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

Sheeps

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I wonder if any of the people who agree that rowling is transphobic and an arsehole have read her latest statement? If they have maybe they could they highlight to us which parts specifically are transphobic and indicative of being an arsehole because honestly, I'm not seeing it.

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

Actually she's getting more abuse now. People are being absolutely horrible.

hetuzozaho

And now Emma has come out against her... Any reunions they had planned are gonna be messy!

https://twitter.com/EmmaWatson/status/1270826851070619649

One eyed Jack

OscarMIlde wrote: »

Right, but since you know I am a biologist and a woman you knew full well I wasn't using the term in a James Damore type manner (whoever that is, I refuse to listen to toxic misogynists).

I also wasn't conflating biological and sociological terms at all. I was very clear in defining what I meant, indeed I clarified what you understood non-binary to be. I think it is perfectly correct to use the biological definition of a female when referring to menstruation, as only biological females can menstruate.

You disagree with this position for idealogical reasons not because it is factually incorrect and call someone who holds these factually correct views an asshole as a direct consequence of airing them.

You are free to think that and others are free to disagree with you in a respectful and courteous manner. J.K. Rowling was not debated in a respectful and courteous manner. She was called a bigot, and TERF, and an asshole, the latter insult which you yourself repeatedly referred to her as.

I do know you weren’t using the term in a James Damore type manner, because the only people who would commonly refer to females are biologists and James Damore types. You know I know you’re a biologist so why would you think I was calling you a James Damore type? I also know your grasp of English can’t possibly be so poor as to think I was calling you a James Damore type.

Your use of the term biological females wasn’t the issue, it was your persistent use of the term biological women. We’re both clear on the fact that only females have the capacity to menstruate. That is not the same context as making the point that women, girls and non-binary people menstruate. Both contexts are factually correct.

I do not disagree with JK’s position, I disagree with the way she went about making her point. JK herself did not debate anything in a respectful and courteous manner when she ridiculed an article which was intended to educate people in underdeveloped countries about the need for adequate and appropriate menstrual healthcare for women, girls and non-binary people.

TERFs and bigot are not terms I would ever call anyone. Asshole refers to their behaviour, whether it’s a man or a woman, male or female. I’d say the same of anyone who behaved as she has done and then tried to portray themselves as a victim of some terrible injustice against them. Plenty of people have suffered terribly and they don’t behave as JK has done in this instance. I’ve already said I don’t support the disproportionate backlash she is getting. I don’t think anyone should be subjected to that kind of treatment, which is why I don’t support how JK chooses to treat people she doesn’t agree with by taking the piss with this nonsense -


‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?


Even with an electron microscope you won’t find any reference to females in that tweet, seeing as your issue is that females is the correct term.

1 sheep2

hetuzozaho wrote: »

And now Emma has come out against her... Any reunions they had planned are gonna be messy!

https://twitter.com/EmmaWatson/status/1270826851070619649

Yikes. Radcliffe's was softer.

I'm supportive of trans people and have adapted my sense of woman to include those whose sex at birth was male, and vice versa. But I think it so naive and dogmatic to say, Trans women are women. They just are. Etc.

TuringBot47

1 sheep2 wrote: »

But I think it so naive and dogmatic to say, Trans women are women. They just are. Etc.

It's even a step too far for an author who believes in magic.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

An estimated 1.8 billion girls, women, and gender non-binary persons menstruate, and this has not stopped because of the pandemic. They still require menstrual materials,

The joys of womanhood even the self identifying non gender binary women menstruate .

Gatling

The vitrol abuse of jk Rowling is pretty pathetic and sick,
She hasn't attacked or abused anyone , claiming hate speech against her and any one who supporters her ,

Larbre34

"Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are."

- Emma Watson

Constantly questioned?

If there wasn't a narrative being pushed that trans identity necessitates a cis identity, and that contrarians to this are pushing a TERF idealogy, then your ordinary everyday 'Cis' would be thinking 'you do you' and I'll be over here living life also.

Its the constant clamour to revise (and yes we're doing revisionism this week) the standard sense of identity for 99.645% of the population that brings about the resistance. The idea of 'cis' will simply not ever be adopted. Ever. The sooner that everyone moves on from that, the sooner 'that trans dude' is just that dude and nobody cares if the person has two penises and four uteruses and self identifies as a small Spanish cottage with vineyard views.

