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

One eyed Jack

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

And yet again, arguing against something I didn't say. Easier than trying to argue against what I did say, I suppose.

Which was that trans people are often targeted for violence by transphobes. Which is true.

There’s simply no way of knowing how true a statement like that is, and I suspect you know this because it appears to be deliberately vague. We do know for example that the number of people who genuinely experience transphobia, not only are they unlikely ever to encounter a person who is transgender, but they’re even less likely to inflict harm upon that person. It’s far more likely that people who are transgender are targeted for violence by people who aren’t afraid of them, and have a particularly nasty habit of simply picking on people they know they can humiliate in order to feel superior to that person.

Being transphobic isn’t necessarily a requirement of inflicting harm upon people who are transgender, and the vast majority of people who are transphobic will never inflict harm upon anyone only themselves, as transphobia can be a debilitating condition.

Too easy throw around those terms in these sorts of discussions IMO. It’s why I never use them myself tbh.

Gruffalux

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Once more, I never said "they're targeted more than the rest of the population". Feel free to quote where I did.

And even a majority being attacked by their partners that doesn't change that "often" (not "always") transphobes do attack them. Maybe we just have different ideas of "often".

Jesus, I know you're desperate to stuff words in my mouth but it's getting a bit pathetic now.

But if it is mostly their partners or lovers who target them then surely it is to those partners you should be addressing the phrase "very violent and enjoy beating and murdering people"? Not to the so called transphobes who it seems contrary to what you said are not actually often murdering them.

BarnardsLoop

Oh, Christ, are we really back to this? Do you think I have time to sit here and convince you that no amount of attempts to put words in my mouth will work? Do you just want me to **** off and stop upsetting the nice little circlejerk ye had going here?

Because I've really got better things to do like... picking weevils out of hard tack and... counting the seconds before the sweet release of death means I don't need to bother with hobbledehoys any more.

jam_mac_jam

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

I've never once spoken about "the definition of a woman" and feel free to quote where I have.

What I've been talking about is the generally accepted treatment for gender dysphoria.

Well that's what the thread is about. That's what JK Rowling is being cancelled for. So I assumed that's what you were talking about.

I don't think anyone is arguing that there should be no treatment for gender dysphoria.

You are just calling people names and not really addressing any of the arguments made.

jam_mac_jam

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Well considering the most dull witted arguments are mooted here all day every day, I was just trying to appeal to the local custom.

And correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't medical science disagree with Rowling et al.? I'm pretty sure all that's said is transmen also menstruate. Which is true. Interesting to know why so many transphobes think they know better than medical experts.

That's where you said medical science does not agree with JK Rowling. JK Rowling has never said there should be treatment. She said women menstruate.

Danzy

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Oh, Christ, are we really back to this? Do you think I have time to sit here and convince you that no amount of attempts to put words in my mouth will work? Do you just want me to **** off and stop upsetting the nice little circlejerk ye had going here?

Because I've really got better things to do like... picking weevils out of hard tack and... counting the seconds before the sweet release of death means I don't need to bother with hobbledehoys any more.

Preach to us Father.

Save us from our damnation.

Gruffalux

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Oh, Christ, are we really back to this? Do you think I have time to sit here and convince you that no amount of attempts to put words in my mouth will work? Do you just want me to **** off and stop upsetting the nice little circlejerk ye had going here?

Because I've really got better things to do like... picking weevils out of hard tack and... counting the seconds before the sweet release of death means I don't need to bother with hobbledehoys any more.

Well, yeah Barnard man, if you're gonna randomly say stuff then stand by its being challenged. Otherwise the moon is made of cheese and I am the Queen of Sheba.

BarnardsLoop

Yes but you see, unlike you lot, I don't actually need to pretend the people I'm talking to are morons who couldn't possibly see past my feeble attempts to conceal what I'm saying.

I just... come out and say what I mean. Such as: transphobes are vile, disgusting, dangerous people and the world would probably be better off without them. Inveterate bigots like that are the enemies of all decent people.

Danzy

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Yes but you see, unlike you lot, I don't actually need to pretend the people I'm talking to are morons who couldn't possibly see past my feeble attempts to conceal what I'm saying.

