Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

JK Rowling

1246

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 33,851 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Agreed @Bannasidhe underneath it all when you scratch the surface it really is the growth of a hate movement that first targeted trans people and is now targeting LGB people. Groups like the LGB alliance are literally foaming at the mouth bigoted hate groups. The evidence is there. In Ireland their 2 members decided to try and cancel LGBT bullying programmes. Shameful transphobia and homophobia that is a threat to us all.

    And funnily enough all of the doomsday scenarios some in the UK have been shouting would happen havent happened here. 7 years we have had Self ID. No issues.

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,211 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Ten of Swords


    @raclle dont post in this thread again.

    Abusive posting and coming to this forum to insult the LGBT community (from the above quote - wallow in self pity, loud and obnoxious, self centred community) rarely end well.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,851 ✭✭✭✭ Annasopra


    Yeah I shot it down because effectively you were gaslighting and victim blaming. Others were doing that too as well as trying to claim victimhood on behalf of JKR. To paraphrase Panti its a bit of a neat Orwellian trick that the homophobes/transphobes become the victims.

    The point of the the thread was to point out that Gender Critical ideology doesnt just attack trans people, we can now see its starting to lash out at LGB people and that the hate fuelled ideology from it is becoming worse.

    I have UK trans friends who are sick and tired of the constant extremist hate rhetoric about them, about their lives. They are genuinely terrified about their future in a country where they are literally every day treated as pure scum of the earth by Mainstream media and politicians. Twitter fuels this further. And as a result street harassment and violence is increasing. Reported incidents of transphobic hate crime across the UK are hugely increasing in the last few years. Trans people are now living in a climate of nervousness and fear because of all this extremist hate rhetoric. In this thread there was no understanding from some posters of what I just described but also a complete unwillingness to understand it. If I felt people wanted to genuinely listen about trans peoples experiences not just come in to berate me I probably would have engaged more. Trans people have been dehumanised by media, politicians, twitter. Why would I engage with people here who also want to dehumanise them? Some of the posters in here were coming at the issues from quite a transphobic point of view. The point of the lgbt forum was never for posters to have to be subjected to a lot of transphobia/homophobia.

    Post edited by Annasopra on

    Apparently a "normal" woman is a busty blonde sexy page 3 model who wears make-up, short skirts and red lipsticks and has pouty lips.  Who knew. 👀😏

    ******

    "Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,660 ✭✭✭ cloudatlas


    So someone is wearing a 'Lesbian not queer' tshirt. I didn't think that was a controversial thing. To be honest I have preferred to say I'm Lesbian/Gay rather than queer because anybody who bullied me about it always used those words so I want to take ownership of who I am. My flatmate says she is queer but is obviously bi-sexual. I'm kind of confused about the Queer vs thing.

    I know a gay man who now identifies as trans and says he is 'pan' and 'poly' but he can't be 'poly' because she isn't attracted to cis gender women?

    Also on the word 'TERF'. Jon Ronson does a podcast episode on it https://podcastaddict.com/episode/134492674 and the origins are not negative in the sense that it was just delineating a certain group and not used as a slur word.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    So as things stand, if someone is unwilling to ignore biology, and is unwilling to accept that a person who is male/a man can be a female/a woman, or that biological women are intrinsically different to biological men, that is transphobic?

    Saying that individuals can change their sex is surely more dehumanising. Humans can't change their sex.



  • Registered Users Posts: 423 ✭✭ CrookedJack


    Your point is basically that you don't believe these opinion are transphobic because you don't believe in transgender as a concept. Sure you can see that that is by definition transphobic. If mean if it's not, what WOULD be transphobic in your opinion?

    But that's not the point being raised here. What is or is not transphobic is besides the point. We're trying to discuss whether people who hold those opinion will over time start targeting LGB people and if/how that is happening with JK Rowling.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    I provided several examples of comment's by Rowling where she directly links transgender women with sexual predators. Echos of the attempts made to link gay men to paedophiles - which is now expanding to include all trans supportive cis LGB people. We are being called "groomers". But apparently JKR had no hand or part in that.

