Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

JK Rowling poking the Trans bear again

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

Opinion: Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 40106/30/2020

JK Rowling has guts.

by Anonymousreply 106/06/2020

Good for her! The fact that people are pandering to this "people who menstruate" nonsense is embarrassing. Do they refer to men as "people who ejaculate"?

by Anonymousreply 206/06/2020

JK Rowling has 'fuck you' money and guts

by Anonymousreply 306/06/2020

Predictably, cries of TERF and other bullshit cuntery are everywhere.

by Anonymousreply 406/06/2020

This gorgeous monster is constantly ranting about Rowling, getting up online petitions against her, etc. I suppose when you live on food stamps & Go Fund Me pages, you have nothing better to do.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 506/06/2020

I don't think she's wrong, but she's a gigantic Blairite so I hope she gets burned in the end.

by Anonymousreply 706/06/2020

Trans people have done nothing for gay rights r6. The only thing trans are doing for gays is making it easier for society to erase us because if biological sex doesn't exist then same-sex attraction doesn't exist. People with penises claiming to be lesbians does nothing for gay rights.

And, no, trans women of colour did not start Stonewall.

by Anonymousreply 806/06/2020

Trans people have done nothing for gay rights - unless you believe the fiction trans people started the Stonewall riots.

by Anonymousreply 906/06/2020

Oh shut up, r7.

by Anonymousreply 1006/06/2020

Did she have a makeover/under?

Bush look like Sally Jesse Raphael. That’s not a compliment.

by Anonymousreply 1106/06/2020

"If sex isn't real, there's no same-sex attraction."

BOOM!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1206/06/2020

JK has lots of money and good lawyers, so a bunch of crying trans folk on twitter aren't going to do any damage this time and it's killing them knowing they have no power over her.

by Anonymousreply 1306/06/2020

Trannies want to erase women.

by Anonymousreply 1406/06/2020

No, no R2, it's " People who *INSEMINATE* "

by Anonymousreply 1506/06/2020

Men posing as woman want to erase women. A man won woman of the year once, which goes to prove even men do a better job of being a woman.

by Anonymousreply 1606/06/2020

[quote]JK has lots of money and good lawyers,

How heroic to hide behind a team of lawyers when someone says something you don't like. The rich people's version of calling the cops on someone "suspicious".

[quote]it's killing them knowing they have no power over her.

Clearly they do. She stays pressed on the issue. What is she so afraid of aside from not using filters on her pictures?

by Anonymousreply 1706/06/2020

r17 = DL fave Rachel McKinnon, er ... Veronica Ivy

by Anonymousreply 1806/06/2020

YEES! Let these Trans people know!

by Anonymousreply 1906/06/2020

R17 not it's not, that's such "desperate to be a victim" thinking. If they want to accuse her of doing something then they had better be prepared to back it up in a court of law. That's if they really believe in what they are trying to push. And she's scared of a bunch of screwy people trying to rewrite the role of women and the struggles that come with that, but I guess that doesn't matter so long as a bunch of trans get what they want.

by Anonymousreply 2006/06/2020

I love JK Rowling. I have nothing against Trans people.

by Anonymousreply 2106/06/2020

R12 Wow. I have a newfound respect for her. That took guts to say. Good for her.

by Anonymousreply 2206/06/2020

R13 It's all about power. They're textbook "cry-bullies."

by Anonymousreply 2306/06/2020

R17: “hide behind a team of lawyers.” Lol, sure.

All Adrian Harrop wanted to do was to say an esteemed children’s author was as much of a danger to kids as one of the most notorious child abusers in British history and she had the AUDACITY to object to this and make him back down and maybe got a lawyer to deliver that message.

Let’s face it. JKR pisses people off because she’s a woman who is too wealthy to give a fuck about offending people by speaking the truth, namely that men can’t ever be women.

by Anonymousreply 2406/06/2020

R5. Sorry, but 🤮

by Anonymousreply 2506/06/2020

She made $60 million last year with no new books out, so I don't think she cares what anybody thinks about her. She's the 28th highest paid celebrity this year.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 2606/06/2020

DL fave and felon Callum Mcswiggan chimes in with the stupidest comments ever.

@CalumMcSwiggan

I’m attracted to transgender men. That doesn’t make me bisexual, it makes me gay. I cannot express how frustrating it is for you to say these ignorant uneducated things over and over again. Please please please do better. We all want you to be one of the good guys. Please.

@CalumMcSwiggan

I’m not bisexual. I’m not pansexual. I have no romantic or sexual interest in women. I’m gay.

by Anonymousreply 2706/06/2020

[quote]Please please please do better. We all want you to be one of the good guys.

It must be convenient to live in a medieval allegory with "good guys" and "bad guys" and zero room for nuance.

by Anonymousreply 2806/06/2020

McSwiggan needs to be cancelled immediately.

It’s unacceptable to single transgender men out as different from any other men and say you’re attracted to them, how outrageous.

He should have just said he was attracted to “men” which obviously includes trans men because they’re men after all, and we all know you can’t even tell that they’re trans, even when they’re 5ft 2 and have a vagina.

by Anonymousreply 2906/06/2020

[quote]All Adrian Harrop wanted to do was to say an esteemed children’s author was as much of a danger to kids as one of the most notorious child abusers in British history and she had the AUDACITY to object to this and make him back down and maybe got a lawyer to deliver that message.

One idiot does not represent the entire community, and she was right to after that one. I was directing my comments to the posters who think that her having lawyers negates any and all questions about her opinions. It doesn't and it reeks of flaunting ones wealth and privilege.

[quote]too wealthy to give a fuck about offending people by speaking the truth,

Again, who gives a fuck about how wealthy she is. What does have to do with the argument at hand?

Any idiot can get on Twitter and lecture and make ironic comments all they want. That's not activism. If she truly feels injustice is being done, then get out in public and take it to the media and explain her side. Sit down with Trans activists in a public forum and talk it out.

by Anonymousreply 3006/06/2020

For a group that alleges that sex and gender don’t exist they sure have a lot of rules around these non existent categories. People who menstruate are biologically female no matter their gender.

by Anonymousreply 3106/06/2020

R30, why does JKR have to engage with trans activists?

She isn’t claiming to be writing a great social injustice anyway, she is simply putting her opinion on Twitter and I don’t see her asserting she’s making the world a better place by doing it.

by Anonymousreply 3206/06/2020

R30 the trans activists do plenty of talking on Twitter. Their arguments are disengenuous, filled with logical errors, and fantasy. She's educated herself, has trans and gay people in her life, and she has directly seen how they "argue" - by trying to cancel everyone, get them fired, etc.

Why should she validate their claim to power by engaging with such dishonest people?

by Anonymousreply 3306/06/2020

I meant “righting” not “writing” in R32 obviously, no professional writing career for me...

by Anonymousreply 3406/06/2020

Also, wow the young people on a Twitter who are dragging her manage to be sanctimonious, self pitying and completely clueless. It’s amazing to see the male privilege that these trans women still hold on to very tightly.

Dear Trans folks, People are ok treating you as the gender you feel you are. But biological sex does have meaning. It’s why two people with vaginas can’t rub them together and make a baby. Think of it as the difference between gay men, who have romantic relationships and men who will stick they’re penises in male holes. Both technically have homosexual sex, but being gay is different than just sex. I know you feel cheated that you will never biologically be a man or a woman, and it sucks but it’s also true.

by Anonymousreply 3506/06/2020

OK what’s with the fraus and the big black ugly glasses? Gwyneth Paltrow, Sarah Paulson, Tori Amos and now J.K. Rowling? Do they think oversized glasses makes them look like cute little girls playing dress up?

by Anonymousreply 3606/06/2020

Their not they’re.

by Anonymousreply 3706/06/2020

"One idiot does not represent the entire community"

Are you honestly arguing that Harrop's vile misogyny and homophobia makes him some kind of outlier in the trans community? I see it CONSTANTLY on Twitter. From many, many activists.

"Sit down with Trans activists in a public forum and talk it out."

You can't "talk it out" with people who won't stop screaming, "THIS IS NOT A DEBATE!"

by Anonymousreply 3806/06/2020

The Trans are so ANGRY! It’s hilarious!

by Anonymousreply 3906/06/2020

Yes, trans “discussions” are best described as lectures or monologues

by Anonymousreply 4006/06/2020

Chasten Has Spoken!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 4106/06/2020

[quote] She made $60 million last year with no new books out,

And she did it almost entirely by repackaging thr fantasy fiction ideas of more original authors. Good for her!

by Anonymousreply 4206/06/2020

don't we also have this bitch to thank for the mess that was Twilight?

(not that she wrote it, but that someone stole her work which was in turn borrowed from elsewhere)

by Anonymousreply 4306/06/2020

R42 I read Harry Potter and thought the whole time that it was derivative stuff, and not brilliantly-written. Particularly as JKR had taken ideas from say Diana Wynne Jones and in particular, The Worst Witch series. And I always got the feeling she made the main character a boy rather than a girl so that boys wouldn’t be put off reading the books. Her writing of minority characters is terrible or non-existent and that all these kids end up dull and straight-married to other kids that they were at school with is just both yawn and cringe. That she went down a sort of racism path with the “mudblood” stuff and backed off, the bad use of time travel... a lot of it pissed me off.

That said, until the final book, by which point JKR herself had clearly lost interest and has the kids running around in a forest for no apparent reason — I gave up halfway through — I couldn’t stop reading them, somehow. Oddly compelling. Guess that sort of thing is one reason she has all that money.

by Anonymousreply 4406/06/2020

I hate trans rhetoric and admire Rowling, but this does seem pointlessly provocative.

by Anonymousreply 4506/06/2020

It was Saturday night in the U.K. and I honestly assume she posted this stuff after spending the evening drinking.

by Anonymousreply 4606/06/2020

Nice to see as usual the DataLounge gay community joining Team Trump and the Evangelicals to bash Trans people. JK Rowling, like many celebs, has jumped the shark and she's no longer relevant. Harry Potter was 20 years ago. Get over it.

by Anonymousreply 4706/06/2020

and you can't change your sex. get over it.

by Anonymousreply 4806/06/2020

I read the books as an adult and there’s just too many silly mistakes in them. Example, even after attending the school for 6 years, Harry still doesn’t know who the Ravenclaw ghost is? First night there: OMG there are ghosts! Yeah! Each house has one...It’s one of the first things he would’ve learned.

by Anonymousreply 4906/06/2020

R43 = idiot

You are thinking about 50 Shades of Grey which was ripped off of Twilight, you freaking dumbass.

by Anonymousreply 5006/06/2020

Who invited them to the party? Should trans have their own group? I don’t want them in mine.

by Anonymousreply 5106/06/2020

R47, I don’t know why JKR goes out of her to post this stuff, but she is not bashing trans people to say that sex matters. Do I think it’s the message the world wants to hear right now? Not really.

But when you post “trans women are women” online whilst ignoring all the consequences for actual women (yes, I said it) that that statement entails, then you’re not making the world a better place.

by Anonymousreply 5206/06/2020

R49, you could actually feel the editors giving up reining her in around Book 4, but then the books were making so much money then I assume they thought they didn’t need to bother.

When she introduces that Cedric character in the tournament thing just to kill him off in the same book, rather than having the, well, balls? Or vagina? to off a major character like Ron instead... gimme a break.

by Anonymousreply 5306/06/2020

Good for her standing up for womens rights!

by Anonymousreply 5406/06/2020

R53 exactly. The same thing (silly plot armor) ruined Game of Thrones (the show). Certain characters are invincible. Hopefully, the books don’t make this mistake.

I tried reading Rowling’s mysteries. They’re much better than HP but very ugly and strangely unsatisfying.

by Anonymousreply 5506/06/2020

I think the books were well written and thoroughly enjoyed them. You two hens seem like you're just trying to nitpick in order to bash the author.

by Anonymousreply 5606/06/2020

Am I the only one confused about what this controversy is all about? I guess I'm not "woke" enough to get it.

by Anonymousreply 5706/06/2020

R56 I’m not bashing the author. Good for her for making a ton of money. I’m just mystified at their popularity when there are so many excellent books out there. Life is short.

That said, I enjoyed the movies.

by Anonymousreply 5806/06/2020

J.K. is the ultamite badass. She has no more fucks to give and is giving a voice to the voiceless in the LGB community!

by Anonymousreply 5906/06/2020

[quote] Nice to see as usual the DataLounge gay community joining Team Trump and the Evangelicals to bash Trans people.

Binary thinking is the mark of a simpleton.

by Anonymousreply 6006/06/2020

R58, Are yuh ou 65? The books were written with kids in mind.

by Anonymousreply 6106/06/2020

R47, Trans bash gay people all the time- and they use organizations formed by and for the gay community to do so.

by Anonymousreply 6206/06/2020
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 6306/06/2020

I LOVE JK Rowling!!!!

by Anonymousreply 6406/06/2020

Has Alyssa wagged her woke finger at her yet?

by Anonymousreply 6506/06/2020

JKR has annoyed lots of blue-ticked non-entities (seriously, does Twitter verify every “freelance writer” who asks?) and a couple of actual celebs have been rude about her, Sarah Paulson for example. I’m sure Alyssa will be along any minute.

by Anonymousreply 6606/06/2020

That micro-peen bitch Calum McSwiggan should have been finished the day he faked a hate crime. And that dumb fuck who tweeted underneath with a pic of a hairy female and said you're not really gay if you're not attracted to this can fuck all the way off. Gay men aren't attracted to hairy women with amputated breast you homophobic mentally disturbed tranny fucker shitbag.

by Anonymousreply 6706/06/2020

JK Rowling is the LGB hero we deserve?

by Anonymousreply 6806/06/2020

These trans activists are really giving all trans a bad name. Has anyone noticed it's almost always men who transitioned into women and not vice versa?

by Anonymousreply 6906/06/2020

"Binary thinking is the mark of a simpleton."

Gender-critical people believe that a man can be feminine and be no less of a man, and that a woman can be masculine and be no less of a woman. They believe that all human beings are "nonbinary," because not one human being who ever lived has been 100% masculine or 100% feminine every single moment of their their life. They believe that gender stereotypes have caused great harm to both female and male people-- but especially gay people-- and for that reason should be abolished.

But keep lying your ass off.

by Anonymousreply 7006/06/2020

Why is it that the moment a "trans woman" cuts off his penis he demands to be fellated?

by Anonymousreply 7106/06/2020

Trans gave themselves a bad name the second they decided to pretend to be something they're not.

by Anonymousreply 7206/06/2020

Rowling is choosing a fight that says more about her issues than about trans people.

And she uses the same types of logical fallacies for arguing against trans women (with ridicule and disdain) that people used against same-sex marriage.

A woman must menstruate. Trans women don't menstruate. Therefore trans women aren't women.

Rowling knows damned well that not all women menstruate. A women with a biological condition that prevents menstruation is still a woman. Post-menopausal women do not menstruate. Women who have had surgeries of various kinds because of sickness do not menstruate. If she pretends to be saying that, well, these non-bleeding women ARE women, of course, then the biological condition of one's core gender identification not matching the biological attributes and identity assigned at birth suffer from a biological condition that, when corrected, will result in a woman who is not able to menstruate.

This kind of troubling rhetorical gaming is inhumane and disrespectful. From the mouth of a woman of great influence it is hateful, because she is negating people's identities with flippancy and black/white "my declarations are the only truth, no matter what you are living" pronouncements.

R69 then exemplifies the "how dare they not align with my diktat of appropriate behavior" approach, which is the same attitude used against race activists, gay activists, women activists - everyone. Declaring how to manage PR is a job for people hired to do PR. R69 simply is requiring people to adhere to her expectations, and to merit what the people see as their denied basic rights.

The constant false claims here against trans people, the impatience, the petulance and dismissal and jokes, are the mark of repressive cranks and trolls. R72 is the perfect example. Shame on you people. Your false conditions and definitions lead to your false conclusions.

And conflating non-binary declarants with binary trans people doesn't help anything except the trolls.

by Anonymousreply 7306/06/2020

[quote]She’s awful. The gays and trolls here attempting to divide and spread hatred rn are terrible.

They're all straights, they've said so before. Lesbians wouldn't come to a gay board, demand to take it over, and tell the gay regulars to leave if they don't like it like these fucks do.

JKR is doing this during Pride Month on purpose, and during the police brutality protests on purpose. She's an attention whore and a rightwinger hoping to distract people from the actual social change that is going on, and trolling people to exhaust them so their voices can be more easily drowned out. It's an old troll tactic, and it's pathetic that some old woman with millions of dollars has nothing better to do than that.

