J.K. Rowling Book Burning Videos Are Spreading Like Wildfire Across TikTok

Trans is beautiful!

Come on, this is some funny shit. Some people deserve book burnings. She's one of these people.

“Your love of 'Harry Potter' is not more important than the lives of trans women."

So, it’s all about men then, isn’t it?

If this were people burning copies of the ghostwritten "The Art of the Deal," you'd all be cheering and applauding. JK Rowling is no different from Trump in that she's a rich asshole who is a shitty person. She has more than enough money )that should be taxed). Let her watch her poorly written books go up in smoke.

I'm not allowed to play with matches.

Why can’t she just retire, enjoy her billions, and STFU.

O brave new world

Oh no! TikTok book-burning! Things must be getting serious.

Also, it's not like she cares if her books get burned because, as has been stressed many times, she has fuck you money and doesn't give a fuck anymore. If she doesn't care, why should any of you?

Why give her the satisfaction of attention? When it comes to Trans rights she's a troll.

Trans people are nazis

I will never support book burning.

For any reason.

Wonder what the parents who actually paid for these books feel about their kids burning them.

Q: “How did I fail as a parent?” A: “You spoiled your kid rotten by repeatedly buying them $35 hardcovers when they could have gotten the same books for free from the public library.”

Mass book burnings always lead to great things.

Yeah, she's definitely a troll, but the people she happens to be trolling are even bigger ones, so I guess I'm still on her side.

F&F OP

There’s like a million ongoing threads, you dumb cunt.

[quote] K Rowling is no different from Trump in that she's a rich asshole who is a shitty person.

Giving away nearly a billion to charities sure makes her comparable to Dump.

Go back to your bowl of watery old person shit. It’s not going to eat itself.

Yet more proof that trans cultists are Nazis. Do they really believe that this type of thing will help their cause or will it simply expose them as the crazed lunatics they are?

JK Rowling is a self-made billionaire who started out as a single mother who had to go and write in a cafe because she didn't have a great place in which to live. She's become so successful because people love her work. Not sure why her haters keep going on about her being very wealthy as though this is some reason to hate her - her success, achieved through her own hard work, skill and resilience, is impressive. She's a role model for young women and young men too.

Remember occultism controversy over Harry Potter in the Evangelical community? Psychos on one side want to burn her books for content they found offensive. Psychos on the other side want to burn her books content they found offensive.

Guess what? They’re both psychos who should shut the fuck up and have more in common with each other than most people with common sense.

Book burnings never helped nobody! I am team JKR!

She's a heroine. I couldn't give a fuck if anyone says otherwise. Utterly stunned that society has reached the stage where "men don't have periods" is considered hate speech. Fucking insane. Can't wait until all the kids whose bodies have been irreparably damaged by "transitioning" sue their doctors (and hopefully their own parents as well).

R12. I’m with you—it’s no more acceptable when leftish trans rights activists do it than when the Nazis did. It lacks any sense of historical genealogy, but why doesn’t that surprise me.

[quote] Not sure why her haters keep going on about her being very wealthy

She threatened to sue gay men into bankruptcy until extracted apologies for them.

Her ‘free speech’ is protected by her wealth.

Those men? Not so much free speech for them.

"I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn't hate to speak the truth."

R23, it’s the same hypocritical empty politics as “If you don’t agree with everything I’m saying, then you’re a fascist.” These people have no self awareness, no education, and no understanding of fascism, otherwise they’d acknowledge it in themselves.

This is what happens when people get simplified buzzwords and ideas online. They just parrot these things out with any life experience or understanding of the subject and end up warping it and watering it down in the process.

It’s mostly just been annoying for the past few years, but it’s because of these imbeciles that there is a very good chance that Trump will be re-elected. Fuck these people and it’s time to call them on their shit publicly.

The media needs to stop reporting on them like they are widely held views. They’re not.

Social media outrage is as constructive, productive, and meaningful as the display of social media's solidarity and "Thoughts & Prayers" compassion.

We are all killing time and avoid dealing with our own issues that way. At least let us all be real about it.

R24, so? There's gay men that are Republicans, do you defend their ignorance too? Those men made some false accusations and deserved a legal threat. I know damn well if the roles were reversed, you'd be disgusted by a gay man being accused of disgusting things as she was.

The hiding behind identities, to excuse or justify shitty behavior, needs to stop. Look at how many on DL are bringing up her wealth 🙄 when she is a rare billionaire that lost that status by donating a huge chunk of her earnings.

These pisspots can fuck off. If people are going to defend this nonsense at least stop being a hypocrite by mocking other anti science stances. There's no more credibility to changing biological sex than there is with flat earthers or anti vaxxers.

She's being trolly for sure, but book burnings are never, ever a good thing.

She should just fade into the sunset now. She's got enough money, fame, fortune etc. for ten lifetimes.

They should go out and buy as many Potter books as possible to burn.

Before the Trans issue she was so great at trolling Trump and his Deplorable base on Twitter. I wish she'd go back to that and leave the Trans alone.

Yes, she's so evil for questioning giving minors a cancer drug. The same drug that adults are told to limit as much as possible because the side effects often cause lifetime health complications. Side effects include: stunted brain development, bone density loss (early osteoporosis), stunted sex organs (Jazz was left with a micro penis they couldn't surgically manipulate), mental illnesses, such as an increase in suicidal thoughts (leading to suicide), and so on.

No shock that they are mirroring Nazis to defend the same medical procedures spear headed by Nazis. There's nothing wrong with having body dysphoria, that sometimes needs medical intervention -- it is wrong to lie about a dangerous trend targeting minors and allowing them to pretend they can easily change sex like a clown fish. Not only that, but take it farther by legally replacing sex with "gender identity".

R31 they don't leave her alone. They were starting shit for a single like of something years ago and have escalated from there. Why don't the "trans" just STFU at this point? They know her stance, yet they want to force her to change her opinion instead of moving on. They are nasty, coddled psychopaths.

I know and love alphabet soup people, but erasing the concept of gay men removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn't hate to speak the truth.

R33, it’s crazy. If you compare Caitlyn Jenner coming out to Ellen, and you chart 2015 as the official beginning of the trans rights movement, they’ve managed to lose supporters in the five years interim, not gain them. They immediately lost the argument that gays used well of “See, we’re just like you” by screaming and acting positively deranged.

Now gays and lesbians want nothing to do with them.

Great job.

Yet more lies from r24. Rowling haters are nothing more than liars and book-burners.

lol that’s fantastic R9

But yes. Book burning. How... progressive. Good god the militant Left is retarded.

This bitch is not nor was she ever a single mum on the dole writing books in a British coffee shop.

She’s a fucking troll, and media created one at that.

Willing to bet the troll herself is also trans. She’s full of shit, and why anyone believes any of this tripe is beyond me.

And fuck all of you who justify burning books. Dumb fucks.

[quote] Great job, trolls.

Fixed that for you, r35. You're welcome.

"Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn human beings too."

Fascist burn books, huge red flag.

People really have a difficult time understanding what this actually is, R40. And I cannot blame them, because it’s a really muddled and confusing landscape to forge through.

Being “woke” isn’t what people actually think being “woke” truly is.

This is all bullshit, all of it. And then the bullshit becomes the “truth”, and then that “truth” is turned back into bullshit.

All in the name of MONEY. He who has the most money, wants you to burn the books. That includes this JK Magical Faerie, Harry Potter Troll Hack of a Bitch.

She doesn’t give a flying fuck about children being transitioned, nor does she give a fuck about gays, or women’s rights, or any of it. She only gives a fuck about herself, and her MONEY. The bitch will even supply you with all of the matches and books she signed if you ask her nicely.

[quote]If this were people burning copies of the ghostwritten "The Art of the Deal," you'd all be cheering and applauding.

This is untrue. I am against all book burnings. It smacks of fascism. And thin-skinned assholes who can't bear to hear another opinion.

But it is pretty hilarious that people think destroying a book you already paid for is hurting the author.

Why add the carbon to the atmosphere so quickly? Just recycle it, for god's sake.

Her publisher probably burned the first book themselves, being that no one is buying it for the purpose of actually reading it, otherwise.

Idiot at r45, they're burning Harry Potter books.

Troubled Blood is already a best-seller at amazon.co.uk despite only having been released 3 days ago.

[Quote] Not sure why her haters keep going on about her being very wealthy

Because wealthy people are, by and large, huge assholes that are out of touch with the suffering of the poor and middle class. This describes not just JK Rowling, but all billionaires. And who cares if she's given some of her wealth to some bullshit charities. It's all about reducing the amount of taxes she has to pay for more meaningful things like the NHS and affordable housing. Fuck her and her defenders here.

I don't even really care that much about her opinions on the trans community. I just think she's a garbage person and doesn't deserve any support. She's in the same league as Bill Maher in that these entitled fuckers need to get their just desserts. If the trans community is able to permanently cancel her, then more power to them.

I stand with J.K.Rowling.

She is constantly called transphobic for simply stating that there is a difference between biological females and trans women. Because there is.

[quote]She doesn’t give a flying fuck about children being transitioned, nor does she give a fuck about gays, or women’s rights, or any of it. She only gives a fuck about herself, and her MONEY.

Regardless of what you think of her views on issues, you should stick to facts. Yes, JK Rowling is very wealthy, but, unlike many rich people, she has given away a lot of her money to charities. So much that she is no longer a billionaire.

And if she only cared about money, she wouldn't express "forbidden" opinions that will affect book sales. Duh.

But I do think that having so much money gives her the luxury of not giving a fuck if she gets canceled for stating her opinion.

What cancellation has she undergone?

R49, that’s called protecting assets from being taxed-not charity.

C’mon. Go give this schpiel to someone who hasn’t a fucking clue.

The regressive left is self-destructing. Classical liberalism, respect for universal human rights, could have gotten us everything right we needed. The marriage debate was won on those terms but after that everyone went all identity politics and various forms of Marxism. Now you are left defending antifa riots and book burnings.

Social media people are actively competing against each other as to who can be the most disgusted by Rowling, to a point they are simply lying about her.

Not sure if it's something that's been learned from the right wing, but sites like Mail Online have a track record for repeatedly hounding young black people. This is from a Guardian article about the dance group Diversity and their BLM routine.

[quote]Just 4% of the 24,500 complaints were made in the immediate aftermath of the programme being aired, suggesting these were people who were offended by the original broadcast after watching it live. The majority were filed over the following weeks, following repeated news stories about the original number of complaints.

[quote]MailOnline alone has published more than 20 articles about the incident, with tabloid news sites regularly posting articles about the rising number of complaints to Ofcom about the Black Lives Matter dance. These articles apparently prompted even more complaints, almost a fortnight after the show originally aired.

MailOnline are also going after a young black footballer turned TV presenter who is replacing former French Open champion Sue Barker as presenter of a long running tv show, suggesting Scott only got the job because she's black.

The likes of Pink News are working with in hand with right wing media like MailOnline and the Telegraph to whip up a frenzy about trans issues and increase their revenue from clickbait outrage.

The Independent ran an article today saying the villain of one of the earlier Strike novels was a trans woman, when the character barely featured and the murderer was a literary agent.

Who needs the truth when falsified outrage will do?

[quote] The regressive left is self-destructing. Classical liberalism, respect for universal human rights, could have gotten us everything right we needed.

Maybe. But women rejected it with feminism.

ever noticed how r47's type went from calling for the heads of millionaires to billionaires ever since it turned out multiple of their heroes fit the millionaire grifter mould, hello Bernie Sanders

[quote]What cancellation has she undergone?

You ask this on a thread about people burning her books?

Some of you are so willfully obtuse.

R52, your argument had a chink in the armor.

Antifa isn’t “left, progressive, or liberal” nor are book burnings, just because the Daily Fail and FOX say it is.

I can see her laughing as she is watching the books that she received a royalty from being burned. Go for it, trannies, I got mine.

But you boys who want to be girls need to accept the fact that you came into this world as a dude. I have sympathy for the minuscule number of people who are facing a biological challenge. But most of you guys are just gay men that need an excuse to explain their attraction to men and are afraid of being labeled gay.

It really is that simple.

[quote]that’s called protecting assets from being taxed-not charity.

In other words, she can't win with you.

It's almost as if you don't care what she actually does because you are blinded by an agenda to silence anyone you disagree with.

Got it.

[quote] You ask this on a thread about people burning her books?

Her books have not been withdrawn from sale, her contract has not been terminated, she has not been banned from interviews, etc...

The book-burners -- exercising their free speech -- are nobodies.

r54, the vast majority of women don't call themselves feminists.