    I provided several examples of Rowling on social media celebrating her links to the leading lights of the Gender Critical Movement, and giving them her unqualified support. But hanging out with people who own their transphobic, supporting people who own their transphobia, publicising people who own their transphobia apparently does not make one a transphobe.

    I was met with fingers in the ears denial and whatabouts.

    I asked one poster to give me an interpretation of Rowling's comments that showed they were not transphobic - I was answered with a homophobic diatribe.

    Then it was stated that myself and Annaspora are soapboxing - that is up to the mods to decide, not some random poster who pops into the LGBT forum to tell members of the community how wrong we are, how mistaken we are about what we are experiencing, and generally trying to define us according to the principle of "as I understand it".

    Rather than counter the points being made - and the evidence supplied - the main tactic has been to attack members of the LGBT community who are trying to have a discussion in the one forum designated a safe space for Trans people. Apparently trans people can't even have this one little corner of this whole site as a space where they don't have to listen to constant invalidation of their existence.

    Rowling is still at it by the way, currently she is busy defining what a lesbian is. Straightsplaining at it's finest. I can safely say I have far more experience of what being a lesbian is than either a straight woman or most of the she's not transphobic posse rushing to her defence in this thread and I reject her definition outright. No doubt there will now be posts telling me I am mistaken -and I bet none of them will be written by a lesbian.

    If it quacks like a duck, hangs out in the pond with the ducks - chances are it's a duck. Show us the evidence she is a swan if that is what you think she is.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    I think my understanding of transphobia is that it would be people who have a hatred of other people believing that they are the opposite sex from which they are.

    I don't think it is fair to label people who believe that sex is not in any way malleable as transphobic.

    But yes, I agree that that is slightly off topic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    "Rowling is still at it by the way, currently she is busy defining what a lesbian is. Straightsplaining at it's finest. I can safely say I have far more experience of what being a lesbian is than either a straight woman or most of the she's not transphobic posse rushing to her defence in this thread and I reject her definition outright. No doubt there will now be posts telling me I am mistaken -and I bet none of them will be written by a lesbian."

    Well that's slightly hypocritical.

    I have far more experience in being a man than any transman, and if I reject their definition outright, I am classed as a transphobe.

    I understand that this forum is somewhat of a safespace for people, but when terms like "straightsplaining" are bandied about, it is exceptionally counter productive.

    I can't see how people are calling Rowling homophobic based on her belief that men and women are different.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    It can also mean having an 'aversion'.

    This all had to be explained over and over again before the run up to Mar Ref to people who insisted they were not homophobic as they did not "hate" homosexuals, they just didn't think homosexuals should have the same rights as "normal" people.

    Once again - you are conflating biological sex and gender. It has to be deliberate at this point as it has been explained to you several times over many many thread.

    No-one is claiming biological sex can be changed. We are saying some people were born the wrong biological sex - this causes severe mental health issues for the majority of those people, so they seek to change GENDER by finding a way to 'change' as much as possible of the 'wrong' biology to approximate as close as possible to what should have been their 'correct' biology. Of course this is fraught with difficulties, no-one denies this. Of course the body they get is not absolutely the same as it would have been if nature hadn't made a mess in the first place.

    So we use the designation 'trans' to mean - the biology is wrong, but attempts have been made to correct it, please respect that and use the correct gender designation out of respect. Trans people do not WANT to be trans people - they would much prefer to have been cis people all safe and happy in the correct body, but they never got that choice. So they work with what they got and try to make it right. And they acknowledge it by defining themselves as 'trans'.

    'Cis' means - yup, born in the biologically correct body. Go Me!



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    Am I telling you what a 'man' is? No.

    I have no idea what it feels to be a 'man'.

    Which is why I am not a Trans Man - although Rowling and her GC pals are using lesbian visibility week to claim I, as a not feminine women, am being pressured by trans activists to transition - this have NEVER happened. I know an awful lot of trans people, yet the only people who have ever insisted I "want to be a man" are cis straight people. Funny that.