The UK anti trans folks can scream about "cocks in frocks molesting women at the rate of 7000 per second" all they want, they're just distracting themselves from the utter shit about to rain down on them thanks to Brexit.

And they can try to take all human rights away from trans people all they want, but this is a country that can't even get rid of Dominick Cummings after what he's done, so good luck with that.

by Anonymousreply 7406/06/2020

JK probably wanted to have a laugh today. She knows these trannies are unhinged and react to everything. Entertainment for her.

by Anonymousreply 7506/06/2020

R73, whilst I don’t know why Rowling is picking this fight at a time like this, repeating some of the same errors in logical thinking as are in her Twitter replies won’t win this argument.

Saying that only women menstruate, doesn’t mean that you are saying if you don’t menstruate, you aren’t a woman. As you say, a woman will be well aware that some women don’t have periods. Nevertheless anyone who does is female, however they identify.

by Anonymousreply 7606/06/2020

I'm a lesbian and I agree with her. Trans women are men. I'm actually physically disgusted by male genitalia and my refusal to suck or fuck one does not make me a TERF. It makes me a lesbian.

I'm really tired of being told otherwise.

by Anonymousreply 7706/06/2020

Circular garbage from R73/74. Women menstruate. No Rowling never said women who don’t menstruate aren’t women, but yes 99.9% of biological women menstruate at some point in their lives.

by Anonymousreply 7806/06/2020

[quote]Trans people have done nothing for gay rights - unless you believe the fiction trans people started the Stonewall riots.

Trans were there on the first night of Stonewall and at the forefront of the subsequent marches in the days after the initial riot. They were always part of the gay movement, as were lesbians. Every single event and meeting on film from the gay rights era has gays, lesbians AND trans.

I mean, you can lie about it all you want, but it happened. You can hoodwink the people who already hate trans because these are the days where people believe just whatever the hell they want as long as it confirms their own personal beliefs, but you'll never destroy all the documentation, the films and the photos and the histories.

by Anonymousreply 7906/06/2020

My friend’s child thinks it’s a unicorn. She gently tells the child it’s okay to play at being a unicorn, but you are in fact a human girl.

This kind of gentle love and logic has been lost in the insane transhumanist world.

by Anonymousreply 8006/06/2020

You sound so tiresome and self righteous R73. Rowling might be trying to shit-stir but the trans movement is being taken over by angry MEN (mostly) demanding that people deny biological science and and common sense and claiming a person is transphobic if one refuses to do so. They are a JOKE and no amount of bullying is going to convince intelligent people otherwise

by Anonymousreply 8106/06/2020

Shouldn't JK be a datalounge hero for having the courage to stand up to the transgestapo

by Anonymousreply 8206/06/2020

Also, anyone who feels like a woman has ZERO clue of what it is to actually be one. You can not be a man and know what it is like, just as I don't pretend to know what it's like to be a man.

As I say to my friends, "You cannot know what it feels like to be a woman unless you've had to ask your other friends, 'hey is there blood on my pants?'"

Also, why do trans women have to commandeer the accouterments of the shitty things that society tells women they should have/wear? I can't remember the last time I wore a dress or heels or had long, painted nails but that doesn't make me less of a woman. Not all women wear dresses and have drag queen hair.

by Anonymousreply 8306/06/2020

[quote]She's educated herself, has trans and gay people in her life

Today she literally said "I have a lesbian friend" as some kind of defense against her bigotry and it was absolutely embarrassing, an obvious variant of "some of my best friends are black."

Glinner did the same with Magdalen Burns and when her widow asked him to stop using her photo for his propaganda, he blocked her and lied about it, and got Magdalen's family involved to side with him, causing a rift between them all, just because he's a selfish putty-faced bastard.

These guys don't care about gays, and neither do the straights who flood Datalounge with this crap.

by Anonymousreply 8406/06/2020

Ask any straight guy whether women have penises. He will find the question bizarre and tell you no (unless he is on Twitter and wants to look like he is woke) and not get called a TERF for it. Of course if an actual woman has the audacity to say that she knows what women are, then it’s cancellation time.

by Anonymousreply 8506/06/2020

[quote]As I say to my friends, "You cannot know what it feels like to be a woman unless you've had to ask your other friends, 'hey is there blood on my pants?'"

My step sister never menstruated due to a thyroid problem. I'll tell her she's not really a woman, thanks for sharing your vast scientific knowledge with us.

[quote]Also, why do trans women have to commandeer the accouterments

That is fucking embarrassing. You should be embarrassed for writing that.

by Anonymousreply 8606/06/2020

R74 if you, and people like you, wouldn't use hyperbole and outright lies to make your point, you might find that you don't actually have an argument.

Rowling isn't arguing for "taking rights away" from trans people. She wants women to keep their hard-fought rights - which are necessary because men and women are not the same, no matter how much mostly male trans activists and their enablers try to claim they're the same.

The reason she stepped into this minefield is because she saw a woman forced out of her job because a bearded man who claims womanhood (but doesn't actually try to look like one) said she MISGENDERED him a few times. That was the final straw for her as a supporter for women's rights, and so she spoke out.

The trans activists have gotten some pretty concerning laws passed in the UK that makes it an actual crime. That's what they want in the US too. But it's not just that. It's men competing in women's sports, men in women's prisons and bathrooms, men basically infringing upon all the rights women have won.

by Anonymousreply 8706/06/2020

R86, most things that trans women feel makes them women are gender stereotypes. In my opinion, trans people seem to have very rigid stereotypes and define themselves by them. Which is not progressive. It’s the equivalent of thinking one gay guy is the “woman”.

by Anonymousreply 8806/06/2020

[quote]I don't think she cares what anybody thinks about her

If that were true, she wouldn't be doing the equivalent of jumping up and down and screaming, "Look at me!" with her tweets about this all the time.

She posted what she did today during the demonstrations and during Pride Month to stir shit. If she was confident of her opinion and her anti trans stance she wouldn't have deliberately tried to hurt people during Pride Month, and wouldn't have tried to take attention away from the police brutality marches and protests.

by Anonymousreply 8906/06/2020

Also, there are PLENTY of gay men on DL who don't agree with you, r84.

You're trying to "Other" us so you feel more justified in attacking people who flat out disagree with you, but guess what? I'm a gay man and I think you're embarrassing. Literally.

by Anonymousreply 9006/06/2020

I will add that it's unfair to lump all trans together as I've met a few trans women and they just want to live a peaceful life as what they see themselves

by Anonymousreply 9106/06/2020

R80, how dare your friend assume her kid’s gender!! Etc.

I have very little argument with grown adult trans people doing whatever they want with their lives, but let’s be fair here, this argument was started by extreme trans thinking, not by people just waking up one day and deciding to be transphobic. I don’t judge trans people by the crazy shit a small proportion of the activists push, by any means, but I do take issue with e.g. gay people being told to consider straight sex or they’re bigots, with kids being brought into the LGBT community because they don’t gender-conform, etc. The movement has also clearly been co-opted by men who just love the thought of taking a big shit on women’s rights and are positively gleeful about calling women TERFs.

But Rowling has said very little about Black Lives Matter these last few weeks — today there were lots of protests on this stuff in the U.K. — and tonight pops up with “biological sex is real.” I understand her point of view but I don’t know how she can have thought now was the time for it, or that chiming in on this on Twitter wouldn’t just get reduced to “JKR is a bigot.”

by Anonymousreply 9206/06/2020

R89 can you say anything without resorting to hyperbole and mind reading?

For all the "LET'S SIT DOWN AND HAVE A CONVERSATION" screeching the Twitter trans gestapo does, it sure doesn't seem like they want to converse at all. They lecture and dictate. Just like you are doing. If you were interested in arguing against what she is saying, then do so. Right now you're not, you are just making shit up and pretending she said it or did it or intended this or that.

by Anonymousreply 9306/06/2020

Oh god is R79 going to spot out the “a tans woman of color led the riots and threw the first brick” bullshit?

Marsha P Johnson a gay man who wore women’s clothes has said that they didn’t show up until hours after the protests started and Silvia Rivera wasn’t there at all.

Neither Marsha or Silvia identified as transgender and Rivera hated the word.

The books about and the photos from that night show mostly working class gay men and lesbians.

R86 what is a woman? So it’s not an adult human female. If someone murdered your stepsister and they didn’t find her remains for a year would she not be identified as female by forensic scientists?

Doesn’t the cornoa virus magnify the biological difference between men and women and how their bodies react and fight the virus?

by Anonymousreply 9406/06/2020

[quote]she is negating people's identities

Here's the crux of it - I'm supposed to respect your identity, period. Even it's not grounded in reality. So many of the activists are just attention whores: "Respect my identity goddammit!"

I totally accept trans people (and there are many of them) who (as R91 says) don't make extravagant claims for their "identity" and are content to live their lives with the tradeoffs they've made.

by Anonymousreply 9506/06/2020

R92 the protests for BLM happening in other countries (she lives in the UK) are more against Trump than they are anything else. The black situation in the US and our runaway police are not the way the majority of the EU police operate. They also have a lot of civil rights laws enforced that we dont have. So it's kinda myopic to expect a person from another country and a different worldview to make as much of a stand about BLM as someone from the US, where this is happening.

by Anonymousreply 9606/06/2020

R96, I’m in the U.K. myself (yes, it’s 4.30am here, before the post police catch me and accuse me of not telling the truth, believe it or not but not everyone sleeps the same hours) and I was specifically noting BLM because the protests here were big news here, today.

I am sympathetic to what Rowling is saying and why she says it, but with that, the pandemic and Pride month, it’s truly a bizarre time to tweet it. She ends up looking worse than she needs to, despite the fact she is mostly tweeting facts.

by Anonymousreply 9706/06/2020

People are EXHAUSTED by her!

EXHAUSTED!

[quote]I was about to tweet about JK Rowling but I'm exhausted.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9806/06/2020

R97 didn't you hear that pride was cancelled due to BLM??

I think part of the issue is, in these times, there's so much shit going on that it is impossible to time things when something major isn't happening. It's the same argument that gets thrown around whenever people in the US want political action after another school shooting, and all the right wing talking heads shriek "NOW IS NOT THE TIME! PEOPLE JUST DIED!" etc.

by Anonymousreply 9906/06/2020

R98 they're just EXHAUSTED because they simply can't! Not again! They just... Can't right now! Too exhausting!

by Anonymousreply 10006/06/2020

Uh-oh R99. Please cancel me for not knowing Pride is cancelled, I will do better, etc!

It is totally in JKR’s control when she tweets about this stuff and there was no particular reason or cause for her to tweet about this today. I don’t myself have an issue with it and believe she can say what she likes, but she will certainly be judged harshly by the standards of others.

by Anonymousreply 10106/06/2020

"I am sympathetic to what Rowling is saying and why she says it, but with that, the pandemic and Pride month, it’s truly a bizarre time to tweet it."

You think it's "bizarre" to tweet, during Pride month, that gay men and lesbians have the right to their own sexual orientations? Think about what you just said, FFS.

By the way, Martina tweeted "AGREED."

by Anonymousreply 10206/06/2020

R98, I see the tweeter is not so exhausted that they can’t take a female author saying “biological sex is real” and suggest that viewpoint is somehow responsible for male violence.

In the U.K., where JKR lives, on average in the last ten years, one trans person a year has been murdered. Awful, obviously, but statistically, it turns out that makes them less likely to be murdered than a “cis” person...

by Anonymousreply 10306/06/2020

I take your point R102. Maybe I’ve been inhaling too many Kool-Aid fumes by reading too much Twitter. But specifically, I don’t think tonight was the time. But hey I’m absolutely no-one — it’s up to her and I admire JKR for not giving a fuck really.

by Anonymousreply 10406/06/2020

in the UK there are more trans murderers than trans murdered per year in the past few years.

by Anonymousreply 10506/06/2020

They’re simply Transmanian Devils!

by Anonymousreply 10606/06/2020

I would expect nothing less from a woman that defended trainwreck Johnny Depp.

by Anonymousreply 10706/06/2020

I love that people like yashar Ali are trying to call her out yet yashar an abusive fraud like Charlotte clymer and Naomi Campbell who verbally and physically abused personal assistants not to mention getting other black models fired from shows.

by Anonymousreply 10806/06/2020

[quote] But keep lying your ass off.

From the wad of psycho-babble that preceded the above, it’s clear you didn’t get my point at all.

by Anonymousreply 10906/06/2020

[quote]Trans were there on the first night of Stonewall...

Stop right there. This is totally made up, as 95% or so of the guys instigating the Stonewall uprising were white gay guys and lesbians. You can look at photographic evidence, and all you will see is Marsha P. Johnson as a man, smiling in the back row, a sight-seer and bystander, while the rest of the guys (mostly white and no drags) push against the police. I'm not saying this to enrage you, but to educate you. This whole "trans women of color" thing has been wholly invented in the last 8-10 years and is accepted as fact by younger gays affected by the loud trans movement (unknown in 1969, of course) who are just parroting it to each other. Do some research.

Marsha gave a radio interview where she said Sylvia Rivera wasn't even within two miles of Stonewall, but later she left it out. You shouldn't need to be told that these two who were "transed" only after their deaths, and were the merest of peripheral players according to participants, if at all. Sylvia Rivera actually did advocacy work years later. Marsha P. Johnson was a bedraggled homeless drag queen and street person who dined out over the years on her ever-increasingly important part of Stonewall, and people just went along with it, because she was there physically, but not really a big part of anything. Many people, some of whom I know, are alive today and are puzzled by this new tale!

I've done penty of actual reserach, and you haven't, so please stop erasing gay men and lesbian women from Stonewall. It is false and offensive.

by Anonymousreply 11006/06/2020

[quote]OK what’s with the fraus and the big black ugly glasses? Gwyneth Paltrow, Sarah Paulson, Tori Amos and now J.K. Rowling? Do they think oversized glasses makes them look like cute little girls playing dress up?

Don't forget me!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11106/06/2020

Trust a bunch of men like some of the posters on this thread not to understand why JK Rowling - a woman - is unhappy that women are being erased, told they must accept men in their sports, that some women have penises, etc., etc. and that actual women are not allowed to say "hey, wait a minute, this is not what being a woman mean to us" otherwise they will be cancelled as terfs.

Basically, as a biological woman, JK Rowling should shut up when biological men tell her to.

by Anonymousreply 11206/06/2020

Excellent summary and appraisal r110. This needs to be repeated everywhere.

This whole "trans women of colour started Stonewall" stuff is not just annoying bullshit that erases lesbians and gay man and biological women in general, it creates anger and upset amongst trans women of colour and exacerbates all the worst fault lines in society right now. I remember during Pride last year, there was some story going around of a black trans woman at a Pride event standing up and being all upset and practically unable to breath because she felt the event wasn't honouring the black transwomen who kicked off the "LGBTQ" rights movement. If black people and transwomen in particular are really (naively) believing that we only have same-sex marriage today because black transwomen started the fightback against homophobia then of course they're going to believe they're being erased if we're not worshipping them for starting the Stonewall riots. Let's also not forget that the "transwomen of colour started Stonewall" myth also conveniently erases the fact that up until a few years ago there was a lot of homophobia running through the wider black community.

The thing is, it's almost impossible publicly to say that, no, Marsha Johnson did not throw the first brick at Stonewall and wasn't even there on the first night. Actual gays and lesbians have to shut up and almost live in fear within our own so-called community for trying to state the facts and the truth.

So, good on JK Rowling for having the guts to speak out.

by Anonymousreply 11306/06/2020

[quote]You think it's "bizarre" to tweet, during Pride month, that gay men and lesbians have the right to their own sexual orientations? Think about what you just said, FFS.

The existence of trans doesn't take away our orientation.

Or maybe I should say my orientation, because I doubt any of you cranky unloved Brit antitrans obsessives are gay. You always talk about "gay men and lesbians" like you've never even met one.

After all the nasty shit you've said about gays on Datalounge over the years and your complete silence toward our rightwing trolls who hurl slurs (mostly against lesbians) literally every day, you cannot fucking tell me you care about "gay men and lesbians."

by Anonymousreply 11406/06/2020

As for "trans were there on the first night", no, trans weren't there on the first night - drag queens were there (apparently) on the first night. Let's also not forget that up until very recently too, the trans were aggressively opposed to drag queens - just look at their treatment of RuPaul (incidentally, a drag queen of colour).

