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

Parabellum9

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't think you're ever going to be successful at having that reclassed as an insult.

It's a pretty stupid and vacuous insult anyway if that's what you consider it to be seeing as it's only directed at women - there's plenty of men here as well that are sick of this **** and don't have anything to do with feminism. Really does make me wonder how much woman hating is a part of that whole belief system...

Gervais08

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't think you're ever going to be successful at having that reclassed as an insult.

I find it offensive and have asked you politely to refrain from using it.

If someone asks me not to use a word I might not see the offence in (e.g. I used transsexual as a friend calls herself that after a decade of surgeries) I would refrain from using it.

Why can you not extend a courtesy when asked politely ?

Errashareesh

LLMMLL wrote: »

Loving all your intellectual non-sneery comments guys. Keep em coming

Another comment with no substance to it at all - and no addressing points put to you. That's all ya got.

Errashareesh

Gervais08 wrote: »

I find it offensive and have asked you politely to refrain from using it.

If someone asks me not to use a word I might not see the offence in (e.g. I used transsexual as a friend calls herself that after a decade of surgeries) I would refrain from using it.

Why can you not extend a courtesy when asked politely ?

How you feel doesn't matter.

But how people feel about biology being acknowledged matters very much.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Isn’t that just your opinion too though that “trans women are women”, just like it’s your opinion that anyone who doesn’t share your opinions could possibly be transphobic? The whole thing seems to revolve around acknowledging your perceived authority to make these sorts of determinations.

Your determination that someone could be transphobic appears to be based more upon the fact that they don’t share your opinions, than their opinions with regard to the rights of people who are transgender.

It’s more accurate to acknowledge the fact that some TRAs consider “trans women” to be women, most TRAs certainly do not. It’s an extremist minority who parrot that particular mantra, not because they actually believe it themselves, not even because they want other people to believe it, but simply because they know it draws attention to them and winds people up. This extremist minority are akin to the extremist minority in any group or movement - anyone who doesn’t share their opinions are agin ‘em and must be condemned as transphobic, or misogynistic, etc. It’s common rhetoric often used with great effect because it works on people who don’t think too hard -


You're either with us, or against us


It only has any meaning if one thinks of the person making the statement as their peer, a good example being the godawful term “TERF” - it divides feminists (who are mostly women) into feminists who support the idea that “trans women are women” and therefore should be regarded as women, deserving of rights and protections as women and so on, and those feminists who disagree - people who are transgender are not women, they are people who are transgender, and their campaign for their rights is completely separate and distinct from any campaigns to promote the rights and welfare of women and girls.

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on whether most TRAs consider trans women to be women.

The post you quoted was mostly about showing ODB that her assertion that TRAs are othering black women are based on faulty reasoning.

Even if you consider the statement "trans women are women" to be just my opinion, it still leads to the conclusion that when a TRA makes a comparison between racism and transphobia that they are not othering black women precisely because of their Knowledge, belief, or "opinion" that trans women are women.

Gervais08

Parabellum9 wrote: »

It's a pretty stupid and vacuous insult anyway if that's what you consider it to be seeing as it's only directed at women - there's plenty of men here as well that are sick of this **** and don't have anything to do with feminism. Really does make me wonder how much woman hating is a part of that whole belief system...

Front and centre.

You’re a woman? I’m a man and can be a better woman than you.

You only want to have sex with women? Nonsense. My penis is a girl’s.

You don’t want your prepubescent daughter to see a grown man naked in the changing rooms ?? Stupid - I’m a woman.

Lots of misogyny and autogynephilia going on for certain.

Gatling

Errashareesh wrote: »

How you feel doesn't matter.

But how people feel about biology being acknowledged matters very much.

Imagine at some stage maternity hospitals will have to allow men to go though fake deliveries so that trans men feel included

LLMMLL

Errashareesh wrote: »

How you feel doesn't matter.

But how people feel about biology being acknowledged matters very much.

The whole TERF is an insult thing is just a PR tactic. Not worth entertaining.

Errashareesh

Deleted User wrote: »

How are they women?

What is your definition of 'woman' that makes trans women literally women?

They aren't women.

For example (and this is just one of many many examples) women have the fear of cervical cancer and ovarian cancer hanging over us. Trans women don't. Trans women are trans women.

Don't let anyone bully you into agreeing that trans women are women.