I just... come out and say what I mean. Such as: transphobes are vile, disgusting, dangerous people and the world would probably be better off without them. Inveterate bigots like that are the enemies of all decent people.

Such bravery of soul and clarity of expression is a rare gift.

You'll make Cardinal someday I warrant.

BarnardsLoop

Bing, what're you doing here? I told you to go **** your mother.

One eyed Jack

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

I just... come out and say what I mean. Such as: transphobes are vile, disgusting, dangerous people and the world would probably be better off without them. Inveterate bigots like that are the enemies of all decent people.

Barnard there’s nothing great about just coming out and saying what you mean if it’s simply an attempt to insult and abuse people. How do you square what you’ve posted above with what you posted only minutes earlier in the other thread?

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

I suppose directing abuse at people is okay. As long as they're the right people, right?

Directing abuse at people is never ok Barnard, regardless of what you might think of them. It doesn’t change anyone’s mind, but simply makes a person look immature IMO.

Airyfairy12

I'm very open minded, I have no problem with trans people wearing what they want and calling themselves whatever they want but when they start infringing on other people and forcing people to agree with them I draw a line. Unless they are being abused by the people disagreeing with they should practice what they preach and allow people to have their own views, opinions and be who they are.
Ive heard numerous times that the words 'women', 'woman' and 'she' are offensive, it's crossing lines now that are infringing on biological womens rights.
As a woman I would not be comfortable with a trans person using women's toilets or using female changing rooms in gyms, the fact they cant understand why thats not appropriate and the fact they don't even care about womens views and feelings on the topic speaks volumes. They want the laws and other people to change as it suits themselves but have no interest in considering other peoples rights, experiences, opinions, feelings or entitlement to a safe space within society.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

I'm very open minded, I have no problem with trans people wearing what they want and calling themselves whatever they want but when they start infringing on other people and forcing people to agree with them I draw a line. Unless they are being abused by the people disagreeing with they should practice what they preach and allow people to have their own views, opinions and be who they are.
Ive heard numerous times that the words 'women', 'woman' and 'she' are offensive, it's crossing lines now that are infringing on biological womens rights.
As a woman I would not be comfortable with a trans person using women's toilets or using female changing rooms in gyms, the fact they cant understand why thats no appropriate and the fact they don't care speaks volumes. They want the laws and other people to change as it suits themselves but have no interest in considering other peoples rights, experiences, entitlement to a space within society.

Im in total support of trans people but if youre part of the trans ive mentioned above, you need to go cop on and get over yourself.

Rowling was piled on and subjected to abusive tweets for saying pretty much the same as you have said here. It’s mad, isn’t it?

Danzy

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Bing, what're you doing here? I told you to go **** your mother.

You are seriously unwell.

Angry mental Priest.

BarnardsLoop

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Barnard there’s nothing great about just coming out and saying what you mean if it’s simply an attempt to insult and abuse people. How do you square what you’ve posted above with what you posted only minutes earlier in the other thread?

Directing abuse at people is never ok Barnard, regardless of what you might think of them. It doesn’t change anyone’s mind, but simply makes a person look immature IMO.

I'm not here to change anyone's mind because I know nothing I do or say could ever change the minds of the people who've been circlejerking themselves to completion throughout this thread.

Which is to say, I couldn't really give a rat's arse what anyone here thinks of me. I stopped caring about the opinions of people on this site a good ten years ago. I'm here to have fun and poke the alt-righters that've turned this forum into their stomping grounds.

If people like that have a low opinion of me, frankly I'd consider it a compliment.

BarnardsLoop

Danzy wrote: »

You are seriously unwell.

Angry mental Priest.

You seem to have priests on the brain, fellah. Is there something you'd like to share with the rest of us?

Beasty

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Bing, what're you doing here? I told you to go **** your mother.

Threadbanned

Danzy

At the risk of being thread banned.

The problem wasn't whether he had a dick but that he was one.

Joke.

I'll leave as well.

Baggly

Danzy wrote: »

At the risk of being thread banned.

The problem wasn't whether he had a dick but that he was one.

Joke.

I'll leave as well.

Mod

Dont come back.

2u2me

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Rowling was piled on and subjected to abusive tweets for saying pretty much the same as you have said here. It’s mad, isn’t it?