There's a whole lot of mythmaking and lying underway - starting with the myth of the importance of Stonewall itself. But Stonewall needs to be made central because that's the only way that trans can be constructed as central to the "LGBTQ movement" (what once used to be known as the "lesbian and gay community).

by Anonymousreply 11506/06/2020

I'm a lesbian, idiot at r114. Are you trying to tell me that I should suck dick because "some lesbians have penises"?

by Anonymousreply 11606/06/2020

R94 they said the exact opposite of what you claim they did, but reading doesn't seem like anyone's strong suit here. Very typical, someone says something you can't defend and you invent some strawman argument and go after it instead.

Don't get me wrong, it's been adorable to see you all stop linking to Breitbart and fake medical associations as you realize you're giving away the game every time you do it, but you can never shake off the stench of rightwing idiot troll. Got several of you on ignore already because you've been complaining about "the blacks" and Joe Biden in other threads, hrm I wonder why that is, oh I'm sure it's because you fine heterosexual maidens just want to save us gays from being exterminated by the trans.

by Anonymousreply 11706/07/2020

[quote]I'm actually physically disgusted by male genitalia and my refusal to suck or fuck one does not make me a TERF. It makes me a lesbian.

I can see why you'd come to a gay board crammed full of gay porn then, given that you barf every time you see a cock. Makes tons of sense.

Anyway Miss Lesbian, you're an antitrans bigot because you discriminate against trans. Despite your sky-is-falling rhetoric, no one save a few excitable Twitter folks think you're a TERF because you don't give blowjobs.

by Anonymousreply 11806/07/2020

Oh why not.... I'm with JK, and my utterly straight sisters are, as well. Both are educated, successful, would cut off their hands and eat them before they would vote Republican, aren't driving SUVs and generally not giving a shit about anything other than what they want, etc. Both of them agree with the JKR perspective, find the shrieking "activists" to be woeful dimwits, have no time for trans in women's locker rooms or book clubs, etc.

They also relate that their contemporaries agree with those sentiments.

by Anonymousreply 11906/07/2020

Rowling is as left-wing as you can get. She’s also in favor of protecting women’s rights.

by Anonymousreply 12006/07/2020

Some women have penises, and here's one of many non-Twitter sources attempting to "educate" (read: browbeat) actual women into acquiescence. For you, delusional and duplicitous R118:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 12106/07/2020

[quote]Rowling is as left-wing as you can get.

She used racist and antisemitic tropes in her books, i.e. only one Asian character named "Cho Ching" and hook-nosed greedy goblin bankers. It's so common for bigots to call themselves liberals nowadays that you can't really take many celebrities' or pundits' words for it, because they're not just describing themselves, they're making marketing choices about their branding. No one wants to be thought of as part of the current Boris Johnson/Donald Trump brand of conservative, it would hurt their sales. And it's sadly easy to fool fans into thinking you're "not that bad" if you scream "I'm a liberal!" at the same time you're screaming "Trans aren't human and haven't ever been discriminated against!"

And just consider this: she went after Trump for ages on Twitter, but now agrees with him on the trans issue. She's a rich white old woman, you think she's not going to go conservative? Especially after getting her feelings hurt on Twitter? She's not even close to the first person to go down this path.

I mean, she's welcome to be as bigoted as she wants, to try to use her celebrity status to distract from liberal causes like LGBT rights and protests against police brutality, and then claim she's a liberal, but no one (except you guys) are going to feel sorry for her when she isn't welcomed by the actual liberal community anymore.

by Anonymousreply 12206/07/2020

So because the bank employees in her fairytale had hooked noses she’s an anti Semite?

by Anonymousreply 12306/07/2020

No, R94, I didn't say Marsha P. Johnson threw the first brick, and as someone else noticed, I basically said the opposite. No one knows who did and Johnson herself said it wasn't her.

Trans groups were heavily involved in gay rights. When Johnson spoke, she frequently spoke of gay rights, once famously saying "Darling, I want my gay rights now!" to a news reporter interviewing her at a march. Sylvia Rivera was a member of GLA and GAA, and some groups like Queens Liberation Front were made up of gay, drag, and trans. Trans were always there.

People post photos of the many marches after the first night of Stonewall and you guys always ignore it, because history doesn't conform to what you wish was true. I don't know what to tell you, the truth is the truth, and the only people you convince are those who don't want to believe the truth.

by Anonymousreply 12406/07/2020

If you don't understand even the most basic concepts of symbolism, R123, perhaps you should sit this conversation out.

Should mention I misspelled Cho Chang's name in my earlier post, and also say that I understand why you conveniently didn't mention that part of my reply, given people have been criticizing the stereotyped character for over a decade at this point and there's not much anyone can say to excuse JKR in this area.

by Anonymousreply 12506/07/2020

[quote]To help combat the misinformation and stereotypes that permeate our communities, I've put together a guide for all you queer cis women out there. It comes down to education and communication, so let's chat about trans women and how our bodies work, shall we?

That article at r121 is typical of the entitled, misogynistic worldview of the trans activist. Especially the instructions on how to pleasure the “non-op” ladydick. Advise don’t read.

by Anonymousreply 12606/07/2020

^^^^^

... because it’s so important for cis lesbians to understand the particular character of a ladydick on special hormones, in today’s world ...

by Anonymousreply 12706/07/2020

It doesn’t matter how many performative tweets a person sends... No-one rational and sane, actually in their heart of hearts thinks any person who has, or has ever had, a penis, is in fact a woman.

Even people who use the word TERF don’t really think so either, when it comes down to it. They just like calling women names and playing “I am the most understanding person.” They might use the right pronouns to be polite or politically correct, but they know what biological sex is.

All JK Rowling did was tell the truth, but of course that is controversial these days.

by Anonymousreply 12806/07/2020

[quote]t doesn’t matter how many performative tweets a person sends... No-one rational and sane, actually in their heart of hearts thinks any person who has, or has ever had, a penis, is in fact a woman.

Tell that to the Drag Race queens.

The Drag Race sub over at Reddit is dragging Rowling. Scarlet Envy, in support of trans, blasted JK on Twitter for her remarks.

Those queens should be careful, their fans are mostly women, not trans women. Right now those women are probably deep in their political correctness, but if they wake up, as they should, to realize a big part of the trans movement actually is harmful to biological women and their causes, that fanbase could vanish.

by Anonymousreply 12906/07/2020

[quote]t doesn’t matter how many performative tweets a person sends... No-one rational and sane, actually in their heart of hearts thinks any person who has, or has ever had, a penis, is in fact a woman.

Tell that to the Drag Race queens.

The Drag Race sub over at Reddit is dragging Rowling. Scarlet Envy, in support of trans, blasted JK on Twitter for her remarks.

Those queens should be careful, their fans are mostly women, not trans women. Right now those women are probably deep in their political correctness, but if they wake up, as they should, to realize a big part of the trans movement actually is harmful to biological women and their causes, that fanbase could vanish.

by Anonymousreply 13006/07/2020

I’ll say it, R130. Everyone knows what biological sex is. It’s simply in fashion to pretend that we don’t.

Yes — most people think “trans women” are those extremely rare individuals who have had full “bottom” surgery and simply want to live unobtrusively “as women.” Whatever that might mean...

When actual women realise what the real deal in fact is — see what happened with British discussion board for mothers, Mumsnet, for example, once they caught wind that the modern trans movement is kids on puberty blockers and individuals claiming their intact male genitalia doesn’t make them any less female — their support evaporates.

by Anonymousreply 13106/07/2020

Hey r122 this is a picture of a goblin. You can google the images yourself.

Some are drawn and look more like the creatures from the movie gremlins. Some look like the representation in Harry Potter.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 13206/07/2020

Hey r122 this is a picture of a goblin. You can google the images yourself.

Some are drawn and look more like the creatures from the movie gremlins. Some look like the representation in Harry Potter.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 13306/07/2020

Notice how R124 ducks and swerves to avoid acknowledging that neither Johnson nor Viera were trans, by their own repeated assertions. It's ok to steamroller over their actual declared identities as gay men in the trans rewriting of history..

by Anonymousreply 13406/07/2020

I have no problem With the concept of Trans Men and Trans Women in those categories. But Trans women were born with different genitalia and many (not all) benefitted from male privilege before transitioning. And I am not sexually attracted to Trans men with “front holes”.

by Anonymousreply 13506/07/2020

All the trans cult are on reddit crying TERF all over the place and screaming at anyone that comes even a little close to defending what JK is saying. I reckon it's not only Russia that has a bot army.

by Anonymousreply 13606/07/2020

R117 is the same troll who tries to derail an conversation by screaming republican! Breitbart! etc....if you disagree with him/her/it.

Yes r94 neither Marsha nor Silvia initiated stonewall unless Marsha was lying about it and a trans activist born in the 90s knows the real story.

Exactly r134 both of them didn’t call themselves trans and Silvia said in a interview not long before she passed away she hated the word and wasn’t transgender as did Johnson.

by Anonymousreply 13706/07/2020

#IStandwithJKRowling is now trending on Twitter in the UK.

by Anonymousreply 13806/07/2020

Someone on twitter noted that JK is everything misogynistic men hate: a strong, opinionated, rich and successful woman. Of course the trans cult hate her.

by Anonymousreply 13906/07/2020

[quote]neither Johnson nor Viera were trans, by their own repeated assertions

The full quote from Johnson is that she wanted her gay rights now, especially for women such as herself. She identified as gay, trans and drag queen, and her middle initial P stands for "Pay it no mind" in reference to her gender. She had a male persona she called "Malcolm."

Rivera identified as a drag queen, a gay guy, a gay girl, and a "street queen," and used "she" to describe herself, She took hormones and considered sex reassignment surgery.

Neither identified solely as gay men, ever. They identified in multiple ways over the years. You're wrong.

by Anonymousreply 14006/07/2020

I can't believe she felt she could publicly take this stance at the present. All of us who follow the gender wars knew she'd clearly been a skeptic of the prevailing "academic" gender paradigm, but since virtually everyone that the cancel brigade goes after for these types of "crimes" (opinions, i.e. thought-crimes) gets wrecked I didn't expect her to come out so forcefully before the tide turns. She's definitely got brass.

BTW all of you "troll watchers" who consider yourselves experts on good trolling, take note--what Rowling did, knowing the absolute shit storm of frothing genderspecials on twitter was sure to come, is trolling at it's FINEST. It's trolling so good I feel I should be paying to watch it!

by Anonymousreply 14106/07/2020

I'm so tired of the magic-brick from magic trans POC that suddenly inferred on us gay rights. Complete bullshit. Yeah, that's why it took over 45 years to get gay marriage.

It's also complete bullshit that there was some conspiracy to erase or hide POC trans people from the gay rights movement. That's calling all the people who fought in gay rights over the past few decades racists and anti-trans.

My question - why, if trans are fighting for trans rights, can they not be trans females or trans males instead of females or males? There is something inherently shameful when you want to be labeled something that you are not.

Why is there shame in identifying as a trans-female and something different than a born-female? That's the problem with all of this - they aren't accepting of who they are and want us to label them as something we know they aren't.

We're all fine with accepting them if they are trans-female or trans-male, just not female or male. Stop your shame and trying to enforce a delusion on everyone else and maybe we can get somewhere.

by Anonymousreply 14206/07/2020

She's right and good for her to poking the bear and having Mara Wilson and the rest of woke twitter attack her.

I will say, though, that Cho Chang is the lamest name ever.

by Anonymousreply 14306/07/2020

R143 - and if the Asian character was given an English name, there would be criticism of erasure.

by Anonymousreply 14406/07/2020

Conner Habib is very exercised about her. He hates her, basically.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 14506/07/2020

Im sick of these trannie freaks and their validation seeking of something that is biological impossible !!! The only reason tranny chasers like them is for their dicks period.

by Anonymousreply 14606/07/2020

Of course Drag Race queens and fans are frothing trans gestapo members. They're all about pretending to be something they're not.

by Anonymousreply 14706/07/2020

[quote]and if the Asian character was given an English name, there would be criticism of erasure.

But Cho Chang? It's a miracle she didn't name her Ching Chang Chong.

by Anonymousreply 14806/07/2020

R140 still thrashes around to avoid concession to the facts. Unavoidable on their part, I suppose.

by Anonymousreply 14906/07/2020

R140 circular bullshit again. Johnson’s last known interview before her death she called herself a gay man. A gender bending drag queen is not transgender.

by Anonymousreply 15006/07/2020

It probably wasn't available r148. Like Ka-Ching.

Sad.

by Anonymousreply 15106/07/2020

When gay marriage became legal in America Conner habib said he didn’t give a shit and that it wasn’t a big deal.

However, he had a big meltdown on Twitter about San Francisco banning public nudity and how it was a vote against gay rights and culture.

That tells me everything you need to know about him. He also sold himself in porn as a former college professor when in reality he was a graduate TA for a short period of time.

by Anonymousreply 15206/07/2020

R148 - well what about naming the South Asian characters Padma and Parvi Patil? Is that racist?

by Anonymousreply 15306/07/2020

I'm not getting the Cho Chang thing either. Was she supposed to call the Asian character John Smith?

It's true that she could have come up with something a lot better than Cho Chang, but I don't see how it's racist.

by Anonymousreply 15406/07/2020

I've watched every season of Drag Race and I can tell you none of these queens are particularly intelligent. Many of them suffer from addictions, mental problems, severe insecurities and damn right stupidity. I watch because I enjoy the idiocy of car crash reality tv shows but I certainly don't look up to these people.

by Anonymousreply 15506/07/2020

I didn't say the name Cho Chang is racist. I said it was lame. And it's on the level of HAI EVERYONE NEEDS TO KNOW THIS CHARACTER IS ASIAN CUZ DIVERSITY. It's a miracle she didn't name the black girl Shaniqua Washington.

by Anonymousreply 15606/07/2020

I support her. If we erase sex we also erase sex rights and same sex attraction. It's leading us down a dangerous path. Rowling isn't even transphobic. She fully supports trans people and trans rights. She just doesn't believe in gender, that's it.

by Anonymousreply 15706/07/2020

R14 Not jut women, gays and lesbians too.

by Anonymousreply 15806/07/2020

R156 - well it was written almost 25 years ago. One black character's name is Angelina Johnson, so not too far off.

White people can't include any POC into anything without criticism of some kind but woe to them if they do not include a POC.

by Anonymousreply 15906/07/2020

R67 Preach. Never forget that Callum faked a hate crime.

by Anonymousreply 16006/07/2020

R69 It's called male privilege.

by Anonymousreply 16106/07/2020

R70 Well said👏

by Anonymousreply 16206/07/2020

Sex is a social construct.

by Anonymousreply 16306/07/2020

R83 Because they are performing as women. All they have are gender stereotypes. Like you said they have no idea what it actually means to be a woman.

by Anonymousreply 16406/07/2020

[Quote]It's men competing in women's sports, men in women's prisons and bathrooms, men basically infringing upon all the rights women have won.

QFT

by Anonymousreply 16506/07/2020

Excellent tweet:

[quote] Just seen lots of "why can't you be kind" again? So: kindness is giving away something you can spare, not your rights. It's kind to give someone your last Rolo, it's self-harm to give away the definition of your sex and the right to determine who enters single-sex spaces.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16606/07/2020

[quote] Sex is a social construct.

Is it?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16706/07/2020

[Quote]I've done penty of actual reserach, and you haven't, so please stop erasing gay men and lesbian women from Stonewall. It is false and offensive.

👏👏👏👏

by Anonymousreply 16806/07/2020

[quote]The full quote from Johnson is that she wanted her gay rights now, especially for women such as herself. She identified as gay, trans and drag queen, and her middle initial P stands for "Pay it no mind" in reference to her gender. She had a male persona she called "Malcolm." Rivera identified as a drag queen, a gay guy, a gay girl, and a "street queen," and used "she" to describe herself, She took hormones and considered sex reassignment surgery.

And that's fine. Certainly better than today's hyper-rigid identities ("I am a cis pan poc queer") and hyper-rigid insistence on correct pronouns and such. One of the reasons I like Big Freedia, for instance, is that he doesn't give a damn about he/she pronouns and says he knows when he's being addressed with respect.

Johnson and Rivera were a bag of contradictions that changed with time or the space they were in at the moment. That seems natural to me.