Women in the developing world have their own struggles and nobody else would dare say they're the same as them.

Just like trans women have their own set of struggles and I would never have the cheek to say I am the same as them.

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on whether most TRAs consider trans women to be women.

Most people don't based off here


So there's no disagreement just a false claim

Gervais08

LLMMLL wrote: »

The whole TERF is an insult thing is just a PR tactic. Not worth entertaining.

I am a person, not a PR firm.

It is inaccurate and offensive to me - a person and I have asked respectfully for you not to use it.

LLMMLL

Gatling wrote: »

Most people don't based off here


So there's no disagreement just a false claim

Your criteria for something being true or false is whether people on boards agree with you?.......

Gervais08

Turloch Mor wrote: »

So the progressives want us to believe 'transwomen are women'?. Ok fine. So I have now decided I am transwoman and therefore I am a woman.

I don't feel like getting surgery though, in fact why should I have to? Is my word not enough?

So let me into the female changing room. And if rape a woman, well you have to put me into a female prison.

That is exactly it the way the GRA works.

It’s like women’s rights kind of got to a point where real equality was reached - and then poof, it’s gone.

Errashareesh

LLMMLL wrote: »

Your criteria for something being true or false is whether people on boards agree with you?.......

Dishonesty too.

o1s1n

Gervais08 wrote: »

I find it offensive and have asked you politely to refrain from using it.

If someone asks me not to use a word I might not see the offence in (e.g. I used transsexual as a friend calls herself that after a decade of surgeries) I would refrain from using it.

Why can you not extend a courtesy when asked politely ?

It's a horrible sounding term alright, isn't it?

Seems to be the way with these things. Cis is another example.

keano_afc

Turloch Mor wrote: »

So the progressives want us to believe 'transwomen are women'?. Ok fine. So I have now decided I am transwoman and therefore I am a woman.

I don't feel like getting surgery though, in fact why should I have to? Is my word not enough?

So let me into the female changing room. And if rape a woman, well you have to put me into a female prison.

Welcome to the Gender Recognition Act.

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

Your criteria for something being true or false is whether people on boards

No it's based on actual fact .

Sir Oxman

Parabellum9 wrote: »

I'd love to know what people you are talking to because that is not reality anywhere, the majority of people that aren't aware of these things don't give 2 ****s about trans or their issues or what JK said - the people who are aware fall in to 2 categories, those who absolutely support her because this nonsense is dangerous and being pushed in to the real world, or those who object because they have some direct involvement in the trans community. I'm guessing those who are "horrified" fall in to the latter.

And if their friends are only getting their opinion of JKR's opinions via someone's subjective (in this case, biased) opinion of an opinion well, what's to be expected.
I direct any of my peers, friends and family when this is brought up to JKR's actual words and the opinion afterwards is 100% 'why is she getting attacked, abused and threatened for that?'

I also direct them towards articles with opinions/critcisms that what she said was 'wrong'
The totality of forming their own opinion (reached independently) results in them being peaktransed.
Every. Single. Time.

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

Loving all your intellectual non-sneery comments guys. Keep em coming

You're claiming Transexual people are actually the gender they identify as and you've the cheek to reference intellectual discourse? .

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

You're claiming Transexual people are actually the gender they identify as and you've the cheek to reference intellectual discourse? .

Yes. So cheeky.

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on whether most TRAs consider trans women to be women.

The post you quoted was mostly about showing ODB that her assertion that TRAs are othering black women are based on faulty reasoning.

We may well have to disagree on it then because if TRAs regarded people who are transgender are women, they would be Women’s Rights Advocates, the T wouldn’t even be a necessary distinction, and yet there it is.

In the same way, the statement that “trans women are women” becomes somewhat impotent if you have to say “women are women”. Except then the extremists wouldn’t be able to wind people up.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We may well have to disagree on it then because if TRAs regarded people who are transgender are women, they would be Women’s Rights Advocates, the T wouldn’t even be a necessary distinction, and yet there it is.

In the same way, the statement that “trans women are women” becomes somewhat impotent if you have to say “women are women”. Except then the extremists wouldn’t be able to wind people up.

That doesn't really make sense. You can regard trans women as women but acknowledge that they have issues that other women (cis women) do not face (such as people trying to police their use of changing rooms) and campaign around those issues.