This is what gamergate was about. A reaction to an industry that was calling it's customers sexist.

Just because you disagree with the wokes doesn't make you a sexist/misogynist/racist/troll/bigot etc..

I hope with the support of people like Rowling this culture can finally be pushed back against.

_Godot_

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

I'm very open minded, I have no problem with trans people wearing what they want and calling themselves whatever they want but when they start infringing on other people and forcing people to agree with them I draw a line. Unless they are being abused by the people disagreeing with they should practice what they preach and allow people to have their own views, opinions and be who they are.
Ive heard numerous times that the words 'women', 'woman' and 'she' are offensive, it's crossing lines now that are infringing on biological womens rights.
As a woman I would not be comfortable with a trans person using women's toilets or using female changing rooms in gyms, the fact they cant understand why thats not appropriate and the fact they don't even care about womens views and feelings on the topic speaks volumes. They want the laws and other people to change as it suits themselves but have no interest in considering other peoples rights, experiences, opinions, feelings or entitlement to a safe space within society.

And there are women who don't feel like you do, who don't mind or even welcome trans women into womens spaces

feargale

GRACKEA wrote: »

Well she should've been anyway considering a few of her dodge political opinions :^)

Such as?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

_Godot_ wrote: »

And there are women who don't feel like you do, who don't mind or even welcome trans women into womens spaces

Well, okay, some women do mind and some don’t. The ones who do mind have something to lose here. The ones who don’t mind - nothing changes for them either way.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

A Labour politician accused Rowling of using her experience of domestic abuse to discriminate against transgender people.

She wrote a tweet thread in response. She’s way more measured than I would have been:

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1277263814552100866?s=21

He has apologised at least but what the hell is the Labour party at? It’s like they’re actively trying to self-destruct.

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

A Labour politician accused Rowling of using her experience of domestic abuse to discriminate against transgender people.

She wrote a tweet thread in response. She’s way more measured than I would have been:

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1277263814552100866?s=21

He has apologised at least but what the hell is the Labour party at? It’s like they’re actively trying to self-destruct.

I think she was even braver and clearer in that thread. I noticed also she just replied to Jana Cornel who I quoted earlier, a survivor of FGM who has been harassed by trans rights activists for using the word female.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1277276256736854016

The White Wolf

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

A Labour politician accused Rowling of using her experience of domestic abuse to discriminate against transgender people.

She wrote a tweet thread in response. She’s way more measured than I would have been:

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1277263814552100866?s=21

He has apologised at least but what the hell is the Labour party at? It’s like they’re actively trying to self-destruct.

Labour UK is well on its way back to generic Blairism so fear not.

One eyed Jack

The White Wolf wrote: »

Labour UK is well on its way back to generic Blairism so fear not.

Groups from all political parties in the UK have expressed concerns that the reforms which have been spoken of could possibly be abandoned. I can’t see them being abandoned myself as currently only gender reassignment is a protected characteristic in UK law. Effectively it leave people in a position where they either undergo medicalisation and surgery to avail of equal rights, or they forego being protected by equal rights legislation. That’s why the UK Government aren’t left with much choice BUT to change it, in order to comply with International Human Rights Law.

There are no rights “being taken away” from anyone, it’s simply the case that people who previously had no protection from discrimination in law, will now be protected from discrimination and have the same right to be protected from discrimination as anyone else.

Recognition of equal protection in UK law has nothing to do with the formation of prison policies, or sports, or any of the many straws that people opposed to equal protection from discrimination for people who are transgender are presenting as arguments against equality legislation reform. Those arguments are founded on nothing more than perpetuating discrimination, which is the purpose for why the reforms are necessary.


Gender Recognition Act: LGBT political group anger at trans law 'changes'

Gruffalux

Stephen King retweeted JKs latest thread. He is getting the usual oh noes treatment.

suicide_circus

Alice laughed. 'There's no use trying,' she said. 'One can't believe impossible things.'

I daresay you haven't had much practice,' said the Queen.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalox wrote: »

Stephen King retweeted JKs latest thread. He is getting the usual oh noes treatment.

Another writer who is pretty much impervious to cancellation! Good stuff.