I frankly don't give a fuck how anyone "identifies," particularly when they're rigid about it. As soon as "identifies" becomes an archaic part of LGB history, the better.

by Anonymousreply 16906/07/2020

Why the fuck do so many of the replies to her tweets just features gifs of KPop? Seems a lot of people can’t even express a coherent thought and just reply with random gifs and memes.

by Anonymousreply 17006/07/2020

It's also amusing when it comes to prison you really only hear about transwomen wanting to be placed in a women's prison. But you know transmen do not want to be placed in a men's prison cause they know the moment it is shower time and the other men see that vagina they are fucked...literally.

by Anonymousreply 17106/07/2020

the less odious of the 2 jezebel trans writers did an article about this and did so in a super mature manner that is sure to cut JK to the bone. He called JK a man and used he pronouns throughout. showed her!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 17206/07/2020

Ask a trans person why won't they date another trans?

by Anonymousreply 17306/07/2020

Get a load of this "open letter to JK Rowling" from "Menstrual Equity and Period Poverty charity, Bloody Good Period":

---

Dear JK Rowling,

I am writing to you as the CEO and founder of Menstrual Equity and Period Poverty charity, Bloody Good Period along with a breadth of co-signatories. We were incredibly disappointed to read your tweet this morning as were countless others who care passionately about injustice. Now is a time where powerful cis white women should be doing everything they can to stand up for the rights of other groups; your words reflect a wilful lack of understanding and compassion for those different from you.

We write this, not to incite trolling, but to invite you in to an open-minded, justice-focused feminist space. We write this with the simple intention of promoting accountability and for the growth of you as an individual to do better by trans and non binary people as well as the betterment of the Menstrual Equity and Intersectional feminist movements.

It is particularly distressing that you chose to tweet such a comment during a time where Black trans, non binary and Gender Non Conforming people are more threatened than ever. Such a tweet from a prominent white woman will, as we’re sure you know, only serve to detract from the press attention on important events concerning Black Lives Matter.

The issues are, of course, interconnected. As highlighted in a recent piece in The Independant by Melz Owusu​, Tony McDade, a Black Transgender man was shot and killed by police in May 2020, and was the twelth known Trans victim this year. Black Trans people are disproportionately victims of violence, simply for existing. They are made to feel invalidated and mocked for menstruating. Nobody should be made to feel shame for their body.

As a global movement, we were delighted to have made progress in the menstrual field, with the introduction of free period products in New Zealand. Sadly, your message reminds us of how far we have yet to go.

The fact of the matter is that yes, when we as a society were woefully uneducated, there used to be a word for people who menstruate, and that word was “women”. What we know now, due to extensive work and amplification from the trans activist community is that it is not just women who menstruate, but trans men, GNC and non binary people. Menstruation does not maketh a woman, and to imply so, not only erases the experience of trans women, but also of cis women who do not menstruate. We invite you to read this evidence-based blog post from Sally King, Research Director of Menstrual Matters. Each of the points below is expanded in her excellent blog which you can read here.

Only half the female population is of reproductive age so half do not menstruate

A significant part of the female reproductive population use hormonal medications/ devices that prevent menstruation and are therefore not people who menstruate

A fairly significant part of the female reproductive population does not menstruate for health or exercise reasons

A small part of the female reproductive population is pregnant or breastfeeding and so, are not menstruating

A small part of the female reproductive population has experienced early menopause and so, are not menstruating

A small part of the female reproductive population cannot menstruate

A small part of this population do not identify as ‘women’ or ‘girls’

by Anonymousreply 17406/07/2020

...

Generalisations about an entire gender are impossible (and usually dodgy.) You are right that the term TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist) should not apply to you. While your incorrect views on menstruation certainly exclude trans women, feminist is not a term we think applies to anyone who does not stand for ALL women, and ALL people. Including all those who menstruate.

We implore you to spend some time researching, and learning from the generosity of trans and non-binary activists and academics, a small number of whom we have listed below.

Kenny Ethan Jones - the first trans man to front a period campaign

Munroe Bergdorf - activist and model

Charlie Craggs - activist and founder of Nail Transphobia

Juno Dawson - Writer

Jamie Windust - Writer and activist

Jono Roche - Writer

Freddy McConnell (the "Seahorse" dad)

We urge you, among other actions, to make a public apology and would welcome a significant donation to charities best placed to serve the trans folk you so deeply hurt. We continue to actively include and stand alongside trans people and invite you to do the same.

by Anonymousreply 17506/07/2020

Like they assume she didn't research and learn about this before she posted it, so they're condescendingly "educating" an actual woman on what it means to be a woman.

by Anonymousreply 17606/07/2020

R170, KPop loonies decided to hijack IStandWithJKRowling hashtag. They don't want you to see any of the supporters or opposition. That's why they're flooding her mentions with KPop gifs. It reeks of desperation.

by Anonymousreply 17706/07/2020

Yes indeed I’m sure a woman who has given birth to two children needs lessons in the significance of female biology from Juno “a lot of gay men are gay men as a consolation prize, because they couldn't be women” Dawson.

by Anonymousreply 17806/07/2020

Does anyone else hate the twitter speak they use, it's so condescending and defensive.

by Anonymousreply 17906/07/2020

Trans activists GUILTY of gender appropriation!

by Anonymousreply 18006/07/2020

R179 Y'ALL it's time we have a talk about how to (some trans bullshit). Let's get started!

....

Do better!

by Anonymousreply 18106/07/2020

R172 at the end of that article, of course "give us money!!"

Yes, support women, by donating to men:

"I suggest that women and cis women, not to mention our male and nonbinary allies, refocus our attention away from hateful men and back on materially supporting women. You can do that by donating to the Homeless Black Trans Women Fund and other pro-woman fundraisers like the Okra Project and For the Gworls, not to mention joining up with the Black Lives Matter protests in your area."

by Anonymousreply 18206/07/2020

Do Jezebel think JKR cares if they call her “he”? She doesn’t have any pronouns in her bio, now does she. It’s really the modern trans movement that obsesses over pronouns, because altering reality is impossible, whereas attempts can be made to compel speech.

by Anonymousreply 18306/07/2020

Still waiting to hear why "Cho Ching" was so WILDLY offensive 20 years later.

What should she have named a Chinese character? Inez Vandergelder? Pippi Martinez? Winnie Gudmundsdottir?

by Anonymousreply 18406/07/2020

R172 - I'm not reading that article, but from your description, it sounds exactly as juvenile as you would expect from Jezebel.

by Anonymousreply 18506/07/2020

[quote]We invite you to read this evidence-based blog post from Sally King, Research Director of Menstrual Matters.

Besides that sentence being on-its-face hilarious, there's something so transpresumptious about someone born a dude presuming to teach a real woman what womanhood REALLY is.

by Anonymousreply 18606/07/2020

[quote]Johnson and Rivera were a bag of contradictions that changed with time or the space they were in at the moment. That seems natural to me.

Well, it mainly changed with who was paying for dinner and what they thought they wanted to hear.

It's impossible to have this argument about these two people without addressing the fact that they were economically disadvantaged and semi-homeless most of their adult lives, had no education or professions other than their fabulism to speak of, or dine out on. Fine, there's no crime in being poor, but how many uneducated homeless people do you know who are effective community organizers? How many have the time to do much more than stay fed and partially domiciled? What about the decade of activism that led to the events of the late 1960s and early 1970s? Do you not realize that these two people are almost entirely unknown to the people in the thick of gay activism at the time, and were known to them only over time as their alleged "magical" qualities began developing as a media narrative?

Take a listen here to well known Lesbian activist Martha Shelley and inform yourself of the state of actual activism during that time in our history as gay and lesbian citizens!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18706/07/2020

In an interview with Making Gay History author Eric Marcus, Johnson recounts her experience of Stonewall:

[quote]Marsha: "The way I winded up being at Stonewall that night, I was having a party uptown. And we were all out there and Miss Sylvia Rivera and them were over in the park having a cocktail. [bold]I was uptown and I didn’t get downtown until about two o’clock, because when I got downtown the place was already on fire.[/bold] And it was a raid already. The riots had already started. And they said the police went in there and set the place on fire. They said the police set it on fire because they originally wanted the Stonewall to close, so they had several raids. And there was this, uh, Tiffany and, oh, this other drag queen that used to work there in the coat check room and then they had all these bartenders. And the night before the Stonewall riots started, before they closed the bar, we were all there and we all had to line up against the wall and they was all searching us.”

Marsha, in her own words, did not throw the first shot glass. And Rivera, according to Johnson, wasn’t even there.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18806/07/2020

Wasn’t it a biracial/black trans man, Storme, who started the riot after being arrested?

by Anonymousreply 18906/07/2020

Storme wasn’t a trans man r189 she was a butch lesbian.

by Anonymousreply 19006/07/2020

I know other people have said this but why would trans people be hanging out at a gay bar at all? It's a total category error. This is just the trans crowd trying to insinuate themselves into a history that isn't theirs.

by Anonymousreply 19106/07/2020

Mega cunt Amber Tamblyn has canceled JK Rowling.

Poor JK!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19206/07/2020

JK Rowling is my new spirit animal

by Anonymousreply 19306/07/2020

Yep, I am sure JKR is crying into her millions that the star of uh... “Joan of Arcadia”, I’m sure she must have had other jobs, who is in an odd-looking marriage to a frankly weird guy twenty years older who has had racism allegations against him, doesn’t like her books... I expect JKR’s retirement announcement any day now.

by Anonymousreply 19406/07/2020

She is alienating her trans fans. A lot of trans people were fans of her.

Also, it is not just trans women upset about this. A lot of trans men are too.

by Anonymousreply 19506/07/2020

R195 Why should I care if some trans person doesn't read Harry Potter? The fuck? That trans person is STUPID because Rowling isn't a bigot.

If you feel alienated by being told you're XY so therefore you're a guy I'm sorry honey but it's the truth.

by Anonymousreply 19606/07/2020

R195 a lot of people are fans of her and grew up reading her books (or in my case read them after I was already an adult). Or the movies. The books and films were very successful and she made a lot of money from them because so many people liked them.

And frankly if these alleged disillusioned trans fans are actually upset about what she said and not some hyperbole from trans activists and their enablers (which is pretty much all I have seen - they ignore the details of her argument and summarize "transphobe"). One of the problems with having your worldview based around soundbites and propaganda slogans is that you can lose touch with reality when it doesn't match those slogans.

by Anonymousreply 19706/07/2020

The reality is, that nearly the entire population of this planet would, if pressed to consider the point — but most don’t have the luxury of the time to think about it in any detail — agree with JKR that biological sex is real and relevant, because, well, er, it is.

It is simply that JKR has enough money and consequent freedom to not really give a shit if people try to “cancel” her. What you see from her is what most people would say if (a) their livelihood was fully secure and (b) they had looked into this issue properly and didn’t just parrot mindless mantras from the internet thinking they were being the most liberal.

You can be sympathetic and caring to trans people and want them to have support, good healthcare and equal rights, without going down the: “well, what’s really a woman anyway??!!” and “why don’t women just give up their bathrooms / locker rooms / refuges / Olympic medals to be kind???” route.

We all know what a woman is. Let’s be real. Feigning stupidity to be “kind” isn’t that kind actually.

by Anonymousreply 19806/07/2020

Yeah can we drop the "enabler" buzzwords when talking about trans bullshit, Ms. Phelps-Roper?

by Anonymousreply 19906/07/2020

R199 are you actually word policing me in a thread partially about trans trying to word police the entire world?

by Anonymousreply 20006/07/2020

R200 WORD POLICING LOL. I'm just trying to get you to THINK about the fact that the language you are using is identical to that of anti-gay activists such as the Westboro Baptist Church. That's all. Since we both agree language should tell the truth.

by Anonymousreply 20106/07/2020

What language r201? I mean it doesn’t seem that hyperboles work with Rowling or a lot of people here. What language is r198/200 using that is similar to westboro?

by Anonymousreply 20206/07/2020

R201 so if Westboro Baptist Church - who everyone thinks is a joke at this point (and I actually haven't heard anything from in years)- uses English I should avoid that too?

What words are acceptable, then?

"Enablers" is a perfectly cromulent word for what these people are because they are enabling the trans rights activists' bullying behavior by backing down for fear of being cancelled. And the ones who then try to overcompensate and performatively encourage them by calling people TERFs and attacking others FOR them. They're the worst.

by Anonymousreply 20306/07/2020

TRANS ENABLER AND FAG ENABLER HAVE THE SAME RING TO THEM. LATER GATOR

by Anonymousreply 20406/07/2020

Yeah I think that might just be your issue, r204.

by Anonymousreply 20506/07/2020

Well it's definitely not an issue for the feminists here I'll grant you that

by Anonymousreply 20606/07/2020

I don't think Westboro has much, if any, influence any longer, so while I understand you in your studies of their literature may make the association, I don't think that is true for gay people such as myself who had just about forgotten they still existed.

by Anonymousreply 20706/07/2020

[quote]White people can't include any POC into anything without criticism of some kind but woe to them if they do not include a POC.

Bullshit, white authors write about POC all time time without naming characters Cho(ng) Chang. This isn't about a PC cabal, it's about her writing choices.

I'm totally with her on how gender is different to sex and kudos to her for speaking out. But her abilities at world building in her books make her poor writing all the more glaring.

by Anonymousreply 20806/07/2020

R208, talking of Asian people of colour, two of the four police officers who have been charged in George Floyd's death are Asian. Derek Chauvin's now estranged wife is a refugee from Laos via Thailand.

by Anonymousreply 20906/08/2020

As for the quality or otherwise of Rowling's writing, these are children's books and she was also under huge time pressure at certain points to complete one a year. They were never intended as high literature and the writing is as good as any other popular best seller, especially for kids. I'm guessing none of you have ever read Dickens.

The first Harry Potter book came out in 1997 and the last in 2007. Chang was introduced in book 4, I believe, which came out in 2000. That's 20 years ago. Yes, it's no excuse for being lame but sensitivities were not so in tune to certain things back then.

by Anonymousreply 21006/08/2020

R195, the JKR defenders on social media all seem to not even know trans men exist, which isn't surprising considering how anti trans propaganda is entirely focused on trans women "victimizing" women, gays, children, etc. Twice yesterday I saw some internet genius post a defense of JKR that made it sound like they didn't even remember trans men existed, someone would ask them about it, and they'd delete what they wrote within moments and pretend like they hadn't forgotten about trans men altogether.

by Anonymousreply 21106/08/2020

[quote]Wasn’t it a biracial/black trans man, Storme, who started the riot after being arrested?

She wasn't trans, she was a butch lesbian. Witnesses said a lesbian being hustled into the police wagon shouted "Why don't you do something?" and she always claimed that was her, so I think it's likely she was the one who lead to someone in the crowd throwing that brick.

by Anonymousreply 21206/08/2020

[quote]Why the fuck do so many of the replies to her tweets just features gifs of KPop? Seems a lot of people can’t even express a coherent thought and just reply with random gifs and memes.

It's not random. K-pop stans have been flooding hateful and rightwing hashtags with K-pop gifs for several days now. They've done it for the Antifa hashtag, various racist hashtags, and now to JKR. It's been in the news, which you might want to glance at on occasion.

by Anonymousreply 21306/08/2020

Sure r213, K-pop gifs in replies to JK Rowling tweets are the central features items in the news these days, not a global pandemic, the economic effects of the lockdowns, police brutality, tensions between China and the West, etc., etc.

by Anonymousreply 21406/08/2020

And, no, r213, it's not hateful or rightwing to say only women menstruate.

by Anonymousreply 21506/08/2020

[quote]I've done penty of actual reserach, and you haven't, so please stop erasing gay men and lesbian women from Stonewall. It is false and offensive.

You haven't done research at all, you just make shit up and say you've done research. Everything you've said is wrong, and a quick Google for anyone who cares will confirm what I've posted and contradict what you've posted.

And saying there were trans there on the first night is NOT erasing gays or lesbians, you utter moron. They were. It's in the eyewitness accounts in Duberman's book and Carter's collection of contemporaneous accounts, and you can see some in the photos of the riot.

At NO POINT did I say no gays or lesbians were there. That's the dumbest damn thing, I can't believe you even tried that.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21606/08/2020

Jameela Jamil has overcome her normal reluctance to call attention to herself.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21706/08/2020

But there weren't trans at Stonewall on the first night r216 because the concept of trans that is fashionable today didn't exist then.

The bullshit that we are being forced to believe today - that lesbians and gay men owe our freedoms today because trans women of colour started the Stonewall riots - is offensive, a lie and dangerous, as all myths that cannot be questioned are.

by Anonymousreply 21806/08/2020

Good on her. War on women. Keep men out of women’s sports.

by Anonymousreply 21906/08/2020

[quote]>Trans were there on the first night of Stonewall...

[quote]Stop right there. This is totally made up, as 95% or so of the guys instigating the Stonewall uprising were white gay guys and lesbians. You can look at photographic evidence, and all you will see is Marsha P. Johnson as a man, smiling in the back row, a sight-seer and bystander, while the rest of the guys (mostly white and no drags) push against the police.

