JK Rowling Supporter Now Rethinking Stance on Gay Marriage Due to Transgender Movement

Oooookay.

Can;t wait for her next article, "How Me Being a Total Cunt Made me Rethink Fascism".

She’s right. I don’t see how anyone can argue that gay marriage has been a massive mistake. It has harmed gay men most of all. We had our own culture... it’s now been ripped from us so we can be foot soldiers and moneybags for the trans agenda.

Is she planning to transition into ashes?

Seems rather shameless to frame a Jew's concern about the best way to deradicalize Nazis as Nazi sympathies, but you do you, OP

r3 needs to fuck off and die.

R6 Are you lost cunt?

OP forgot her claim to fame from this year when she trended on Twitter as “Grandma Killer”

the Federalist ...

Okay but this far right cunt saying she approves of what JK Rowling has said STILL doesn't convince me an XY male can be female by declaring himself to be. Sorry. It's always good to know that there will be people out there that have contempt for trans people, gay men and lesbians equally.

Stronger together, my ass!

The terminally single sex addicts like R3 are partially why they hate us.

R12 Don't forget self-loathing. The implication R4 made was that equal civil liberties for gay people have harmed straights to an extent as well.

**R3

Good luck finding any evidence that she actually supported gay marriage.

And that poorly written stupid article doesn't actually explain how trans rights and gay marriage are somehow inextricably linked in her mind. It's basically presented as self-evident when it's not at all.

Tell that to everyone screaming TP and T*RF at anyone who points out the difference, R15.

This article is from 2017. JK Rowling is mentioned nowhere.

Fuck The Federalist, what a piece of shit, right-wing propaganda rag. And fuck OP for linking to that garbage.

Tell them what R16? That this writer is full of shit?

Marriage is not a civil right. Single people, cohabiting people and civil partners are not sex-addicts.

The fight for the bullshit-named "marriage equality" was pushed through by bullying radicals with a paper-thin majority in the LGB community. Any discussion was shut down by cries of "bigotry!" exactly like the trans bullies are now doing.

R3 is absolutely right.

^^I'll add that this agenda was pushed over the option to focus on helping LGB runaway kids on the street and Gay men who were sick and dying of AIDS. I guess many of these are deceased now so you bridezillas don't have to worry about them anymore. And I meant the discussion among the general public was called "bigotry".

Yawn. Troll thread.

R20, you're a reprehensible moron.

marriage IS a civil right. how sad and miserable your life must be, you poor desparate soul who wander this earth so lonely.

Dyke at R20.

I don't agree with her specifics in the article; however, I do agree with the overall spirit of what she is articulating. There is NO denying that there is a "thought police" out there. You can only say what fits the current narrative or else be condemned.

As an "independent" with very well defined liberal-leaning ideals, I find it ironic that those who identify as liberal etc. are just as closed-minded, dogmatic and discriminatory to anyone who doesn't believe/think as they. They emulate the exact same traits that they're always accusing the conservatives of; sad state for a state to be in.

[quote] Marriage is not a civil right.

The civilized world disagrees.

[quote] The fight for the bullshit-named "marriage equality" was pushed through by bullying radicals with a paper-thin majority in the LGB community. Any discussion was shut down by cries of "bigotry!" exactly like the trans bullies are now doing.

Complete ahistorical bullshit contradicted by years of polling, activism and mainstream dialogue.

You're a revisionist liar.

I'd ask you to expand on why it is you think heterosexuals should enjoy the right to marry and gay people should not, but we both know there is no rational case for denying equal civil liberties to gay people. It comes down to whether or not you think gay people are inherently second class citizens to heterosexuals.

This article has nothing to do with JK Rowling and Rowling is not even mentioned anywhere in it. JK Rowling has always been a supporter of same-sex rights, including same-sex marriage and a person's right to love their own sex - while the so-called "LGBT+ community" now pretty much stigmatises those who say they are attracted to their own sex.