She’s gained more fans then she is losing.

r58, a lot of 'trans women' are or were straight men, it's a common misconception that it's only an issue for gay men

R55 Actually, that's because of inflation where the dollar is worth less, so a million dollars isn't worth what it used to be. That's like complaining about someone in a poor, sub saharan African country defending millionaires, where a million of their currency is the equivalent of a couple thousand US dollars. It's not hypocritical at all when the dollar is debased in such a dramatic way to essentially be worthless.

[quote][R54], the vast majority of women don't call themselves feminists.

R52's point was about why we can't have 'classical liberalism' and the group who abandoned it long before trans women were ciswomen.

keep telling yourself that you sellout, r54

^ whoops, the sellout I was referring to was r64

Returning to classical liberalism would mean abolishing feminism.

cool it with the anti Semitic remarks, r65

I like how a few hysterical individuals decided for themselves to speak (and light a match) for the whole trans community.

Would this be qualified as stunning or brave?

People who do things like burn books, protest movies, etc. are always the sharpest tools in the shed.

r64, you're a hypocrite, and stop liking your own posts

[quote] Not sure why her haters keep going on about her being very wealthy as though this is some reason to hate her

This seems to be the prevailing view among many younger people and/or people who have failed in life(i.e. most of Twitter)--"why are you supporting that person? They are RICH!?". Like all people making over $1 million are the equivalent of sexual predators.

R68 there are many forms of feminism, some are compatible with variants of classical liberalism.

As stated at R24, she uses her wealth to attack people who exercise their free speech.

[quote][R68] there are many forms of feminism, some are compatible with variants of classical liberalism.

Nope. There are. All feminism is identity politics.

But you only care when trans women assert their identity.

R59, how in the world am I silencing this troll? The bitch is writing books, that are being burned, for God’s sakes!

How is my protest against her hypocrisy and grift, silencing her? I’m not the ideologically confused trans “woman” , burning her books, as I have no skin in that particular game.

Also, just for true clarity, in case anyone here is wondering what I personally think of all of this bullshit “fuss”, here it is:

Trans is not real because NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, can be born MALE, and become a FEMALE, and be born FEMALE, and become a MALE. Just as Harry Potter cannot go to “Magic” school and fly on a fucking broom, or any of this shit that people want to believe is nothing but fictional, just like the characters in Ms. Rowling’s books.

That being said, I DO believe that there are men and women who want to present as the opposite sex, for reasons that I’m sure are varied and complex, hence I do not claim to understand them, nor do I need to, because I’m not a specialist in any field that warrants my understanding. However, I DO accept them AS THEY WISH TO PRESENT THEMSELVES. That doesn’t mean I am somehow buying in to the falsehoods of them being biological women, because we all know that is NOT the case, including they, themselves!

Both of these things can be true and are. They aren’t biologically the sex they present as, but they certainly have a place in our culture and in our society, which needs to stop quarreling about a constructed quarrel, in order to create false “sides “ of a quarrel that doesn’t actually exist, because biology has made that quarrel non -existent, in the first place.

And that’s why I speak up against Rowling. Because she’s turned this into something for herself to monetize and profit from. It has nothing to do with advocating for children.

Children who are not hers, are not technically her possessions, and unfortunately, are legal wards of the parents. As of right now, there are little set barriers in place for a parent to be prohibited from transitioning their child. There’s nothing we can do about it at this moment, and if she cares so much about it, she should run for office instead of writing a book about a trans or cross dressing serial killer, so that the trans kids that she claims to advocate on behalf of, don’t see themselves depicted as sociopaths who grow up to murder others as a result of a pathology possibly created by hormonal therapy, or otherwise. And on top of it, JK laughs all the way to the bank, as the trans burn her books, rather than hold her accountable for what is really going on here: exploiting the trans community for cash, publicity, and prizes.

She’s not being silenced by me. Nor am o being silenced by anyone who claims I want to silence her.

And she’s an EXCELLENT author. Too bad she lives fictionally as well, rather than just sticking to fiction when she writes her fictional books.

I wonder if r78 will ever grasp the fact that Rowling's new book is NOT about a trans or cross-dressing serial killer.

[quote]Do they really believe that this type of thing will help their cause or will it simply expose them as the crazed lunatics they are?

I didn't need Rowlings to expose them. The nonsense they've been demanding was enough confirmation.

Then why do reviews say it is, R79? I’m just going by that. Are they wrong?

A review from Amazon:

“Great book SPOILERS

Thrilling and interesting to read. Has nothing to do with trans rights - the murderer is never described with any such language and the fact that people are so mad - despite never having read the book - is ridiculous. The murderer is a cross-dressing psychopath who uses womens clothes to display a non-threatening image to his victims. That is all.

If you still have a problem with this, and feel threatened and outraged, perhaps you should not be reading horror and true crime novels.”

Yes, they are obviously lunatics to us but a lot of people (at least in the American media) actually believe a lot of the trans nonsense. Let's not overlook the fact that the trans cult have successfully piggy-backed on the gay community and so many well-meaning straights believe that being trans is just some kind of version of being gay.

No, R82. We well meaning straights do not believe they are lunatics, nor do we believe they’re a version of being gay.

A lunatic can be a lunatic regardless of sexual orientation, gender, or trans surgery.

[quote]I didn't need Rowlings to expose them. The nonsense they've been demanding was enough confirmation.

This is a statement by the left wing Labour run administration in Wales, in response to the UK Government (aka Boris) decision to put the self ID changes on hold.

[quote]The Welsh Government is committed to advancing equality for all and is clear this means taking account of intersecting forms of discrimination, disadvantage and striving to achieve equality of outcome for everyone.

]quote]The UK Government has failed in its commitment to formally respond to the Gender Recognition Act consultation by repeatedly delaying publication of the review. We have pressed for a publication date and have been disappointed to see the leaks of selected sections of the report without proper communication by the UK Government to Welsh Government Ministers.

[quote]This has caused significant distress and anxiety among trans people and wider LGBT+ communities here in Wales and the UK. We believe trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary identities are valid. We restate our support for trans people’s right to self-identification.

[quote]We have expressed our frustrations directly with the UK Government on several occasions in relation to its position on the consultation and review. We have pressed for clarity in relation to references to single sex spaces, the methodology of ‘checks and balances’ and sought clear commitment that changes to the 2010 Equality Act will not be made. We will write again to Equalities Minister Liz Truss MP to ask that urgent progress is made.

[quote]We will submit our views on the published review of the Gender Recognition Act at the earliest opportunity and will ensure trans rights in Wales are protected to the fullest extent of our powers.

[quote]We have provided funding to Stonewall Cymru to begin work engaging stakeholders to develop an updated Transgender Action Plan for Wales. At a constructive meeting this week, chaired by Stonewall Cymru, we heard directly from members of the trans community who expressed their concerns about a lack of progress by the UK Government regarding its commitment to Gender Recognition Act reforms. In particular, they were dismayed at the increasing likelihood of a regression in their Human Rights as trans people.

[quote]We share their concerns.

[quote]While the thrust of the Gender Recognition Act may deal with matters which are reserved, we will explore what actions may be open to us to support trans people in related areas which are within devolved competence.

Such a cowardly statement, it doesn't deal with any of the complexities and how existing laws will change, e.g. will there be a "Yaniv" exemption so women in the beauty industry can't be punished financially for refusing to touch a penis? There are no women's prisons in Wales, all female prisoners are sent to English prisons so how will rapists like Karen White be treated if they self ID as a woman? And are they proposing to add a new legal status for non binary people, in which case how will that work with sex protection laws?

So many politicians are scared and pathetic unwilling to deal with the complexities around conflicting rights and safeguarding and just resort to the "Trans women are women! Trans rights are human rights" statement.

JK Rowling has made sure women's sex based rights are at least a consideration, and politicians are going to have to start answering basic questions if they want to change the law and bring in self ID.

Dunno r81, every other review I've read by people who've finished the book has said that that is not what the book is about. I even read one review that said that this aspect was just one line in the book. You claim that this book will damage trans kids (actually, the people are damaging them are those telling them they're trans), whereas the review you cite says: "Has nothing to do with trans rights - the murderer is never described with any such language and the fact that people are so mad - despite never having read the book - is ridiculous." Not sure how that could damage trans people or anything else you say. Thanks for posting a spoiler, though!

Another review from amazon.com, which suggests that the cold case victim was not killed by a serial killer and hence the actual murderer is not the cross-dressing serial killer, which is just a sub-plot. Also a great review for detailing all the issues that the Strike books are about and why they are such a great read:

[quote]While the main plot that carries Troubled Blood through is about a cold case disappearance, the real story is about family and relationships, and how much of our own stories we know, how much we choose to try and understand, and how much we choose to ignore or pretend doesn't exist or matter.

[quote]Strike still has unresolved father rage. I need to go back and read the previous novels, but his character seems slow to change or grow. He has a few moments of clarity in TB, which gave me hope for development. Robin's growth and change are more satisfying. She's understanding how the violence of her past is affecting her present, dealing with her pending divorce, and evaluating her relationship with Strike. I enjoyed watching both characters taking baby steps toward understanding what they want from themselves, and what they expect from other relationships.

[quote]As Strike and Robin ferret out details of the life of a woman everyone has assumed was victim of a serial killer, it becomes more and more obvious how fractured and incomplete people's knowledge and understanding of their own life story, and the story of those closest to them -- family, lovers, friends, business acquaintances -- really is. TB is a slow, dense read, but in the end satisfying.

This is Chiyo, the menstruator (that's the right term isn't it?) competing to be Mr Gay England.

To be clear, from the review at r86, it appears that the cross-dressing serial killer is not the killer Strike and Robin are looking for, it's just a sub-plot and the cross-dressing serial killer (based apparently on a real killer) is just one suspect that in the end transpires not to be the perp.

Anyone who's ever read any of the Strike books knows that Rowling is not interested in such lazy sensationalism and the murders are committed, as happens in real life, by people that the victim knows, not some random psycho killer.

I haven't been reading these threads as I have little in interest in "trans" but what is this big stinko about? Did she say something particularly offensive or just say that men have penises and women have vaginas.

The stinko is about the fake news trans Pink News deliberately misreading a review of the book in the Telegraph, which apparently noted a minor sub-plot about a cross-dressing killer. The Pink Trans News then spun that into Rowling writing a book in which the central murderer is a transwoman. The crazed trans then went all out to kill Rowling, even though none of them had read the book or knows what's in it.

Ridiculous. I’ll be buying all her stuff.

Absurd. Obviously these are people who don't read.

Is feminism identity politics?

Who's the Nazi now, [italic]bitch[/italic]? Who's the Nazi now, [italic]bitch[/italic]? Who's the Nazi now, [italic]bitch[/italic]?

People have a lot worse things to be worrying about than this.

The whole trans thing is the reserve of upper middle class women in Britain which nothing better to do.

R92, the Republicans who defend her are the ones who don't read

R97, I think you'll find a lot of Labour supporters read and love Rowling. She is a Labour supporter herself.

I’ve never bought any of Rowling’s books but I’m buying this one to show my support.

I bought a copy, to support freedom of speech.

And because the Cormoran Strke books are genuinely good.

Support of WHAT EXACTLY???

That trans isn’t real nor are “cis” women or “cis” men, but some people do see themselves as opposite sex, and some people cross dress and some people have surgery in order to pursue presenting as opposite sex?

Either you’re a woman or a man. Period, end of. If you want surgery to look otherwise, that’s OK and completely acceptable, and have the right to be treated as a person presenting as opposite sex, and also have the right to be protected under the law, as a human being deserving of all legal protections due to a person that is born male and identifies female.

So what is JK advocating for here? Is she advocating for the same things I advocate for? Because I don’t believe that’s the case here. She claims to not hate trans, except she seems to be upset that people identify as opposite sex, even though that is all that they’re doing, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with identifying opposite sex.

Why is this any of her freakin’ business? What skin has she in the game if someone wants to wear a dress and makeup? Or if someone wants to have surgery and be called a woman, even though biologically, they weren’t born one?

How does any of this threaten her or other women? I don’t see the issue here and this is why she is getting pushback.

We have no right to tell people how to live their lives, and if we don’t like children having hormones in order to transition, then we as individuals have every right to not allow our own children to undergo hormonal therapy.

This woman is advocating against personal parental rights and personal rights of adults.

Personally, I would approach this with great caution if my child wanted to pursue something like this, however, I’m certainly not going shut down on my child and tell them they’re crazy or mentally ill. This is something that no parent understands, or even knows what to do about it, unless they’re faced with it themselves. I have no doubt that it must be a huge challenge and an overwhelming one, at that. Why rise up against them, rather isolate them as bad parents?