TuringBot47

Gatling wrote: »

The vitrol abuse of jk Rowling is pretty pathetic and sick

Yeah, those realityphobes can get fairly worked up.

hatrickpatrick

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I do not disagree with JK’s position, I disagree with the way she went about making her point. JK herself did not debate anything in a respectful and courteous manner when she ridiculed an article which was intended to educate people in underdeveloped countries about the need for adequate and appropriate menstrual healthcare for women, girls and non-binary people.

Why should she, though? She's probably fed up, like so many people, of having the new dogma that "gender is a social contract" rammed down her throat without any recourse to disagreement. The people who push this sh!te are in no way respectful or courteous, they're literally "agree with this bizarre redifining of fundamental concepts, without question, or we will f*ck you up". As far as I'm concerned, nobody has any obligation to be respectful or courteous when dealing with this, the other side fired the first shots earlier this decade and were extremely nasty and vitriolic about it.

This kind of sh!t went mainstream with absolutely no discussion, and now anyone who objects is somehow a bad person. In that context, no, there was no need for JK Rowling to be respectful and courteous in her argument. She's a brave person who menstruates for speaking her mind knowing that that's not something you're allowed to do anymore, as far as I'm concerned.

I'll just leave this here:

Gatling

So hetro couple have sex = straight sex

Gay couple (men ) have sex = gay sex

Lesbian couple have sex = Les/gay sex

Couple one straight one trans (both have penises) = straight sex

Couple one woman (no penis ) one trans (no penis ) = straight sex

So is gay /lesbianism done and everyone is straight ?

sabat

An intelligent, reasoned and honest piece from Rowling, but my God she must be naïve to think, after everything she's already been through with them, that she could pacify that cabal of brainwashed lunatics and imbeciles. She probably thought that being open about her own traumas would bring shared humanity to the table but the narcissistic individualism that causes these people to consider themselves gods will just see it as a weapon to use against her.

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why should she, though? She's probably fed up, like so many people, of having the new dogma that "gender is a social contract" rammed down her throat without any recourse to disagreement.

It was OscarMilde who made the point that JK was not debated in a respectful and courteous manner. Using your same logic, why should anyone who disagrees with JK debate with her in a respectful and courteous manner when they’re likely just as fed up of having to deal with people in their daily lives like JK who constantly remind them that they are not something which as far as they’re concerned, they are! People who like JK will go out of their way to stoke up paranoia and prejudice against them.

Everyone has recourse to disagreement, you’re not seriously suggesting that a billionaire with however many followers she has on social media has no recourse to disagreement? According to herself she’s been ‘cancelled’ five times already. No recourse to disagreement? Stop that :pac:

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The people who push this sh!te are in no way respectful or courteous, they're literally "agree with this bizarre redifining of fundamental concepts, without question, or we will f*ck you up". As far as I'm concerned, nobody has any obligation to be respectful or courteous when dealing with this, the other side fired the first shots earlier this decade and were extremely nasty and vitriolic about it.

Please show me, because I can’t see it, in what possible way were Marni Sommer, Virginia Kamowa and Therese Mahon, the authors of that article which JK references in her tweet, being disrespectful to JK?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This kind of sh!t went mainstream with absolutely no discussion, and now anyone who objects is somehow a bad person. In that context, no, there was no need for JK Rowling to be respectful and courteous in her argument.

This kind of shìte couldn’t have gone mainstream if it wasn’t being discussed. People have been discussing it for as long as humans have been able to communicate with each other. JK wasn’t making any argument, she didn’t even make a great point? According to some posters here the word she was looking for is females. JK wasn’t even close!

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

She's a brave person who menstruates for speaking her mind knowing that that's not something you're allowed to do anymore, as far as I'm concerned.

Oof :pac:

JK will be out for blood if she sees you refer to her as a person who menstruates Patrick! I’ll just leave this here myself -


‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gatling wrote: »

The vitrol abuse of jk Rowling is pretty pathetic and sick,
She hasn't attacked or abused anyone , claiming hate speech against her and any one who supporters her ,

It’s mad. Even people who have been fairly moderate in criricising Rowling are themselves getting attacked for being too nice to her. An actress I won’t name so she doesn’t get dogpiled, wrote a tweet thread where she disagreed with Rowling but was very measured and said nice things about her too. The comments are full of people telling this actress how disappointed they are in her for being nice to Rowling. Nothing but complete compliance is good enough for these people. It’s creepy.

iptba

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why should she, though? She's probably fed up, like so many people, of having the new dogma that "gender is a social contract" rammed down her throat without any recourse to disagreement. The people who push this sh!te are in no way respectful or courteous, they're literally "agree with this bizarre redifining of fundamental concepts, without question, or we will f*ck you up". As far as I'm concerned, nobody has any obligation to be respectful or courteous when dealing with this, the other side fired the first shots earlier this decade and were extremely nasty and vitriolic about it.

