Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…3536384041…207

Comments

  • Options
    #1112
    CtevenSrowder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,909 ✭✭✭CtevenSrowder


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    People’s rights clash all the time, and the Courts act as arbiter in any dispute where people’s rights are in conflict. This is no different than whether or not parents who are religious have a right to educate their own children according to their beliefs and values, and those people who say it’s child abuse.

    Did I ever say otherwise? The whole issue here is one sides inability to even admit to there being a clash of rights.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    It’s no different than people who say Maya Forstater was fired for stating a biological fact. No she wasn’t, her contract of employment was not renewed because in spite of numerous warnings about her behaviour making her co-workers feel unsafe, Maya continued to behave as she wanted. She then tried to paint herself as the victim of unfair dismissal and discrimination by her former employer. But in order to do that she had to prove that her beliefs were worthy of protection under equality legislation. The judge in the case determined that her beliefs did not warrant legal protection in a democratic society.
    And?


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Discrimination cases aren’t determined like that.

    I never said anything about discrimination cases.


  • Options
    #1113
    Gruffalux
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Gruffalux


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Trans women are women.

    Transwomen are not women - Jenn Smith (transwoman).

    https://transanityca.wordpress.com/2019/03/01/the-new-transgendermanwoman/


    Transwomen are not women - Miranda Yardley (transwoman)

    https://mirandayardley.com/en/transwomen-are-not-women/

    Transwomen are not women - Fionne Orlander (transwoman)
    Source - all over their popular Twitter account
    https://twitter.com/FionneOrlander/status/1229087625526611969?s=19

    Transwomen are not women - Dr Debbie Haydon

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/22/transgender-woman-accused-hate-speech-wearing-t-shirt-stating/amp/


    There are many more but these are well known.


    I suppose these transgender people who disagree with you are haggard old spinsterly terfs too..?


  • Options
    #1114
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    You think that objecting to men who identify as women being allowed access to women's prisons and women's refuge centres is a slippery slope to a society like Saudi Arabia?

    You think that objecting to men who identify as women being allowed to compete in women's sports event, denying biological women the chance to be professional athletes and the loss of sports scholarships is a slippery slope to a society like Saudi Arabia?

    You think that questioning defined gender roles attributed to men and women will lead to a society like Saudi Arabia?

    You think that objecting to children who are still physically and mentally developing being given untested cocktails of hormone treatments is going to lead to a society like Saudi Arabia?


    I only ever said in this thread that arguing women need protecting from men leads to a society like Saudi Arabia. The rest of it you came up with yourself. I don’t mind, you do you and all that, but I’m not responsible for that, so I’m not going to defend something I didn’t say.

    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    You implied that you knew what I was thinking. A man speaking for a woman, as if my assertions on this thread weren't clear enough. A man, who was outraged that I would dare to tell a muslim woman to remove her headscarf (even though I said no such thing) and would dare to deny them agency. The same man who is unconcerned with the inequality faced by women in Saudi Arabia.


    I didn’t, and again what follows that is entirely your responsibility.

    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    The same man who can't rationally win the argument advanced by the women in this thread so feels the need to continuously resort to obstufication.


    I’ve been very clear in what I suggested, I won’t keep repeating it. No interest in winning any argument either, but if winning an argument on the internet is important to you then I’ll happily concede defeat if it makes you happy?


  • Options
    #1115
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    CtevenSrowder wrote: »
    Did I ever say otherwise? The whole issue here is one sides inability to even admit to there being a clash of rights.


    That’s because there isn’t any actual clash of rights. There’s a conflict for you in imagining the rights people should have vs the rights they have in law.

    CtevenSrowder wrote: »
    I never said anything about discrimination cases.


    I’m simply making the point that it wouldn’t be up to you as an individual to determine the rights that other people are or aren’t entitled to in law.


  • Options
    #1116
    FVP3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭FVP3


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    I'm not wrong.

    you are.
    Trans women are women.

    They aren't. I think they guy asking you was asking for proof. That kind of statement is as logical as "Cats are chickens". Repetition of a position is not proof of that position.
    Why is this so threatening to you?

    Personalisation of debate.

    It doesn't threaten me at all, for one. Although it clearly has an effect on (what you would call cis) women.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1117
    FVP3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭FVP3


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    That’s because there isn’t any actual clash of rights. There’s a conflict for you in imagining the rights people should have vs the rights they have in law.

    Theres a clear clash of rights. And the law isnt the same everywhere. Very few countries have full on self determination.

    I’m simply making the point that it wouldn’t be up to you as an individual to determine the rights that other people are or aren’t entitled to in law.

    I doubt he said that. It is, of course, up to society. If we had a referendum on the issue it would be interesting.


  • Options
    #1118
    OscarMIlde
    Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭OscarMIlde


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    I only ever said in this thread that arguing women need protecting from men leads to a society like Saudi Arabia. The rest of it you came up with yourself. I don’t mind, you do you and all that, but I’m not responsible for that, so I’m not going to defend something I didn’t say.