We don’t know what any of this looks like, unless it happens to us.

Leave these people alone and stop demonizing them in the press. They aren’t a real threat to women or gays. And saying that they are just because others say so, doesn’t make that real, nor does it make it true. Are there delusional people out there who believe they’re menstruating because that had surgery? Well, I guess there might be or are. But how does this affect me on my personal life and my own period? It doesn’t! Not one bit. So I fail to understand how someone claiming that they’re ovulating when they biologically cannot because it’s impossible, take anything away from me ovulating, just because I do, and they don’t.

Let them say whatever the fuck they want. I’m still dealing with cramps, and I don’t understand how that takes anything away from this experience that is only experienced by women.

This entire movement is useless because AGAIN, it is based on bullshit that doesn’t actually happen, nor does it actually exist.

MEN DO NOT OVULATE OR HAVE MONTHLY MENSTRUAL CYCLES...

Next!

Burning Potter books...

...doing the work of One Million Moms and fundie christain nutbags the world over.

Tell me that the regressive left hasn't morphed into the radical right.

What controversy? No one in the US has given her any attention since her initial remarks. She keeps putting herself out in the media. Like when she returned the award that she got from the Kennedys because one of them didn't agree with her viewpoints. No one would have even known what she said had Rowling not thrown a tantrum on social media. She's probably paying people to go on TikTok and do this to generate buzz and so she can be "victimized" once again. . You read her diatribes, she's plunging headfirst into Anita Bryant "Save the Children" territory.

It's the media's fault for inflating this woman's head to begin with. Harry Potter heavily ripped off Jill Murphy's The Worst Witch books, but they never called her out on it, instead proclaiming her as some creative genius. Clearly that has gone to her head.

20 years ago I thought Harry Potter books were lame (because they were so mainstream). If anyone had predicted then these would be the object of such vindictive, I would have laughed.

Has Armistead Maupin issued a statement?

[quote]Why can’t she just retire, enjoy her billions, and STFU.

Why can't idiots just wake up to the Transtapo erasing real women, and forcing them to be defined by guys in dresses!?

J.K. is a fucking hero.

She is one of the few brave people who has not caved to these Trans Terrorists.

Don't cave, J.K. Thank you for standing up for women.

Who cares about women?

People burned Beatles records too. Then the Fab Four faded into obscurity in 1966, never to be heard from again.

Not really.

Hi trans troll! Am I missing anything or is it the same regurgitated shot?

People burned Mein Kampf too.

She dug her own grave and she's lying at the bottom. She can still issue an apology or lie there a bit longer and wait for them to start shoveling the dirt down on her if it's not too late and hasn't already happened.

I feel I should point out that it’s not good to inhale the smoke of burning books. The glue, the covers, the ink - they’re all full of chemicals.

I have burned (poorly written) books when I was moving and the clock was ticking, and I had already lugged numerous boxes of others to the thrift shop... but I sat well away.

They burn very “lazily,” too. It’s not very exciting.

Cancel trannies and all leftards who enable them.

R4, you've never even read what she's written on gender issues. Those doing all the squawking are making up content. She's actually quite a kind and reasonable person. She worked for what she has and has donated a lot to charities.

Look how many of these death threats are coming on the back of Pink News story, factually incorrect and taken from the most right wing newspaper in the UK.

Hope they succeed!

[Quote] Is feminism identity politics?

Yes

All the women on this thread will claim feminism isn't identity politics.

But gay and trans rights are.

They're hypocrites.

I suddenly feel the need to buy the Harry Potter book series, which I've never actually read. Incidentally, I was going through my PVR and didn't realize I'd recorded all the Potter movies at some point.. maybe next week, since the U.S. Open is this weekend.

Gay rights or LGBTQAI+ rights organizations need to condemn the book burning and threats.

Have lgbtq libraruans in the UK and US issued a statement?

have the stars of Harry Potter issued a statement condemning book burning and death threats yet?

[quote]Gay rights or LGBTQAI+ rights organizations need to condemn the book burning and threats.

What do gay rights have to do with this?

Do you think all this could end if we returned to 'classical liberalism'?

When I signed on as a card carrying and dues paying member of the "gay community" decades ago I had no idea it meant I had to support book burning and death threats against artists.

[quote]have the stars of Harry Potter issued a statement condemning book burning and death threats yet?

Of course not, because that would deviate from their TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN generic bland statements and require them to consider that this subject is more complex.

Emma Watson's brand of feminism is about the type of heels women wear, not whether low paid immigrant women working in the beauty industry should be sued for refusing to wax a trans woman's penis, or

[quote]not whether low paid immigrant women working in the beauty industry should be sued for refusing to wax a trans woman's penis

That sounds like a gay rights issue.

I'm going to bet that beautician was a homophobe who would refuse to wax a gay man's penis.

[quote]Is feminism identity politics?

All politics are identity politics.

I've never read anything by this woman but I understand she's already angered the Woke SJWs in the subtitle of this book.

I've been told that the "M______" Word and the "H___-C____" Word are just as bad as the N Word.

It should be legal to refuse services to ciswomen.

For many gay men, including myself, they can be triggering.

I didn't think people used the word "triggering" unironically anymore.

What's next, 'microaggression'?

So, not only is JK Rowling's new book on the Amazon bestseller list, so are several of the Harry Potter's.

I love the way this showing just how meaningless social media mobs are in the real world.

[quote]If this were people burning copies of the ghostwritten "The Art of the Deal," you'd all be cheering and applauding.

Very true of actual DL regulars, but these aren't regulars. A lot of the trans hating trolls are pro Trump though, for months they were trying to get people to vote for Trump by saying "he's the only one who cares about women and gays" until they realized that tactic wasn't working for them here on DL, so they've dialed it back a little.

Jedward are trolls and it's kind of funny to see "celebrities and activists are fascists who are calling for book burning!" to read the article and find the truth is really "Jedward made a book burning joke on Twitter."

Aw, r126, that's so cute, especially since you've been very vocal about the gay community not even existing! You and your friends are always saying that "there's no such thing as the gay community" and demanding that the L, G, B and T split off into little discreet groups of their own, as they were always meant to be.

[quote]Very true of actual DL regulars, but these aren't regulars. A lot of the trans hating trolls are pro Trump though, for months they were trying to get people to vote for Trump by saying "he's the only one who cares about women and gays" until they realized that tactic wasn't working for them here on DL, so they've dialed it back a little.

Yep. Most of DL's anti-trans trolls are pro-Trump.

^Projection much, Karen? Or is it Natasha?

[quote]What cancellation has she undergone?

The anti-trans trolls say she's both cancelled AND victorious because the book is a best seller.

The Woody Allen trolls do the same thing. They'll say he was cancelled and his book couldn't get published, and then 0.02 seconds later say he's "won" because his book was on the best-seller list.

These people just toss out whatever they think will score points on a thread, they don't care if it's true or if it makes sense. Sometimes they want to pretend like "the woke" are evil fascists who wield unimaginable power, moments later they want to pretend like those same people are a powerless minority who have been defeated by the righteous JKR stans.

Acting like loonies never bring you new supporters (at least not the ones you want).

And burning books reminds of very dark times

Most Democrats, Labour supporters, lefties, even woke agree with Rowling. Very few people don't believe that there's a difference between a bio woman and a transwoman, very few people believe that men menstruate, there is very little support for gender self-id, there is great concern about children and adolescents taking pharmaceuticals and having surgery that will make them infertile and affect their still not fully-formed bodies. Sports fans don't want to see bio men competing in women's sports, there is great concern about bio men - especially those sentenced for sexual assault - in women's prisons.

Even 99% of gay people agree with Rowling - we are attracted to our own sex, not our own gender. Lesbians don't want to suck "lady sticks", gay men don't want to fuck "front holes".

When Daniel Radcliffe starts dating a transwoman - especially a pre-op one - then I'll believe that he truly thinks that transwomen are women.

R113 Why didn't you just throw them in the trash?! It's what I did.

[quote] Even 99% of gay people agree with Rowling

No, they don’t.

R142 Not 99% but i think a majority agrees with her. Specially because the backlash is totally disproportionate (not that it really hurt her, she is not one of those they can get fired)

R142, care to explain what being gay means to you then? Does being a gay man, for example, mean enjoying eating pussy?

[quote]Does being a gay man, for example, mean enjoying eating pussy?

Nope.

'Transmen' are not men.

Trans women are women.

[quote][R142] Not 99% but i think a majority agrees with her. Specially because the backlash is totally disproportionate (not that it really hurt her, she is not one of those they can get fired)

No.

Face the fact that most gay men are left-wing and fully support LGBT.

Most gay people and liberal-lefties don't really think through to the logical conclusion of trans demands, especially the gender not sex or gender not genitals rhetoric. Gays just want to be nice and, especially many of the younger ones, don't question the lumping together of the LGB with the T. So they'll come out with stuff like "I'm attracted to several genders" because they think that's the correct thing to say but without really being able to specify what they mean, especially young lesbians who want to be nice and PC. They think saying "I'm attracted to different genders" means other women and transmen (i.e. other women) or gender queer girls, basically other bio females. For many young lesbians, gender simply means gender identity - so, as they see it, they're attracted exclusively to their own sex, but a wide array of gender identities within that sex. They don't get that talking in terms of gender as an identity means that they also have to accept that they should be attracted to people of the male sex who identify as female, especially bio men who "identify" as lesbian. Be prepared to suck that lady stick, girls!

Similarly with the liberal-lefty straights, they think that being trans is something that's limited to the "LGBTQ+ community", that trans people are only interested in dating people LGBTQ+ people. Let's see what happens when transwomen start demanding that straight men date them. All those liberal-lefty straights who say bullshit such as "gender assigned at birth" don't realise that if they really believe that kind of thing then they will have to raise their kids as having no gender until they're old enough to decide what gender they want to be.

No, most left-wingers know exactly what they support.

Gay men should question the lumping together of G with other letters though.

Most lesbians are attracted to 'other genders'.

R145, if you believe in gender then you can't choose between gender identities. If - in your opinion - transwomen are women, then you must also agree that transmen are men, otherwise you're a transphobe.

R146, if most gay men fully support the T then those most gay men should be happy to lick a gay transman's pussy. Chiyo's for example. Don't tell me you believe Chiyo should be banned from the Mr Gay England contest?

Here's a dyke who refuses to suck a girldick, but demands gay men suck a pussy:

R146 You are completely wrong, most gays are on the left but that doesn't mean they agree with everything trans radicals say. One thing is supporting trans rights and other very different some of the nonsense they spread

But most gay men do support them.

You can argue about whether they should, but they do.

R152 Twitter and reality are two very different things

Yes, IRL I don’t know any ‘gc’ gay men.

[quote]Gay men should question the lumping together of G with other letters though.

If you knew anything about LGBT history you'd know that particular battle has been fought since the late 1960s, you guys are always rehashing old intra-community concerns and trying to pass them off as new.

The handful of gays you get on your side tend to be the older types who say things like "why should trans be part of the community when they're not respectable" or "why should we care about racism in the gay community when all blacks are homophobes," very 1974 kind of stuff that most people have rightly shrugged aside years ago.

[quote]Even 99% of gay people agree with Rowling

Ludicrous. There have been no studies about gays and their opinions of either Rowling or trans.

Is that all you guys are doing, just making up statistics and posting them on Datalounge like it'll make them true? Good lord, get hold of yourselves!

[quote]If you knew anything about LGBT history you'd know that particular battle has been fought since the late 1960s, you guys are always rehashing old intra-community concerns and trying to pass them off as new.

I agree actually.

I'm saying the people we need to be concerned about are the 'LGB' people.

Most men I know that identify as gay are not into girl bits. Similar with lesbians and dick. Yes there are people like Kristen Stewart, but she's technically bi but prefers girls way more. Political trans people say junk is not a factor and demand we be attracted to it all, when most of us know it's not only a factor but a driving force.

Most lesbians aren't into dick or vagina.

Most lesbians don't like vagina?

This is the weirdest fucking thread, it's like I stumbled into a group of homeschooled heteros who have never seen any movie rated higher than PG in their lives.

I'll never stop saying it. This is what happens when a tomboy lesbian with deep seeded hatred for men ignores a much needed therapy and decides to get even with men by fabricating a pseudo-scientific ideology of gender. If there's a hell which I'm sure there isn't, Judith Butler, the criminal mind behind this nonsense should burn in there forever.

OH NOES, HARRY POTTER!

Maybe Rawling should post some tik tok video doing that vagina dance, because, tik tok is basically idiocy.

