, ultimately your defence of Rowling is a defence of yourself. You want to hold views that would be labelled as transphobic by any transgender person, but you don't want that label. Unfortunately you don't get to decide whether you are transphobic or not, it's the people whose views your words and actions would hurt who decide that.

It is difficult though Line of Beauty because there are quite a lot of trans people who agree that they are not actually biologically the opposite sex, that third spaces are an equitable solution and that they want nothing to do with those people have become hysterically nasty about anyone standing by protection of sex-based spaces - what are we to call those people? Transphobes seems so ridiculous in such a case...

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

They can still do all those things. There are facilities available to them. Apparently those facilities are NOT SAFE and we must take that very seriously, whilst at the same time dismissing women's safety fears. Have I got this right?

Very quickly, because actually I'm genuinely curious, do you recognise Female to Male gender reassignment?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

And yet even if somebody has gender reassignment surgery anbd legally changes their gender you don't recognise their gender?

I'll call them whatever they want, I'll treat like the gender they want to be. But unless the thought police exists, unfortunately it can't be controlled if I notice their birth sex. And if there are instances where I am not comfortable with a male dealing with me, I won't feel bad about that. I've had a number of intimate medical procedures done in my life that I would only want a female carrying out. Any male who thinks their feelings override my comfort when I'm in such a vulnerable position can take a hike and chuck whatever slurs they want at me on the way out.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

Very quickly, because actually I'm genuinely curious, do you recognise Female to Male gender reassignment?

I recognise it and believe that it's a cosmetic approximation of the opposite sex. It does not change the sex of the person receiving it and I'd be surprised if any doctor describes it that way. If they do, they are lying to their patient and that is deeply unethical.

LineOfBeauty

Gruffalox wrote: »

It is difficult though Line of Beauty because there are quite a lot of trans people who agree that they are not actually biologically the opposite sex, that third spaces are an equitable solution and that they want nothing to do with those people have become hysterically nasty about anyone standing by protection of sex-based spaces - what are we to call those people? Transphobes seems so ridiculous in such a case...

Gruffalox legitimately I've had the public spaces debate before with Obvious Desperate Breakfasts, I'm out of here in about 20 minutes and I really don't want to do it again.

Just quickly, I go to pubs, I go to the gym, I've played sport since I was about 8 and still do. In terms of male spaces, or shared spaces, I've never experienced any issues with a trans person in the space. To be honest, the only time I've ever noticed any trans people in a bathroom is in gay bars or clubs. The big deal we make it for them to just use the toilet, it's insane.

ceadaoin.

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

Gruffalox legitimately I've had the public spaces debate before with Obvious Desperate Breakfasts, I'm out of here in about 20 minutes and I really don't want to do it again.

Just quickly, I go to pubs, I go to the gym, I've played sport since I was about 8 and still do. In terms of male spaces, or shared spaces, I've never experienced any issues with a trans person in the space. To be honest, the only time I've ever noticed any trans people in a bathroom is in gay bars or clubs. The big deal we make it for them to just use the toilet, it's insane.

Thats great. Good for you. Some other people, male and female, might feel differently, especially in situations that involve being unclothed or vulnerable. Is that not ok too?

Also here is the article again where rowling explains the pen name back in 2013. 3 years before the actions of Robert galbraith heath came to light. I think this proves that she didn't pick the name out of homophobic intentions. Just in case you missed it.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jul/24/jk-rowling-robert-galbraith-harry-potter

LineOfBeauty

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I'll call them whatever they want, I'll treat like the gender they want to be. But unless the thought police exists, unfortunately it can't be controlled if I notice their birth sex. And if there are instances where I am not comfortable with a male dealing with me, I won't feel bad about that. I've had a number of intimate medical procedures done in my life that I would only want a female carrying out. Any male who thinks their feelings override my comfort when I'm in such a vulnerable position can take a hike and chuck whatever slurs they want at me on the way out.

ODB what if this doctor was a trans person, has trained in medical school for umpteen years. What makes that doctor any less qualifed than any other doctor? And, in that case, would you be against like male midwives?

LineOfBeauty

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Thats great. Good for you. Some other people, male and female, might feel differently, especially in situations that involve being unclothed or vulnerable. Is that not ok too?

So if you're a trans male in a shopping centre. You gotta pee. What bathroom would you go to?