I never said Marsha P Johnson was there on the first night. That's a strawman argument; I never said it, and she herself said she didn't show up until late when it was almost over. When Sylvia would falsely claim to have been there, Marsha would correct her right out loud in front of whoever she'd just lied to.

As I already mentioned, drag queens, crossdressers and trans were there that night, identified and carted in by the cops, and it's mentioned in eyewitness accounts in Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution and in Duberman's 1994 Stonewall book.

Not everyone was white either, there were a lot of Puerto Rican kids, especially drag queens. Here's a link to an eyewitness account recorded for NPR in 2010.

[quote]This whole "trans women of color" thing has been wholly invented in the last 8-10 years and is accepted as fact by younger gays affected by the loud trans movement (unknown in 1969, of course) who are just parroting it to each other. Do some research.

Again, I said nothing about Stonewall being started by a trans woman of color. Absolutely nothing. You want to rage about that, go find someone who actually SAID that first and go yell at them.

Meanwhile, there are living witnesses and witnesses who were interviewed in the past who bring up the drag queens, Puerto Ricans, trans, and all sorts of other people you claim weren't at Stonewall. They're not doing it because they're "kids parroting lies to each other." They were there. Those interviewed are almost all white gays and they have no reason to have been lying in the 1980s, in 1994, or even in 2010 when they were being interviewed.

The presence of these Puerto Rican kids and trans folks doesn't mean there were no gays or lesbians. Of course there were. Saying trans were also there doesn't "erase" anything.

You can say "do some research" all you want, but the fact is that actual, legitimate research will prove you wrong every time. It's the last thing you want. If you wanted people to do actual, real research, you wouldn't be telling lies, refusing to link to all this "proof" you claim you have that it was only white gays and lesbians at Stonewall, and you wouldn't be pulling this cheap strawman argument trick, either.

You're pathetic. I'm sorry the truth hurts your feelings so much, but on the other hand, you're just some angry rightwing straight lady who couldn't organize a party let alone a meaningful protest movement, and your feelings aren't really that important to anyone anymore. Which is probably one of the reasons you are the way you are.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22006/08/2020

As if Rowling gives a rat's ass about the few thousand trans fans that she has... especially since most T don't have children or the money to spend on expensive merchandise. Again, the T overestimate their importance due to their fetishistic obsession with their own 'identity.'

As a gay man, I welcome Rowling's trolling. The more those trans extremists are clutching their pearls and are helplessly shrieking like the madmen that they are, the more moderates will begin to realize the idiocy of self-identification laws, the 'transing' of gender nonconforming children, and deluded censorship of basic science.

I am for sensible laws that protect trans people and allow them to lead fulfilled lives, but not at the expense of children, of other disadvantaged groups, or of truth and reality. There are a lot of moderates in the trans community who are perfectly reasonable, but they have to fight back control of their movement if they don't want to be silenced forever as well.

The thing is, even if we would enshrine current trans extremist ideology in law, these extremist fuckers would still find some reason to stylize themselves as martyrs and victims of society. Victimhood is a lifestyle for them.

by Anonymousreply 22106/08/2020

I'm sure these posters care very passionately about Jews and asians and aren't just keyboard monkeys latching onto random shit to throw at disobedient women. Sane people agree with Rowling and if anything it's tragic that it takes the invincibility of wealth to say men cannot be women.

by Anonymousreply 22206/08/2020

I'm sure JK cried herself to sleep last night knowing as a woman, her existence drives trans-woman mad.

by Anonymousreply 22306/08/2020

r211, no one forgot about trans men, we just know that they are women.

by Anonymousreply 22406/08/2020

R220, can you please explain what "trans" might have meant, if it were even used, in 1969 and compare with what it means now?

by Anonymousreply 22506/08/2020

You are being somewhat disingenuous R220. If the claims being made were just - there were, probably, a few people at Stonewall who might well be part of the transgender movement today, that but be fine. It's the default widespread claim that trans WOC started Stonewall that causes the pushback.

by Anonymousreply 22606/08/2020

[quote][R220], can you please explain what "trans" might have meant, if it were even used, in 1969 and compare with what it means now?

The words "transsexual" and "transvestite" were used at the time, as you well know. Johnson and Rivera identified at times as transvestites, and of course named their organization Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries. Rivera famously called transvestites the "half brothers and half sisters" of the "gays and lesbians of the revolution." In 2000 or so, she changed Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries to Transgender, as an indication of how the term had changed.

Language is fluid. So is identity for some people, including Rivera, who called herself transvestite and transgender at times but never used any term exclusively. She complained about all labels, not just transgender as someone earlier claimed: "I'm tired of being labeled. I don't even like the label transgender. I'm tired of living with labels. I just want to be who I am. I am Sylvia Rivera. Ray Rivera left home at the age of 10 to become Sylvia. And that's who I am."

Now, how 'bout you explain why you're on the Colston thread saying it's blacks who should be condemned for slavery because they forced innocent whites into owning Africans?

Anyway, super glad to hear that this isn't some thread full of rightwingers taking advantage of a gay space to push their hate.

by Anonymousreply 22706/08/2020

[quote]Do they refer to men as "people who ejaculate"?

Pics please.

by Anonymousreply 22806/08/2020

They cross dressers or drag queens r227 not transsexuals. They played dress up, they didn’t want to be Christine Jorgensen. The bar itself was filled with mostly blue collar working class people.

Interesting I don’t see trans men demanding to be put in men’s prisons. Gee maybe they are smart enough to know what would happen someone who is 5’4 with a vagina

by Anonymousreply 22906/08/2020

Truth will set you free. And biology is truth. Grieve the loss of the fantasy that you are a girl/woman, no matter how femme you feel. Feelings are not facts. We must fight for logic in these intellectually vulnerable times.

by Anonymousreply 23006/08/2020

[quote]the JKR defenders on social media all seem to not even know trans men exist,

This is largely because trans men are less likely to have an agenda, since they're not misogynists, and also because (as R229 points out), they were women to start with and so they're more empathic and smart enough to realize the ambiguities of their position.

Plenty of trans people live their lives quietly and in peace with their situation; it's only the activists you have to watch out for. And they tend to be biologically male blowhards.

by Anonymousreply 23106/08/2020

R227 you lost me at the end with that smug Twitter-esque insult. You just can't help your pompous sense of righteousness, can you? Definitely turns people off whatever you are saying. I know you think you're educated, so hopefully you will realize that, someday.

by Anonymousreply 23206/08/2020

r216 r220 keeps proving my point by rapidly backtracking and posting the most famous picture of Stonewall showing exactly zero "trans women of color" (including Marsha Johnson dressed as a man!) which he keeps telling everyone started everything. We all have eyes and can use Google. You keep using it to disprove what I am saying, yet seem unaware that your hollow assertions are simply not based in fact.

Where are all these "trans women of color" you keep yammering about? Who were they? Were they among those arrested? How is it so easy for you to simple erase all the men and women we can see or hear interviewed? Why do you pretend they weren't there doing anything? These aren't exactly probing questions!

You are a rigid ideologue with an agenda attempting to alter the facts to suit your narrative. Go for it!

Shorter version: SHRIIIEEEEEEEK!

by Anonymousreply 23306/08/2020

R227, transsexual and transvestite mean something very different from what transgender - i.e. trans - means today. Trans today is about the notion of "gender identity", i.e. if you "identify" as a woman you are, even if you have a penis, and there is apparently no distinction between a biological woman and a transwoman. The concept of gender identity means any mention of biological sex is hounded down and it is not permissible to say something as factually correct as "only women menstruate" because, according to trans ideology, some people who menstruate are not women. That's certainly not what the people at the Stonewall uprising were fighting for.

by Anonymousreply 23406/08/2020

R227, transsexual and transvestite mean something very different from what transgender - i.e. trans - means today. Trans today is about the notion of "gender identity", i.e. if you "identify" as a woman you are, even if you have a penis, and there is apparently no distinction between a biological woman and a transwoman. The concept of gender identity means any mention of biological sex is hounded down and it is not permissible to say something as factually correct as "only women menstruate" because, according to trans ideology, some people who menstruate are not women. That's certainly not what the people at the Stonewall uprising were fighting for.

by Anonymousreply 23506/08/2020

People with a penis are not entitled to tell people with vaginas who is a woman, or how to be a woman.

That is the inherent misogyny of the trans agenda which sadly the woke left has wholly adopted at the one true marker of a progressive. I find that baffling.

by Anonymousreply 23606/08/2020

“YOU’RE A WOMAN, TRANNY!”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 23706/08/2020

R2 I think it’s referred to as beings that jizz.

by Anonymousreply 23806/08/2020

God I am afraid how this is going to play out in the debates/kick off to the election. I hope someone doesn’t ask Biden/his VP choice about trans women in sports, bathrooms or prisons.

by Anonymousreply 23906/08/2020

Ugh, ok, Radcliffe needs to STFU. He's just repeating the same nonlogic and falsehoods and isn't really addressing her argument.

by Anonymousreply 24006/08/2020

A comment from the Radcliffe article:

I love it when privileged white men lecture women on what being a woman means.

by Anonymousreply 24106/08/2020

62 W&Ws and Op is still lined through. Hang in there brave xx or xy person.

by Anonymousreply 24206/08/2020

R116 - the way they treat lesbians on this site is a disgrace. Straight women are spit upon and lesbians are barely tolerated as are bi women.

Guess why? Because we are women! It's funny how easy it is to claim you are oppressed and not allowed to be you and the turn around and do it to others. Don't you love the old double standard?

by Anonymousreply 24306/08/2020

It's a bit sad that Trevor Project, "a non-profit dedicated to crisis intervention and suicide prevention for LGBTQ people", is used in this way. The reality is all this pro-trans talk can make it really hard for some gay people to accept who they are. Trans people seem to be many times advocating a very strict view on gender, where you pretty much are seen as trans if you're not traditionally masculine or feminine. We've seen too many examples of parents declaring their small kids trans for way too flimsy reasons. Just imagine how messed up those kids will end up being. Will Trevor Project help them if they try to commit suicide after being told for years they must be trans when they are not?

Radcliffe should've kept his mouth shut about this since he probably only thinks he's supporting a good cause without realizing all the issues surrounding the case. I don't hate trans people and I was a girly boy growing up. I'd hate to think what would've happened if I was told then that hey, you're a girl, let's mutilate your body permanently!

Trans people should most definitely be accepted as what they are, and that is being transgendered. I don't understand why some of them need the validation of being seen as complete women or men since it's obvious not all of them come even close to resembling one. Most trans women seem to be just more demure drag queens, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's like some of them are trying to say we're better than being a minority, those pesky gays and lezzies, we're true women!

It's really weird and sad how some very liberal and open-minded people have bought the trans narrative and believe it's the only true truth. It's also terrible that anyone not buying the trans narrative is immediately labeled as a right-winger, although that is obviously used as scare tactics to make people shut their mouths about criticizing the trans. I'm glad J.K. Rowling doesn't give a fuck. She's got balls and there most definitely should be more like her in the LGB community.

by Anonymousreply 24406/08/2020

Radcliffe is of limited talent, really not a great actor, and he didn’t knock any scene out of the park once in what, eight kids’ films? His mother is in the industry and that’s how he got his break, and FWIW in some movies for ten year olds I always found him the weak link.

He’s getting very easy ally points by not engaging with what JKR said and simply dumping on it, but seems men will always be praised for shitting on women, even women whose work they’ve benefited from.

“Trans women are women.” “Ok, but doesn’t that mean...?” “Shut up TERF, just say the mantra.” That’s modern discourse really.

by Anonymousreply 24506/08/2020

The thing about the trans movement is that it's always about Trans Women. You hear reasonably little about Trans Men. Which makes me think that a lot of the trans movement is concerned with soothing the egos of bio men.

by Anonymousreply 24606/08/2020

[quote]They were never intended as high literature and the writing is as good as any other popular best seller, especially for kids. I'm guessing none of you have ever read Dickens.

That's right, [R210]. Complaining about the name (Ching) Cho(ng) Chang clearly indicates that none of us have read Dickens and we spend all our time watching Michael Bay movies.

by Anonymousreply 24706/08/2020

[quote]They were never intended as high literature and the writing is as good as any other popular best seller, especially for kids. I'm guessing none of you have ever read Dickens.

That's right, [R210]. Complaining about the name (Ching) Cho(ng) Chang clearly indicates that none of us have read Dickens and we spend all our time watching Michael Bay movies.

by Anonymousreply 24806/08/2020

But Daniel, transwomen don't menstruate.

by Anonymousreply 24906/08/2020

R246, in fact even Radcliffe seems to have forgotten about them and erased them in a way JKR didn’t but nothing stops the praise machine for repeating the mantra.

Reading this thread, or others, or talking to actual people in real life, I know that while most people are fair, have sympathy and want trans people to be happy and safe, they don’t think that trans women are women, because that statement does not make any logical sense, and has lots of odd consequences if you really do take it literally.

But you basically do have to say it if you’re an actor or on Twitter.

by Anonymousreply 25006/08/2020

[quote] Nice to see as usual the DataLounge gay community joining Team Trump and the Evangelicals to bash Trans people

What are they doing? Bashing people with a truth bat?

by Anonymousreply 25106/09/2020

There was more int hat signature before I accidentally deleted it.

by Anonymousreply 25206/09/2020

[quote]Now, how 'bout you explain why you're on the Colston thread saying it's blacks who should be condemned for slavery because they forced innocent whites into owning Africans?

I didn't you liar, I was just stating a historical fact and I never said innocent whites were forced into owning Africans. I was stating a historical fact, which is that whites very rarely went into Africa and enslaved people, but slaves were traded to whites by local Africans. So, if we're going to be honest about the history of the slave trade then we should be honest about that too.

Or do you want us to lie about African involvement in slavery, just like you want us to lie about Stonewall?

by Anonymousreply 25306/09/2020

That's not what I was saying you little twit r248. I was responding to those who seem to think it's a major point against Rowling that her books are not, in their opinion, classic literature.

Why the fuck is it apparently so difficult for some people's brains to be able to compute two or three different messages when they read more than 12 words?

by Anonymousreply 25406/09/2020

By the way r248, transwomen are biological men and biological men don't menstruate.

by Anonymousreply 25506/09/2020

If transwomen were women, the word trans wouldn't exist. It really is that simple.

by Anonymousreply 25606/09/2020

And, for what it's worth, back 20+ years ago when Rowling was writing her books there wasn't a pressure for diversity, it wasn't even much of a thing. That JK included Indian characters and Chinese characters was because she herself wanted to have characters from different cultural backgrounds. The whole Harry Potter series is about people who are outside of mainstream society and a little different. If the only criticism of her is that she had one tacky name in several 1000s of pages of books, then she did well.

The transtapo who try to slur her by saying she had hook-nosed bankers have never read the books and are talking shit. If she were writing the books today, no doubt she'd be hounded for not including a transgirl who doesn't have periods.

by Anonymousreply 25706/09/2020

r255, I fully agree with you! So what?

by Anonymousreply 25806/09/2020

Reminds me of how the pussy-hat demonstrations had to be stopped because "not all women have a pussy".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25906/09/2020

That was pathetic. Trump wasn't laughing about grabbing trans women by their lady joysticks. Transwomen have no solidarity with their sisters.

by Anonymousreply 26006/09/2020

A ghastly young acquaintance of mine has sent me a very scolding message because I follow Graham Linehan on Twitter. This makes me a huge transphobe apparently.

Clearly if I've read any Harry Potter books and enjoyed them, this makes me a transphobe too. This fucking attitude it what puts me off embracing trans rights fully, even some of their 'allies' are complete nut jobs.

He later posted the whole 'Stonewall was started by trans people of color' bullshit with 6 or 7 pics of the riots. Strangely all the faces appear to be white.

by Anonymousreply 26106/09/2020

[quote]A ghastly young acquaintance of mine has sent me a very scolding message because I follow Graham Linehan on Twitter. This makes me a huge transphobe apparently.

I had a brief twitter interaction with Glinner several years ago - about Father Ted! - and am now on a multitude of blocklists. I can't see some twitter activist-journalist-celebrities at all. It doesn't take much.

by Anonymousreply 26206/09/2020

I had to look up Graham Linehan.

Graham Linehan is an Irish sitcom writer. He created or co-created the sitcoms Father Ted, Black Books and The IT Crowd.

IT Crowd was a BRILLIANT show. He has contributed far more then Daniel.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26306/09/2020

I think his website animation where he's riding the fat horse is cute.