This view is not limited to the trans community and those who support them: lots of people, including many/most/all (?) "gender critical" feminists, see gender as a social construct*.

41% of British people say that gender is a social construct, but 36% oppose that view

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/09/25/majority-see-gender-socially-constructed

*I'm guessing that's what you meant, rather than contract

2u2me

Gatling wrote: »

The vitrol abuse of jk Rowling is pretty pathetic and sick,
She hasn't attacked or abused anyone , claiming hate speech against her and any one who supporters her ,

They'll claim her speech affects their safety; just like they always do.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

iptba wrote: »

This view is not limited to the trans community and those who support them: lots of people, including many/most/all (?) "gender critical" feminists, see gender as a social construct*.


https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/09/25/majority-see-gender-socially-constructed

*I'm guessing that's what you meant, rather than contract

Well, I don’t have much problem with this. Because what that means is when somebody says “transwomen are women!” or “transmen are men!” and are asked to clarify what makes a man a man and a woman a woman, in the absence of biology backing them up, generally it will come down to regressive gender tropes. I think the argument is why can’t people be content in their biological sex and not feel constrained by how they should act according to that biology.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It was OscarMilde who made the point that JK was not debated in a respectful and courteous manner. Using your same logic, why should anyone who disagrees with JK debate with her in a respectful and courteous manner when they’re likely just as fed up of having to deal with people in their daily lives like JK who constantly remind them that they are not something which as far as they’re concerned, they are! People who like JK will go out of their way to stoke up paranoia and prejudice against them.

Everyone has recourse to disagreement, you’re not seriously suggesting that a billionaire with however many followers she has on social media has no recourse to disagreement? According to herself she’s been ‘cancelled’ five times already. No recourse to disagreement?

Utter nonsense it's there in black and white she's litterally being a attacked by a bunch of hyenas with keyboards it's not a discussion or debate of any kind it's an assault and nothing more .

Fact you cannot change your age

You cannot be a alien from outer space

You cannot physically have a period /menstrual cycle as a man , even if you self identify as binary ,non conforming ,gender fluid /neutral

There is a penis and a vagina , both Very distinctly different and serve different purposes ,
There is no such thing as a lady penis or a male vagina because someone made it up doesn't make it actually true ,
It's not hate speech no matter why it's tried to be twisted it's simple biological and scientific fact .


Something you did mention I agree people are paranoid and I believe this is an the crux of the matter people living in an echo chamber being led to believe they are something that's they are clearly not ,then come into the real world and suddenly the realisation oh I'm a man but I've a vagina , cervix , ovaries, womb ,
Or I'm woman who has a penis and testicles not a lady penis or cervix , ovaries or womb ,and doesn't have menstrual cycle because they don't have ovaries , cervix ,womb ,womb lining ,
It's not hate or exclusionary it's simple fact,


You cannot force people to agree to believe something that is not true ,

The world is not an echo chamber welcome to the real world

Gruffalux

Yegads! I think I may begin to be worn down by an exemplar of tirelessness. As a person who menstruates, and an owner of a cervix and possessor of XX chromosomes, I begin to think we should do away with liminal, diffuse, ever-changing depending on the social construct exclusionary words like man or woman.
As any member of either sex can now legitimately identify as either sex, as per statute, I vote that intimate or protective places or spaces of confinement, sporting categories, scholarships, representative roles, etc no longer be divided by male and female categories. Henceforth they should be divided between owners of vaginas and possessors of penises, in whatever state those organs presently manifest themselves, new, old, worn out, fresh, troubled or exuberant, and be they man, woman or anything in between or beyond. Enough with the uncertainty and solipsistic word discrimination!

JimmyVik

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

It’s mad. Even people who have been fairly moderate in criricising Rowling are themselves getting attacked for being too nice to her. An actress I won’t name so she doesn’t get dogpiled, wrote a tweet thread where she disagreed with Rowling but was very measured and said nice things about her too. The comments are full of people telling this actress how disappointed they are in her for being nice to Rowling. Nothing but complete compliance is good enough for these people. It’s creepy.

People living in the public eye are very vulnerable to witch hunts for simple opinions they they may have one minute and not the next. They are held to what they say forever, even if the way they meant it didnt actually come out right and sounds different to what they meant.

The only way not to be targeted in future is to never use social media. Never like anything. Never ever express your personal opinion in public or anywhere it can be recorded. Sounds scary now that I say it.
This type of mass bullying is getting out of hand.