CtevenSrowder

LLMMLL wrote: »

Your criteria for something being true or false is whether people on boards agree with you?.......

It's a false claim because a women is an adult human female, and transwomen aren't female. They are male.

I'll ask again if you don't mind:

"Thank you for answering. If you could placate me pls. .. What if the transwomen has had sex reassignment surgery? John does still not want to sleep with the transwomen, for the previous stated reason (they are male). Is this an act of transphobia in your view?"

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

That doesn't really make sense. You can regard trans women as women but acknowledge that they have issues that other women (cis women) do not face (such as people trying to police their use of changing rooms) and campaign around those issues.

1) I don't regard Trans women(or men) as the biological sex they identify as, I regard them as Trans. 2) "cis" women are the biological sex they identify as. If there's any campaigning to do it's to call out nonsense wherever it's promoted, especially if it impinges on others and actual realities.

As it stands I can self identify as a woman, keep my "woman's penis" and "woman's beard" and change nada but the tickbox for gender on forms and have to be accorded the rights of lifelong biological women and that's a bloody madness and a damned disgrace. The day when I agree with a point made by feminists(and hell didn't freeze over) is the day when something is so the sky is blue bloody obvious that it can't be denied.

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

1) I don't regard Trans women(or men) as the biological sex they identify as, I regard them as Trans. 2) "cis" women are the biological sex they identify as. If there's any campaigning to do it's to call out nonsense wherever it's promoted, especially if it impinges on others and actual realities.

As it stands I can self identify as a woman, keep my "woman's penis" and "woman's beard" and change nada but the tickbox for gender on forms and have to be accorded the rights of lifelong biological women and that's a bloody madness and a damned disgrace. The day when I agree with a point made by feminists(and hell didn't freeze over) is the day when something is so the sky is blue bloody obvious that it can't be denied.

And you're not actually going to do any of this because you're not trans. It's just scaremongering.

volchitsa

LLMMLL wrote: »

And you're not actually going to do any of this because you're not trans. It's just scaremongering.

Pardon if I've missed stuff here (it's a fast moving thread and hard to keep on top of) but does this imply that you actually believe that Barbie Kardashian is genuinely a woman, despite wanting to rape and murder women more or less at random apparently, and not just a young man who has been desperately damaged by his father's abuse of him and his mother from babyhood?

I mean, it would be massive coincidence if his claim/belief about being a woman were entirely unrelated to that abuse - don't you think?

Do you believe that everyone who says they are trans is bound to be trans?

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

And you're not actually going to do any of this because you're not trans. It's just scaremongering.

Scaremongering. :rolleyes: The fact is under the current clearly rushed out under pressure and monumentally stupid law I can do just that. I can "self identify" as whatever the hell I like.

Which is actually fine as far as I'm concerned. It seems to be the in thing of late with 50 genders/sexualities on Facebook. Meh, if it makes people feel unique, or their lives a little better, again game ball. Doesn't affect anyone. All fine until you bring in a law that is a complete and utter bloody nonsense and forces society to pander to this bullsh1t and no doubt with the hate speech laws we didn't bloody vote for either can have people prosecuted for stating a cast iron fact of science. That's beyond scary.

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

That doesn't really make sense. You can regard trans women as women but acknowledge that they have issues that other women (cis women) do not face (such as people trying to police their use of changing rooms) and campaign around those issues.

That’s somewhat missing the point.

TRAs, as the acronym suggests, are people who campaign for the rights of people who are transgender. Women’s rights advocates... one would think it should be obvious, but they campaign for women’s rights. They’re two distinct ideals.

I didn’t suggest that anyone couldn’t be both an advocate for women’s rights, and they can be an advocate for the rights of people who are transgender, but they are two completely separate and distinct ideals, as indicated by the T, or “trans”, rather than just referring to them as women. It should be obvious, but people who are transgender aren’t necessarily women.

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

Scaremongering. :rolleyes: The fact is under the current clearly rushed out under pressure and monumentally stupid law I can do just that. I can "self identify" as whatever the hell I like..

And again. You're clearly not going to. Because it's......scaremongering.

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

And again. You're clearly not going to. Because it's......scaremongering.

If tomorrow the government brought back legislation that allowed slavery I wouldn't go out and buy a slave. It doesn't mean it wouldn't be a retarded law.