Aside from the lying OP's lying attempt to link JK Rowling to the person who wrote this article, this article does indeed show how the trans obsession is setting gay rights back years if not decades - not to mention that transing is often used as a gay conversion therapy.

Behind every transphobe is a homophobe.

R29 I doubt she knows her or what she's about. The bitch writes for the Federalist. Rowling replies to everyone and I'm sure she'll rebuke her if she hasn't already

Here's another woman she liked a post by.

R29 Rowling isn't following this woman, the author of that article on twitter. She follows mostly gay people and liberals. You're obviously trying to do a guilt by association game where you find something said to her randomly, she replies without doing a full background check on an individual, and you slander her. That's pretty dirty. All this for saying men are not women?

She seems a perfect example of why I can't take conservatism seriously at all these days. She just reacts to shit, flying all over the place intellectually based on who has upset her that week. Of course she's a "rising star" of conservatism. There's nothing there but emotion and resentment, and as some called it, "vice signaling."

[quote]She follows mostly gay people

What gay men does she follow?

R31 Who cares what this nutty random radical feminist on twitter is saying? They're cunts.

They still aren't wrong about basic biology and fairness in sports, women's prisons, etc.... What's your point?

R34 Go look at her following list if you're so determined to smear her through association. I checked to see if she was following this woman and she isn't. It's liberal celebrities, authors and public figures. No evidence JK has ever subscribed to right wing ideology.

[quote]Who cares what this nutty random radical feminist on twitter is saying? They're cunts.

'Random'?

This is standard radical feminist homophobia.

They're ALL like that.

I could post THOUSANDS of links like that.

Those are the circles JK moves in now, so I'll assume she agrees with.

[quote][R34] Go look at her following list if you're so determined to smear her through association.

LOL. So she follows no gay men then.

R38 She follows 874 people. I'm not going to comb through 847 people and list all the gay ones for you here to prove a point. You're an idiot.

[quote][R38] She follows 874 people. I'm not going to comb through 847 people and list all the gay ones for you here to prove a point.

LOL. So she follows no gay men then.

[quote]She follows mostly gay people

[quote]She follows 874 people. I'm not going to comb through 847 people

🤔

[quote] She’s right. I don’t see how anyone can argue that gay marriage has been a massive mistake.

Fucking unbelievable. So gay men/women having the right to now visit their husbands/wives in the hospital is a "massive mistake"? You're an idiot.

R38 R40 The onus isn't on anyone to prove she follows a single gay man, it's on you to prove otherwise. Everyone realizes how stupid you are, you can give it up.

I thought you were familiar with who she follows?

LOL!

Just looking through her following list now... lesbians... rainbow flags, gay comedians, Joni Mitchell fan blog--- yeah she runs in some pretty hateful circles it seems. Fucking idiot.

[quote] Just looking through her following list now... lesbians... rainbow flags, gay comedians, Joni Mitchell fan blog--- yeah she runs in some pretty hateful circles it seems. Fucking idiot.

So any gay men?

R46 R44 R41 R38 is Tucker Carlson still welcome in you boudoir any time?

[quote] So any gay men?

She doesn't follow your boyfriend Tucker Carlson, if that's any indication of her character and yours. The gay men she follows are all there publicly on that list provided. You fail at life.

r3 needs to be banned. Fucking incel twerp.

And the 7 straight women that liked it R49

This one misogynistic homophobic troll seems to be dominating this thread. More holes than Swiss cheese.

[quote]Okay but this far right cunt saying she approves of what JK Rowling has said STILL doesn't convince me an XY male can be female by declaring himself to be. Sorry.

I mean, these are the people you're allying yourself with. That's the point. The anti-trans trolls who post here will post links to Kiwifarms, Gab, Breitbart and other notoriously anti-gay websites. They will suggest voting for Trump and they frequently say exactly what r3 has said.