And yeah he's hated by trans activists and their enablers. They have tried to cancel him repeatedly and have started attacking people who merely follow him.

by Anonymousreply 26406/09/2020

Wasn’t Rowling’s tweet about trans men, not trans women? She’s joking about the term “people who menstruate,” not “women with penises.” And she never said all women menstruate, she said people who do are women. That’s why the stupid Jezebel misgendering of Rowling didn’t land the way the writer thought it would.

by Anonymousreply 26506/09/2020

Yeah it makes sense "good" writers would be considered transphobic as they will be more logical and realise there is a difference between a woman and a trans-woman.

by Anonymousreply 26606/09/2020

Yes, R265, correct, a key reason why the praise for Radcliffe’s brain-dead sentiments is particularly wrong-headed. But you’ll get far more RTs and Likes for trite untruths than difficult facts.

I was never a particular fan of Rowling’s work but she seems smarter and braver than most given the way she’s put her head above the parapet on this issue.

by Anonymousreply 26706/09/2020

It is impossible to debate with someone who believes transmen are men and transwomen are women. The whole basis of their argument is flawed from the off; so there’s no use using facts and logic to discuss things with them.

As for the Menstrual Equity and Period Poverty charity, Bloody Good Period. Give me strength! "there is evidence that trans men menstruate..." That's because they're WOMEN.

Of all the suffering and evil in the world these assholes have to set up a charity to...to do what? Comfort delusional men because they can't have periods? Because they're men.

The tranny cult is fucking insane.

And I've said this before and I'll say it again. I have no problem with any trans person I know in real life. I have no problem with the vast majority of trans people. It's these hateful misogynists in dresses that really get my goat. Why do they aspire to be 'women' so much when they hate them?

by Anonymousreply 26806/09/2020

I don't really get the problem with Cho Chang. Lots of the characters have stupid alliterative names like that. "Dudley Dursley" sounds stereotypically British to me, for example.

by Anonymousreply 26906/09/2020

Because the one Chinese character has Fu Manchu style name and Dudley Dursley is one of thousands of white British Harry Potter characters, r269.

by Anonymousreply 27006/09/2020

I read on Twitter that “Cho” is not a Chinese first name. Literal violence, etc.

by Anonymousreply 27106/09/2020

I read it's because 'ching chong chang' is too similar.

by Anonymousreply 27206/09/2020

“Cho Chang” is a terrible name and unfortunately does have negative and racist connotations. I sadly think that’s unavoidable and it reflects badly on JKR, but writers get things wrong sometimes and have to be corrected. I consider it an editing failure more than a writing failure, it should have been picked up and changed. Like I said above, the editors clearly gave up on actually working on these books properly and assume they did nothing but pick up typos in Books 4-7.

(If you know anything about modern publishing you will know the absolute state editing standards are in and have been for a while anyway, and the type of person who now has that job even in good publishing houses these days — put it this way, not the brightest and best).

by Anonymousreply 27306/09/2020

It's because it's Cho Chang is laaaaaammmmmme. It sounds stupid. It is stupid. I first heard the Harry Potter story where she appears on a family car trip via audiobook. When we heard her name we all my parents burst out laughing. Don't claim it's Dahl-ish or sub-Dickensian like Dudley Dursley. It's just cringy and bad. There are a thousand Chinese sounding names that aren't jarring and whaddaya know, "Cho" apparently isn't a given name. Well, it shows.

I am the one who started the Cho Chang complaints in this thread. I reserve the right to make fun of how shitty Harry Potter is and has always been without being lumped in with gender obsessives. But the reason why it's a "thing" right now is because it's a JKR pile-on on social media now to slam her for not following the trans party line.

Look, I'm not a Harry Potter fan. There IS great children's literature (Le Guin, Blume, Dahl, Hodgson Burnett). The thing about JKR and her minions of child readers is that she was ultra-Woke. She used to brag about how her stories are more moral than Dahl's and less preachy than Lewis'. Yet she's not as sharp or succinct a writer as either and her books are choc-a-bloc full of weird shit like the happy slave house elves and greedy neo-Jewish goblin moneylenders. Yet people rarely whined about that before. And the Cho Chang stuff is evident of her often stupid choices.

So I'm loving her fans' hearts being shattered because a) I was never one of them and b) they now realise you can't judge the art by the artist.

It's also really telling that the JKR's new anti-fans are now online saying that Harry Potter is now authorless or written by Emma Watson. (Emma Watson! Emma Watson who makes Kristen Stewart seem like Bette Davis.) Fucking hell. If there isn't anything more insulting to the most successful female author in the world who started publishing as a single mother, I don't know what is.

I salute Rowling for standing up for what is in her circles a very unpopular fact. Regardless of my feelings about her work, she's clearly a woman of integrity.

by Anonymousreply 27406/09/2020

It's because it's Cho Chang is laaaaaammmmmme. It sounds stupid. It is stupid. I first heard the Harry Potter story where she appears on a family car trip via audiobook. When we heard her name we all my parents burst out laughing. Don't claim it's Dahl-ish or sub-Dickensian like Dudley Dursley. It's just cringy and bad. There are a thousand Chinese sounding names that aren't jarring and whaddaya know, "Cho" apparently isn't a given name. Well, it shows.

I am the one who started the Cho Chang complaints in this thread. I reserve the right to make fun of how shitty Harry Potter is and has always been without being lumped in with gender obsessives. But the reason why it's a "thing" right now is because it's a JKR pile-on on social media now to slam her for not following the trans party line.

Look, I'm not a Harry Potter fan. There IS great children's literature (Le Guin, Blume, Dahl, Hodgson Burnett). The thing about JKR and her minions of child readers is that she was ultra-Woke. She used to brag about how her stories are more moral than Dahl's and less preachy than Lewis'. Yet she's not as sharp or succinct a writer as either and her books are choc-a-bloc full of weird shit like the happy slave house elves and greedy neo-Jewish goblin moneylenders. Yet people rarely whined about that before. And the Cho Chang stuff is evident of her often stupid choices.

So I'm loving her fans' hearts being shattered because a) I was never one of them and b) they now realise you can't judge the art by the artist.

It's also really telling that the JKR's new anti-fans are now online saying that Harry Potter is now authorless or written by Emma Watson. (Emma Watson! Emma Watson who makes Kristen Stewart seem like Bette Davis.) Fucking hell. If there isn't anything more insulting to the most successful female author in the world who started publishing as a single mother, I don't know what is.

I salute Rowling for standing up for what is in her circles a very unpopular fact. Regardless of my feelings about her work, she's clearly a woman of integrity.

by Anonymousreply 27506/09/2020

Having read all the Harry Potter books, it took me a long time till I got used to the idea that Priti Patel is actually a real person and not a character from Harry Potter. Unfortunately, not only is Priti Patel real, she is one of the most racist politicians in Britain and in charge of migration and policing.

by Anonymousreply 27606/09/2020

People are taking the name Cho Chang and now saying it's Chong Chang and Ching Chong Chang. Are we seriously going to get upset over a name choice?

If the character was insulting - like Mickey Rooney playing a Chinese landlord - then have at it. But what is in a name? Maybe she liked the alliteration of it.

Is Bellatrix Lestrange a name? That would be offensive to French. Seriously - the regressive left gets so caught up in pettiness.

Save your energy and time for defeating real enemies - Trump, Barr, fascist leaders in other countries, COVID lies, etc. Stop looking for reasons to drag her through the mud - nobody had any problems with this name for 20 some years and NOW it's an issue?

by Anonymousreply 27706/09/2020

Something that always stumps trans activists is asking them if someone can be transgender why can’t a person be transracial?

by Anonymousreply 27806/09/2020

Stop preaching, r277. I'm not going to stop thinking "Cho Chang" is symptomatic of Harry Potter's shitness just because JKR isn't a trans activist.

by Anonymousreply 27906/09/2020

Cho Chang as a name might seem a little stereotyped but within the naming system of the Harry Potter books it makes sense and isn't "othering" the character but actually makes her more integrated into the Harry Potter world, where everyone has that kind of name.

by Anonymousreply 28006/09/2020

DL is overflowing today with "stop caring about [this thread topic] when there is so much more important stuff" bullshit and it's hilarious. It's also transparent but for some reason DLers always fall for it.

Rowling has a lot of issues with stereotypes and she uses a lot of coded conservative tropes in her work. Of course she's "allowed" to so don't go screaming that I want her censored, you big babies. I'm just saying that if she's going to write like that, she's going to get criticized for her content, and if she's big brave woman enough to tweet out flamebait and threaten lawsuits every time her feels get hurt, she can handle criticism of her stupid character names.

Maybe you should learn to be strong enough to handle this kind of thing, too, instead of crumbling the second your hero JK Rowling gets criticized on Datalounge.

by Anonymousreply 28106/09/2020

[quote]she was ultra-Woke.

She absolutely never was any such thing. Sci-fi and fantasy fandom may have bestowed upon her the label of liberal, but she was always criticized as being a Blairite, and people were always bringing up the "happy slave house elves and greedy neo-Jewish goblin moneylenders." Just because you never saw it doesn't mean it wasn't happening. It was, a lot, all over the internet where people talked about HP fandom.

[quote]So I'm loving her fans' hearts being shattered because a) I was never one of them

Which is psychopathic but typical for Datalounge. "LOL these people are really hurt and it's hilarious because they're not like me, I love it when people are hurt" is just the worst of the right-wing nut-job takes, but it's all over the place here.

by Anonymousreply 28206/09/2020

R279 - you can think Harry Potter books are shit - that's fine. But now it's become a search and destroy effort to prove that JK Rowling isn't just anti-trans, but she's a racist as well.

R281 - no one is crumbling. Everyone is seeing this as a stupid witch hunt to get pressed about names. Now she has coded conservative tropes? Your bullshit is astounding.

She is allowed to say that only women menstruate (or have the capacity to menstruate). Now it's some bullshit about how certain women don't menstruate and it doesn't make them less a woman. It's not a valid point. A man who takes female hormones and puts plastic in his chest is not a woman. The end.

That's a trans-woman. Why are trans-women so ashamed of being who they are? Because they want to convince themselves that they pass and, more importantly, to convince straight men that they are women and to shame men into believing it.

by Anonymousreply 28306/09/2020

[quote]the way they treat lesbians on this site is a disgrace. Straight women are spit upon and lesbians are barely tolerated as are bi women.

So why are you here? Seriously, why have you come to a gay male space, told all the men they're sexist dullards, and started hundreds of these threads where you frequently tell gays that Trump is their friend, that Republicans/Conservatives are their friends, that they should read what Breitbart and The Blaze have to say, and if they don't agree then they should leave their own board, which you now claim as your own?

And then when the occasional gay tells you to fuck off, why do you cry like you've just been sentenced to death for the "crime of being a straight woman" or whatever?

You have your own blogs and L-Chat and Twitter, so why here, too? Every time you come here someone always hands you your ass, and there's not really a big audience for your crazy here anyway. You're just talking to each other's sockpuppets. Why bother?

There's a guy on the political threads who keeps saying that DL is one of the small websites that trolls use to test out their arguments and now I wonder if he isn't spot on with that.

by Anonymousreply 28406/09/2020

[quote]no one is crumbling

Pretty much every argument you tried in the first half of this thread was shot down and there were a lot of temper tantrums about it, and now you're trying to make it seem like the only argument against Rowling is about her racism, which was "only brought up because of trans women" or whatever. That's not true, it's been mentioned a ton of times over the course of years, and it's just one thing that people all over the internet have been talking about since Rowling went ham on Twitter the other day.

[quote] Everyone is seeing this as a stupid witch hunt to get pressed about names. Now she has coded conservative tropes? Your bullshit is astounding.

Go look it up, you lazy shit. There are plenty of good articles written about this which were put out long before her recent attention-getting stunt. If you can't be arsed to go find out for yourself, then shut the fuck up about it and stop pretending like you know anything about the topic.

by Anonymousreply 28506/09/2020

R285 - keep convincing yourself this is something other than a trans attack on her. It's not attention-getting to state fact and to counter the trans lies and delusions.

There's nothing that she states that is anti-trans. There's no evidence she's an enemy of liberals and a supporter of racist ideology or anything else destructive.

It's all made-up bullshit because she doesn't believe exactly as you. Because you're either 100% with certain trans and other woke agenda, or you're a Trumpist, fascist, conservative bent on discriminating against people. You're ridiculous.

by Anonymousreply 28606/09/2020

Have a look on Facebook or LinkedIn and look for Cho Chang - there are loads of people with that name. Of all the things in the world to get upset about, some people choose that???

by Anonymousreply 28706/09/2020

JK is fearless. You gotta love a woman who has one of the most creative and brilliant minds ever and is a proud TERF.

One of us! Gooble Gobble! One of us!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28806/09/2020

[quote][R279] - you can think Harry Potter books are shit - that's fine. But now it's become a search and destroy effort to prove that JK Rowling isn't just anti-trans, but she's a racist as well.

Greaaaattt, the All Lives Matter troll has arrived

by Anonymousreply 28906/09/2020

There's nothing wrong with "Cho Chang". The idiot troll who keeps trying to make out Rowling as racist because of a name choice is very transparent.

by Anonymousreply 29006/09/2020

The posters who are arguing that it’s a totally appropriate name are even more transparent.

by Anonymousreply 29106/09/2020

R291 dude, go to Facebook and search for the name. It's common. Youre ridiculous.

by Anonymousreply 29206/09/2020

These are common trans activist arguing techniques, by the way. Set up a strawman "she's racist"! and argue for that rather than the actual point, i.e., trans women are not, in reality, women.

It's a sign of a bad argument - and a clearly disengenuous one - when you can't argue the facts, so you have to throw up a smokescreen.

It means you're wrong, and you know it.

by Anonymousreply 29306/09/2020

Ah. "Bad argument". "The facts". "Arguing Techniques".

Vomit up that Red Pill. Your colours are showing.

by Anonymousreply 29406/09/2020

DL fave Anthony Rapp arguing the subject on Twitter.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 29506/09/2020

R294 - your misogyny is showing. You're anti-woman and always have been. Just admit it.

You've never fought for women's rights and don't give a care about what women have to say about the issue. You're just a man ignoring women's complaints and calling a famous woman a racist and transphobe.

WE see right through YOU!

by Anonymousreply 29606/09/2020

Go eat some beef and read some more Jordan B. Peterson, r296.

by Anonymousreply 29706/09/2020

R297 - ahhh - still deflecting and now throwing in another nonsensical point. You're anti-woman and don't want women to speak for themselves.

You want to shut everyone down who doesn't believe just like you. You are a disgrace to liberal values and discussion.

You only support men and men who think of themselves as women. Look hard in the mirror.

by Anonymousreply 29806/09/2020

[quote]You only support men and men who think of themselves as women

Ew. Wrong again.

[quote]You want to shut everyone down who doesn't believe just like you.

I don't want your advice, sweetie, but take your own about looking hard in the mirror.

by Anonymousreply 29906/09/2020

Yep, that's exactly what r297 is doing. He can't argue the facts so he has to distract and bully. Go back to Twitter, r297.

by Anonymousreply 30006/09/2020

R287, are they real names? When I was on Facebook there were several guys I followed who used movie character names, as long as they sounded real FB never noticed. And one guy went by "Kingo Gondo," which is from a movie but doesn't sound real. Never got caught.

I went looking after reading some of the replies here and found an old blog post where someone was trying to figure out what "Cho Chang" even meant, since they were both Chinese surnames rather than one given name and one surname. Some people apparently wondered if the character was meant to be Korean, because the name was so confusing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 30106/09/2020

R301 do some research and get back with us on this very important topic!

by Anonymousreply 30206/09/2020

Keep talking like this r301 and you'll be accused of being a trans activist!

by Anonymousreply 30306/09/2020

R300 - that's why he nonsensically says to read more Jordan Peterson who wanted to defund all women's studies programs? And he eats an all beef diet?

He doesn't know what he's saying - and "Ew" - says it all. He's immature and knows he can't argue against biological facts.

Trust me, with the way trans are treating women and gay men, you're not going to get 'points' with them by supporting the radical trans agenda. Trans do not support gay men or lesbians or women.

by Anonymousreply 30406/09/2020

[quote]The thing about the trans movement is that it's always about Trans Women. You hear reasonably little about Trans Men. Which makes me think that a lot of the trans movement is concerned with soothing the egos of bio men.

No, it's basically a product of "Michfest rules," i.e. at Michfest if you were a trans man you were allowed in because you were born female, but if you were a trans woman you weren't allowed to attend. The anti-trans movement has been co-opted by the right and alt-right, but it began as a radical feminist movement, and as such was focused on gender essentialism: born woman equals woman always and forever, no matter what. Woman's identity is entirely defined by their vagina and their menstrual cycle. The rightwingers just came along for the ride, happy to have some extremists to party with, basically.