TuringBot47

JimmyVik wrote: »

The only way not to be targeted in future is to never use social media. Never like anything. Never ever express your personal opinion in public or anywhere it can be recorded. Sounds scary now that I say it.
This type of mass bullying is getting out of hand.

I reckon there'll come a time where the internet will split in two and you can only use a strongly authenticated real life identity in one and all business and social media will move to that one.

That would end this anonymous bullying and attacks by crazy fanatics.

conorhal

JimmyVik wrote: »

People living in the public eye are very vulnerable to witch hunts for simple opinions they they may have one minute and not the next. They are held to what they say forever, even if the way they meant it didnt actually come out right and sounds different to what they meant.

The only way not to be targeted in future is to never use social media. Never like anything. Never ever express your personal opinion in public or anywhere it can be recorded. Sounds scary now that I say it.
This type of mass bullying is getting out of hand.

Oh we're way past that and into the territory of 'compelled speech' now, or haven't you heard? "Silence is violence" according to the mob.
So unless you're loudly and proudly proclaiming the received wisdom of the Twitterati's 'Newspeak', like a North Korean on Dear Leader's birthday, your failure to clap along will be noted (just see: Every Harry Potter actor ever denouncing Rowling's wrongthink.)


Remember:
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery and Ignorance is strength", oh and men menstruate now.


Please place this in your twitter bio alongside a black square and your pronouns.

That said, I can't deny a certain degree of schadenfreude watching 'right-on Rowling' getting eaten by her own mob.
Lets not forget that she's more then happy to employ cancel culture against anybody that disagrees with her politically.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/830426421323526145

So JK, how's it feel standing on your own pyre?

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

Utter nonsense it's there in black and white she's litterally being a attacked by a bunch of hyenas with keyboards it's not a discussion or debate of any kind it's an assault and nothing more .

Fact you cannot change your age

You cannot be a alien from outer space

You cannot physically have a period /menstrual cycle as a man , even if you self identify as binary ,non conforming ,gender fluid /neutral

There is a penis and a vagina , both Very distinctly different and serve different purposes ,
There is no such thing as a lady penis or a male vagina because someone made it up doesn't make it actually true ,
It's not hate speech no matter why it's tried to be twisted it's simple biological and scientific fact .

Something you did mention I agree people are paranoid and I believe this is an the crux of the matter people living in an echo chamber being led to believe they are something that's they are clearly not ,then come into the real world and suddenly the realisation oh I'm a man but I've a vagina , cervix , ovaries, womb ,
Or I'm woman who has a penis and testicles not a lady penis or cervix , ovaries or womb ,and doesn't have menstrual cycle because they don't have ovaries , cervix ,womb ,womb lining ,
It's not hate or exclusionary it's simple fact,

You cannot force people to agree to believe something that is not true ,

The world is not an echo chamber welcome to the real world

You speak of welcome to the real world, yet you appear to refuse to acknowledge reality yourself in that the world is not an echo chamber where people can be forced to adhere to or accept your standards. The reality is that a lot of people just don’t.

It’s like you saying we all speak English, welcome to the real world. We clearly don’t all speak English, and you cannot force anyone to use the same terminology you do. I know I don’t, I know plenty of people who don’t, and the reality is that anyone else is impotent, or rather - powerless, to stop anyone from referring to whatever they like, however they like. That’s the real world, the one where nobody is obligated to conform to a specific standard as defined by other people.

What’s also a fact is that Irish and International human rights laws don’t appear to care much for scientific fact and biology either, and that’s a reality which some people outright reject too. What’s also a reality is that an estimated 84% of the world have some form of religious beliefs on which they base their perspective of reality.

You can’t force anyone to believe what they don’t believe is true either. And the more you attempt to force them to do so, the more likely they’re going to lash out at you for being a dick as they see it. That’s why I don’t bother with twitter and the likes, because it seems to be an echo chamber of people who are committed to winding each other up. I know in reality there’s plenty of useful stuff on there like data scientists talking about their latest research and stuff, but it’s just not worth it. I can happily live my life not knowing what the latest hot take on quantum mechanics is or whatever. I’ll catch them at the next conference, or echo chamber, if you prefer, because all they’ll be talking about is stuff that interests all of us who are there.

Essentially, if someone refers to themselves as a man, what is anyone else going to do to stop them from doing so? There’s nothing anyone can do only express their disagreement. How they express their disagreement though, is what matters. JK has since written a piece by way of explanation for her behaviour, in her usual “sorry not sorry” fashion where she starts off by saying -


This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an issue surrounded by toxicity. I write this without any desire to add to that toxicity.