We fucking TOLD you people that the anti-trans movement was about being anti-LGBT, that they wanted to split the organizations up, split the allies up, and go after them separately. You wouldn't believe us. They branched out here on DL into anti-bi tirades several months ago thanks to Gap Guy but that was just a reflection of what they had been doing in other online spaces already. A few months ago I noticed they were pushing the anti-gay-marriage angle on social media, especially that LGB Alliance group, and from there it's gone full anti-gay.

Just like we said it would.

If you as a gay man want to ally yourself with people who hate you, because your hate for trans is so uncontrollable you'll hurt yourself to hurt them, go ahead I guess. You're not the first person who will let yourself be hurt (or worse) just to stick it to the libs.

And if you're a lesbian who thinks they won't eventually come after you, well, don't come asking us for sympathy when they eventually do.

Yet heterosexuality is still considered sacrosanct on this board.

Bravo, Ms. Rowling!

The only takeaway from this article is that the link with the trans is damaging gays.

The takeaway from the OP's post and his bullshit subject title is that the trans propagandists are a bunch of liars whose words should not be trusted.

There are a lot of anti-transers in this thread right now, as we type, calling gay marriage "bullshit."

You'll also notice that they have all showed up on the weekend just like our long-time rightwing trolls have been doing for years. Right now there are a dozen active threads full of these assholes being homophobic.

Your hateful rants are not having any effect on JK Rowling's book sales, R56.

R52 Your post makes about as much sense as me saying you support gay men in Iran being forcibly castrated and given hormones as an alternative to the deal penalty.

Knowing that modern trans activism is regressive and based on gender stereotyping and actually completely undermines the notion of innate homosexuality doesn't make someone a Breitbart reading bigot, sorry.

To accept the unscientific claim that humans can change sex is to accept that a fixed sexual orientation doesn't exist and be changed, as well.

R58 is a homophobic misogynist.

I meant R56. Sorry, R58.

R58, if you're ranting about "the deal penalty" you don't get to call others out for not making sense.

Iran has strict anti-gay laws that are clear and obvious human rights violations. How many human rights organizations do you belong to which work to combat these violations?

R56 is spot on.

[quote]Knowing that modern trans activism is regressive and based on gender stereotyping and actually completely undermines the notion of innate homosexuality doesn't make someone a Breitbart reading bigot, sorry.

The major anti-trans troll invasion came thanks to Milo Y. who was posting all of his articles here on DL, and used his shitposters and his own accounts, including one named "Linda," to push his anti-trans agenda.

It got so bad that DL banned all Breitbart links. Go to Google and type in

[italic] breitbart banned site:datalounge.com [/italic]

and see for yourself how many threads we had from 2015 through 2018 on their links being banned because of the anti-trans and alt-right trolls.

If you want to see how Breitbart-loving trolls contributed to the anti-trans trolling, try this in Google:

[italic] breitbart trans site:datalounge.com [/italic]

and enjoy the results.

Do you read Breitbart? Don't know, don't care. But don't you even try to claim that these threads are not full of Breitbart-loving alt-right jackasses.

R62 is a misogynistic homophobe, too. I will be goddamned if I allow gay rights to be held hostage to the likes of this:

R63/R56

That can be true while also acknowledging there are excesses to trans activism and that fundamentally it's a homophobic notion to say that a straight man who declares himself to be female is now not only female, but a lesbian as well. You're saying that homosexuality isn't informed by being attracted to the same sex when you do away with sex all together and the thousands of genetic differences between males and females.

Of course there are bigots and white supremacists on datalounge. You're right.

At the same time, the "my penis is female" transbians and aedans can go fuck themselves, too. I can push back on both.

If it wasn't for "radical feminists" there would still be sodomy laws and women would not have the right to vote.

[quote] If it wasn't for "radical feminists" there would still be sodomy laws and women would not have the right to vote.

Maybe in the UK this is true, but feminists had fuck all to do with sodomy laws in the US.

[quote]You're saying that homosexuality isn't informed by being attracted to the same sex when you do away with sex all together and the thousands of genetic differences between males and females.

I'm not saying any such thing, and I don't waste my time arguing with people like you who keep moving goalposts and refuse to engage in good faith.