    I didn’t, and again what follows that is entirely your responsibility.





    I’ve been very clear in what I suggested, I won’t keep repeating it. No interest in winning any argument either, but if winning an argument on the internet is important to you then I’ll happily concede defeat if it makes you happy?

    So when you said 'I think it’s fair to say you imagine that..' you weren't claiming to know what I was thinking?


  • Options
    #1119
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    FVP3 wrote: »
    It doesn't threaten me at all, for one. Although it clearly has an effect on (what you would call cis) women.


    It has an effect on everyone really, some people in a positive way, some people in a negative way, and more people they simply don’t care for how it affects them until it becomes relevant. It might never become relevant, but if it does, those people are protected by the relevant legislation.


  • Options
    #1120
    FVP3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭FVP3


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Nobody is advocating restricting the rights of cis women because they aren't really trying to protect them from stronger men. Their sole aim is restrict the rights of trans people.

    But in pretending to care about women's safety the ideas they propose DO lead to a restriction in all women's freedoms. If men and women should be separated anywhere that men could potentially harm women due to their greater strength (as OBD proposes) then that basically means separating women.....EVERYWHERE.

    Naw, it means restricting male access to places where "cis" women feel unsafe, which is something that feminism has been advocating for years until men became women if they thunk it.

    It also means that other spaces or gender quotas are under threat from men, or the gender fluid.


  • Options
    #1121
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    So when you said 'I think it’s fair to say you imagine that..' you weren't claiming to know what I was thinking?


    No, I wasn’t, and that’s certainly not how it was intended.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1122
    OscarMIlde
    Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭OscarMIlde


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    No, I wasn’t, and that’s certainly not how it was intended.

    What did you mean then? It's very unclear.


  • Options
    #1123
    Merry Prankster
    Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭Merry Prankster


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    No I don't. I accept that they do not have two X chromosomes though.

    What is your definition of "female"? From your comments, it seems that your understanding of the term is different from what people have traditionally understood by the term, which is what J.K. Rowling was pointing out.

    The meanings of words change all of the time, reflecting all manner of societal shifts and changes. However, sex (biology) is different from gender (culture). Cultural meanings and values are constructions and change constantly, just like fashion. Scientific definitions change only when new observational data alters our existing understanding.

    There may well be more that the traditional two binary sexes, but that does not necessarily mean that the term female will be altered to accommodate this. Rather, new terms will be created if required. Female has a specific meaning that is rooted in biology and is (and should be) immune from cultural or political debates.

    The abuse directed at J. K. Rowling for simply stating this is absolutely bonkers.


  • Options
    #1124
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    What did you mean then? It's very unclear.


    What I was attempting to say was that given your contributions to the discussion up to that point, and the context in which we were discussing the issues of women’s safety, I thought it was fair to say that what you were advocating for, you’re advocating for it with the intent that it would lead to women feeling safer.

    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    My comments aren’t about equality, they are about the sort of society one ends up with when they argue that men need to be protected from women.

    I think it’s fair to say you imagine that would lead to women feeling safer, and logically speaking that would make absolute sense, as long as there were no other factors considered.


    That’s not telling you what you’re thinking, it’s telling you what I think when I’m trying to be fair to you rather than dismissing you as a complete idiot who isn’t worth my time engaging with.


  • Options
    #1125
    OscarMIlde
    Registered Users Posts: 772 ✭✭✭OscarMIlde


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    What I was attempting to say was that given your contributions to the discussion up to that point, and the context in which we were discussing the issues of women’s safety, I thought it was fair to say that what you were advocating for, you’re advocating for it with the intent that it would lead to women feeling safer.





    That’s not telling you what you’re thinking, it’s telling you what I think when I’m trying to be fair to you rather than dismissing you as a complete idiot who isn’t worth my time engaging with.

    I'm sorry, but the poster who earlier cited the theoretical possibility of future technology that might be able to produce a fully menstruating uterus in a transwomen meant that J.K. Rowling couldn't state that only women can menstruate is calling me an idiot.

    Well, thanks for the laughs.


  • Options
    #1126
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,306 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Pure nonsense there is nothing hateful about the word cis. I'll continue to use it.

    "There's nothing hateful about the word woman/women/female. I'll continue to use it." JK Rowling

    *misogynistic hate storm ensues

    Can you say raging hypocrisy?


  • Options
    #1127
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    J. K. Rowling has just published this offering a rationalisation of her position (as if she required one)

    https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/


  • Options
    #1128
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,306 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but the poster who earlier cited the theoretical possibility of future technology that might be able to produce a fully menstruatung uterus in a transwomen meant that J.K. Rowling couldn't state that only women can menstruate is calling me an idiot.

    Well, thanks for the laughs.

    who remembers when that particular poster stated that breastfeeding is a not a natural behaviour in humans and that, pre formula, babies who couldn't be fed by their mothers were given plant juice, and not just fed by another woman, and all was fine and dandy. Babies can survive on plant juice. Lol.