If the anti-trans people really cared about "transing of babies" and "gay erasure" they would be talking about all gays and lesbians, all bis, all pansexuals, etc. They're not. They've focused entirely on trans women "being perverts who just want to attack us in bathrooms and erase all gays" and if they ever talk about lesbians, it's briefly, and usually by claiming they themselves are lesbians who have been continuously victimized by evil trans women since the dawn of time.

Any mention of bis or pansexuals is scoffed at. But if they truly believed anyone with any kind of same-sex attraction was going to be erased, they'd include everyone. Might want to ask yourself why they don't.

by Anonymousreply 30506/09/2020

Also, I'd like to point out to the person who keeps calling others redpillers, Jordan B. Peterson fans, misogynists, racists, etc. that those are your allies. You're aware of that, right? You know that when you're freaking out about the evil, evil trannies, you're palling around with these exact same incel redpillers you hate, yes? Because you are.

by Anonymousreply 30606/09/2020

Trans women who are attracted to men: self-loathing homosexuals who think re-inventing themselves as women means they are no longer gay men.

Trans women ( lesbians with penises, what a joke!) who are attracted to women: they wear their femininity like a costume, proof positive that straight men will do ANYTHING to perve on women & invade women's spaces (restrooms, changing rooms, etc.).

by Anonymousreply 30706/09/2020

r182 They are trying to hijack the protests and make it all about them. For once can we not hear about the plight of Trans people?

by Anonymousreply 30806/09/2020

I did get a funny and accurate pun from that Anthony Rapp exchange: "wokus dei"

by Anonymousreply 30906/09/2020

R305 how come trans men have expressed no desire to be in a men’s prison?

R305 how do you explain the 5000% increase in teenage girls being given referrals to gender clinics in the last few year? Also could you explain why a significant percentage of them have been diagnosed on the autism spectrum?

Speaking of trans kids, could you explain why the studies showing that at least 90% of kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it with no medical intervention are downplayed or are not taken into account when deciding whether or not to put a child on hormones or puberty blockers?

R305 would you mind explaining how puberty blockers aren’t permanent and there are no lingering side effects to them when there are numerous studies to contradict this, some of these are lowered IQ, sterilization and bone density issues that are normally associated with people that are much, much older.

Oh and if these side effects aren’t permanent and are reversible could you explain why jazz Jennings a transgender girl who was on puberty blockers at 11 had a irreversible micro penis that couldn’t be used for her gender confirmation surgery.

Also hasn’t it been established by scientists and neurologists that a mind doesn’t really reach maturity until age 25. Considering we have laws that restrict the age of smoking, drinking and even voting, do you think that it’s a good idea that 14-15 year olds should make life changing and life long medical decisions?

If you could answer these without hyperbole it would be much appreciated.

by Anonymousreply 31006/09/2020

If the only time in your life that you've ever championed women's rights is when you're pushing them for "trans women" (born with a penis), what you are is a misogynist.

Next!

by Anonymousreply 31106/09/2020

There you go lying again r305, and showing your hatred of women and lesbians to boot.

The reason there is more attention on trans women is because there are far more of them and - being physiologically male and having been raised male and basically being male - they tend to expect that everyone is going to listen to what they say and obey them. So, they get more outraged at the idea that they are not being listened to by actual women, whom they hate and are jealous of, and this triggers their anger.

We can talk about trans men too, if you like. Most are lesbians to start with and it's kinda interesting that even when transmen "transition" most still want to hang out within lesbian circles and date lesbians. Some decide that they're gay men and so want to date gay men. Would you date a transman?

We don't pay much attention to pansexuals because they're just a fad. There is a lot of concern that young baby dykes are falling into this transman thing, which is a bit trendy at the moment and makes you more "special", and so they're rushing to chop their tits off and take drugs to grow some fluff on their chins.

As for bisexual women, personally I'm a fan (speaking as a lesbian).

by Anonymousreply 31206/09/2020

"You know that when you're freaking out about the evil, evil trannies, you're palling around with these exact same incel redpillers you hate, yes?"

Oh, incels? You mean, like Riley J. Dennis, Zinnia Jones, and Charlotte Clymer? You know, the ones you "pal around with"?

by Anonymousreply 31306/09/2020

I've been reading a ton of replies on the J.K. Rowling twitter mess, and I have a question. The people who are arguing against biological essentialism say that sex exists within a spectrum. Ok, but for there to be a spectrum, there has to be two end points, correct? I always thought the two polar ends of the sex spectrum was male on one end, and female on the other. So I am completely confused by people arguing on twitter that sex is not a binary, and then arguing that sex is a spectrum. What gives?

by Anonymousreply 31406/09/2020

Human sex is a binary. There are some exceptions, but they are exceptions that prove the rule. Trans activists seek to use those exceptions as proof that sex isn't binary and is in fact chosen; basically that sex and gender are the same thing. The arguments they use to "prove" this are full of logical errors and co-opted medical terms that mean different things in a medical context.

They've managed to infiltrate a lot of the formerly gay and lesbian organizations and shift them to trans-focused. They then used the power of those organizations to lobby and get language put into official channels that they then use to validate their original arguments. The entire structure is built on this type of circular logic and falls apart if you question any part of it. That's part of why they do not allow any discussion or questioning of the dogma, e.g. "my existence is not up for debate!!"

by Anonymousreply 31506/09/2020

Thank you, R315. It's confusing because a bunch of biologists are popping up on twitter, and saying that sex exists within a spectrum. And I'm just sitting here like, do you know what a "spectrum" means? Especially within a medical contexts, as you state? It feels like I'm being gaslighted. I admit, I haven't taken a biology class since my bachelor days, so I'm no expert, so it's disappointing to read biologists use arguments that confuse and do not enlighten.

by Anonymousreply 31606/09/2020

This article/essay explains it all very well in my view

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31706/09/2020

I've never figured out Quillette in terms of legitimacy and bias. Right-wing rag or balanced or...?

by Anonymousreply 31806/09/2020

some babies are born with no legs. some with one leg or even three legs. some babies had mothers who took thalidomide and were born with flipper limbs. some babies grow up and lose a leg or two.

we don't say humans are not bipedal or are dolphins. our legs are not a spectrum either

by Anonymousreply 31906/09/2020

I'm not sure, R318. I don't read it often but did see the link to this article on Twitter and thought it was very objective.

by Anonymousreply 32006/09/2020

Also intersex is a straw man for activists. People who have intersex conditions are still classified as male or female and conditions are sex specific. Klinefelter Syndrome only happens to males and Swyer syndrome happens in females.

Also intersex people have zilch to do with being transgender and don’t want to be lumped in with transgender people.

by Anonymousreply 32106/09/2020

Correct, R321. I had a dear family member, sadly no longer with us after passing away too young, who had health problems his entire life. Severe heart attack in his early 30s, and unable to father children which was personally heartbreaking to him. Would have been a great dad, split with his first wife partly due to the infertility issues. Finally diagnosed with Klinefelter Syndrome a few years before he died.

I DARE one of these genderfuckers on the internet to tell me he “proved sex wasn’t binary” or that he “wasn’t a man” but was instead something other between male and female.

Fuck. Off.

by Anonymousreply 32206/09/2020

[quote]Also intersex people have zilch to do with being transgender and don’t want to be lumped in with transgender people.

Also gay people have zilch to do with being transgender and don’t want to be lumped in with transgender people.

by Anonymousreply 32306/09/2020

[quote]a bunch of biologists are popping up on twitter, and saying that sex exists within a spectrum. And I'm just sitting here like, do you know what a "spectrum" means? Especially within a medical contexts, as you state?

You genuinely think you, someone who hasn't had a biology course in decades and has no medical or scientific training at all, know more about biology than actual biologists?

by Anonymousreply 32406/10/2020

Quillette has been outed twice now as having deliberately planted hoax articles about leftist organizations, very similar to what OANN does. They've published articles touting phrenology as a legitimate science (it isn't) and they repeat much of the same fake news as alt-right websites do, with the same victimhood complex attached, i.e. "a small liberal arts college cancelled the production of a controversial play; therefore, America is no longer a democracy and freethinking intellectuals like us will soon be up against the wall and assassinated for wrongthink."

So it's right up your alley but it's no more common sense, neutral or even liberal than, say, Jordan B. Peterson.

by Anonymousreply 32506/10/2020

How interesting that the TRA poster will insult Quilette and Twitter "biologists". I'm shocked, shocked that he will attack anything that doesn't support his "trans women are women" mantra!

by Anonymousreply 32606/10/2020

But it doesn’t R324. Intersex conditions are extremely rare and those people are still male or female. Again intersex has zilch to do with being transgender and they don’t want to be lumped in with them nor do they want to be in the ever expanding alphabet soup

I noticed TRAs use the false flag argument of claiming Rowling is saying if you don’t menstruate you aren’t a woman, no she’s saying ONLY women menstruate..

by Anonymousreply 32706/10/2020

Yeah they can't argue what she actually says, because it's true.

by Anonymousreply 32806/10/2020

I’ve also seen the insane argument that trans women experience symptoms of having periods when in reality it’s side effects of taking synthetic which just about anyone who takes a synthetic hormone will get whether it’s testosterone or estrogen or whether they are male or female

by Anonymousreply 32906/10/2020

Synthetic =synthetic hormones

by Anonymousreply 33006/10/2020

The trouble is R328 they do argue just that. It is the entire foundation of (extreme) trans theory. Instead of accepting they are still men if they they are MTF and still women if they are FTM. They want the whole world to warp to their view of reality that a biological man is a 'real' woman and a biological woman is a 'real' man.

I'm totally sympathetic to trans people, but I can't accept that crazy shit.

by Anonymousreply 33106/10/2020

[quote]Quillette has been outed twice now as having deliberately planted hoax articles about leftist organizations, very similar to what OANN does. They've published articles touting phrenology as a legitimate science

Total bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 33206/10/2020

R331 - and that's the crux of the issue. If they just accepted themselves as transmen and transwomen, we could get somewhere.

But they want to be seen and acknowledged as biological males and females, which isn't true.

The other part of this rage/fight is that they're pissed when they find out that many men and women do not want to date trans (particularly with no bottom surgery). This enrages them - and they want to twist things around so to pressure people into sleeping with them.

Harsh reality check: straight and gay people don't want half-man/half-woman. It doesn't jive with their online fantasy world echo chambers.

by Anonymousreply 33306/10/2020

I urge the next gay male celebrity couple who want to be parents and need a surrogate mother, to choose a trans woman to carry and birth their child.

This will not only really send the right message and “own the TERFS”, but prove once and for all not that a) trans women are women, but also b) that there is no such thing as men or women, and also c) that it’s actually impossible to tell men from non-men unless you check their chromosomes.

Really, a win all round.

by Anonymousreply 33406/10/2020

It's the hostility towards and determined erasure of "cis" gay white men and lesbians that gives the whole charade away.

Their radical agenda seems to be convincing the world that everyone gay or lesbian is secretly "trans", but not brave enough to admit it, which is pure nonsense.

Gender dysphoria is a psychological condition which should be treated with counseling and compassion not radical surgery, or hormones.

by Anonymousreply 33506/10/2020

R324 I don't consider myself an expert, hence the question. I'm trying to learn. But go off, I guess.

by Anonymousreply 33606/10/2020

[quote]If they just accepted themselves as transmen and transwomen, we could get somewhere.

I think that many do, but they're the quiet ones who have made peace with where they are and are just going about their daily lives.

It's the vocal activist types who are the problem, and who are clearly motivated by other issues (e.g., misogyny).

by Anonymousreply 33706/10/2020

I'm not sure where you're coming from R334 unless your post is meant to be an ironic joke, then apologies that it went over my head.

Maybe you're just getting your terms mixed up. As I understand it a trans woman in a man who wants to be female and a trans man is a woman who wants to be male.

So how can a trans-woman carry a child when they don't have a womb?

by Anonymousreply 33806/10/2020

R338, I guess I need to work on my jokes...

Everyone knows what a woman is, which is why no-one, even people who repeat over and over “trans women are women”, is ever going to ask a trans woman to be a surrogate.

by Anonymousreply 33906/10/2020

R339, The counter of course would be that trans women are just infertile women. And knowingly asking an infertile woman to be a surrogate is (in most cases) cruel.

by Anonymousreply 34006/10/2020

This is the mentality we're dealing with. Rowling's statements are condensed into "transphobic" and "my existence is not up for debate"! Context and what she actually said are totally ignored, militant response follows and tons of people are there saying "she's so brave"!

---

@fayekinley

my boyfriend just spent probably no longer than 20 seconds trying to justify JK Rowlings recent transphobic statements and “debate” it with me knowing I’m trans and I immediately broke up with him and that’s on self care why do men think they’re not disposable watch what you’re saying dickhead

He was pretty “fair” about it tbh but I’m not debating my existence with someone lmao, you know how many people I can date that are already educated on this subject I’m not wasting my time educating a man

I mean obviously I’m somewhat upset but my ego can’t let him know that

I have nothing to promote but transphobes and racists and ppl that enable transphobes and racists can suck my dick

I’m not commenting on this again but yall can stfu with the “educate him” and “this is a teachable moment” I did teach him when I dumped his ass bet he won’t do dat shit again

@dorhastings Replying to @fayekinley

As someone who teaches argumentation, I find it really frustrating to talk with people who think that *anything* can and should be up for debate. Including identity.

@fayekinley Replying to @dorhastings

It’s such a boring trope like get a personality

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 34106/10/2020

I'm glad I gave you the benefit of the doubt R334!

by Anonymousreply 34206/10/2020

That whole Twitter post and comments should be ready. It sounds like she's attracted some people who disagree with her, which is funny too, because a lot of what they're saying is true.

by Anonymousreply 34306/10/2020

R340, I’m not really talking about being polite but about reality. Biological sex is very mysterious, women have all kinds of different qualities, etc etc, we can all debate this endlessly, but when it comes down to wanting a human child to be born, you’re going to need an actual female to carry the child.

Almost as if identifying who is female is actually possible and is in the land of objective reality after all...

by Anonymousreply 34406/10/2020

R341: the whole thread by that person sounded like fanfic, doubt it happened but exactly the kind of thing that gets a lot of Twitter engagement.

by Anonymousreply 34506/10/2020

R337 - I'll take it one step further. The problem with the trans community doesn't appear to be from females to male. It has a small amount with gay males who transition to females.

But the biggest agitators and aggressors are straight (white) men who 'transition' to female and now are 'lesbians' or bi.

That's what I see and it's easy to understand - when you grow up as a woman or as being gay, you're taught not to be so aggressive or to stand up for your rights. These white men now have a cause for the first time in their life - and they're going for full on scorched-earth.

by Anonymousreply 34606/10/2020

Former convict Calum blesses us with more of his clout-seeking and totally un self-aware posts:

@CalumMcSwiggan

The problem with J K Rowling is that she knows exactly how to manipulate language to make even the most insidiously transphobic argument sound reasonable. She’s indoctrinating people who might be otherwise accepting of trans people, and she’s fully aware that she’s doing it.

by Anonymousreply 34706/10/2020

[quote]straight (white) men who 'transition' to female and now are 'lesbians'

Because they are basically incels who put on a dress and lipstick in hopes at least the lezzies might give 'em a blowjob, because everyone knows dykes are less looks-conscious than straight women. 🙄

by Anonymousreply 34806/10/2020

Actually almost an intelligent post from McSwiggan, by his standards. It might convince a few.

But what JKR is doing is using this really insidious weapon called “reality” to push back on the anything goes trans-nonsense that’s been popular the last few years, but will fully collapse like a house of cards if straight people, and straight men, in particular, fully and properly realise what’s going on.

Hence why “no debate” and “rights are not up for discussion” have to be the enforced standards in this area.

by Anonymousreply 34906/10/2020

R347 - JKR is twisting language and indoctrinating people? Wow - talk about no self-awareness. It's like the cops complaining about being labeled thugs.

That twitter post was disgusting - she gave him all of 20 seconds. And nobody is saying they don't have a right to exist.

It's lunacy. He was probably a really great and understanding guy and she just kicked him to the curb.

Where are the FTM posts? Don't see many of those about these topics.

by Anonymousreply 35006/10/2020

Isn't Calum McSwiggan a character on "The Simpsons"?

by Anonymousreply 35106/10/2020

"@CalumMcSwiggan

The problem with J K Rowling is that she knows exactly how to manipulate language to make even the most insidiously transphobic argument sound reasonable."