The only reason you're claiming any of this is because you hate trans and you realize that you need some kind of justification for it, some way to make it seem like hating trans is the moral thing to do. That's why you scream "Iran castrates and kills gays!" but then clam up when someone asks you what you're doing to help stop those human rights violations. It's because you're not doing jack shit about it, you just want to use the suffering of gays in countries like Iran as a weapon for your anonymous online arguing. It's grotesque.

More misogynistic outbursts! More, I say!

[quote]Your hateful rants are not having any effect on JK Rowling's book sales, R56.

[quote]R58 is a homophobic misogynist. ... I meant R56. Sorry, R58.

I'm homophobic because I pointed out a thread full of homophobes?

I call out the fucking pieces of shit who say gay marriage is "bullshit" and you say I'M the homophobe?

Fuck you.

R64 is posting from opposite world.

[quote]This article is from 2017. JK Rowling is mentioned nowhere.

The OP clearly said this lady is SUPPORTING Rowling, not that Rowling supports her.

And she does support Rowling, I took a glance at her Twitter and she, like a lot of rightwingers, are fans.

R68 You engaged in poor faith throughout this entire thread. You're incapable now of defending an ideology that is unscientific and requires you to believe in magic. You can't make a defense of the claim that humans can change sex and "trans women are women" because neither is true. Trans activism is all smoke and mirrors these days, far removed from its radical transsexual roots that acknowledged there were two sexes and that being gay isn't something you can opt in to or out of.

You calling me a bigot when for years I have spoken out against bigotry in all forms, against trans people in housing and employment and social discrimination as well, is absurd. I don't have to suspend my belief in reality to not hate trans people. I'm not going to agree to the lie that Jack, a straight man, can be reasonably be known as Jill the lesbian because of something going on internally. Sorry.

You haven't done the thinking on this.

Also, it's hilarious that you think me, one person, not unilaterally ending Irans human rights abuses against gay men is somehow a reflection of my worth. You do realize there have been transgender activists with HUGE ONLINE FOLLOWINGS that have publicly said castrating gay men forcing them to "live as women" is a PROGRESSIVE, TRANS-FRIENDLY POLICY in Iran? Fuck you.

No, I'm posting from the real world. The misogyny and homophobia is off the fucking charts.

Someone find that Riley Dennis video of him saying Iran's policy on gay men and state subsidized sex changes was a good thing. I think he deleted the original video from his account.

Trans has gone off the walls so of course bigots are going to take advantage of that. When your mantra is "trans women are women, period" you have to twist yourself into a pretzel to defend that, even if gay men and lesbians no longer are in the picture as a distinct group. I cannot tell you how absurd it is for these people to be calling me a "cis, gay man" especially since the .5% of the population that could be called "trans gay men" are in fact straight women.

Let's not even get into trans rewriting the entirety of gay and lesbian history to place themselves at the center.

[quote]You calling me a bigot

I didn't, as you well know. I said these threads were full of bigots. You took it personally. I said about you, specifically, that I didn't know and didn't care if you read Breitbart or not, which I don't, because it's irrelevant.

[quote]Also, it's hilarious that you think me, one person, not unilaterally ending Irans human rights abuses against gay men

I don't know how to explain to you that I do not give one single solitary shit about you personally. You're the one making personal attacks on others.

For instance, you said I personally supported Iran executing and castrating gays. I don't. I made it clear they were committing a host of human rights violations, and I asked you what you were doing about that, since you care so much. You moved goalposts and refused to answer which, as I noted already, is very typical of anti-trans trolls. They mention Iran's harsh anti-gay laws leading to executions, violence in prisons, violence against sex workers, etc. but only care about them as a rhetorical idea, not as tangible problems. They don't want solutions and never link to prison reform organizations, human rights orgs, never suggest voting for candidates who support international human rights initiatives. All they do is say "gays are being castrated in Iran and it's the fault of trans."

You just want to blah blah blah about what you've personally done. Great, don't care. Not the point. The anti-trans crusade and behavior of anti-trans trolls on Datalounge is not justified by your unverified claims of liberal sainthood.

[quote] For instance, you said I personally supported Iran executing and castrating gays. I don't. I

You misread my post. I said you labelling everyone against the excesses of the trans movement a bigot is like me saying you're supportive of those human rights abuses, meaning, both would be absurd.

[quote] All they do is say "gays are being castrated in Iran and it's the fault of trans."

What I've done, personally, is written to every gay human rights org and contacted individual activists to talk about it.

At least the people that you're saying just use it as a drop and go in a rhetorical debate are talking about it at all! That's more than you will get from any trans activist! Change happens through dialogue.

You think Charles Clymer, Monroe Bergdorf, Laverne Cox or any of these notable transes give one shit about gay men? They actually have the following and clout to influence activism.

Instead they use it to self promote, rewrite history, push sexist narratives and stereotyping. I'm just over it. They were covered by the SCOTUS ruling with regards to Title VII, so they have what they need from gay men and lesbians. Time to separate. Why should gay men lobby for men to beat women's asses in sports and for violent male prisoners to be housed in captivity with vulnerable women? Stupid move-- only drives down gay acceptance rates. There's data and polling on this.

She refers to the ‘great Ben Shapiro’ so I doubt she was ever on board with gay marriage. Like him, she is essentially a heterosexual supremacist and gays will always be an aberration to be tolerated. They do not believe in equality. She also exaggerates the heterosexual ‘lives that were destroyed’ by gay marriage because some people were told their businesses could not discriminate. Lives were not destroyed.

However I’ve never understood adding the T ( and other stuff actually ) to the supposed LGB umbrella just because that is about gender identification and not sexuality primarily. An entirely different issue. My same sex attraction has nothing in common with a man wanting to become a woman. But, initially, I thought little about it.

Then the extremists started to erase a history we fought for, started to aggressively threaten and bully others under that so called umbrella and then started to deny the reality of biology with the whole girl penis bullshit and so on. Of course heterosexual supremacists would use that to erase their reluctant acquiescence over gay marriage and the like. After all, we’re all under that wonderful fucking rainbow umbrella aren’t we ?

Some people seem to think that holding two adjoining thoughts which may contradict each other on some points isn't possible.

It's possible to agree with JK Rowling and think that biological sex is massively important and is often the root cause of discrimination against women, including sexual violence and employment discrimination. As such, the removal of "women" or "female" from discussions around this is dreadful, rather than extending the courtesy from biological female trans men or non binary people. The idea of removing "mother" from a birth certificate to describe the person who carried the baby in their womb and pushed it out of their vagina is ridiculous, even if they are legally a man.

It's also possible to believe that people with gender dysphoria who should be able to change their status and live as their preferred gender, they deserve protection against discrimination and ridicule. It's possible to think that there is a difference between authentic and inauthentic trans people and that some manipulative and predatory men who will use the situation to get access to vulnerable women. It's possible to think that trans women have a different experience to biological women, and trans women who've been socialised as men and may have only recently become women should stop telling women what to say and to redefine womenness. It's possible to think that gender dysphoria in children is real, but it needs to be treated very carefully with life changing medication or treatment considered as an absolute last resort.

It's also possible to believe that heterosexuality and homosexuality is real and that sexual attraction is based on biological sex rather than gender. It's possible to be attracted to a woman and not want to have sex with her because she has a penis. It's possible to be attracted to man and then not want to have sex with him because he has a vagina. Some people might be able to work around genital preference, but it's ok if you don't want to. Sexual preference is individual to each person and no one should be shamed for not wanting to have sex with someone they don't want to have sex with. Consent is massively important.

[quote] Some people might be able to work around genital preference, but it's ok if you don't want to.

Yes, bisexuals. Bisexuals are attracted to both sexes.

R6 Such a reasoned and nuanced take.

I have checked Twitter.

JK follows NO gay men.

R82 You're an asshole though. You came in here shit stirring saying that gay men and lesbians shouldn't have the right to marry. What did you expect?