And then goes on to pour plenty of fuel on the fire :pac:


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


JK knows well what she is doing, and so do the people who attack her in the very same fashion as they feel she is attacking them. The only people I feel any bit of sympathy for are those people who get caught in the crossfire of their crap, people who didn’t ask to be involved and didn’t want to be involved, but they become involved because someone read the blog of a writer and it honed their attacks on how to best wind people up and sound clever while doing so, by throwing around words like science and biological fact and all the rest of it. Someone of that mindset was always of that mindset, they just didn’t have the language to be able to express themselves in order to inflict maximum damage on another person’s dignity.

It’s also reality that those people are thankfully for everyone else, those people are very much in a minority, and starving them of the attention they crave rather than fuelling the fire and legitimising their opinions is the best way to deal with them if one disagrees with them. It’s easier to get angry about it when someone hurts your feelings of course, but that only perpetuates the victimhood narrative, which appears to have currency in those types of echo chambers, which is why JK is now attempting to portray herself as the victim of those hyenas with keyboards you referred to earlier.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

conorhal wrote: »

That said, I can't deny a certain degree of schadenfreude watching 'right-on Rowling getting eaten by her own mob.
Lets not forget that she's more then happy to employ cancel culture against anybody that disagrees with her politically.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/830426421323526145

She’s not really trying to cancel him there though, is she? She’s giving her opinion just like the bould Piers no doubt did.

Silentcorner

JimmyVik wrote: »

People living in the public eye are very vulnerable to witch hunts for simple opinions they they may have one minute and not the next. They are held to what they say forever, even if the way they meant it didnt actually come out right and sounds different to what they meant.

The only way not to be targeted in future is to never use social media. Never like anything. Never ever express your personal opinion in public or anywhere it can be recorded. Sounds scary now that I say it.
This type of mass bullying is getting out of hand.

While it is unpleasant to see what is happening to JK Rowling, she has been flirting with the woke crowd for a few years, she was happy with the adoration then...until she hit the wrongthink button.

She also believes that we are living in the most misogynistic era...which is patently untrue and divisive in and of itself.

What are men supposed to do but give this whole mess a wide berth.

mohawk

For me the most troubling aspect of this is how there is no discussion allowed on most social media platform. You either agree or your a TERF. No matter how a trans person feels about the situation they are always going to be trans. Trans is part of who there are for better or worse. As a trans person they are a minority and given humanity’s history of dealing with minorities they 10000% need legal protections and rights etc to protect them. If they want to be called he/she/ they whatever. does that really matter? I say no.

Women should be able to express concern about sharing prisons, domestic violence shelters etc with a biological man. A biological woman is no match physically for a biological man. I do believe the research indicates that if you reduce testosterone levels is a man they do lose a significant amount of strength. This is where self identification becomes tricky because you don’t have to take hormones to identify as the gender you believe yourself to be.

This could be an interesting subject if people were willing to discuss it instead of calling people names. Gender as a social construct is an interesting topic. How much of the gender norms have we made up ourselves? If gender is a purely social construct then the only difference between men and women is biological.

Annasopra

Silentcorner wrote: »

While it is unpleasant to see what is happening to JK Rowling, she has been flirting with the woke crowd for a few years, she was happy with the adoration then...until she hit the wrongthink button.

She also believes that we are living in the most misogynistic era...which is patently untrue and divisive in and of itself.

What are men supposed to do but give this whole mess a wide berth.

Ah speak for yourself and dont assume all men are like you. I'm a feminist trans inclusive cis man.

MoonUnit75

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Ah speak for yourself and dont assume all men are like you. I'm a feminist trans inclusive cis man.

But you can never be fully woke. That’s the major problem with social media, there’s always a crowd who are more extreme than you so everyone feels like their fundementalist opinions are reasonable and achievable in comparison. The more extreme crowd will probably come for you sooner or later too.

randomchild

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Ah speak for yourself and dont assume all men are like you. I'm a feminist trans inclusive cis man.

Members of the oppressing class cannot be part of the struggle to free the oppressed, only as allies. You can no more be a feminist than Prince Charles can be a member of the working proletariat.

is_that_so

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

But you can never be fully woke. That’s the major problem with social media, there’s always a crowd who are more extreme than you so everyone feels like their fundementalist opinions are reasonable and achievable in comparison. The more extreme crowd will probably come for you sooner or later too.

Python were so spot on! The left just spontaneously splits and falls out with itself.