Or perhaps, Calum, it's just... reasonable? If you search JKR on Twitter right now, it's nothing but TRAs desperately tweeting, "Do NOT read this!", "I read it so you don't have to!", "I beg you, DON'T waste your time!", etc. I say, read it and decide for yourself:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 35206/10/2020

Jennifer Saunders retweeted it.

by Anonymousreply 35306/10/2020

I really like Rowling's post. She explains the issues very well for a broad audience, so I hope more and more people will understand the problematic aspects of trans extremist ideology and will speak up. It's time to counter this toxic narrative. With her reach and money, she will be a beacon for common sense and reason in midst of this madness.

by Anonymousreply 35406/10/2020

From r341's thread:

"That’s fucked up. If he’s WITH YOU, he’s obviously not transphobic."

Reply:

"Dating a trans person does not automatically mean you don't hate trans people."

Ah, yes, those who hate Ts with all the marrow in their bones generally seek out Ts for partners.

by Anonymousreply 35506/10/2020

Not even dating a trans person excuses you from being transphobic, because everything, including COVID-19, menstruation and the woman who wrote Harry Potter, Is transphobic AF.

by Anonymousreply 35606/10/2020

I am surprised this thread is still up. Isn't anything with trans mentioned automatically gets destroyed? The OP has been crossed out, so I think it's only a matter of time before this thread just disappears.

by Anonymousreply 35706/10/2020

R355 the initial assumption is that everyone is transphobic, even babies. It's like Original Sin. Only by bowing and scraping and presenting homage to the trans will you be allowed to live a normal life. Otherwise you're a TERF and cancelled!!

by Anonymousreply 35806/10/2020

I love her and admire her a lot more now. She's brave, strong and never changed/apologized her opinions/views because of the trans cult or anyone, she doesn't give a fuck and has guts.

We really needed this push of reality from a big name, the trans activism is out of control, basic biology now is considered "transphobic", our gay history being erased by these lunatics and not to mention the rampant misogyny and homophobia that we all know.

And I bet there are a lot big names that agree with her but stay silent to be not called/harassed by these lunatics as "transphobic"/ "terf" and other names.

and remember #DropthefuckingT.

by Anonymousreply 35906/12/2020

I love her and admire her a lot more now. She's brave, strong and never changed/apologized her opinions/views because of the trans cult or anyone, she doesn't give a fuck and has guts.

We really needed this push of reality from a big name, the trans activism is out of control, basic biology now is considered "transphobic", our gay history being erased by these lunatics and not to mention the rampant misogyny and homophobia that we all know.

And I bet there are a lot big names that agree with her but stay silent to be not called/harassed by these lunatics as "transphobic"/ "terf" and other names.

and remember #DropthefuckingT.

by Anonymousreply 36006/12/2020

Saying "transwomen are women" is the equivalent of saying "porn is real sex".

by Anonymousreply 36106/12/2020

She is awful. And this is literally the only website I go on that is licking her ass.

I find her garbage DailyMail piece to be especially disgusting. Using her domestic abuse and sexual assault to paint herself as the victim and to spite trans people. Meanwhile, she completely ignores that 1 in 2 trans people have faced domestic abuse and sexual assault.

But yeah I’m not surprised the nasty bigots on this website love this hateful bigot. You bastards are the ones who trashy DailyMail and the bigot brigade are for. Screw her and screw y’all.

by Anonymousreply 36206/13/2020

Her garbage Daily Mail piece? Enlighten us, R362, when did JKR write for the Daily Mail? Perhaps you have a link? I am sure it isn't that the Daily Mail quoted her blog or otherwise wrote an article about what she said or her views, as many papers did, or that you're completely and utterly making things up online, is it? No, no, I am sure it isn't that.

1 in 2 trans people suffer violence, I am actually prepared to believe that, but again, do you have a source? Wow, I can't believe those fucking TERFs are full-on breaking into trans people's homes and assaulting and abusing them right there... oh, unless you meant that you're invoking male violence against their partners (whether cis or trans) in the context of a debate about what a woman said in an argument that started with a Twitter post about identifying women as women rather than "menstruators". You wouldn't be doing that, I am sure, R362, I am sure you have a great set of arguments you're just itching to post. Now is your time.

by Anonymousreply 36306/13/2020

Lol, how fucking stupid is r362!

by Anonymousreply 36406/13/2020

Yeah r363 it’s like the trans women of color are being murdered at an alarming rate argument until you look at how many are actually murdered and the reasons behind their murders. Activists try to blame it on “terfs” and claim that it’s because they are trans when in reality the solved/suspects are men and the murders didn’t have anything to do with them being trans.

by Anonymousreply 36506/13/2020

For the bigots.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 36606/13/2020

Like I said R366, I believed you. Because the stats on domestic violence are shocking. The number you quote is “intimate partner” violence. Like what JKR herself says she experienced, because men abuse women (whether cis or trans) that they are or were involved with (whether as husband, boyfriend, ex, sexual partner or hirer of sexual services).

Thousands of “cis” women are killed by their partners or ex-partners per year and people seemingly accept this as a sad fact of life.

Please explain how the horrible stats prove sex is not real and significant, or, if you like, that anything JKR said in her blog post wasn’t true.

by Anonymousreply 36706/13/2020

R366, according to the transtapo, all trans and NB are being physically harassed almost daily. According to your link (data from 2015), just under 1 in 10 trans (9%) were physically harassed in the previous year for being trans.

It would be interesting to know whether the harassers were biological men or biological women and also the circumstances in which the harassment was taking place.

"More than half (54%) experienced some form of intimate partner violence, including acts involving coercive control and physical harm." - I wonder what the overlap between intimate partner violence and physical assault of trans people is. Take out intimate partners, and how many trans are assaulated by complete strangers?

Yes, we all agree people should be able to live their lives without fear of physical and sexual assault. So, you can see why suggestions to change the law so that indivduals can self-ID, allowing any very masculine potential perpetrator of assault to simply register as a woman in order to be legally recognised as a women, is scary for biological women.

by Anonymousreply 36806/13/2020

R362,Lipstick Alley also supports JK.

But sure, go ahead and erase black women, you big racist.

by Anonymousreply 36906/13/2020

Read this thread on the bullshit "trans women of color are DYING!" bullshit guilt arument:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 37006/13/2020

Well _I_ for one, am won over by the comments of some random "y'all" poster calling us bigots and TERFs! Hearts and minds!

by Anonymousreply 37106/13/2020

What is never mentioned by the Trans supporters are the percentage of trans women, especially the sanctified "trans women of color" who are involved in sex work. The same lefties are generally the ones demanding we decriminalize sex work, but even if that were accomplished, it does not remove the violence sex workers face. They always act as if women/trans women go into sex work for the opportunity and not because they have few other options. Screaming to support trans women actually might mean creating a society where fewer women and trans women had to choose sex work as a financial option, but you know where a suggestion like that will get me!

by Anonymousreply 37206/13/2020

R372 because that doesn't fit their narrative.

by Anonymousreply 37306/13/2020

Even on that awful show "Pose" some of the leads are sex workers and they are the heroes!

We aren't supposed to be sad for them, or think it unusual for these heroic trans women of color to be written as sex workers!

I find that both transphobic, misogynistic and racist, but I forgot I'm the problem!

by Anonymousreply 37406/13/2020

R374 that's because you're guilty of Original Transphobia, which is the same as Original Sin but worse. Therefore all your actions and thoughts are transphobic by default.

by Anonymousreply 37506/13/2020

I am a lesbian. I not only menstruate, but I won't have sex with anyone with a penis, even if they call it a Sparkle Dildo Stick. Or, shudder, "strapless."

My existence is inherently transphobic.

by Anonymousreply 37606/13/2020

I'm glad you finally see that r376!

Now you can repent, I guess!

by Anonymousreply 37706/13/2020

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but it is my understanding that JK never made the statement that only women menstruate.

I thought that this thing blew up simply because she made a Twitter comment objecting to an article that was written that referred to women as “people who menstruate.”

All the accusations are just bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 37806/13/2020

Pretty much r378. She said only women menstruate and that was twisted by TRAs as you’re not a woman if you don’t menstruate.

If trans men tried to start a movement to call men prostate havers or ejaculators it would last about 5 minutes and be universally laughed at.

by Anonymousreply 37906/13/2020

I've argued with people online who INSIST Rowling's statement is the same meaning either way. They're totally insane, and/or idiots.

BTW they also call them "bleeders". Not the most flattering.

by Anonymousreply 38006/13/2020

Everything JK said has been twisted. People who admit they never even read her blog are criticising its alleged contents even though she doesn't say what they imagine she did, while others online are posting shit like "so you don't have to waste your time reading Rowling's blog, here's my response to it", but their response doesn't have anything to do with what she actually wrote.

by Anonymousreply 38106/14/2020

Everything JK said has been twisted. People who admit they never even read her blog are criticising its alleged contents even though she doesn't say what they imagine she did, while others online are posting shit like "so you don't have to waste your time reading Rowling's blog, here's my response to it", but their response doesn't have anything to do with what she actually wrote.

by Anonymousreply 38206/14/2020

[quote]And this is literally the only website I go on that is licking her ass.

The vast majority of the anti-trans trolls online are a single group who interact on Mumsnet, Twitter, Reddit, etc. There's a reason why it looks like DL has more anti-trans members than Reddit's anti-trans group, and that reason is sockpuppets and lack of moderation.

They come here because of that, and to pretend like they're gays and lesbians who want to split LGBT up into at least two, maybe more, parts.

They wouldn't be here if they weren't very specifically trying to divide LGBTs. They repeat themselves everywhere and there's no real benefit to posting here as far as spreading their message, because not enough people will see it. The benefit is to give the illusion of a fractured LGBT.

by Anonymousreply 38306/14/2020

Very odd that you'd try that tactic R378, because she hasn't denied that she said women are the ones who menstruate, and so have all your anti-trans friends in this thread.

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

That's saying "it's women who menstruate, not people in general." If you're too dumb to get that, that's your problem, stop trying to make it ours.

by Anonymousreply 38406/14/2020

Here's Trans Rights Activist #8383 in r383 and r384 to try to "Other" DL posters and say we aren't real. It'd be nice if all the people who disagreed with your militant cult philosophy were from one source, wouldn't it? It'd make it so much easier for you to mentally dismiss them.

Perhaps you should try reading Rowling's essay. I somehow doubt you have. The reflex to attack, attack, attack is all you know. Facts don't seem to matter to you!

by Anonymousreply 38506/14/2020

R384 so you're saying her "people who menstrate are women" comment is the same as her saying "only women menstrate"?

I suggest you take a logic class. You clearly are in need.

by Anonymousreply 38606/14/2020

Rowling did NOT say that in order to be a woman, one must menstruate (which would be a bizarre statement coming from a woman in her fifties). She said that all people who DO menstruate are female human beings. That's not an "opinion." It is a cold, hard fact.

It truly boggles the mind to see the very same people who (rightly) mock the fundies for their faith-based young earth nonsense, and conservatives for their anti-science denial of global warming, rant on and on about how "pEopLE aRE WHo tHEy sAY ThEY aRE!!!" No, they often really aren't. Rachel Dolezal is not black. Trump is not a stable genius. Stefonknee Wolscht is not a six-year-old little girl.

Real life is not Twitter, and the vast majority of voters are not on Twitter. Democrats might want to ask UK Labor about the dangers of ignoring that.

by Anonymousreply 38706/14/2020

It's actually a fact that only women menstruate. Men do not menstruate. Trans men are biological women.

by Anonymousreply 38806/14/2020

J. K. Rowling and the trans activists: a story in screenshots

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 38906/14/2020

(R33) One of the walking routines I had with the dogs took me past a blacksmith working outside local barn in the country. Done that dog walk for years, and one day the blacksmith was there, working and showing his work. Stopped as the dogs were chatting to his dog, and drinking from his bowl. We got chatting about the gorgeous day, the dogs, being a blacksmith, his past life in the army where he told me he was sexually abused by senior officers, his upbringing in New Zealand although he is English, what the area is like, blah blah. We spoke about a lot, while viewing his latest work, which is brilliant. Cut a short story to the nub, we chatted and laughed there, and exchanged numbers. About an hour later when I got home, there's a text to say, i'll come over with a bottle of wine, have you got any food? Sitting on stools in the kitchen, back door open, dogs in and out, concocted a supper, great evening talking about decorating and how things work. When we were together, it was girly, but not teenage girly, more like talking about furniture, art, and how to photograph decorative ideas. Suddenly, it was over. The mild, casual, perfectly lovely friendship was over. It wasn't a huge friendship involving life or death because it didn't need to be. Nothing happened. Something did happen actually....She realised that she doesn't like being a woman? What nailed it for me was the fact she sent me a strange text, saying "you've got too much to say". That's when it clicked. She is a nasty piece of work, bearing grudges against her sisters. But she isn't at all. She is a sexually abused British Army male, whom ended up chopping off his penis, and still isn't happy.

by Anonymousreply 39006/14/2020

Fuck this prick. How did the left reach this stage?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39106/27/2020

That person is one of the Corbyn trash that wormed its way into the Labour party. He's full of shit but Starmer has to keep some of these Corbynites on. Not sure Starmer can sack him after having just got rid of Long Bailey, but at least Moyle coming out and saying this stuff makes him a target for Labour women and, thankfully, now that the fear factor around talking about trans issues critically has started to decline, this Moyle idiot will come in for the criticism he deserves.

by Anonymousreply 39206/27/2020

I still think Starmer should sack him, R392. What he said was much, much worse than what Long-Bailey did. I think only the most hardcore Corbynistas would object.

by Anonymousreply 39306/27/2020

I'd love to see it too r393, but I can imagine Starmer will just let it slide. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with him. He's playing a long game and will probably get rid of Moyle whenever the next opportunity arises, which given with an idiot Moyle is it's bound to at some time. Or, given that Moyle is not really that senior a figure, he will just drop him quietly.

Starmer was waiting for just the right opportunity to dump Long Bailey, and she gave it to him on a plate. If he'd moved against her earlier, he'd have had a Momentum uprising on his hands. But I think it's quite clear that the trans craze that overtook Labour is being gradually reversed, helped of course by the fact that the government apparently intends to drop the GRA reforms and replace them with something that sounds much more sensible and not tranny-driven.

The trans no longer control the agenda in the UK and it will be interesting to see just how much they flail around now that the politicians are no longer sucking up to them. There's still Scotland to deal with, but I can imagine Sturgeon will delay the GRA issue for as long as she can and by the time the SNP get round to it again the trans lobby will have completely had its wings clipped. There is also more public awareness of the issue now, which wasn't the case in previous years, so this horrendous "self-ID" proposal can't be quietly slipped through.

So, thank you very much for all that JK Rowling.

by Anonymousreply 39406/27/2020

....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39506/28/2020

The best thing that can happen to Pride is for the gays to stop going to it. Leave it to the queers and trans and see how many people actually turn up. Of course, the trans narrative has been even stronger this year because the "trans woman of colour started Stonewall" bullshit gets pushed even more by the BLM stuff. Also, just the fact Pride events aren't happening means the gays aren't congregating and aren't bothering with getting involved much.

by Anonymousreply 39606/28/2020

They have now removed that quote from the article linked via R395.

by Anonymousreply 39706/28/2020

A screenshot of the original

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39806/28/2020

Criticising gay men for not wanting to date women IN AN ARTICLE ABOUT GAY PRIDE. You couldn't make it up.

Also, JKR has responded to the Lloyd Russell-Moyle MP:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 39906/28/2020

The new thing on YA Twitter is to cleanse your follows of anyone who follows HER. These people really miss seventh grade.

by Anonymousreply 40006/30/2020

True r400 but perhaps it's not a bad idea for them to try that so they can see how limited their support actually is. In the real world, people agree with Rowling. For example, the response that idiot MP Moyle got must have come as a big surprise to him. Aside from being made to look a fool by Rowling himself, he has no support from within his party. Starmer, the party leader, basically disowned his comments and made it clear he disagrees with them and rather than cheers of support Moyle opened himself up to attacks from Labour women's groups. The tranny groups in Labour have been shown to be weak. Sure, by going after Rowling on the sexual assault issue he was always going to be controversial, but there's no sympathy for his pro-trans views either.

Tranny activists in the UK must be starting to feel a little uncomfortable and realising that their default mode of attack, attack and cancel is not going to work anymore. They might actually have to start explaining their positions with facts and arguments, and even they know they will always lose when the issue is discussed in terms of facts, truth and effects in the real world.

by Anonymousreply 40106/30/2020
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Don't you just LOVE clicking on these things on every single site you visit? I know we do! You can thank the EU parliament for making everyone in the world click on these pointless things while changing absolutely nothing. If you are interested you can take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT and we'll set a dreaded cookie to make it go away. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!