Like the OP, and all his weirdly specific misogyny--how every single woman or slightly feminine thing is some kind of poison, but you know, he's totally on J.K. Rowling's side.

He would have accused her of preaching witchcraft to children before, but these are Trump times, and desperate bigots need desperate measures.

The Trans Troll isn't pro trans at all, as you can see from other threads he refused to acknowledge the existence of trans men who have vaginas and have perioids.

He expresses his total revulsion at vaginas.

The Trains Troll isn't pro trans, he just wants to see the erasure of women as a class.

He is a misogynist.

[quote]He expresses his total revulsion at vaginas. He is a misogynist.

This is a gay board. Accusing a gay man who doesn't like vag of being a 'misogynist' is homophobia.

"This is a gay board. Accusing a gay man who doesn't like vag of being a 'misogynist' is homophobia."

No it isn't. Unless you're joking, in which case what you said was kind of funny.

But seriously, you don't get to act like a shitheel and pretend that's intrinsic to homosexuality unless you are homophobic yourself. Which of course you are, because you're not fooling anyone.

But damn, you think so highly of yourself it's on a mental illness level.

Not that that's an acceptable excuse for your behavior.

I'm officially done with other people's crazy on the internet.

Not sure what I'm going to do next.

Macrame? I mean, no. But like a craft thing?

Maybe I should make another collage. That last one came out really good.

Saying gay men who repeatedly, cruelly discusses how revolting he feels vaginas are, may well be a misogynist, but a man acknowledging he's not into them or is turned off by them isn't homophobic. Personally I don't find any genitals inherently attractive. That's what convinces me it's an attraction we're born with.

Gay men are free to feel however they want about vaginas.

Further proof it's lesbians, not trans women, who are most upset about gay men being into dick exclusively.

[quote]Saying gay men who repeatedly, cruelly discusses how revolting he feels vaginas are, may well be a misogynist, but a man acknowledging he's not into them or is turned off by them isn't homophobic. Personally I don't find any genitals inherently attractive. That's what convinces me it's an attraction we're born with.

I agree. Except this troll thinks lesbians are anti trans if they don't want to suck a dick.

He doesn't extend his genital preference to gay men and lesbians, just gay men, because he hates women.

Because if you accept that lesbians aren't inherently attracted to trans women, then it dilutes the trans women are women message.

He hates vaginas, he hates people with vaginas and those sexually attracted to people with vaginas. A classic misogynist.

R156, let me put it clearer for you: I would wager that 99% of gays agree with Rowling that same-sex attraction is what makes them gay, not same-gender attraction. Are you attracted to your gender identity or your sex? If you think being attracted to your gender identity is what makes you gay then that means you are potentially attracted to people of the opposite sex.

It's not trans women who are policing gay men's attitudes to vaginas on this thread.

It's radfems!

Of course!

R170, you accept that gay men aren't attracted to people with vaginas, do you accept that lesbians aren't attracted to people with penises?

R170, do you accept it's not remotely transphobic if a straight man doesn't want to sleep with a transwoman with a penis?

Gay men are not attracted to vaginas.

Yes, we've established that. Now answer for lesbians and straight men regarding attraction to people with penises.

....

I'll ask again.

Do you agree lesbians and male heterosexuals are within their rights to not find people with vaginas attractive, just as you agree it's not transphobic for gay men to not be attracted to trans men with a vagina?

Gay men are born gay. Our attraction to penises is biological.

Lesbians often chose to lesbians. See 'political lesbians'.

R168 Well if he has a double standard than is a troll. I thought it was about 'attracted to sex vs. gender' discussion.

Gay men are gay because they love men.

Lesbians are lesbians because they hate men.

I have seen trans activists say straight guys have to be attracted to trans women or else they're anti trans bigots. They make no allowance for the complexity of attraction or the all the unknowns. They just insist on making rules for non trans people. But in my experience not all trans are like this.

Who the hell cares

Self-Righteous, Cancel Culture Book Burners are just as bad as Self-Righteous, Cancel Culture Vegans

JK and JR (Joe Rogan) may make a dandy couple. But does JK like any dick?

[quote]I have seen trans activists say straight guys have to be attracted to trans women or else they're anti trans bigots.

Sounds like you are well-traveled, even interviewing transgenders about their ultimatums to straight guys.

If you interview straight guys, they may say they don't give a shit. Most gay guys may say the same.

But where's the self-proclaimed expert that trolls saying trans are just criminal, psychotic men in dresses and wigs chasing after pussy, particularly from bulldykes?

The contradicts are abundant.

.

From the above tweet from a mentally ill woman larping as a gay man:

“ GAY MEN LOVE PUSSY LESBIANS LOVE DICK GET OVER IT”

Gay me love dick. Lesbians live dick. Get over it.

These people really need to grow the fuck up.

Wait....didn't Nazis burn books?

[quote] Saying gay men who repeatedly, cruelly discusses how revolting he feels vaginas are

Gay men discussing how we feel about vaginas is now cruel.

R123 "have the stars of Harry Potter issued a statement condemning book burning and death threats yet?"

Nailed it.

R123 for the win.

[quote] Wait....didn't Nazis burn books?

Yes, they did. But wait, there's more!

You like?

[quote]r141 Why didn't you just throw them in the trash?! It's what I did.

My trash bin wasn't that big. And I'd already made enough trips carrying heavy boxes across the lawn that week.

Burning books isn't a regular activity for me - I'm just saying I've done it. I will say my dinner guests that night were RATHER taken aback when they saw what was in the fireplace.

Thank you, R140. That post should just be pinned to the top of the thread.

A fairly rational piece about the pantomime from The Observer.

Yawn.

Everything is misogyny.

R196 Not everything, but in this case there's a clear misogyny.

J K Rowling is very far from being the antichrist that some activist proclaim on twitter. Overreaction doesn't help you to gain new followers

It is whenever you're involved hun.

Misogony and homophobia, especially internalised, are very much at the heart of the trans ideology, r196.

Radfems can’t argue without the word misogyny.

The truth is very simple, they can't cancel her and that makes them very angry.

Some of the thing she said are controversial, but most thing she said are pretty obvious.

Instead of giving good arguments, they decided she is worst than a nazi but making noise on twitter every 15 days didn't made her any harm.

That kind of storm on a tea pot only works when you can make the woman fire and damage her living, but that it's impossible in this case.

And the truth is a huge part of the population couldn't care less about the whole debate.

Trans people should learn they are not going to win anything bullying actress for playing trans roles, or demanding trans athletes to compete against cis women, or wanting awards to cancel the male and female cathegories.

The world can and should respect you, but they are not going to change enterely to adapt to you

[quote] The truth is very simple, they can't cancel her and that makes them very angry.

Yes.

She’s too rich for that.

But also a victim.

Muhsoggynee

R202 Of course she is a victim, she is the one receiving death threats

She is simultaneously defying all the haters.

Yet also a helpless victim.

Rad fems are trying to do logic again but suffering from womanbrain.

TERFs are yapping on the Internet far, far more than trans. What they do is PROJECT, just like their idol Trump. Being a MAGA-koot is not a virtue. JK, DeVos, The Huckster, Pirro, it's the same agenda.

Homophobic? What terfs do to gay men. Gay men do have penises.

Misogyny? What terfs claims about ALL men that don't fawn at their hateful delusions and behavior. For them, it's Joe Rogan, not Joe Biden.

Women (most) that reject their silly cult? Terfs fear the most.

R204 Yes, she is defending herself and that doesn't change the fact that she is the one receiving the death threats

R205 Be serious, are you comparing Rowling with DeVos? Because that's the most stupid thing i read in a good while

JK Rowling homophobic?

Remember when she expressed her delight at same sex marriage being legalised in Ireland and got into a fight on Twitter with the Westboro Baptist Church?

Remember when she criticised the vile homophobe Brian Sewter, the business man who campaigned to keep the anti gay Section 28 law in Scotland? Remember when the Scottish Nationalist Party were bankrolled by Sewter and nominated him for a knighthood, so he's now Sir Brian Souter?

And what's this? Oh it's Pink News reporting on JK Rowling challenging homophobia.

Go dilate R205.

No surprise. Soon they will start burning people.

Thanks r194. I think the crucial point is to distinguish between trans people's right to live their lives as they wish and the logical consequences of gender identity theory.

Haha, good one r209. That's from 2014 of course, before the Pink News had been fully taken over by the trans cult (although it was still pretty bad, even then).

[quote] although it was still pretty bad, even then).

Why? What was wrong with it then?

I’ll give her credit for anything she’s done for gay men. But, like most of the straight British women who now make up the movement, I suspect she was libfem up until a few years ago.

I bet she might even have been pro-trans back in 2014.

My suspicion is her views on gay men have changed.

People are idiots. Enjoy the books and if you like embrace chicks with dicks.

I suspect PinkNews were bad prior to 2014 because they stood up for gay men.

Radfems hate that.

There are no ‘chicks with dicks’.

Only dudes with boobs.

R213 That happened to a good bunch of gay sites. Now it's all trans all the time.

Nothing wrong with covering trans issues but it's pretty obvious that now they are trans sites and not gay ones

R215 There's absolutely no proof of that.

The problem is that if you don't agree with everything some trans activist say you become automatically transphobic, and i have a really hard time to accept that trans women competing in female sports is fair

I just know she's going to say something homophobic at some point.

And all the women on this site will rush to her defense.

Poor R221, It really hurts, doesn't it, that you can't find some sort of homophobic quote from JKR, you so desperately want to fit her into a little black box.

You're so desperate to do this that your claiming she'll do so.

Good example, by the way, of the black and white/splitting that goes with some personality disorders. And, of course, the misogyny (your demonization of any kind of feminism) is also revealing.

I'd suggest finding a good therapist, but you'd actually want to have to be a healthier person. I don't think you want to be. It's just easier to blame all your issues on someone else--probably biological women.

A Terfie sucking the cock of a shemale is so hot!

Rowling started this controversy at the beginning of Pride month. So clearly she doesn't give a shit about gay people.

She's manufacturing her own controversy to keep her name in the media and sell her book. Her rantings got some press in the beginning but everyone has moved on, so she goes on Twitter and pulls stunts every few weeks. No one cares enough to burn her books. That reeks of a desperate PR stunt. Maybe a couple of places stopped carrying them, but it's a free world. Deal with it. Is she going to threaten to sue everyone who disagree with her?

Give it a couple of months and let her keep running her mouth. She will make herself a relic of the Trump era's assault on anyone who isn't straight and white. She can take her place alongside the other obnoxious white women who destroyed themselves by flaunting their privilege.

Ignore her.

She's not running her mouth though. The trans cult are like a dog with a bone and cant let JK's essay just be. She published a thoughtful essay outlining her concerns and now she's in their crosshairs. She published ONE piece and you're making it sound like poking the trans is her new hobby. FOH, with that hysteria.

I’m pretty sure she is homophobic — the pseudonym, her tweet implying gayness is environmental, her opposition to a bill that banned gay conversion therapy, her choosing Pride month.

But she’s soon going to say something like gay men do not belong around children and women here will claim she means trans but also has a point.

Like so many trans cultists r224 is so delusional that he thinks Rowling needs to create controversy to keep her name in the limelight to sell more books, when she deliberately chose to publish the Cormoran Strike books under a pseudonym so that her fame wouldn't overshadow the actual content of the books.

June belongs to everyone r224, it's not as though the whole world has to stop because someone designated it "pride month". In any case, she was responding to things that were happening at the time and sticking up for those of us who love our own sex.

Yadayada, white woman, yadayada, white privilege. Not everyone's American, so stop trying to impose your American neuroses about "white people" on the rest of the world.

Troubled Blood is getting brilliant reviews from everyone who's actually read it and is already a best-seller, despite not even having been published for a week yet.

[quote] June belongs to everyone [R224], it's not as though the whole world has to stop because someone designated it "pride month".

This is homophobia.

It's so obvious the trans are just burning these books to keep warm while they sleep outdoors.

Rowling is worried about teens dying like this, that's why she's speaking out. How does a 16 year old die of a cardiac arrest? Couldn't be anything to do with the "hormone therapy" he was on, could it? At least this one was aware the "therapy" would make him infertile. There should have been an inquest into this kid's death.

------------------------------------------------ Mother of dead transgender girl vows to honour baby pledge

A mother has spoken of her determination to fight through the courts to ensure that her transgender daughter can posthumously become a parent.

Ellie Anderson, 16, died suddenly in Stirling after a cardiac arrest. She had her sperm frozen when she was 14, before she started hormone therapy, in the hope she could eventually have her own biological children.

Her mother, Louise, wants to honour her wishes, using Ellie’s sperm, an egg donor and surrogate. Ms Anderson has been campaigning since a fertility clinic informed her they would have to destroy her sample in line with guidelines.

If Ellie had been in a relationship, her partner would have had the right to ask for her sperm to be retained. That right cannot be transferred to her mother without a ruling from the highest civil court in Scotland.

Ms Anderson, 45, plans to launch a legal fight to save the samples. She told The Mail on Sunday: “I’m not doing this because I’m clinging on to a memory. I’m doing this because Ellie asked me to and I made a promise I’m determined to honour. One of her greatest wishes was to become a mother.”

Ellie had been saving for a surrogate. Ms Anderson added: “Ellie made me promise if anything happened to her I would make sure her children were born. She wanted a boy and a girl and we had even discussed their names.”

Virgil Crawford, her solicitor, is consulting a QC with a view to seeking an “action for declarator” at the Court of Session which would allow Ms Anderson to gain ownership of her child’s sample, which is being stored until the case is resolved. If unsuccessful they intend to appeal to the Supreme Court.

A spokesman for NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which runs the clinic, expressed sympathy but said: “The storage of gametes [sperm] is managed in line with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act and complies with the consents provided by the donors.”

That's a very sad story.

Only girls should be transed, not boys.

It can only be burned if it's purchased. Who would purchase her alone?

She's a great story-teller, yet her writing and conveyance are tedious to normal readers, those who had reading habits beforehand.

She's a $trong, brave woman who don't give a fuck for what these anti-science homophobic misogynistic cunts say.

And probably DLers who are against her def are disgusting tranny chasers.

Keep going my queen, the anger of these homophobic lunatics of are my joy.

#DroptheT #SexnotGender

Ewwww. A blackened-out TERF thread and TERFs think volume and repetitive hate-mongering are convincing? Even Boris found them intolerable.

Book burning? Vat a great way to get your point across. Nothing fascist about that at all!

So the mother is the link at R230 wants to be able to do to her grandkids what she did to her kid - terrifying.

Yeah. But it'll somehow be men's fault. Somehow.

If you want to cite credible sources, Rupert Murdoch (or similar) tabloids from the UK are not it.

Troubled Blood is un-put-downable.

And has no trans characters in it, evil or otherwise.

It's interesting how many anti-trans people are only recent converts to the cause.

I bet JK was nominally pro-trans back in 2014.

Maybe because most of them are not really antitrans at all, they simply not agree with everything trans actists say, and that now makes you automatically antitrans.

A single mention of biology and you receive death threats and be call a bigot

R241 is right. In that long statement Rowling made that got the trans community's backs up in the first place, she was very careful to say that she has no problem with trans people and wants them to live their lives and call themselves whatever they want and just be happy.

She made it clear what she was objecting to was radical trans activism. As I recall, the particular thing that was concerning her at the time was pending legislation that would allow men to go into women's toilets because they said they identified as women: no other evidence of trans status needed. That raises safety concerns for the average woman, never mind one who writes about rape and murder.

Then people started telling her what to think and what a woman really is, and of course she arced up. You'd expect any sensible woman to arc up if comments like that were made to her in a corporate meeting or around a Board table (as they so often are, albeit a bit more subtly), so why not when they're made by trans activists?

Being opposed to trans women accessing bathrooms is transphobic.

Just like being opposed to gay marriage is homophobic.

"Trans women" are not "any man who claims he identifies as female", R243.

Yes, it is.

And there, your Honour, is the problem.

MTFs will argue the livelong day that it is at worst unsafe and at best uncomfortable for them to use male toilets, but women don't get to argue the reverse, even when the guy shows no evidence of being trans but his say-so.

Correct, R246.

But ciswomen hate when they can't pretend to be victims.

Yup. You can tell that nobody really thinks male-to-female transgender people are truly women, because they still get treated like men.

Yes, that's also true, R248.

Trans women still suffer from oppression as men.

"Ciswomen" don't pretend to be victims of men, R247, they are. Look at the domestic violence statistics, and the proportion of women sexually assaulted before they turn 21. If you come back at me with similar statistics for trans women, I will say (a) I know, and (b) so why do you have a right to feel victimized about it, but when women do they are playing the victim card?

R248, they get treated as men because they behave like men. Being able to walk in heels is not behaving like a woman. The whole tone of this argument from the MTF side is, "I am actually better at this than you, and I am also more aware about your failings than you are." Guess who says that to us every day of our lives? Hint: It ain't women.

You will feel a lot less oppressed if you just live your life as you, whoever that is, and allow other people, whoever they are, to relate to you naturally instead of according to a set of precepts that they can never be good enough for.

For Rowling, it's not really about toilets, it's also about reforms to the Gender Recognition Act in the UK that proposed legislating for gender self-identification. Thankfully, that appears to have been dropped now, at least in England and Wales. The Scottish government is allegedly going to go ahead with it, but they are waiting until after the May elections, because they know they will lose tons of votes if they try to push it through now.

Rowling's other concern is the trend for transitioning among young people, especially the huge explosion in the past decade of young women (really butch lesbians) being shoved on the conveyer belt of transitioning by the ideologically-motivated "specialists" in youth transitioning in the UK. It's already been exposed that the Tavistock youth gender clinic in London has been transitioning young gay people with homophobic parents as a form of gay conversion therapy (not unlike how the state forcibly transitions gay people in Iran).

Rowling also wants it to be appreciated that biological sex is a real lived experience for most of humanity, however much the trans might rail against this fact.

Of course the trans cult knows that her arguments are more nuanced than simply transphobia, hence why they try to shout her down and destroy her rather than address anything she's saying.

[quote] The whole tone of this argument from the MTF side is, "I am actually better at this than you, and I am also more aware about your failings than you are." Guess who says that to us every day of our lives? Hint: It ain't women.

Guess you know different women from me.

Fish on this website have told me that all gay men secretly want to be women.

You want tabloid UK stuff? OK.

THIS TRANS WOMAN WANTS TO WIDEN THE BANDWIDTH OF GENDER BY KEEPING HER BEARD

Most women - biological or trans - would not want to be followed into the toilet by this 6 ft 3 individual.

I genuinely believe that most people acknowledge that transgender people exist, they support their rights against discrimination, yet there is a spectrum between someone who makes a huge amount of effort to blend in, a Chaz or Caitlyn, and a man in a dress like this.

When I see Trans organisations complaining about public health campaigns using the term MEN and BOYS for prostate and testicular cancer, to balance menstruators and "anyone with a cervix" then I'll accept they're not fundamentally misogynists.

That's the end of result of believing 'gender is a social construct'.

That's crazy.

But rad fems can't call it out.

Gotta say the OP’s pic JK has a dominatrix vibe. The red hair and heavy makeup suits her.

R254 Whoa, that person looks like Rasputin. I’d be creeped out if he followed me into any bathroom, men’s or women’s.

Hmmm, how about this woman?

Lovely stories

FtM enlightenment.

Barbie: The Terf Slayer. The Chosen One.

She will stand alone if need be.

R255 Is a mentally ill troll who has posted almost 60 times in this thread alone (you can check this by blocking him, going to "Ignored" and ctrl + f "J.K."). I'm gonna say that again: this nutcase is responsible for almost 25% of all the posts in this thread, or 1 in every 4.

Checking his posting history will show you that he is nothing but a deranged homophobic tranny troll with serious mommy issues. He shows up in every single thread that is even remotely related to trans and does everything in his power to shut down criticism.

Some gems from his posting history:

- Says that Bruce Jenner looks better than actual women

- Derailed a thread about a Moroccan tranny responsible for the suicides of multiple gay men

- Spends his entire time screeching about women (specially lesbians) and calling them "TERFs", "fish", "dykes", etc

- Believes all women are narcissists

- Thinks little gay boys should be doing drag

- Claims that he came here "for Lucille Ball discussions", yet his posting history shows that he's just a pathetic troll

Reminder to FF and block the deranged tranny troll. This is what transactivism does to your brain, kids.

The troll is a misogynistic mens rights activist (probably a sex starved gincel too) but he doesn't have any interest in advancing what he considers trans rights, he just wants women's rights eradicated.

His thoughts on transgender men are clear - he's repulsed by them and won't acknowledge they exist. See his posts about the transgender man competing to me Mr Gay England.

He despises people with women and anyone with a vagina. He's a penile supremacist.

No one has yet posted a TikTok video of one of these alleged Book Burnings.

I suspect it's all a beat-up or 'fake news'.

R263 There is no doubt he despises women, that much is clear. The fact that he exclusively targets trans threads (in an effort to shift discussion), has written posts like "Ciswomen make me laugh", goes around calling women "fish", and says that Bruce/Caitlyn looks better than the female Kardashians makes me think that he is either a middle-aged tranny or a GAMP (gynandromorphophilia, aka a man with a tranny fetish).

In any case, he needs to be banned. He's been doing this for months and it's pathetic.

My theory is he's a 50something gay man who has a deeply unhealthy relationship with his mother, possibly she resented him because she was left with significant health issues after her pregnancy. And now she's elderly and relies on his support his anger is being redirected at women who want to protect their own rights.

He's spent his life working with and around women, resenting their relatively drama free lives and the ease with which they develop friendships and the joy and frustration their kids bring them. His own efforts to find himself a partner ended up with him sat at the bar getting drunk until he's removed by security, hissing at the men who rejected his drunken advances. He stopped going to bars several years ago and gets drunk at home every night, probably on those little cans of gin and tonic, which he doesn't even bother pouring into a glass with ice and lemon.

He probably has a Grindr profile with someone else's photos to lure men in and get their nudes. Probably got profiles on straight apps too pretending to be one of the women he despises.

A very, very sad pathetic man who really needs some counselling to deal with his misogyny issues.

R264, it was based entirely on Jedward making a joke on Twitter about sitting by a cozy fire made from JKR books. It never really happened, just like all the other things these people claim to make themselves the ultimate victims.

[quote]Fish on this website have told me that all gay men secretly want to be women.

In a weird irony, the only women I have heard that from recently have been the anti-trans trolls.

We used to get a lot of that "gays want to be women" stuff but it was from a different kind of troll, the shit-stirrers and the rightwingers.

[quote]they simply not agree with everything trans actists say...A single mention of biology and you receive death threats and be call a bigot

How would you know what anybody called you? You can barely speak English.

[quote]June belongs to everyone [[R224]], it's not as though the whole world has to stop because someone designated it "pride month".

This is just more of the "there's no such thing as a gay community" anti-trans propaganda these rightwing assholes are trying to spread everywhere. They hate gays.

They're the exact same people who say "where's the White History Month?" and complain about any minority of any type getting a job, because it's surely due to "quotas" and not talent.

R270, do gay men have pussies?

R270, do gay men have pussies?

R269 Oh dear, insults are easy to understand. And i barely speak english because i'm not english, or american.

If my bad english it's all you have to say about my post it's very clear that you don't have arguments

From NYT back in March.

I fucking love this woman. She knows how to provoke these homophobic lunatics.

The radfems have been particularly homophobic on Twitter today.

Going after ‘PenisNews’.

R276 PInknews is pathetic for a good while, it's nothing new. It's been a while but that site is not a gay site anymore

I guess it’s hard to center gay men when you’re attacked for covering penises.

The Pink Trans News recently reported that trans people are up to six ties more likely to be autistic, but they don't make the connection as to what that says about the concept of being trans.

------------------------------------------

Transgender and gender-diverse people have higher rates of autism than cisgender people, a landmark study has confirmed.

The research, published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature Communications, also found that trans people are more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia, ADHD, bipolar disorder, depression, learning difficulties or OCD than cis people.

The authors, led by Varun Warrier from Cambridge University’s Autism Research Centre, used five large existing datasets to closely examine whether people who have autism are more likely to be trans, and vice versa — something that’s been posited by previous research, but only by studies using small sample sizes.

Their findings, the authors concluded, show that “transgender and gender-diverse individuals have elevated rates of autism diagnosis, related neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions, and autistic traits compared to cisgender individuals”.

Why do they think Penis News is funny?

That makes it a war crime. Disabled people are being targeted for this by being too trusting of dishonest people.

R270, it's funny that you say I hate gays, considering I am gay. The gay haters are the trans cultists such as yourself, who have taken over Pride by fabricating complete falsehoods about it, such as the huge, outrageous lie that transwomen of colour started the Stonewall riots. Pride has been turned into a means of coercion of gay people in recent years to make us accept the superiority of trans over us and to force us all to fight for things we don't believe in, such as giving hormone blockers to 14 year olds or letting men participate in women's sports or to celebrate teenage girls having double mastectomies of their completely healthy breasts. In any case I'm apparently banned from the London Pride march because, as a lesbian, I don't believe that lesbians have penises - and "lesbians" with penises are given pride of place London Pride.

And what a stupid thing to say, that because it's June and Pride Month in the US, someone in the UK is not permitted to say that only women menstruate or that if there is no such thing biological sex then there is no such thing as same-sex attraction.

JK Rowling and those of us who believe in sex not gender identity are the ones who support gay rights - we demand the right to love our own sex, not our own "gender identity", which is a bullshit fake thing anyway.

[quote]considering I am gay.

[quote]as a lesbian

Isn't it amazing that when it comes to discussing biological females, the owner of Pink News insists on terms like menstruator, person with a cervix and pregnant person.

Yet when he and his husband need a biological female to provide them with a surrogacy service so they can become parents he is a very adamant: he need a WOMAN. Not a person with internal reproductive organs as opposed to external reproductive organs, not someone with internal gonads, not a womxn, a WOMAN.

Why doesn't Cohen think men or non binary people can act as surrogate?

It's almost as if JK Rowling was right all along.

They hired a menstruater.

We have no idea how it identifies.

In the hate cult, Menstruaters are the younger fat ones with poor hygiene, fishy smelling, unwashed hair, and floppy clothes. The menopausers are the predominant numbers, not well-groomed and rancid odor.

Terfs won't work in UK. They could go and do housecleaning. They want men to pay for their tabloids, then gossip and blame their woes on trans-women.

Poor Pink News, it's hate campaign against Rowling hasn't worked.

[quote]Nielsen BookScan reveal that Troubled Blood has hit the No 1 spot in the UK’s book charts, selling 64,633 copies in the five days to 19 September. According to the Bookseller, this is “by far” the biggest single-week sale for any Galbraith title, almost double the first-week sales of the novel’s predecessor, Lethal White.

But I thought she was a cancelled victim?

Hey Misogynist Troll, are you a fan of Adrian Harrop, the creepy British doctor?

After the UK government announced yesterday it wouldn't fundamentally reform the process it takes trans people to change their legal status, Dr Harrop and other men's rights activists started talking about the rights of men to pay surrogates. Dr Harrop had this to say:

[quote]in a free and liberal society, consenting adults who are in possession of a uterus ought to have the right to do with them as they please, on the basis of bodily autonomy. this ought to include the right to market their reproductive capabilities, including being a paid surrogate.

R289 She simply refused to be cancelled. It seems you can't cancel everybody.

The curious thing is this time cancellation had the effect to give her publicity, this novel sold the double than the last one on the first week

Oh, and now the homophobia becomes more overt...

Yes, gay men have a right to surrogacy.

[quote] She simply refused to be cancelled.

But she — and her rad fem supporters — still claim she’s a victim.

R293 I'm totally tired of the rad fem stupidity. She said some dubious things, some trans activists think she is the anticrhist and wanted to cancel her but they couldn't.

And no, not everyone (not even close) who thinks all this cancel J K Rowling is a bit too much is a radical feminist.

In fact this type of overreaction has consecuences. Most people had a very bad reaction to the RIPJKRowling hashtag-

Right now it seems that if you don't agree with everything that some trans activists say you are transphobic and that's simply not true

The point is that they pretend she’s a victim when in reality she can isn’t.

She uses her wealth to sue gay men who disagree with her.

The rad fem thing is about how she has emboldened them as — as can be seen upthread with surrogacy — they’re going to be coming for gay men next.

R295 She used her money to sue a man who defamed her. Good for her.

R288 Those people are clearly NOT on the brave and stunning side of history.

THIS, however, is what the brave and stunning side of history looks like.

R294 Ignore him. He is our resident lunatic transactivist troll (mentioned here R262).

"Yes, gay men have a right to surrogacy."

No one, straight or gay, has the "right" to be a parent, the "right" to use another human being as their breeder, or the "right" to buy an infant. Commercial surrogacy should be outlawed worldwide. It's an ongoing tragedy for Third-World women and children.

There are plenty of available children to adopt in this world.

Just because the attempt to cancel JK Rowling failed, doesn't mean the attempt wasn't made. Actually, multiple attempts have been made to cancel her.

It is funny to see the Trans Twitter mob try to pretend that they haven't been as horrible as they have been.

What JKR did took guts and a big bank account. She didn't have to take a stand here, but she did, so kudos to her. Think I may buy her book--though, I wish it were a lot less than 900 pages.

Gay men’s right to surrogacy is not up for debate.

The question isn't surrogacy, the question is paying for it and the possible exploitation of the women involved. There are arguments on both sides.

No, surrogacy is gay rights.

It is not up for discussion.

Too bad, toots, it's up for discussion. Some countries allow it, some don't.

Yes, and trans women in ‘women’s spaces’ is allowed in places — and we’re going to win!

Just so you homophobic fish get what you deserve.

Surrogacy is much more than the buyer's rights. The rights of the surrogate mother AND PRIMARILY THE CHILD come before those who want to parent the child. I'm not sure how I come out in the end on this issue but it is very complicated.

Unless the surrogate wants to do it.

Then she’s a handmaid, right?

Ok, this thread isn't about surrogacy, which is a complicated issue and is not limited to gay people. Ben Cohen seeking a surrogate on Twitter, however, is yet more evidence of his hypocrisy towards women - biology does matter.

Nah, you’re a dyke, R308. You started it. R290 started it specifically, but you signed up for all this. We knew they wouldn’t stop at trans women.

Remember, in the world of misogynists there's no such thing as a biological woman, until men decided they need something from a biological woman.

Then. and only then, will misogynists pretend to care about the rights of biological women.

We can all look forward to Pink News promoting the creating of an LGBTQIANBNHNC +++ not for profit surrogacy service where trans men and non binary people offer their functioning wombs out to trans women and cis men. They can call it Under Their Eye: Surrogacy for Queers. Maybe Jameela Jamil will donate use of their womb.

The best we can hope for is violent resistance on the part of gay men from the fish like R310 who try to take away our rights.

R310’s cunt needs some battery acid.

[quote]The best we can hope for is violent resistance on the part of gay men from the fish like [R310] who try to take away our rights. [R310]’s cunt needs some battery acid.

You'll be incredibly disappointed to learn I have a fully functioning penis and testicles, because I'm a gay man.

But why doesn't it surprise me a misogynist like you wants to wants to mutilate women's vaginas and cause women severe physical pain?

You really hate vaginas so much you fantasise about sexual violence.

Are you one of the Mens Rights Activists who defends female genital mutilation on the grounds of "respecting cultural history"?

Why, yes, I am a gay men’s right activist.

I support gay men having rights.

R311 continues to be an excellent example of a personality disorder in action. It hates women, so it projects its irrational hatred of women onto them and creates "TERFS" and gives the same sort of irrational hatred that R311 posesses, but in reverse. It doesn't really see other people, per se, it's all about R311's needs.

And, if there's anyone who should never be allowed to parent a kid it's R311--it's fucking nuts. But it probably also had a toxic mother--NPD or BPD--thus, its irrational hatred of women in general.

Terfology is the study of TERFs. A Terfologist looks at the cult of hate by menstruaters and post-menstruaters who have acidic attitudes toward penises. For TERFs, penises are PENI (Publc Enemy Number 1).. They are MAGA and Brexit off-shoots, ironically dedicated to their idol, Vladimir.

Amazingly, someone used the term ‘penile supremacist’ unironically in a gay board.

R263

[quote] He's a penile supremacist.

There’s nothing like a big dick.

Dick haters have no entitlement to be bigots.

𝐉.𝐊. 𝐑𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐁𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐥 𝐂𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞

Rowling's new thriller takes No 1 spot amid transphobia row

Troubled Blood, written as Robert Galbraith, has faced criticism for including a killer who dresses in women’s clothes, but has recorded strong first-week sales

The Trans troll isn't even in favour of Trans people having more rights - he's completely opposed to trans men with vaginas being classed as men. He doesn't believe TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS.

He just wants women to lose their sex based rights.

It took the rad fems all of two seconds after they got what they wanted from the British government to jump on this thread and start hating on a gay man and surrogacy.

I think it should be mandatory for every prison, sport, and bathroom to have a big beautiful dick in it.

They need to work on their homophobia.

Yes, penises are supreme.

Penis Ross and The Supremes

[quote]It took the rad fems all of two seconds after they got what they wanted from the British government to jump on this thread and start hating on a gay man and surrogacy.

It was of course two gay men - Ben Cohen and Dr Adrian Harrop - who raised the issue of their rights to surrogacy services immediately as the government announced it wouldn't reform the Gender Recognition Act, and focus on making the transition process cheaper and more accessible, and improving health services for trans people.

They lost their campaign to remove sex as a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, now they want to make it lawful for men to enter into financial contracts with "individuals with a uterus" aka WOMEN.

[quote] It was of course two gay men - Ben Cohen and Dr Adrian Harrop - who raised the issue of their rights to surrogacy services

Yes, that’s gay rights activism.

[quote]Also, just for true clarity, in case anyone here is wondering what I personally think of all of this bullshit “fuss”, here it is:

LOL @ R51. You must be new. WTF do you imagine anyone here is on the edge of their seat wondering what YOU think? Here's a fun fact that will probably shock you. Your post is too long and no one read it.

^R51 = R78 (the long, boring lecture)

There’s nowhere for rad fems to go now but to straight up homophobia.

We’ll probably even overtake trans women as enemy no. #1.

R142, if it isn't 99% that's only because many are uneducated about there true nature of biological sex. They are also unaware of how mentally ill most trans truly are. It's body dysmorphia, nothing more. Like when people want to amputate their own limbs (yes, it's a thing) because in their hearts they "feel" like a paraplegic.

R297 The levels of delusion are very high there.

The "if you don't want to fuck me you are transphobic" is one of the most ridiculous things i read in a while.

And they should be careful, because without gay support their movement has zero chances of gettin anywhere

This is way beside the point, but I just love her makeup in the photo in the original post.

[quote]Burning books isn't a regular activity for me - I'm just saying I've done it. I will say my dinner guests that night were RATHER taken aback when they saw what was in the fireplace.

LOL, you've never had any dinner guests....except imaginary ones.

[quote]Like when people want to amputate their own limbs (yes, it's a thing) because in their hearts they "feel" like a paraplegic.

Yes. They tend to be women.

And it's crazy.

But rad fems don't care about craziness. Just about how things work for them.

^missing the point entirely. Trans is the exact same illness.

Sure.

But why don't all the science-n-facts dykes criticize that then?

Because they don't care about reality, just their own position.

^They do, dimwit. And it is extremely rare (not a growing hysteria). No one in the medical community entertains their crazy (all refuse to do the amputations). AND..... no one is trying to cut off the limbs of children.

Oh those crazy dykes with their "science-n-facts".

[quote] ^They do, dimwit.

No, they don't. They're more interested in drag queen story hour and gay men having children than in any of that.

[quote]Oh those crazy dykes with their "science-n-facts".

Well, some of them anyway.

Just don't bring up the facts about abusive lesbian relationships.

Those statistics are 'hate'.

Why would they be interested in it? Other than to illustrate, rather perfectly, that you are not in fact a woman.....you are just crazy. It really is that simple.

[quote]They're more interested in drag queen story hour and gay men having children

Uh, what dykes are concerned about these things?

[quote]Uh, what dykes are concerned about these things?

The ones a few posts above you.

Caitlyn new Netflix star for The Cabin while JK writes nasty.

Right r334, no doctor is amputating healthy limbs, which makes the question as to why doctors are amputating the healthy breasts and penises of adolescents even more of an urgent question.

Because women think it's cute to have a trans kid!

[quote]doctors are amputating the healthy breasts and penises of adolescents even more of an urgent question.

Cite your source(s) from a respected medical journal, not a UK Murdoch tabloid.

Name a licensed U.S. surgeon and hospital who are performing adolescent transgender surgeries with source. Surgeries on hermaphrodites or unique, troublesome, unrelated medical conditions need to be excluded.

Ok, I'm confused.

A transgender woman called Laurel Hubbard was due to compete at the Olympics in the women's category because she is a legally a woman, despite being physically male

A transgender non binary person called Quinn is still playing for the Canadian Women's football team, despite not identifying as a woman.

From the article:

[quote]The 25-year-old remains eligible to compete in women's sport despite identifying as transgender because gender identity differs from a person's sex - their physical biology.

So there are now 2 categories of elite sport. Men, and non men.

And to think those silly women worried about being erased as a class!

[quote]So there are now 2 categories of elite sport. Men, and non men.

No, there are the serious categories which are non-gendered and women's categories.

[quote]And to think those silly women worried about being erased as a class!

So erased! Bitch, when is this erasing happening? Cos I can't wait for you to shut up.

R345 Well, i doubt nobody will have a problem with trans men competing in men's sports. Of course they can't compete no matter how talented they are becuase you know, biology is a bitch

Sports have nothing to do with talent.

It’s all genetics.

R348 No dear, you are not a great tennis player, gymnast or diver just for genetics.

Okay. Then make them gender free!

I don’t care about sports BTW. They were invented to oppress gay men.

[quote] They were invented to oppress gay men

No they were invented to sell beer and tires.

You can't make sports gender free because biology is very clear and women and men have not the same strength.

There are a lot of different types of sports and fortunately not all gays have the same tastes

[quote]They were invented to oppress gay men

[quote]No they were invented to sell beer and tires.

No, they were invented to sublimate the warring impulses of straight men.

R227, I think R224 has posted a number of other misogynistic and inaccurate comments about Rowling. I had blocked him before I even opened this thread. Someone is stuck in a rut.

R344 Jazz/Jaron Jennings had his "gender confirmation surgery" (aka turning his chemically-stunted micropenis into a surgical wound that will need to be dilated for the rest of his life) at age SEVENTEEN in New York City at Mount Sinai Beth Israel in front of TLC cameras.

Try again.

R344 And here's another seventeen-year-old.

So yeah, you're wrong.

JK is just mad because she's thirsting to lick front hole 💋

She needs to keep it moving because her obsession is so tiresome. She could never 😔

The word is vagina, R357, you wretched misogynist. VA GI NA. VEE AY GEE EYE EN AY. Say it.

So much news out of the UK today. Mermaids is furiously backpedaling on "born in the wrong body" and Stonewall is getting ratio-ed to hell on every post, because gender ideology has been purged from schools there, in favor of supporting gender-nonconforming kids as they are.

R294, what did Rowling say that was dubious? I read her original essay and it was thoughtful and measured.

Is front hole the preferred term now? I know a lot of people find the term vagina is alienating and brings to mind dirty or messy.

LOL, you love to see it...

[quote] The word is vagina, [R357], you wretched misogynist. VA GI NA. VEE AY GEE EYE EN AY. Say it.

This sounds like a classic example of how it’s rad fems not trans women who believe gay men’s ‘genital preferences’ are problematic.

[quote]Stonewall is getting ratio-ed to hell on every post, because gender ideology has been purged from schools there

And now they want any mention of homosexuality purged too.

[quote]I know a lot of people find the term vagina is alienating and brings to mind dirty or messy.

LOL, no you don't know "a lot of people" who think this. You are the only fucked up person who does.

Dirty and messy? Yeah, okay. As opposed to what? The "back hole"? Ahahahaha. Keep trying.

Alienating? Why yes, I suppose the REAL WORD 'would' be alienating (aka triggering) to a highly disturbed person who doesn't have a REAL VAGINA and desperately wishes they did.

[quote] You are the only fucked up person who does.

No, I also feel that way. I’m not OP.

[quote] Why yes, I suppose the REAL WORD 'would' be alienating (aka triggering) to a highly disturbed person who doesn't have a REAL VAGINA and desperately wishes they did.

This is homophobia. Gay men do not want front holes.

Please respect us.

[quote]I know a lot of people find the term vagina is alienating and brings to mind dirty or messy.

This is misogyny. Please respect us.

Of course this isn’t a gay men’s website anymore.

How gay men feel must be subservient to how women feel.

No one said gay men want vaginas, idiot. This is about trannies. Stick to the thread topic.

You fish can’t even stick to the thread topic.

You had to insert surrogacy and accuse gay men of wanting to be women, and then, when gay men said they preferred the term front hole, you told them to shut up.

I can't see any books burning. Fake news

Saying you don’t JK is literal book burning.

From the same people — rad fems — who brought you the term ‘literal violence’ which is when men exist.

[quote][R227], I think [R224] has posted a number of other misogynistic and inaccurate comments about Rowling. I had blocked him before I even opened this thread. Someone is stuck in a rut.

The Misogynist Troll is now responsible for 25% of posts in this thread. He doesn't believe in trans rights (he despises transgender men) he just hates women.

[quote] He doesn't believe in trans rights (he despises transgender men) he just hates women.

That kind of thinking is common among rad fems. Reversed, of course.

See:

[quote] He doesn't believe in trans rights (he despises transgender men) he just hates women.

Oh, and you’re more outraged when someone doesn’t like women than when someone defends trans rights.

We know what’s really number one to you, sweetie.

[quote]Oh, and you’re more outraged when someone doesn’t like women than when someone defends trans rights.

But you don't support trans rights. You don't believe in the rights of transgender men because you don't believe transgender men exist.

I believe trans people exist, I think trans people should be allowed to change their legal status, I believe that sex based rights should be recognised alongside trans rights, e.g. women in the beauty industry who bikini waxes for women are able to decline the request of trans women like Jessica Yaniv who want them to wax their penis and testicles.

You’ve stopped pretending trans women hurt gay men and now say gay men should care because women are more important than us.

I’m willing to go along with any reasonable critique of trans excesses.

You don’t care about that. Just women — often ones who hate gay men.

Dynamic and lovely,

R345, sport is one area where physical biology and not "gender identity" totally matters. That BBC article has the whole thing confused - the whole reason Quinn is allowed to compete in women's football, despite identifying as transgender, is precisely because she is a biological female. If she was to play for the category that she identifies as then she should be trying to get on the men's team.

This is another example of the hypocrisy of trans in sports. If a bio man wants to compete in women's sports then he can do so simply by "identifying" as a woman and taking some hormones; if a bio woman who "identifies" as trans wants to compete in sports, of course in almost every single sport she will have to participate in the women's category, because however much T they inject themselves with women are never going to get the same muscle mass and physical structure as trained male athletes. But, it's ok, bio women who identify as trans can continue to compete in women's sports!

According to the trans logic, Quinn should only be able to compete in men's sports. What the heck the BBC is trying to say makes no sense though.

The solution: abolish any form of gender segregation in sports

R376, I'm not whoever the poster you're replying to is. I believe in transgender rights, I believe that transgender men exist. I just don't believe they're men. I believe that trans should, in the many areas of life that touch upon the issues of physical sex, be given rights as transmen and transwomen, not as men and women. They should have equal rights and the same as everyone else, not special rights over and above what everyone else has.

[quote][R376], I'm not whoever the poster you're replying to is. I believe in transgender rights, I believe that transgender men exist. I just don't believe they're men. I believe that trans should, in the many areas of life that touch upon the issues of physical sex, be given rights as transmen and transwomen, not as men and women. They should have equal rights and the same as everyone else, not special rights over and above what everyone else has.

I fully agree with you. The "trans women are women, trans men are men" response to any trans issues has been the biggest misstep anyone looking to improve trans rights could have made. It doesn't allow for any spectrum of experience, i.e. a trans woman who has undegone countless surgeries and hormone treatment vs a woman with a beard and a hairy chest who says that they are a lesbian.

My post was in response to the Misogynist Troll responsible for 25% of the posts in this thread who hates women. He claims to support trans rights and wants to abolish sex based protection for women but refuses to accept trans men as men, such is his loathing of anyone with a vagina.

R371, the "fake news", as you call it, was reported in Newsweek, it wasn't made up by "TERFs". Perhaps Newsweek saw a few videos on TikTok when Pink News first published its fake news about the trans murderer and - like all dumb media, film, pop culture, Hollywood, etc. outlets today - thought "this is what all the younger generation are doing, we must jump on the bandwagon", even though, in reality, it's only a tiny, tiny minority that are so trans cultish. Their over-representation on social media (because they are products of it) gives the impression that the trans cult is far more popular than it actually is.

Probably as the days passed and it transpired that the central killer was not a transwoman, despite the fake news published in the Pink News (never retracted) even the 16-year-old "transmen" on TikTok realised they had made a mistake.

I never claimed to support trans rights beyond how they help gay rights.

And, yes, gay men have a right to loathe vagina, you homophobe.

He's winding you up, you moron, R383. He's countering your woman supremacist shtick with his gay supremacist shtick, and yet for years -- literally YEARS -- none of you have been smart enough to pick up on it or understand how it's pointing out your massive, massive hypocrisy.

You're not savvy enough to post here, and yet here you are.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]I’m willing to go along with any reasonable critique of trans excesses.

Sure, but there aren't any.

You can point to individuals who have committed crimes, prisoners who have abused services and committed assault, crazies who post nutty things on IG, things like that, but they no more represent the entire trans movement than Matt or Erna represent all gays.

The reason rightwingers use this "singular example reflects the entire demographic" crap is because it unfortunately works. It's the same thing as the families who had someone killed by an immigrant who want to stop all immigration because they claim all immigrants are murderers and rapists. Or Trumpsters who post a video of a brawl in a McDonald's and say all blacks are savage apes.

one tik-tok

[quote]Let's see what happens when Keira Bell's case comes to trial - the young woman who was pushed by the gender identity development service into transitioning when she feels she was far too young to make that decision and is now suing the National Health Service.

At no point will you rad fems ever call on her or her mother to accept any responsibility for their part in that though.

All womyn are pure -- anything bad that befalls them is the result of gay men and trans women.

[quote]He's winding you up, you moron, [R383]. He's countering your woman supremacist shtick with his gay supremacist shtick, and yet for years -- literally YEARS -- none of you have been smart enough to pick up on it or understand how it's pointing out your massive, massive hypocrisy.

He's not a gay supremacist, he's a Men's Rights Activist or a Male Supremacist.

As for being a Woman Supremacist, my experience over the years is that MRAs will always try to remove the rights women have fought hard to win - including autonomy over their bodies, including lesbians being coerced into sleeping with male bodied trans women.

Women fought for gay rights, I'm a gay man arguing that women have sex based rights and sex should remain a legally protected status.

R338, there are plenty of excessive trans demands - not allowing people to talk about how their biological sex shapes their existence being one. The trans demand that lesbians should be open to relationships with biological men or that gay men should fuck biological women is an excess. Not being able to say "the people who menstruate are called women" is another. Bio men in women's sports, bio women in the Mr Gay England contest. Putting young kids on hormone blockers and cross-sex hormones is another. The idea that all one needs to do to legally change gender is fill in a form yet another.

Sure, pointing to one or two "bad apples" is not necessarily a reflection of reality (and don't limit that tactic to the right, the left uses it all the time too). The problem is there are so many bad apples amongst the trans movement that it's quite clear the problem isn't about individual excesses but the very philosophy that trans are using to argue that "transwomen are women" and no distinction is permissible. And let's not even get into things like the history of Stonewall being falsified to make it appear that transwomen of colour started the riot, when that is a complete lie. When gay people are being told that we have to believe lies about Stonewall, then questions need to be asked as to what the trans are aiming at.

If trans people simply said "I just don't feel comfortable in my own skin and would feel happier living my life as though I had been born the other sex, I don't make any demands of society beyond that I have the same civil and legal rights as everyone else and am treated respectfully" then there wouldn't be a problem. But that's not what trans and their allies are doing.

[quote]He's not a gay supremacist, he's a Men's Rights Activist or a Male Supremacist.

Gay men are men. As you rad fems love to say.

[quote]Women fought for gay rights

No. Gay men fought for gay rights.

You -- not trans women -- are erasing our struggle.

Apologies, r392 is for r388.

[quote] And let's not even get into things like the history of Stonewall being falsified to make it appear that transwomen of colour started the riot, when that is a complete lie.

Unlike the LGBAlliance hate group -- who say a lesbian started it.

We know who the real threat is.

Two young lesbians who felt uncomfortable being girls and became convinced they were transmen and so transitioned - until they met each other, fell in love and realised that they're just girls who like girls, and it's ok for for a girl to fall in love with another girl. Now they want to go back to being girls.

[quote]Nele could see only two options - transition or suicide. She sought help from a transgender support organisation. They sent her to a therapist.

[quote]"When I arrived, I was like, 'Yeah, I think I might be trans.' And he directly used male pronouns for me. He said it was so clear I'm transgender - that he's never been as sure with anyone else."

[quote]Within three months, Nele was prescribed testosterone.

[quote]"I watched some YouTube videos of trans guys who take testosterone, and they go from this shy lesbian to a handsome guy who is super-popular. I liked thinking of myself having that possibility - it felt like I should have a male body."

[quote]But being so young, she needed parental approval for any medical intervention. The first doctor she visited with her parents said Ellie should wait - she thought that was transphobic and found another medic who was positive about her desire to transition.

[quote]"He told my parents that all the effects were reversible - which is the biggest lie. I had done my research, and I knew that this doctor could not be trusted. But I was just so happy that he said that, because then my parents were OK with it."

The problem with the Stonewall argument is that there isn't a lot of verified history for a variety of reasons, so there is some conflict and confusion, which is to be expected. The straight ladies co-opted that to try to use it in a "trans are changing history to erase gays!" way and they've just made everything worse.

What we know is that the first night, most trans of all flavors were out of the area when the riot started because the cops carted them off first. The brick was thrown after a lesbian being hauled into a wagon shouted "Do something!" No one knows who threw the brick. The lesbian was possibly Stormé DeLarverie, who was there per multiple witnesses, but so were quite a few other butch lesbians who also fought back against police.

Some trans from other neighborhoods arrived later in the evening after the uprising was well under way. The primary force on the first night were gays and some lesbians; the following days, during the marches and protests, had gays and trans and lesbians all participating together. Trans were a big part of the entire movement, even if they weren't there in significant numbers on the first night.

That's the truth. Sorry if it doesn't meet any of your political expectations but that's life.

[quote] Two young lesbians who felt uncomfortable being girls and became convinced they were transmen and so transitioned - until they met each other, fell in love and realised that they're just girls who like girls, and it's ok for for a girl to fall in love with another girl. Now they want to go back to being girls.

And they have zero agency in any of this?

They were kidnapped, tied down, and forced to become men?

All 'transmen' are victims? But all trans women are evil?

You rad fems refuse to criticize women and so you can't call this out.

Stonewall was a gay bar. Most of the patrons were gay. So were the protestors.

LGBAlliance wants to call out the Marsha story, but can't admit -- statistically -- that it was likely a gay man or gay men who kicked it off.

"What we know is that the first night, most trans of all flavors were out of the area when the riot started because the cops carted them off first."

How do we know this? Was it actually reported anywhere, or is it something that was made up much, much later? The idea that the "trans" (who, in any case, if they were actually there, would have been drag queens rather than transwomen) were at Stonewall but carted off before the riots could start is a very recent one, invented to counter the fact - on the rare occasions when the "transwomen started Stonewall" crowd are forced to face up to facts - that no actually identified "transwomen" were there.

The people who were actually arrested at Stonewall on the night of the riots were gay men and a woman.

But the really big lie is not simply that "transwomen of colour" started Stonewall but that specifically Marsha P. Johnson and Silvia Rivera started the Stonewall riots - when Rivera wasn't even there at all and Marsha came much later, after the riots started. Apparently Marsha was still calling herself Malcolm at the time and never considered herself to be a transwoman.

So, we are meant to believe that either all the transwomen had been carted off or they were present and started the Stonewall riots - it's got to be one, it can't be both. Considering these kinds of claims have only been made in recent years, to justify the trans takeover of what was formerly known as the lesbian and gay community, it sounds more like this "transwomen of colour started Stonewall" is a recent invention to justify the transification of everything gay.

Also r398, you need to define what "trans" meant in 1969, because the word is being used in very different ways today.

By the way r398, I'm not saying that there were no transsexuals or drag queens present at the Stonewall riots, sure there may have been some. But history is being rewritten to erase the gay men and few lesbians who were there, who were the real force of the riots. Look at how the history of Stonewall was written up until around 2010 and see how it's been rewritten since then - there is a marked difference, especially once it stopped being something that was part of "living memory" and hence much easier to make up any old crap about it.

Apparently, we have to believe that Marsha Johnson and Silvia Rivera - two individuals who were nowhere near Stonewall when the riots started and one of whom was completely uninvolved - started the riots and all gay people around the world owe everything to them, especially to Malcolm, sorry, Marsha P. Johnson.

[quote] Considering these kinds of claims have only been made in recent years, to justify the trans takeover of what was formerly known as the lesbian and gay community

It was never known as that. When Stonewall happened it was just called the Gay community.

"You can point to individuals who have committed crimes, prisoners who have abused services and committed assault, crazies who post nutty things on IG, things like that, but they no more represent the entire trans movement than Matt or Erna represent all gays."

No gay man ever forced a woman from a spot on a female sports team, or took a medal or scholarship from her. No gay man ever insisted on his right to stand naked in a women's locker room while women were disrobing. No gay man ever appropriated a business loan that was earmarked for women. No gay man ever told women that they could not speak freely about their female bodies and the consequences of living in those bodies. No gay man ever led a decades-long campaign to shut down a rather benign, if somewhat eccentric, lesbian music festival. No gay man, during the fight for equal marriage rights, ever used social media to threaten female professors, writers, literary agents, and everyday, working-class women with rape and death.

A random, individual gay man occasionally remarking that "vagina is icky" is NOT the same as the institutional capture, legal onslaught, and systemic oppression carried out by the incel-led movement that is masquerading as "trans rights." Do not try to tie this to gay men when we all know who is behind this: straight men.

[quote] A random, individual gay man occasionally remarking that "vagina is icky" is NOT the same as the institutional capture, legal onslaught, and systemic oppression carried out by the incel-led movement that is masquerading as "trans rights." Do not try to tie this to gay men when we all know who is behind this: straight men.

Tell that to rad fems not us.

They all say gay men are much more misogynistic than straight men.

No, they don't, R408. That's ridiculous.

[quote]No, they don't, [R408]. That's ridiculous.

Do you want receipts?

I could post them here all day.

[quote] what did Rowling say that was dubious? I read her original essay and it was thoughtful and measured.

Her thoughtful and measured tone is what most triggered the lynch mob. An angry rant by its nature is easy to disregard but JK makes her point in a way that will reach people. All the more reason they must pile on and silence her.

R411 The essay was great unfortunately it didn't matter because she is a demon now.

Anyway, when i say he said some thing dubious, it was more some of her retweets than what she said herself.

They’re all good at seeming reasonable.

But ask them point blank if trans women should be allowed to exist as women and they’ll say no.

Please define "exist as women," R413.

Should men be allowed to transition?

Yes or no.

“I contend that the problem with transsexualism would best be served by morally mandating it out of existence”

Janice Raymond

The rad menstruaters & menopausers and Russian troll farmers have mixed objectives. The former, lacking sufficient self-esteem, education, and sex appeal, and the later to generate divisiveness and victimize LGBT on behalf of Putin, see Transgenders as vulnerable targets due to very low numbers and the already established ostracization. They are here to deliver propaganda to subcultures external to their own cults of hate. They use lies to influence. A percentage of gay men will bite because they want to disassociate and distinguish themselves from transgenders who are already not the same nor seek to be the same.

For the rad fems, it really is not just about pre-op and post-op transgenders using restrooms and participating in softball tournaments; it is about creating and spreading "penis guilt" to try to garner societal entitlements and privileges not to be afforded to others.

Correct, R417.

The Trans community have turned into the 21st century version of Third Reich fascists, whose hallmark was book-burning.

Rowling hasn't done any damage to the Trans community except to call them on some of their unscientific sociopolitical bullshit and their aim of destroying anyone who doesn't agree with their view of themselves.

Take a look at this recent article from The Spectator (UK) which stood up to a small group of staffers at the Co-Op who tried to bully the magazine because of its "coverage of transgender issues" (translation: they didn't acknowledge that a mutilated man dependent on hormones in a dress is just as "real" a woman as someone born with two normal XX chromosomes AND defended Rowling for coming to the defence of a radical feminist who also wouldn't tow the party line for the Trans community).

It backfired splendidly.

[quote] who tried to bully the magazine

What did they do?

Except exercise THEIR right to free speech.

"But ask them point blank if trans women should be allowed to exist as women and they’ll say no."

Fucking bullshit. I don't care what they call themselves or how they dress and they can assume any complex disguise they like, including as Prof. McGonegal in her peaked hat.

What I won't allow them to do is assert that that little Y chromosome they have to carry around no matter how many ops they have or how many dresses they wear or how much estrogen they pump daily makes them "real" women.

They are manufactured women, and I will tip my hat to them in the lift and defend their right to their jobs, homes, etc.

But I won't allow them to treat biology and science with contempt because it's the only way they can persuade themselves that biology really doesn't mean a thing.

Except it does, because look at the lengths they have to go do to disguise its impact.

It's totally an Emperor's New Clothes scenario.

It don't mean a thing/if ain't got that swing between your legs?

Fine: stop your hormones and see what happens in a year.

ER420 - "Except exercise THEIR right to free speech."

No, they didn't: they tried to use their employer, who had no idea what the staffers were doing in its name, as their channel for "free speech" to bully the magazine into only publishing what they view as the "correct" coverage of Trans issues by withholding advertising. They tried to pretend it was the employer acting in the name of free speech.

Co-Op, the employer, when it found out, apologised to the magazine who, in fact, is one of the lucky few who are supported mainly by its readers and not by advertising.

Free speech is writing a letter in response in your own name, not trying to hide behind an employer whom you haven't even informed of your intention.

That’s part of free speech.

The dykes at LGB Alliance know about boycotting.

Free speech is when dykes do things.

Cancel culture is when trans women do things.

R423 - That's the most absurd statement so far on this thread.

Going behind your employer's back to pretend to a client that it, rather than you, is acting in the name of a particular cause is not free speech: it's fraud and misrepresentation

If a dyke did it to a pro-trans publication you’d be all for it.

R426 - I would call it exactly what it is: fraudulent misrepresentation and using someone else's name without their knowledge or consent to achieve a political gain.

The real truth here is that YOU are the one without principles, who is defending fraud and misuse of someone else's name JUST because it was done FOR the trans community.

You are the amoral apologist, not me.

R426

No, you wouldn’t. You’d say the dyke was doing what had to be done to fight the Transtapo, Lesbian Erasure, the patriarchy... and all their other made up BS.

From another thread:

R428 - You're full of shit. Your willingness to spout assumptions on absolutely no evidence whatsoever is exactly what supports my post: as long as it's on your side, you support corrupt and fraudulent practices. The activities of the employees of the Co-Op toward The Spectator are fact.

What I might or might not do is imagination on your part.

I stand by the fact: they were wrong and they got egg all over their faces for it. And they would be wrong if they'd done it for Dykes LLC, BLM, the SWP, or Putin, Inc.

It's ipso facto, wrong, and you haven't the balls to admit it.

Tweet of the day:

Tweets of the day for R409:

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

R409

[quote] Perhaps they might care about straight men’s opinions. (Incidentally, when straight people (men and women alike) fully wise up to what the trans community is trying to push, it will be over. Straight men tend to have more sympathy for the average woman then the average gay man because they spend more time with them and often love them, and once they decide they’re done with this crap, it really will be done.)

The dyke deleted:

Dyke replies

Go on your little tangent, but it doesn't matter because these batshit homophobes are not even trying to hide it anymore: "STRAIGHT QUEER PPL EXIST. SO WE SHOULDN’T SAY 'STRAIGHT' AS THE DIRECT OPPOSITE OF QUEER. BYE."

[quote]Go on your little tangent, but it doesn't matter because these batshit homophobes are not even trying to hide it anymore: "STRAIGHT QUEER PPL EXIST. SO WE SHOULDN’T SAY 'STRAIGHT' AS THE DIRECT OPPOSITE OF QUEER. BYE."

Yeah and all those 'I'm queer' people are --- CISWOMEN

Oh my, what's this? 12.5 K likes? Gee, that's not disturbing at all.

Yikes!

Almost as disturbing as a self-described gay rights org saying this:

Of course the real point is that dykes don't actually care about gayness. Just womanhood.

Just waiting for the day that they start telling straight people that it's transphobic to say they're attracted only to people of the opposite sex, r439.

If anyone told me to eat a vag I'd punch them.

If anyone told a cis lesbian to eat a dick I'd start cheering them on.

R412, people with an axe to grind lied anyway about what she wrote initially. I'm very concerned that children are being drugged and carved up and young lesbians are being manipulated in the service of something that has turned evil. It makes more sense to fund counseling groups and legal services for these individuals who are being sacrificed on the altar of the bank accounts and egos of the manipulators than to argue with insanity. I've blocked Donald Trump on twitter for the same reason while donating to his opponents.

[Quote] young lesbians are being manipulated

Are you just concerned about them?

While this makes rad fems happy, the poor gals are paranoid about some transgender jumping in the tub with them

First of all, there's no room.

The Rock

Twinks with skateboards have a response.

Look at the kind of people who are against her, the more I see the kind people who are against her, I love her a lot more and shows how she's right.

#DroptheT #Trannyhomophobia #SexNotGender

Look at the kind of people who are against her, the more I see the kind people who are against her, I love her a lot more and shows how she's right.

#DroptheT #Trannyhomophobia #SexNotGender