  • Options
    #1129
    chopperbyrne
    Registered Users Posts: 11,013 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    Self identifying trans women pose a much greater risk to biological women in shared changing/bathing facilities than self identifying trans men do to biological men in shared changing/bathing facilities, especially if that person has fully matured before transitioning, or is not going through HRT.

    However, I'd think trans men are much more at risk from biological men in shared changing/bathing facilities than trans women are from biological women.

    It's a bit of a catch 22 situation.

    If my wife or daughter (both biologically female), or any biological woman, objected to sharing facilities with someone who is biologically male, I don't see how you could not respect their objections, and concerns.


  • Options
    #1130
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    OscarMIlde wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but the poster who earlier cited the theoretical possibility of future technology that might be able to produce a fully menstruatung uterus in a transwomen meant that J.K. Rowling couldn't state that only women can menstruate is calling me an idiot.

    Well, thanks for the laughs.


    The point of me engaging with you at all is precisely because I wasn’t calling you an idiot.

    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    who remembers when that particular poster stated that breastfeeding is a not a natural behaviour in humans and that, pre formula, babies who couldn't be fed by their mothers were given plant juice, and not just fed by another woman, and all was fine and dandy. Babies can survive on plant juice. Lol.


    I certainly didn’t say all was fine and dandy. They died, in great numbers.


  • Options
    #1131
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,690 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    who remembers when that particular poster stated that breastfeeding is a not a natural behaviour in humans and that, pre formula, babies who couldn't be fed by their mothers were given plant juice, and not just fed by another woman, and all was fine and dandy. Babies can survive on plant juice. Lol.

    Yes I remember that! And he kept it up too, he seemed to really believe it!
    image.png



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1132
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Shelga wrote: »
    What do you define as a woman? Whatever one wants it to be?

    I'd love to see somebody answer this without resorting to gender stereotypes.


  • Options
    #1133
    JohnnyFlash
    Registered Users Posts: 7,055 ✭✭✭JohnnyFlash


    Does anyone else find this whole trans issue to be hilarious? It’s what happens when the madness of intersectionality reaches a point where it starts to collapse in on itself due to the sheer weight of its own contradictions.

    So now you have old-fashioned leftie lesbians and feminists being called terfs by white men who count themselves as liberal, yet seem to deem themselves more of an authority than women. And former self-appointed moral guardians like Graham Linehan being savaged alive by his former disciples.

    It’s all very confusing and amusing to watch to be honest.


  • Options
    #1134
    Silentcorner
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    JohnnyFlash wrote: »
    Does anyone else find this whole trans issue to be hilarious? It’s what happens when the madness of intersectionality reaches a point where it starts to collapse in on itself due to the sheer weight of its own contradictions.

    So now you have old-fashioned leftie lesbians and feminists being called terfs by white men who count themselves as liberal, yet seem to deem themselves more of an authority that women. And former self-appointed moral guardians like Graham Linehan being savages alive by his former disciples.

    It’s all very confusing and amusing to watch to be honest.

    What's that they say about the left end up eating their own...it's happening all over...

    I still have to laugh at the predicament of the UK Labour Party...there's a split between the feminists who believe people with penises are women and the feminists who don't....and it's gonna get ugly!!!


  • Options
    #1135
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    I'd love to see somebody answer this without resorting to gender stereotypes.


    What, like JK defining women by their capacity to menstruate?


  • Options
    #1136
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    What, like JK defining women by their capacity to menstruate?

    That is an outright lie. She never defined a woman by an ability to menstruate.

    She said that only women can menstruate.

    Huge difference.

    Massively misrepresentative of what was said and you know it.


  • Options
    #1137
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    CtevenSrowder wrote: »
    Oh my God. Ye, as I said, flat Earthism, anti-Vaccers, Climate Change Denialists etc.

    "I believe the World is warming but just not that humans play any part in it whatsoever".

    If they don't have two X chromosomes, and have XY instead, then they are not female.

    Nothing to do with any of those. The words woman and female were used long before we had any scientific notions that corresponded to those. And they are some of our most fundamental words.

    The same doeS not apply to climate change.


  • Options
    #1138
    JoannaJag
    Registered Users Posts: 85 ✭✭JoannaJag


    https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/


    This is worth posting again. In case you missed it. Compare with the “suck my ladydick” responses to her original tweets.


  • Options
    #1139
    randomchild
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭randomchild


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    That is an outright lie. She never defined a woman by an ability to menstruate.

    She said that only women can menstruate.

    Huge difference.

    Massively misrepresentative of what was said and you know it.


    This will be the end of my brief interaction with this thread. There's no point participating with this crapology.


  • Options
    #1140
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,590 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    So what is a woman/female by your definition?

    Trans women and cis women.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1141
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    LLMMLL wrote: »
    Trans women and cis women.

    No...what is the definition of a woman? That's who you class as women. What parameters must you meet to be defined as a woman?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement