A serial killer in J. K.'s new book is trans. For someone who has said she 'loves' and 'supports' trans people, perhaps she should support them by avoiding deeply harmful tropes about our community. But she doesn't care - this is deliberate. It's gross.
JK Rowling Makes Serial Killer Trans in New Book?
|by Anonymous||reply 234||12 hours ago|
|by Anonymous||reply 1||09/14/2020|
IT’S MAAM!!!!!!! *shoot shoot shoot*
|by Anonymous||reply 2||09/14/2020|
It makes sense. Trans have more psychological disorders than regular people (This is a scientific fact).
|by Anonymous||reply 3||09/14/2020|
R3 Actually straight men are the usual serial killers.
The bitch is nuts, she’s only getting to be cancelled. Universal must be freaking out about it. With JK being transphobic and Depp getting shittier everyday the Fantastic Beasts stuff is going down to the toilet.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||09/14/2020|
Also retarded OP/r1, the excerpt is from the second book of the Strike series, not her newest one, and it's about someone using a burqa to disguise themselves.
You can't cancel her or dent her book sales, unfortunately! But nice try.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||09/14/2020|
R4 Trans still have more mental disorders than normal people. And how dare you assume someone's gender!
She's not transphobic, you are just having a mental episode. Try taking some pills or reducing the HRT.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||09/14/2020|
R6 ok boomer
|by Anonymous||reply 7||09/14/2020|
Good for her.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||09/14/2020|
R7 It's cute that you think ageism is better than alleged "transphobia". Just shows your righteousness is a facade.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||09/14/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 10||09/14/2020|
Is it a sous chef?
|by Anonymous||reply 11||09/14/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 12||09/14/2020|
LOL OP the subplot is about a decades-old REAL crime, and the man in question was a transvestite. You don't even know what you're mad about, you're just dumb and trying to cancel.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||09/14/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 14||09/14/2020|
She should write a novel based on the soft butch sous chef killer!
|by Anonymous||reply 15||09/14/2020|
Some people just like to watch things burn. In this case, it's JK Rowling watching her career and future Harry Potter related revenue streams burn. She has fuck you money, so she doesn't give a shit if her legacy is decimated. I'm wondering, though, if her publisher and Warner Bros. share her lack of concern. There must be something in her contract to punish her for this kind of thing. At a certain point, I figure they'd exercise their contract options, whatever they are, to cut ties with her and their losses. I'm not a huge trans supporter myself, but making one a serial killer in your latest novel doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you don't hate trans people.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||09/14/2020|
R9 Yes I’m cute in everything I do.
People don’t die because of ageism, so yes, I think transphobia is much worst.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||09/14/2020|
I see the deranged misogynistic trans rights activist thread spammer troll has already found the thread! (R15). Ignore and block, don't engage.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||09/14/2020|
OP, you lost me at “our community”.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||09/14/2020|
R17 they do, you utter nimrod. Keep proving your ignorance with more statements though!
|by Anonymous||reply 20||09/14/2020|
[quote] I'm not a huge trans supporter myself, but making one a serial killer in your latest novel doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you don't hate trans people.
Yes, this is... getting unhealthy now.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||09/14/2020|
I love the idiots like r16 who go on rants after only reading the headline.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||09/14/2020|
R16 no one off Twitter and social media gives a fuck about the trans activist attempts to label her transphobic and cancel her for trying to protect women and children from misogynistic men.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||09/14/2020|
It's her book. She can write whatever she wants.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||09/14/2020|
You have to admit, though, a burqa would be a great way to disguise yourself. It's just a black caftan, really.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||09/14/2020|
Trannies are lunatics
|by Anonymous||reply 26||09/14/2020|
R16, Fantastic Beasts hasn’t the enormous hit that people expected it to be, but she’s more than fine. She created one of the biggest franchises of all time. Her publishers wouldn’t dare cite her. She could easily get lured to a competing house and create another blockbuster. Or she could simply self-publish and cripple the publishing industry altogether.
And public sentiment towards Johnny Depp is becoming positive again. That Amber Heard really showed her ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||09/14/2020|
[quote]Trannies are lunatics. And their supporters and promoters are even loonier.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||09/14/2020|
So it’s a win/lost situation for dykes.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||09/14/2020|
Did you see the passage that is used for this? What is the issue? Some comments on if the observer could know it was a halal takeaway from a distance. Okay, a writerly issue but not something else. It's in a character's voice so who knows without context why it was said. The original poster seems to take offense to halal takeaway but the comments take them down for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||09/14/2020|
[quote] Actually straight men are the usual serial killers.
Most trans *are* straight men doofus.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||09/14/2020|
R23 That's not even remotely true or the star of the latest JK Rowling franchise series wouldn't have had to make a public statement about it. As R4 said, with this, Depp's meltdown and several other scandals involving JK Rowling (supporting apartheid in Israel, shitting on Jeremy Corbyn, pissing off the Kennedy family), there comes a point where it reaches critical mass to "cancel" her. Even putting aside her opinions on the trans community, she's just a shitty deplorable person, like Ellen Degeneres. Plus, her writings after the Harry Potter books have been total shit. Have you read anything she's put out besides Potter? I did. I read the Casual Vacancy and I couldn't even finish it, it was such garbage. She's not a great writer and being toxic in general makes it worse for her. This stuff is going to catch up with her eventually, whether her cheerleaders here like it or not.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||09/14/2020|
Maybe all those ‘trans allies’ people online shouldn’t have repeatedly threatened J. K. Rowling with murder. All she has to do is base her work on the facts: there have been a number of cross-dressing serial killers, including the BTK killer who used to photograph himself wearing his victims clothing. Also this high-level officer in the Canadian Air Force.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||09/14/2020|
R32 seems triggered and isn't even making logical sense.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||09/14/2020|
Eddie Redmayne is a dumb cunt, R32.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||09/14/2020|
[quote] several other scandals involving JK Rowling (supporting apartheid in Israel, shitting on Jeremy Corbyn, pissing off the Kennedy family)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA. You think supporting anti-semite Corbyn and the anti-vaxxer Kennedys are things to be proud of? And Redmaybe is a disciple of Harvey; Eddie wouldn’t have his Oscar without him.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||09/14/2020|
R34 is a reich wing, Nazi Trump supporter.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||09/14/2020|
R37 your attempt to label anyone who disagrees with your lunacy as a Nazi Trump supporter is simply adorable.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||09/14/2020|
Are trans women as likely to kill their partners as lesbians?
|by Anonymous||reply 39||09/14/2020|
R38 It's funny you complain about a "deranged misogynistic trans rights activist thread spammer troll" when you've posted here 10 times so far. Perhaps you're the obsessive one? Just a thought.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||09/14/2020|
R40 keep thinking, dearest
|by Anonymous||reply 41||09/14/2020|
OMG r32 she pissed off The Kennedy Family?! Which member ... you mean, the nutbag who runs the fake human rights foundation? Or all 3,000 members of The Kennedy Family??
How very dare she?!
Canceling is too good for her. She must be pilloried and put in stocks in the public square. Her books must be buried, and the soil around them salted. She must be fined, and her name must never be uttered again.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||09/14/2020|
Or just tax her.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||09/14/2020|
Trans want to play Trans parts in movies/tv, trans want to play sis parts, trans don’t want to be villains in books... bitch, If you want to be treated like everyone else... you have to be treated like everyone else! I’m over the Trans whine. I support the Trans community, but sick of all the fuckin whinnying!
|by Anonymous||reply 44||09/14/2020|
LOL - oh, c'mon now.
Making the killer in a novel a T after all the controversy is just...hilarious and genius.
Of course, EVERYONE would immediately start screaming and her books would get a lot of free PR. And the reality is that the people who were not going to buy the book because she's the author are not going to buy the book no matter what. On the margin, she's probably going to get MORE sales out of this than fewer.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||09/14/2020|
[Quote] she could simply self-publish and cripple the publishing industry altogether.
That endeavor of hers would never work and it would be a complete flop. It's why people like Howard Stern never started their own media platforms. It's easier to roll in other people's dough than to invest your own money on an enterprise that may not work out in the end. If her publisher axed her, she'd probably rather just retire than bother with going through all that risk to publish another book.
[Quote] just tax her.
This. And this is also why she hates Corbyn, not because of some delusional claims of anti-semitism, as R38 says. JK Rowling claims to care for the less fortunate, but refuses to pay her fair share to fund the NHS and other humane society programs. The people here who are obsessively defending her are deranged. She's a shitty person not worth defending.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||09/14/2020|
[quote] The people here who are obsessively defending her are deranged. She's a shitty person not worth defending.
They’re lesbians mostly. She could put kittens in blenders and they’d still defend her so long as she was as single-mindedly anti-trans as they are.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||09/14/2020|
R46 you are so full of shit. You can't accept that someone disagrees with you so you, despite all facts and logic screaming to the contrary, have to turn them into a cartoonist villain that has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
It's pathological, not to mention totally dishonest.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||09/14/2020|
[quote]but refuses to pay her fair share to fund the NHS and other humane society programs.
Rowling has donated hundreds of millions to charity. So much money, as a matter of fact, she dropped of the list of billionaires almost 10 years ago.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||09/14/2020|
R47 They are also defending her for hating on Jeremy Corbyn and the Kennedy's too. How's Boris Johnson working out for you, clowns? The Covid cases in the UK wouldn't have been this high if Corbyn had won, guaranteed.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||09/14/2020|
R49 OOOOOH Funding charity. Such a fine replacement for fully funded government services.....not.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||09/14/2020|
[quote][R49] OOOOOH Funding charity. Such a fine replacement for fully funded government services.....not.
You type fat.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||09/14/2020|
^ Or I type a like a person who actually cares about the poor and disadvantaged in a society, the way JK Rowling claims to but actually doesn't.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||09/14/2020|
When one decides to charity they decide how their money is spent.
Tax revenue is decided by everyone, democratically.
I don’t think Horseface has ever donated anything to gay charity though.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||09/14/2020|
R46 ARe you kidding me? She is famous enough and with a big fanbase, she doesn't need a publisher at all.
And Corwyn was a thing from the past, everybody with a brain knew he was bad for the party.
If she was such greedy as you describe she wouldn't donate the huge amounts of money she donated
|by Anonymous||reply 55||09/14/2020|
R53 you type insane and fat.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||09/14/2020|
It's no coincidence social justice warriors like OP don't understand context. OP probably also thinks Martin Scorsese is racist since Travis Bickle was racist in Taxi Driver.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||09/14/2020|
[quote]not because of some delusional claims of anti-semitism, as [R38] says.
R46 The only "delusion" is Labour bigots like you. Which encompasses the entire Party. Thanx to Corbyn.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||09/14/2020|
R50 The fact that Johnsson is a clown and an awful president doesn't make Corbyn a good candidate
|by Anonymous||reply 59||09/14/2020|
If Corbyn was such an amazing candidate, he wouldn't have been completely decimated in the election. Even hardcore Labour supporters turned away from the party because of him. And what was the lesson learned from all this? "We must become more far left-wing!". They are more delusional than Bernie Bros.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||09/14/2020|
[Quote] If she was such greedy as you describe she wouldn't donate the huge amounts of money she donated
Or she could pay a fair share of taxes to fund services like the NHS, which have been on the front lines of fighting Covid, despite severe budget cuts from Johnson's administration. This "charity" bull shit is a ruse to hide your money in organizations without tougher regulations or accountability for how the money is actually spent. It's like how rich people establish "foundations" that are really just ruses to avoid paying taxes.
[Quote] The only "delusion" is Labour bigots like you. Which encompasses the entire Party. Thanx to Corbyn.
As I said, how's Johnson working out for you? Corbyn hasn't and wouldn't have gotten Covid like Boris did. He would have done a much better job dealing with the pandemic as well. Only Trump supporters and Tories think otherwise.
[Quote] The fact that Johnsson is a clown and an awful president doesn't make Corbyn a good candidate
Corbyn would have handled this pandemic a thousand times better than Johnson.
[Quote] If Corbyn was such an amazing candidate, he wouldn't have been completely decimated in the election
And the people of the UK, including Rowling, are responsible for everything that has happened by not voting for him. The "anti semitism" trolls couldn't put aside their hysteria and that's why the death count and case load from Covid is as high as it is. After this is over, a real reckoning needs to take place domestically, including a real push to tax the wealthy, especially Rowling's estate.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||09/14/2020|
R61 = classic Russian Whataboutism
|by Anonymous||reply 62||09/14/2020|
Fuck the trans mob!
|by Anonymous||reply 63||09/14/2020|
Gay men for gay men!
|by Anonymous||reply 64||09/14/2020|
For the poster posting the movie stills, we were just talking about Alfred Hitchcock Presents episodes--and the favorite was the one where the nurse is killed by a fellow nurse (a man pretending to be a woman).
|by Anonymous||reply 65||09/14/2020|
[quote]As I said, how's Johnson working out for you?
R61 Completely irrelevant to the fact that Corbyn, the Labour Party and you are Jew-hating trash.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||09/14/2020|
R66 Actually it is relevant because 1) criticism of apartheid in Israel does not make one "Jew-hating trash" and 2) you can't despite that Corbyn would have handled the pandemic better than Johnson. That's on you, Rowling and all of those who voted against him. I'm sure the 40,000+ people who have died during the pandemic agree with me on this in spirit...literally, since they are dead.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||09/14/2020|
R67 if Labour really cared about getting into power they would not have put forth Corbyn as leader, repeatedly, despite loss after loss.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||09/14/2020|
JK is hardly breaking new ground.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||09/14/2020|
I think it’s funny.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||09/14/2020|
I did it first. Then William Castle ripped off my work a year later.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||09/14/2020|
Every straight Jewish male showrunner in Hollywood is bending over backwards to hire trans girls for their writing staffs. What they don’t realize is they are inviting in a world of crazy that will end up inevitably trying to sue someone or claim some form of harassment.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||09/14/2020|
Fuck the dyke mob!
|by Anonymous||reply 73||09/14/2020|
R73, Fuck you. Most white trannys are straight men who claim to be dykes.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||09/14/2020|
Was a nerve touched?
|by Anonymous||reply 75||09/14/2020|
[quote]1) criticism of apartheid in Israel does not make one "Jew-hating trash"
R67 Yes, it does. Because Corbyn and your obsessed focus is on Israel. Just Israel. To the exclusion of all else. No proportion, no perspective. That's Jew hatred. Every major Brit medium has called out Labour's Jew hatred, fomented and encouraged by Corbyn. Corbyn and Labour Party Jew-hatred is no "delusion". It's deplorable reality.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||09/14/2020|
Given Corbyn's long standing position on civil liberties - his one and only good point - I'm not convinced he would have put the country in lockdown any faster than Boris did.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||09/14/2020|
Transh sherial killersh!?
|by Anonymous||reply 78||09/14/2020|
R76 Your talking points literally sound like ones coming from a troll farm. Please take up your anger at being called out for supporting apartheid with Nelson Mandela's grandson and the vast majority of the international community.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||09/14/2020|
Trans are now spamming Twitter with "#RipJKRowling". Murderous lot.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||09/14/2020|
OP's post comes directly from this Twitter post, or vice versa, OP is "UglaStefania".
|by Anonymous||reply 81||09/14/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 82||09/14/2020|
So if a writer creates a character who is trans and a serial killer, it follows that they think trans people are all serial killers?
If that were true, anytime such a character were white, or straight, or a woman, etc, it would mean that the writer thinks all serial killers are white or straight or a woman. But they don't.
You need to educate yourself about what writers are and what they do. Maybe get off trans twitter while you're at it.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||09/14/2020|
She actually didn't create the character, it's a serial killer from the 1970's who is also a transvestite, which makes the trans reaction doubly stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||09/14/2020|
How sweet the revenge after all that she has had to endure for speaking truth to power.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||09/14/2020|
Oh this is hilarious. Of course she's right to pursue this line in her fiction.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||09/14/2020|
R83 R84 No, this is the equivalent of a racist author who supports eugenics writing about a "savage" black murderer or a homophobic author who thinks gays are diseased writing about a male pedophile. No one would be having an issue with this if JK Rowling wasn't most recently known for her frowned upon views on trans people.
Also, it is kind of crazy how we as a community joined together to take down homophobe Orson Scott Card for being a homophobe years ago, but won't return the favor to take down JK Rowling, who isn't exactly gay friendly herself. Why won't she let Dumbledore be gay in the movies? There's no excuse for not doing it if that's the character's orientation. She's not an ally to anyone on the LGBT spectrum. Just because you applaud her views on trans people doesn't mean she approves of you or us in return.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||09/14/2020|
Who doesn't like a nice breakfast bowl in the morning, no matter its pronouns?
|by Anonymous||reply 88||09/14/2020|
R79: Nelson Mandela’s grandson is a racist antisemitic piece of shit whose grandmother was a vicious psychopathic killer. Israel does nothing wrong by attacking the enemies of Judaism who are also the enemies of homosexuality.
JK Rowling is a heroine.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||09/14/2020|
R87 Oh please. Poor JK has already taken more shit than any one ever has for being anti gay.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||09/14/2020|
[quote] JK Rowling, who isn't exactly gay friendly herself.
She donates huge amounts of money to LGB non-profits.
She donates and advocates for the most vulnerable women--victims of abuse and violence.
She's a champ.
PS. If you don't like the way she writes fictional characters in her book, write your own friggin' book.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||09/14/2020|
Orson Scott card deserved to be canceled for being a dirty fucking Mormon. He is also a fucking traitor who advocated treason if the United States legalized gay marriage. It’s been five years since that happened so why hasn’t he been fucking taken out to the street and shot yet like he deserves?
Anybody who compares this hacky son of a bitch to JK Rowling is not just a homophobe, but a misogynist and xenophobia as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||09/14/2020|
[quote] She donates huge amounts of money to LGB non-profits.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||09/14/2020|
So the OP is that twitter person "Ugla Stefania" ??? Take a look at his twitter. Homophobic and racist to boot.
No wonder that derange Trans would go after a woman.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||09/14/2020|
I seem to remember Rowling only formed a view about trans issues after doing some research for a character in a book she was writing. And here it is.
Don't put the trans cart before the horse.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||09/14/2020|
R89 is pro-apartheid everywhere, not just in Israel. Figured as much. FFed and blocked.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||09/14/2020|
Say their names, motherfucker!
|by Anonymous||reply 97||09/14/2020|
R96 is a racist fit only for punching. Apartheid is what you deserve for your antisemitism and homophobia.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||09/14/2020|
Antizionism is antisemitism is racism is incitement to violence.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||09/14/2020|
[Quote] If you don't like the way she writes fictional characters in her book, write your own friggin' book.
Sounds like what MAGA's say about anyone who isn't a fascist like them.
"Don't like America? Leave it!"
This thread has been a great thread to find trolls and deplorables to block, so I appreciate whoever started this. It will make my enjoyment of this site better overall. Thank you.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||09/14/2020|
Anyone who supports the tr-ns cult is a deplorable.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||09/14/2020|
For people who are interested in what JK Rowling herself has to say about transgender issues and women’s rights, here is a link to her statement:
“J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues“
|by Anonymous||reply 102||09/14/2020|
Antisemitic gentile trash and homophobic hetero trash deserve apartheid and a whole lot worse for what they've done to Jews and homosexuals.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||09/14/2020|
r87 it's a subplot in a 900 page book. You aren't even a big deal.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||09/14/2020|
BTW the trans rights actvists keeps trying to strawman this into a discussion about Corbyn and anything, really, except JK Rowling's actual statements and comments on the trans encroachment of biological womens' rights. Just F&F and block.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||09/14/2020|
Let's see what sort of response JK Rowling got from her original comments. These are not sane people you want to be defending.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||09/14/2020|
I love the JK Rowling threads. It brings out the crazy like nothing else can.
What I don't quite get is why people are so determined to get DL to hate her.
Is this part of the broader divide and conquer strategy or simply unhinged nuttiness.
Well, no matter. I thank you for your service.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||09/14/2020|
[quote]Maybe all those ‘trans allies’ people online shouldn’t have repeatedly threatened J. K. Rowling with murder.
Those who posted death threats were almost entirely trolls with new accounts. They weren't anything, let alone active in any movement. They were just trolls, and if at her advanced age and after decades of being famous she can't handle Twitter trolls, that's on her.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||09/14/2020|
It's kind of sad that people protested Silence of the Lambs decades ago because they knew the murderous tranny trope was harmful back then, but now we've devolved so far that a gay board is full of straights is telling us it's just common sense based on scientific research.
These are the same people who are so clueless they think the Twitter excerpts are all from the new book, so y'know, they're super smart and stuff.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||09/14/2020|
[quote]She donates huge amounts of money to LGB non-profits.
I tried to find evidence of this but couldn't. The only thing that came close was donations to Children with AIDS years ago. Her own webpage has no mention of LGBT charities.
She once said the Harry Potter Alliance "was gay" because of its commercials and campaigns. The organization has been huge in human rights circles but it's not her organization, it was created and run by Andrew Slack.
You just made that up about her giving huge amounts to LGBT orgs, didn't you?
|by Anonymous||reply 110||09/14/2020|
I used to consider myself a trans ally until a few years ago when all this nonsense began and they basically declared war on everybody who isn't trans or who doesn't properly grovel and defer to their every whim.
Now the scales have fallen from my eyes and I see them as the aggressive, entitled, dangerously mentally ill people they are. And a LOT of people feel the same way.
So just keep posting these stories here, OP. They are having exactly the opposite effect of what you intend.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||09/14/2020|
And a lot of people think anyone who isn't white is an inferior human being, R111. A lot of people also think gays are pedos.
That bandwagoning shit you're pulling is pretty grotesque when you're using it to dehumanize an entire segment of humanity.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||09/14/2020|
[quote]Anyone who supports the tr-ns cult is a deplorable.
Matt here (or an amazing Matt soundalike) is off on the Freddy Mercury thread saying he deserved to die because he was a gay who didn't have safe sex, so that's the kind of quality, quality troll we're attracting on Datalounge these days.
"Lots of people think all trannies are mentally ill murderers and gays deserve to die from AIDS!" is great stuff, guys. Keep it up. It doesn't make you look like a bunch of rightwing trolls at all!
|by Anonymous||reply 113||09/14/2020|
R108 uh, you're wrong, as you can see in the link above with a sampling of the comments.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||09/14/2020|
It's trending in Spain too, but most people response is about how tiresome is cancel culture
|by Anonymous||reply 115||09/14/2020|
Womyn’s spaces! Safeguarding!
|by Anonymous||reply 116||09/14/2020|
Now she’s gone and done it
|by Anonymous||reply 117||09/14/2020|
I’m a new woman!
|by Anonymous||reply 118||09/14/2020|
FFS, it's not as if this hasn't been used as a plot device multiple times already. For one, Elizabeth George's "A Suitable Vengeance", featuring a cross dresser named Tina Cogin (anagram of "incognita").
So that makes it past time to cancel Elizabeth George, too. If you're a frothing yaboo obsessed with playing the victim card.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||09/14/2020|
This years' trolls are just low-quality. You show up on a gay message board to boost anti-trans messaging supposedly in the name of gay rights but forget to even pretend to be even a little bothered that Rowling is using the pseudonym "Robert Galbraith"? Even after being called out for it?
"[Robert Galbraith] Heath experimented with gay conversion therapy, and claimed to have successfully converted a homosexual patient, labeled in his paper as Patient B-19. The patient, who had been arrested for marijuana possession, was implanted with electrodes into the septal region (associated with feelings of pleasure), and many other parts of his brain. The septal electrodes were then stimulated while he was shown heterosexual pornographic material. The patient was later encouraged to have intercourse with a prostitute recruited for the study. As a result, Heath claimed the patient was successfully converted to heterosexuality. This research would be deemed unethical today for a variety of reasons. The patient was recruited for the study while under legal duress, and further implications for the patient's well-being, including indications that electrode stimulation was addictive, were not considered."
|by Anonymous||reply 120||09/14/2020|
Has there ever been a man who "transitioned" and became an interesting, compelling, likeable woman? I'm not talking about the ability to "pass," looking good or looking feminine, etc.--character and personality only. Australian transgender Cate McGregor comes to mind:
|by Anonymous||reply 121||09/14/2020|
God they're STILL spamming Twitter with various Rowling tags and whining about it.
It's interesting how having an opinion about men infringing upon women's hard-fought rights suddenly makes everyone turn on you.
They ignore her vast history of charitable giving, the foundations she's set up to encourage more giving, and all the stuff she does for children for free, and because she doesn't agree with mostly male opinions, she must be cancelled, destroyed, willed out of existence. It's a total overreaction and I think it's having the impact of making people investigate further and seeing what the gender critical people have been saying all along about the erosion of women's rights, to appease men.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||09/14/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 123||09/14/2020|
LOL. This is a good rebuttal.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||09/14/2020|
R112, I see a lot of this people who claim they used to be allies of X minority group until members of said minority did something they dislike/disagreed with. These people were NEVER allies to begin with just bigoted garbage hiding behind phoney aid.
Real allies don't abandon you just because times are getting a little harder.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||09/14/2020|
There is no evidence Rowling had ever heard of Robert Galbraith Heath.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||09/14/2020|
[quote] There is no evidence Rowling had ever heard of Robert Galbraith Heath.
No. A quick Google search would have revealed that prior to her choosing it.
Horseface could come out and clarify.
But she won’t.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||09/14/2020|
This is homophobic
|by Anonymous||reply 128||09/14/2020|
Let's stop pretending like this is all coincidence, R126.
She chose the pen name in an era where names were incredibly easy to Google. She knew. And if she didn't know, her editors did.
She's also written anti-Labour crap in one of her RG novels, anti-Muslim stuff in another, now has done this, plus all of the sketchy Harry Potter stuff. And as much as her defenders say otherwise, people had been noticing the iffy bloodlines plot points and hints that the HP world distrusted diversity a long time ago, it's not a new discovery that "woke Millennials" or whatever have just invented.
There's the old saying that once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action. We're well past three "coincidences" at this point.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||Last Tuesday at 2:17 AM|
Who gives a shit about supposed subtext in Rowling's books or in her pen name? Trans loons and their equally loony "allies" are shrieking their misogyny and violent threats loud and clear, no need to read anything into it. It's disgusting and repellent to anybody who isn't equally misogynistic and crazy. The link above showing Rowling's sensible words and the absolutely insane response those words engendered says it all. No need to draw dubious conclusions based on sketchy "evidence"...the trans activists' hate-filled bile is clear to anybody with two eyes and a brain.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||Last Tuesday at 3:04 AM|
R130 it's because they are children and they have no critical thought other than "how dare anyone disagee with the mob"!
They can't react to what she's said and done, so they have to invent strawman after strawman to have something to complain about (and even the strawmen are hyperbole).
When all you can do is lie through your teeth about something, you have become Republican. It's crazy how these righteous idiots don't see they are actually fascists.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||Last Tuesday at 3:11 AM|
And will any of you rad fems speak out if she says something like, ‘gay marriage should be banned’?
|by Anonymous||reply 132||Last Tuesday at 3:17 AM|
Go away, misogynistic trans rights spammer troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||Last Tuesday at 3:18 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 134||Last Tuesday at 3:28 AM|
Do you think the trans killer looks more like the picture above or below?
|by Anonymous||reply 135||Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM|
R129, you’ve spun a conspiracy theory out of three different instances in which Rowling has been accused of three different things. Twitter would be proud!
|by Anonymous||reply 136||Last Tuesday at 3:43 AM|
I wonder if she hates trans women because she looks like one.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||Last Tuesday at 3:44 AM|
[quote]You are not going to win.
Win what? This isn't a game or a competition, but it's pretty telling that you think it is.
But you're also the person who thinks someone with a brand new Twitter account and zero followers who tweets "fuck off bitch" to JKR speaks for the entire trans community, so you're not exactly smart, are ya?
|by Anonymous||reply 138||Last Tuesday at 3:53 AM|
Speaking of stupid, what's up with R136 yelling at R129 (me) and then signing their post as R129?
|by Anonymous||reply 139||Last Tuesday at 3:54 AM|
Jerome Brudos: “Between 1968 and 1969, Brudos bludgeoned and strangled four young women. The only initial evidence was witness sightings of a large man dressed in women's clothing.“
|by Anonymous||reply 140||Last Tuesday at 5:03 AM|
Sorry, r129, I got mixed up!
|by Anonymous||reply 141||Last Tuesday at 5:06 AM|
There are legitimate points of discussion regarding Rowling's position - none of which are covered by the unhinged screeds by anti-gay T militants and their apologists.
I stopped listening to any discussion and chose a side because I won't wade their the silly hyperbole and reductio ad absurdum comments that constitute the vast majority of rebuttals to her points.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||Last Tuesday at 5:27 AM|
I'm just guessing she hates gay men too. They always do.
I'm open to anti-trans talk from a gay man -- like Douglas Murray.
|by Anonymous||reply 143||Last Tuesday at 5:29 AM|
About 80% of MTF transgender people nowadays are heterosexual men who transition into being ‘lesbians’ and then rage at gay women who refuse to sleep with them.
Are the lesbians who refuse to have sex with these transgender women really anti-gay?
|by Anonymous||reply 144||Last Tuesday at 5:34 AM|
[quote]Are the lesbians who refuse to have sex with these transgender women really anti-gay?
They're usually anti-gay men.
Don't like drag, surrogacy, gay male only spaces, etc...
|by Anonymous||reply 145||Last Tuesday at 5:35 AM|
R144 it's the misogynistic trans activist spamming troll. All it does is camp any trans thread and try to blame everything on feminists and Lesbians. I have no idea why it hasn't been banned a long time ago.
It's best ignored and not responded to. Blocking the poster will reveal all.
|by Anonymous||reply 146||Last Tuesday at 6:27 AM|
I don’t know why women aren’t thrown out of here.
But I think it’s because we as gay men lack confidence.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||Last Tuesday at 6:30 AM|
R132, No they wouldn't, a lot of them are vehemently homophobic and at times on par with homophobic conservatives. The only time they pretend to care about homophobia is when they're ranting on about how evil trans are. I've seen it time and time again the harassment of prominent gay men like activist Peter Tatchell, accusing him of being a pedo or supporting pedophilia. I really don't care what his personal views are on the Age of Consent the fact that they went out of their way spamming his Twitter with pedo remarks just shows you what scumbags they really are. Drag queens, gender non-conformity, gay adoption/surrogacy, anything to do with children learning about "LGBT" they'll screech pedo and misogyny....I
It's pretty ironic, everything they accuse TRAs of doing they exhibit in themselves, same mob/cult like mentality, always the victim, and where any disagreement/dissent is framed as misogyny. It's tit for tat.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||Last Tuesday at 9:38 AM|
R145, Basically, and then they'll turn around and say "Why won't gay men support us, don't ya know we were there for you during AIDS?!" 🙄
Always with the emotional blackmail.
|by Anonymous||reply 149||Last Tuesday at 9:46 AM|
r130 what's equally insane is how not only they are trying to cancel her, they are trying to utterly destroy her. Rather than engaging in debate on the very legitimate issues she brings up on self-identification, they shout her down, bully her, tell her to shut up, call everything she's ever written pure shit, turn her into some sort of right wing reincarnation of Hitler, send her death threats, etc.
And no, MermaidsUK and the like wanting to "have a conversation" with her is not a debate. It's them trying to wear her down by throwing fallacies, pseudoscience, guilt, and all the other manipulations they use in an effort to bring her around to rightthink. They won't debate it, and if you challenge them on this you will get some variation of "human rights are not up for debate" which is a ridiculous hyperbolic strawman.
They cannot argue logically or coherently. They act like children. They are fascists, and it's bizarre how they don't realize this when they have Trump as a very big example of a right-wing fascist right in front of them. Trump keeps trying to transform reality in accordance with his desires, but you can't shout down biological reality or the fact that this is all just postmodern lunacy.
It will eventually fade and be replaced by other theories, and if the people bullying others into displaying their pronouns or forcing them to repeat slogans have any sense of decency at their cores, they will look back and will be wholly ashamed for their witch hunt.
|by Anonymous||reply 150||Last Tuesday at 5:15 PM|
When womyn speak it’s discussion.
When people who don’t agree with womyn speak it’s LiTeRaL VIOLENCE111!
|by Anonymous||reply 151||Last Tuesday at 10:15 PM|
This is the single sentence upon which the claim of transphobia lies.
|by Anonymous||reply 152||Last Tuesday at 10:44 PM|
Eh... no it’s her other tweets, retweets, likes, statements, essay...
|by Anonymous||reply 153||Last Tuesday at 11:01 PM|
Go to bed, insane misogynistic trans activist spammer troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 154||Last Wednesday at 1:33 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 155||Last Wednesday at 1:42 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 156||Last Wednesday at 1:44 AM|
The smearing of JK Rowling - how fake news provoked a shitstorm
|by Anonymous||reply 157||Last Wednesday at 2:33 AM|
It’s not transphobic.
But if it is that’s a good thing, right?
Cos trans evil cos women bathroom women sport women prison women something
|by Anonymous||reply 158||Last Wednesday at 2:36 AM|
The same way i think it's not a good idea harass actors and actress who play trans roles (in the end it's bad business for the studio because that kind of movies give more problems than money), the cancelations of J K Rowling can have unexpected consecuences.
She is a well known author and a millionaire so they can't harm her way of living and in the end people could react negatively. Most tweets at the RIPJKRowling hashtag were negative, but not negative to Rowling, negative to the hashtag (most people considered bad taste).
Society and twitter are two very different thing. A minority can cause a big storm on twitter but that doesn't mean most people agree with them.
Some left media are ready to bash Rowling, but i doubt most media will do that. She is not a right wing extremist and unfortunately for trans people some of their most known activist don't look sane
|by Anonymous||reply 159||Last Wednesday at 2:40 AM|
I'll direct the film adaptation.
|by Anonymous||reply 160||Last Wednesday at 3:28 AM|
|by Anonymous||reply 161||Last Wednesday at 5:48 AM|
R126, oh yes there is, from Rowling herself. She is a self-proclaimed expert on everything trans, has called it a new kind of gay conversion therapy, and claims to be well-versed in all the research. If she’s such an expert, then she must be aware of the man who pioneered gay conversion therapy (among many other grossly unethical tortures under the guise of medical treatment). Or she’s just a fraud. But even if she is a know-nothing fraud, the first time she used that pseudonym, she was called out for it and of course denied knowing who he was. And now she’s used it AGAIN. The woman who claims she’s just concerned about unethical medical practices is now knowingly using the name of one of the most notorious unethical doctors from this past century. She’s playing footsie with homophobes and the short-sighted anti-trans crowd laps it up.
But yeah, sure, there's no proof she's using the name as an anti-gay signal. And these guys are just saying OK to the photographer who is hanging upside down:
|by Anonymous||reply 162||Last Wednesday at 1:04 PM|
This is all part of a huge conservative movement happening in the UK right now. Many Rowling supporters are also going after the BLM movement. They're upset at white people being made to feel bad over racism and they want the term "White privilege" abolished.
|by Anonymous||reply 163||Last Wednesday at 1:13 PM|
R162/r163 you sound very conspiratorial. I'm sure it's easier to brand everyone with a difference in opinion as uneducated/ conservative / religious / part of a secret plot, than it is to actually engage honestly with the issues and try to understand their concerns.
|by Anonymous||reply 164||Last Wednesday at 3:13 PM|
R162 and R163 are not the same person.
And there's no "honest engagement" with someone who *tee hee* just happens to *oopsies* use the name of a gay conversion electroshock therapy pioneer. Twice.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||Last Wednesday at 3:28 PM|
Heath (as he was known, not Galbraith Heath) certainly did work in gay conversion research but no one is suggesting that Rowling is anti gay. The fact that you accuse her of using the name TWICE demonstrates your ignorance of Rowling’s work not to mention book publishing in general. There have been five Robert Galbraith novels. As for Rowling’s inspiration for the name, see attached from an interview well before the trans loons set their sights on her.
|by Anonymous||reply 166||Last Wednesday at 4:44 PM|
All defenses of Rowling amount to hyperbole and "You just don't her" fluff comments. She's attached herself to people who are against liberal movements. Conservative think pieces that are aimed at preserving white privilege (white female privilege in her case) by trotting out a few complacent minorities who will provide the smoke and mirrors for the real issues.
Candace Owens adores JK and that's all you need to know on this.
|by Anonymous||reply 167||Last Wednesday at 4:52 PM|
"The fact that you accuse her of using the name TWICE demonstrates your ignorance of Rowling’s work not to mention book publishing in general. "
So she's even worse than I thought. Thanks for the info.
Again, you can buy her silly story about how she managed to come up with the same name as a notorious discredited doctor, but it cuts entirely against her silly claim that she's well-versed in research about the psychology around trans and gay conversion therapy. And she still uses the name despite being confronted with the link. If I started using the name Joey Mengles, I'm sure I'd come up with some asinine story about how it's a tribute to my uncle Joey and no, really I love the Jews, but you'd be a dumbass to believe it.
|by Anonymous||reply 168||Last Wednesday at 5:13 PM|
Joey Mengles? Sue Mengle’s brother?
|by Anonymous||reply 169||Last Wednesday at 5:40 PM|
R165 she's already explained where she got the name from, but keep looking for those tiny clues that you can whip up into some big conspiracy! Check in with Q for the latest!
|by Anonymous||reply 170||Last Wednesday at 6:12 PM|
R170 believes he's going to free that Nigerian prince, too.
|by Anonymous||reply 171||Last Wednesday at 6:19 PM|
R167 uh, no. You can see many rebuttals of the ridiculous arguments, lies, and hyperbole put forth by you and others in this thread. You just won't engage with them, and when you're proven wrong you just shift to the next strawman / Whataboutism argument.
And as has also been said many times, ad hominem attacks on her (by way of "this idea is partially shared by THESE undesirable people!") is a logical fallacy, much like pretty much all of the weird accusations made against her simply because SHE DISAGREES WITH SELF-ID in Scotland, and she disagrees with gender-confused children being told they're trans and led down the path of drugs and surgery before they are old enough to vote, and SHE DISAGREES with men turning up in womens' hard-fought sex-based protected spaces.
Those are her arguments. She has no issues with trans people, she is pushing back against those specific things. None of you engage her on those because you know your arguments are not logically thought out and are, in fact, lazy. You're children who want what you want and you are mad someone isn't buying into the twisting of reality you wish were true.
|by Anonymous||reply 172||Last Wednesday at 6:19 PM|
Neither Robert nor Galbraith are unusual names in Scotland. The attempts to build a case against Rowling by using bits and pieces doesn't really work for anyone who's not already in the anti-Rowling faction.
It's pretty funny that the "anti-trans" claim about the novel comes down to one sentence about a historical murder. So much so, that I do kind of wonder if there was some trolling going on by the newspapers. I mean, it's a beautiful set-up to show just how extreme and prone to overreation the Twitter trans brigade is. They sound mentally ill--I wonder if there's still screening for borderline personality disorder--sexual identity issues are a symptom of BPD, but transitioning doesn't help them. So a BPD diagnosis meant that a patient shouldn't be recommended for transitioning. But screenings these days have gone by the wayside and you get some very toxic individuals carrying the trans flag. At least one of the JKR loons on this thread is setting off my BP-dar.
|by Anonymous||reply 173||Last Wednesday at 8:12 PM|
Galbraith is such a common name, there is even a character in a Bruce Lee movie with that name.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||Last Wednesday at 11:36 PM|
No, it isn’t.
|by Anonymous||reply 175||Last Wednesday at 11:40 PM|
There's a lengthy history of men-wearing-dresses-and-killing in fiction: Psycho, Dressed to Kill, Silence of the Lambs...
It's usually homophobic.
|by Anonymous||reply 176||Last Thursday at 2:01 AM|
The trope is really about homophobia not trans in particular.
It stems from the old pseudoscience theory that all gay men wanted be women and kill their mothers.
I wonder if JK thinks all trans women are gay men who decided they'd just like to live as women.
|by Anonymous||reply 177||Last Thursday at 2:32 AM|
J. K. Rowling
J. K. Galbraith
I am SCARING myself with the “coincidence.”
|by Anonymous||reply 178||Last Thursday at 2:34 AM|
If they're not trans, just a man who wants to wear a dress that doesn't bode well for JK's view of drag queens...
|by Anonymous||reply 179||Last Thursday at 3:11 AM|
A drag queen is not a man who wears women's clothes.
In fact nobody will wear the clothes a drag queen wears to kill because it would be counterproductive.
For some people Rowling is now the antichrist, no matter how much she wants to explain herself, they are going to hate her, and there are several gay webs that are all for her cancellation.
But it's not going to happen, because like other things that happen on twitter this is a storm on a tea pot, and she is so rich that they can't affect her way of living. And they better be careful because death threats rarely help your cause
|by Anonymous||reply 180||Last Thursday at 4:15 AM|
[quote] A drag queen is not a man who wears women's clothes.
[quote]In fact nobody will wear the clothes a drag queen wears to kill because it would be counterproductive.
I mean, this isn't really about what's the most efficient outfit to wear...
Defending it as not transphobic only reveals that it's actually *homophobic*.
|by Anonymous||reply 181||Last Thursday at 4:18 AM|
R181 Do you ever watched on the street a woman who looks like a drag queen?
And no, most people with a crossdresser fetichism are not gay.
Of course we are simply speculating here because nobody read the novel. Maybe the killer only wears women's clothes to try to fool the police
|by Anonymous||reply 182||Last Thursday at 4:26 AM|
If you're on Datalounge saying that a woman who has written repeatedly about her dislike of trans can't be transphobic because her pen name is sorta kinda the same as the name of a character in Enter the Dragon, you need to consider logging off for a bit and taking stock of your life.
|by Anonymous||reply 183||Last Thursday at 4:27 AM|
Yeah, "wearing women's clothes to fool the police" is the plot of a million homophobic movies and crime novels, R182. We're all aware it's possible that's what she did.
Very compelling, taking a plot point from Freebie & the Bean and using it in her hard-hitting thriller published nearly half a century later.
|by Anonymous||reply 184||Last Thursday at 4:29 AM|
Nobody said the plot was good.
And i repeat, most gay men don't wear women's clothes
|by Anonymous||reply 185||Last Thursday at 4:38 AM|
[quote]And i repeat, most gay men don't wear women's clothes
We know. The point is about how it's a disproportionately common trope in fiction -- and always homophobic.
|by Anonymous||reply 186||Last Thursday at 4:41 AM|
And i repeat, to say that you need to read the novel first.
Because the people who read the novel said the novel is not transphobic, maybe they are wrong, but there's something more than a plot to make a novel transphobic
|by Anonymous||reply 187||Last Thursday at 5:03 AM|
I’m just going to assume she doesn’t like man who identify as men wearing dresses either.
|by Anonymous||reply 188||Last Thursday at 5:14 AM|
R183 where has she written repeatedly about her "dislike of trans"? Show us. I'll wait.
|by Anonymous||reply 189||Last Thursday at 6:14 AM|
R184 get back to us when you've read the 900 page novel. Hint: there's a lot of plots (that is one minor subplot amot many).
|by Anonymous||reply 190||Last Thursday at 6:16 AM|
Have you been living under a rock, R189?
|by Anonymous||reply 191||Last Thursday at 6:22 AM|
Drag queens are men who dress in women’s clothes.
They don’t claim to be women; drag is an art form and the queens take off their makeup before bed.
So saying this is odd:
[quote] A drag queen is not a man who wears women's clothes
|by Anonymous||reply 192||Last Thursday at 6:25 AM|
I’m not r189. But r191 has zero proof that JK Rowling dislikes trans ppl. R191 has only read other people's ideas about JK Rowling's ideas.
R191 thinks his puny efforts are going to get JK Rowling cancelled. Aww, bless.
|by Anonymous||reply 193||Last Thursday at 6:31 AM|
Are you British?
|by Anonymous||reply 194||Last Thursday at 6:32 AM|
Almost everyone who doesn't like trans women doesn't like drag queens too.
|by Anonymous||reply 195||Last Thursday at 6:36 AM|
R193 - 191 and 192 is the misogynistic divisive trans activist spammer troll. It sits on any thread tangentially mentioning trans and posts endlessly about feminists and Lesbians and "radfems", trying to distract and derail the thread from the subject. I think it's got some sort of mental condition.
|by Anonymous||reply 196||Last Thursday at 7:34 AM|
Apparently we’re supposed to hate trans women for no reason other than lesbians don’t like them.
I refuse to go along with that.
|by Anonymous||reply 197||Last Thursday at 7:40 AM|
R192 No dear, drag queens are not men who wear women clothes, those are travesties.
Drag queens show an outrageous hyperfeminity just for show, but no woman (apart of Lady Gaga) wears like a drag queen
|by Anonymous||reply 198||Last Thursday at 10:01 AM|
Well, rad fems accuse drag queens of mocking women, so...
|by Anonymous||reply 199||Last Thursday at 10:06 AM|
r198 actually if you watch Drag Race the past 6 years, a lot of the queens go for "fishy" and glamour which means they can pass as women, often beautiful women (at least until they say something). They aren't "classic" drag queens of the hyperfeminine and over the top styles that you seem to be referring to (Trixie Mattel is an over-the-top drag queen, she isn't trying to look like a regular woman). The "passable" queen seems to be more popular among younger queens. THEY can very well be transvestites.
Often in RPDR the judges have to remind the fishy queens that they need to be more outlandish with their outfits and choices because they are really just transvestites.
|by Anonymous||reply 200||Last Thursday at 10:42 AM|
As ciswomen become more sloppy in their appearance the bar is set lower for drag queens.
|by Anonymous||reply 201||Last Thursday at 10:44 AM|
Of course rad fems also accuse drag queens of forcing makeup on women.
|by Anonymous||reply 202||Last Thursday at 11:39 AM|
R202, Of course, JK Rowling hasn't said anything about drag queens forcing women to wear make-up, so one more indication that she's not, in fact, a rad fem.
Thinking that people should be adults before committing to extensive surgery and lifelong medical treatment isn't really a sign of extremism. It shows how bonkers the dialogue has gotten that Rowling's getting death threats for having that opinion and thinking there are differences between biowomen and trans women.
Again, it strikes me as a sign of BPD--the black/white thinking, the splitting (JKR was a goddess for inventing Harry Potter, now she's a demon incarnate who deserves to die), the out-of-control rage. No one is forcing you to read a 900-page book. Lots and lots of people have opinions that don't align with yours. The idea that JKR's views on sex and gender somehow means trans people are somehow being annihilated as a result--another BPD symptom.
Seriously, there needs to be way better screening for gender dysphoria and treatment. Along with BPD types, people on the autism spectrum, who have a ton of issues with ambiguity, get pulled into the trans fantasy--I say fantasy because they, and kids, think that surgery and drugs will make them into the other sex. It really doesn' work that way. At best, you have a presentable facsimile that falls apart under scrutiny or lack of medication. It seems to me the happiest trans people I've seen get that there are limitations, but they find relief in what they can do. They're not the group making death threats.
|by Anonymous||reply 203||Last Thursday at 1:21 PM|
R203 it's because those are the trans that have worked through their mental issues and aren't searching for a quick fix like much of the last few generations.
The last dozen years they've been sold that the ONLY way to fix their gender dysphoria is through the whole transing process, and are told they're so fragile that if people misgender them they will kill themselves. It's all about them, individually, which is why they react so badly to anyone disrupting their fragile view of themselves.
Of course most of the ones of age aren't that fragile. They have just discovered that they can manipulate people by threatening suicide and being victims, and they get more attention and feel special that way.
Being a bully is empowering - for the bully. It gives them a rush and a thrill and a distraction from their own lives. And it's even better if they can justify their behavior with self-righteousness - no matter how displaced that is.
|by Anonymous||reply 204||Last Thursday at 3:05 PM|
R204, Suicidal ideation is another big symptom of Borderline Personaity Disorder. People with BPD don't have a very stable sense of self--if it's challenge, they feel like they're being annihilated and act out with rage (wife-beating is associated with male BPDs), suicide threats or attempts, They get fixated on people (there's also an association with stalking and BPD), ideas--very black and white thinking.
Transitioning doesn't fix BPD. It can make it worse since the weak sense of self is further challenged--and you have all the problems of being trans on top of having BPD. Yes, it can get certain kinds of attention, but it's never enough to fill the black hole inside someone with BPD.
The way transitioning is being handled these days is reckless.
|by Anonymous||reply 205||Last Thursday at 3:22 PM|
[quote] Of course, JK Rowling hasn't said anything about drag queens forcing women to wear make-up, so one more indication that she's not, in fact, a rad fem.
No, she hasn’t said anything like that publicly yet. But it’s not in question that she’s a radical feminist.
A whole bucketload of hatred for gay men ALWAYS goes along with the hatred for trans women.
|by Anonymous||reply 206||Last Thursday at 10:39 PM|
It’s totally healthy and normal for a man to want to wear a dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 207||Last Thursday at 10:48 PM|
Rad fems claim to support gender non conforming
Whenever a man wears a dress and doesn’t claim he’s a woman, they STILL go insane.
|by Anonymous||reply 208||Last Friday at 5:11 AM|
Insane misogynistic trans activist spammer troll, you do realize your endless posts about radfems and women vs. gays just keep bringing this thread to the top and encourage more people to read it and see how nuts this whole thing is, correct?
I know you have some sort of mental condition that you camp on these threads during your waking hours, but I really wish you'd get some extensive therapy. You can't be happy with your life.
|by Anonymous||reply 209||Last Friday at 6:15 AM|
I don't think you're a gay man, R209.
And I think you're having issues with the fact that some gay men (who aren't necessarily pro-trans) are increasingly wondering why they should support women who hate gay men.
We notice that you're more outraged when someone says gay men and women have separate interests, than when someone says something pro-trans.
|by Anonymous||reply 210||Last Friday at 6:21 AM|
This all could go a little smoother if she made a few pro-gay statements.
I'd even come around to support her if she did maybe.
|by Anonymous||reply 211||Last Friday at 6:52 AM|
We love you, JK!
Sleep with us!
|by Anonymous||reply 212||Last Friday at 12:43 PM|
|by Anonymous||reply 213||Last Friday at 12:48 PM|
R211, she has, multiple times.
R208--Rowling said in her long statement about trans "where whatever you want". She also said trans people deserve full protection.
Her beef is about putting minors on lifelong medication, the long-term consequences of such are unknown. Her other concern is about the safety of women and their need for protected spaces. She was a victim of domestic violence, thus her concern.
I notice that the trans ragers actually *avoid* discussing the crux of JKR's concerns. But then, the lack of empathy and inability to see or understand someone else's point of view goes with the various mental disorders that seem to show up among some people embracing a trans identity.
|by Anonymous||reply 214||Last Saturday at 1:26 AM|
[quote] [R211], she has, multiple times.
I think she was libfem up until a few years ago. She hasn't made any pro-gay statements since.
[quote][R208]--Rowling said in her long statement about trans "where whatever you want". She also said trans people deserve full protection.
That's what they all say though: that they love gender non-conforming men!
Except they don't.
They hate James Charles and drag queens as much as they hate trans women.
|by Anonymous||reply 215||Last Saturday at 1:31 AM|
[quote]Her beef is about putting minors on lifelong medication, the long-term consequences of such are unknown.
That's totally valid. And totally unrelated to this:
[quote]Her other concern is about the safety of women and their need for protected spaces. She was a victim of domestic violence, thus her concern.
|by Anonymous||reply 216||Last Saturday at 1:32 AM|
BTW, what happened to Memoree Joelle's Twitter account? She's the pro-Trump editor-in-chief of AfterEllen.
|by Anonymous||reply 217||Last Saturday at 1:34 AM|
Once women break the bough and become radfem they usually begin to more emboldened to become not just transphobic but homophobic. It's like a gateway. I wonder if she looks at all the gay men who tend to support LGBT not her on Twitter and begins to they're a problem too.
Maybe of them have even admitted to following that path.
I have no problem with liberal feminists for the most part, but radfems are dangerous and JK has emboldened a lot of them lately.
|by Anonymous||reply 218||Last Saturday at 1:38 AM|
R218, You're using a slippery slope fallacy and you have elsewhere to justify your claims about JK Rowling because the facts don't support you.
In other words, you're not very bright. Sorry.
|by Anonymous||reply 219||Last Saturday at 1:50 AM|
Oh, I missed this the other day.
|by Anonymous||reply 220||Last Saturday at 1:52 AM|
I've documented, extensively, the homophobia that is an inherent part of radical feminism on through this website.
Hatred of gay men is as much a part of radfem as hatred of trans women.
|by Anonymous||reply 221||Last Saturday at 1:53 AM|
Radfems like Camilla Paglia have been homophobic for decades. She's accused all gays of being into "boy-love" and said gays in the military would be "disruptive" and was a bad idea.
Not that everything she has said has been homophobic, but a good chunk has, and the same goes for radfems. That dead lady whose name escapes me posted homophobic memes, that LGB Alliance has said they're anti gay marriage, many of the same "indoctrinating" and "harming children" claims made decades ago about gays have been repurposed for the new anti-trans movement.
What the anti-trans trolls want people here to forget is that in the early days several years ago they were accusing all gays of being the cause of the trans movement, saying basically that gays didn't gatekeep the community well enough, "let" the trans in and have a voice, and "encouraged" it with the drag community. "Gays don't respect women so they didn't care that trans were abusing us" is the kind of thing you'd hear a lot. Saw it on the Michfest Forums and saw it over here, too.
I think a lot of those particular radfems have left, but you can hear the echos of their complaints in the stuff that straight women are saying nowadays.
|by Anonymous||reply 222||Last Saturday at 2:13 AM|
Good overview, R222.
|by Anonymous||reply 223||Last Saturday at 2:14 AM|
“Radfems” (is that Limbaugh?) DESPISE Camille Paglia.
|by Anonymous||reply 224||Last Saturday at 4:53 AM|
Radfems are people like Julie Bindel, Andrea Dworkin, Shulasmith Firestone.
Paglia is more a shock troll.
|by Anonymous||reply 225||Last Saturday at 4:58 AM|
[quote] Whenever a man wears a dress and doesn’t claim he’s a woman, they STILL go insane.
I see gendercrits all the time saying they miss the good old days when men could be femmy or androgynous or gender-bending without thinking they were women.
And the TRAs hate people like Marilyn for not thinking he’s a woman. It’s nuts.
|by Anonymous||reply 226||Last Saturday at 7:14 AM|
They always say they support the concept of gender non-conforming.
Yet whenever a man actually does it -- like a drag queen -- they hate it.
|by Anonymous||reply 227||Last Saturday at 7:16 AM|
R222, More slippery slope fallacies. You're clumping JKR in with a group of women you dislike even though she hasn't expressed their views, but you somehow translate her concerns about transing kids and violence towards women into a more extreme agenda that is somehow anti-gay.
Since you don't have any record of her saying things that are anti-gay, you just pull in the names of some women with radical viewpoints. But you're so frickin' clueless that you don't even know that Camille Paglia doesn't have anywhere near the same views as Dworkin (Paglia, actually, argues that gay men are key players in the development of human culture and basically any female artist of genius is a lesbian.)
In other words, you're a misogynist (those loudmouthed women are all alike, right? Even when they vehemently disagree with one another) and are doing a good job of showing the misogyny of current trans activism.
Are you even aware you're validating JKR's concerns?
|by Anonymous||reply 228||Last Saturday at 12:33 PM|
Take a look of who JK follows and whose posts she likes on Twitter.
She’s a rad fem.
|by Anonymous||reply 229||Last Saturday at 12:35 PM|
R228 you can't reason with the insane misogynistic trans activist spammer troll - just block. They will continue posting divisive statements regardless, forever, until someone takes the bait again. Muriel avoids these threads and it's careful to only spam in the ones mentioning trans. It posts too many times in a row to have the posts F&Fed and do anything, which is a big drawback with the system.
It camps on these threads and continues posting even if no one is responding. It seems to have some sort of extreme mental disorder.
|by Anonymous||reply 230||Last Saturday at 1:14 PM|
R230, Yeah, it does seem mentally ill, I posted another thread how people with BPD frequently have issues with gender/sexual identity. Enough so that medical professionals who treat trans patients are supposed to screen for BPD and then recommend against transitioning since it doesn't help people with BPD and , given their proneness to suicidal ideation attempts, may worsen their long-term prognosis. The current political atmosphere, however, has meant these recommendations are not adhered to as much as they should be.
But it's why you meet people with gender dysphoria who seem rational and low-key, but also have these total loons on the Internet. They need to destroy Rowling for her views (wish her dead, burn her books, etc.) because they feel profoundly threatened by anyone who doesn't share their world view. It makes for a truly poisonous combination.
Ugh, just hate Cluster B disorders--they're toxic and pretty much impossible to treat. It's why nothing Trump does ever surprises me--he's a walking personality disorder.
|by Anonymous||reply 231||Last Saturday at 2:48 PM|
I’m don’t spend my days worrying about ‘misogny’.
I believe that on the whole trans women are better for gay men than not.
I love my gay brothers who are anti-trans, but not the ones who place w*men over their gay brothers, which is usually their only reason for being anti-trans.
It’s incredibly homophobic to suggest a gay man should be forced to be concerned about what women think.
|by Anonymous||reply 232||Last Saturday at 10:09 PM|
R232, It's incredibly homophobic to ignore half the population? Hmmm, I'd say more like inhumane.
You think the way Trump does.
|by Anonymous||reply 233||19 hours ago|
Do you tell feminists it’s incredibly misandrist to ignore half the population?
|by Anonymous||reply 234||12 hours ago|