Neyite

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

So, let's go for this one. Just to confirm, this counsellor who has undergone gender reassignment treatment, who is legally recognised as a female, you say that person is not a female therefore should not be referred to females who request a female counsellor?

Are you suggesting then that a differentiation between trans women who had gender reassignment treatment/surgery and the trans women who have not undergone it, is necessary?

Is that not transphobic? And totally goes against the belief that trans women are women?

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

ODB what if this doctor was a trans person, has trained in medical school for umpteen years. What makes that doctor any less qualifed than any other doctor? And, in that case, would you be against like male midwives?

Let's say a woman was violently raped. She has PTSD. Hasn't left the house in a few years. Avoids men. Is severely traumatised. Are you saying hand on heart that she must accept a transwoman counsellor to be politically on form?

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

So if you're a trans male in a shopping centre. You gotta pee. What bathroom would you go to?

Well I sometimes pop into the disabled toilet if there is no one about and I will be quick as a flash. Loads of room. woohoo! The third space will not have to be hewn from stone with our finger nails.

LineOfBeauty

Neyite wrote: »

Are you suggesting then that a differentiation between trans women who had gender reassignment treatment/surgery and the trans women who have not undergone it, is necessary?

Is that not transphobic? And totally goes against the belief that trans women are women?

I'm trying to make this argument as simple as possible. Imagine trying to make this thing more complex when, at the moment, nobody can give me a realistic answer for what toilet a trans person should use. These are baby steps.

LineOfBeauty

Gruffalox wrote: »

Let's say a woman was violently raped. She has PTSD. Hasn't left the house in a few years. Avoids men. Is severely traumatised. Are you saying hand on heart that she must accept a transwoman counsellor to be politically on form?

In these debates I get into the odd time, the woman is always in a state of trauma for some reason and the trans person is presented as a potential predator. Going by that and by sheer statistics, straight men should never be allowed in a room with a woman on her own, ever.

LineOfBeauty

Gruffalox wrote: »

Well I sometimes pop into the disabled toilet if there is no one about and I will be quick as a flash. Loads of room. woohoo! The third space will not have to be hewn from stone with our finger nails.

That one did make me laugh. That was Game of Thrones rearranging the chairs level stuff. On that genuinely bizarre note I am out of here until Rowling does something else stupid.

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

I'm trying to make this argument as simple as possible. Imagine trying to make this thing more complex when, at the moment, nobody can give me a realistic answer for what toilet a trans person should use. These are baby steps.

The.....third....toilet....unisex....or how about make the mens jacks the anything goes space. Then the one quarter of women who miscarry in public toilets, the ladies like myself who are Olympic champion bleeders, the girls who are shy of opening tampons, the older women with prolapse and urinary difficulties, etc, etc ad infinitum can have a bit of fecken peace in their own sex protected space. thanks!

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

In these debates I get into the odd time, the woman is always in a state of trauma for some reason and the trans person is presented as a potential predator. Going by that and by sheer statistics, straight men should never be allowed in a room with a woman on her own, ever.

Maybe that particular woman - who is by no means unusual - has chosen not to be in a room with any man for a long time. And not because they are predators. But because she has PTSD. Your sympathy for real life situations that women may find themselves in is overwhelming.

LineOfBeauty

Gruffalox wrote: »

The.....third....toilet....unisex....or how about make the mens jacks the anything goes space. Then the one quarter of women who miscarry in public toilets, the ladies like myself who are Olympic champion bleeders, the girls who are shy of opening tampons, the older women with prolapse and urinary difficulties, etc, etc ad infinitum can have a bit of fecken peace in their own sex protected space. thanks!

Gruffalox I appreciate your honesty and sharing (bit too much sharing for me) and the anything goes men's jacks sounds up my alley too but I'm not sure how feasible any of those suggestions are.

Gruffalux

LineOfBeauty wrote: »

Gruffalox I appreciate your honesty and sharing (bit too much sharing for me) and the anything goes men's jacks sounds up my alley too but I'm not sure how feasible any of those suggestions are.

Why not! If the woman's jacks can be the anything goes jacks, then the men's jacks can be instead..! It is not rocket science. And I will leave it to chaps to argue their own case on that.

And by the way that sharing is not too much. it is the reality of life for women. As Muriel Rukeyser once said if one woman told the truth about her life, the world would split open.