R84: "You love it, don't you? You love to make me hit you!"

I have the nutty gay hating straight feminist that shouldn't be here at R85 blocked but I'm assuming it's accusing me of misogyny or using the term DARVO in some way. See yourself out of these gay and lesbian forums, tawdry bitch.

Get your literal violence against women out of here, R85.

We don’t care. It doesn’t work on us.

Okay, I took a gander too, and she follows Boy George. Also Fred Savage, the gay man who lived near Stonewall and was always calling the cops on them because he hated the gays and trans going to bars, and who now takes credit for Stonewall himself. And that Mister Marilyn freak who I'm surprised hasn't been sued for the crazy shit he accuses people of, I guess because he deletes it all regularly.

Saw more anti-gay orgs like LGB Alliance in her Followers list than I did gay men.

She follows quite a few conservatives and libertarian Quillette types. TONS of anti-gay and anti-trans pundits like Will Malone, Colin Wright, Emma Hilton. the Evanses. Many flavors of "I'm lesbian but I'm not GAY" women, "I could never be a feminist" men, and "I'm transsexual and I hate trans, they're all psycho" nutjobs.

LOL sorry, I meant Fred Sargent, not Savage at R88.

R88 Also Buck Angel, notable tranny pornstar, gay journalist Mic Wright, sky news' Joe Pike, random everyday gay dude named Adam, some gay book publisher with his pronouns in his bio, yawn....

Okay, I've done what I said I wouldn't do and combed through about 100 of her followers. Fuck off with this "she follows no gay people" shit, her follow list is compromised of people like those above, lesbians, probable lesbians and liberals that have taken a pro-gay stance.

Yeah, she follows some feminist blogs and activists as well? Who cares? Where is the proof that she endorses the Federalist writers bigotry towards trans and gay men?

[quote] Fuck off with this "she follows no gay people" shit

We never said that.

We said gay men.

I had no idea Mic Wright was gay. In fact I had no idea he existed until he made some very ill advised comments about the 17 year daughter of UK politician Michael Gove and is now suing the Gove's wife after she responded to them.

He also doesn't seem to like Jews much and has retweeted notorious racist misogynist accounts.

R91 And yet you're replying to a post that shows what an incompetent lying putz you are. Out of 100 I was able to extract those. Keep smearing though, you're doing great.

She follows three gay men, all with a conservative contrarian bent and all anti trans.

R94 Goodbye, troll. You add nothing to the conversation in any of the threads you're in.

R94 has moved on to attacking any gay men Rowling follows or knows in real life now in the righteous name of trans rights. Definitely on the right side of history

Does she follow any gay activists, of just ‘gender-critical feminist’ gay men?

When they say T*RF

They really mean d*k*

just like when they say “Zionist”

They really mean k*k*.

Heterosexual supremacy justifies homosexuals responding in kind.

Have any of you wondered why we have a sudden influx of these types of incendiary threads about trans folks and now have multiple threads popping up every week or two? But people keep falling for it every time. These seem to be troll threads. We can continue to bicker about whether trans folks are “real” men or women and the “danger” that (somehow only) transwomen seem to pose to society, or we can realize this is just troll bs meant to distract and divide so that gay people will do the work of discriminating against the Ts themselves rather than it falling on right-wingers. And it’s working to some extent—-some gay/lesbian folks wanted any trans legislation dropped from equal rights legislation, the T dropped from LGBT, etc. Congrats, trolls!

R100, because the trans thing is a real issue, especially for gay people - we're all LGBT, aren't we? The OP is actually pro-trans so, if you think it's an incendiary thread started by a troll, then, you're right - a pro-trans troll.

Yes, we should drop the T because LGB is about same-sex attraction and the T opposes same-sex attraction - you're only allowed to be attracted to gender identities.

If you believe in keeping the T then why complain that the trans issue appears "too much" on DL? Surely, it's our issue, since this is an LGBT board, right?

....

Has she ever expressed support for gay men?