    A straight woman saying "you are not a lesbian if you xxxxx" is straightsplaining - it's not my problem if that make you uncomfortable. But it is interesting that you take issue with my calling it as I see it, but not with it occurring in the first place.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    As an example, it's not an "aversion" to believe that female-only and male-only spaces/sports should only be accessible to male and female people any more than it would be to believe there should be no 21 year olds on a under 13's football team. That doesn't mean I have an "aversion" to 21 year olds.

    People are advocating that certain spaces and sports are separated by biological characteristics of the people participating in, or using, them. Not their gender.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    So you would be comfortable with agreeing that my definition of what "man" means holds more weight than that of someone who is trans?

    If Rowling found a lesbian who agreed with her definition, would it become not "straightsplaining" as obviously that other lesbian's definition would hold the same weight as yours?

    The terminology you use does make me a little uncomfortable to be honest. Unless you think that the inverse would be true and we could discount gay people's opinions on straight issues as "gaysplaining".

    I don't agree with everything Rowling says, but I don't how people would class her as homophobic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 423 ✭✭ CrookedJack


    Perhaps you missed that i was specifically talking to to OP in that post, and addressing the points she made. You seemed to think I was talking about you. I wasn't.

    However to address a few of the things you said to me here:

    You do provide examples of Rowling's transphobia and I haven't, nor have most people, disputed them But as the OP says that's besides the point. You haven't shown how her transphobia has grown into homophobia and when people try to discuss that you either refer to her transphobia, point out that she associates with homophobes or sarcastically ridicule someone's right to even ask the questions. That's hardly good faith discussion. You weren't met with fingers in the ears, you were met with questions and discussion.

    You were met with a homophobic rant, and it was disgusting. Thankfully it was mod sanctioned and the user thread-banned, there are plenty of other posters though so you can gage with them.

    I actually suggested that OP was soap-boxing, again not you, and asked could they explain to me the purpose of the thread. This is not back seat modding, this is engagement. You say i'm some random poster - well I guess I am, I'm not sure how i go about being a specific poster however. Should i post a number of agreeable posts first before I get to question the OP? I have not invalidated anyone's experiences here, in fact that's exactly what was concerning me about the OPs gatekeeping of homophobia. Nor have I defined anyone. Maybe you're confusing me with someone else?

    I have attacked no one. I have calmly, politely asked questions and made my points in as impersonal a manner as possible. It's disingenuous to call them attacks.

    To use your duck analogy - OP said "Eggs are turning into ducks. Luck at JK - She's was an egg now she's a duck", a lot of posters said "Is she a duck? I can see no evidence of that, why do you think that?" and you responded by saying telling about all the evidence she was an egg and how she hangs out in a duck pond.


    Your point about Rowling "Straightsplaining" is difficult. On one hand I get your point, why should a lesbian not get to define their own identity? what right does someone else have to tell you what you are? The idea of that seems absolutely wrong.

    But on the other hand the term and the associated connotation is problematic. I mean is it only bad because a straight person is saying it? Wouldn't it also be bad if one lesbian was invalidating another's experience. It might just be that it's worse because of the power dynamic between straight and non-straight communities, I'm not sure?

    Added to that, if straight people are not allowed a definition of what being a lesbian is, then how can we accuse them of homophobia? I mean the first step to respect is understanding, and they can't understand with being able to talk about what it is, right?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    Very succinct post. The last two paragraphs are what I was trying to say (but did so very clumsily)



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    No.

    Because I have no experience of what Man means it is not a debate in which I am in anyway qualified to comment. You can debate that with Trans men if you wish, but given you appear to outright reject that a trans man is a man it wouldn't be much of a debate.

    Why do you give weight to a straight woman defining what a lesbian is? That is the question that interests me.

    An aversion is exactly what it is - why do you have an issue with a transwomen being in a locked cubicle next to another locked cubicle with a cis woman in it? What, apart from using the toilet facilities for the disposal of body waste, do you think the trans woman will do in there?

    What impact on you or anyone else will a transman using the men's toilet have? Or changing room? But we know this isn't about transmen. This is about transwomen and the trope that they are potential sexual predators- and that most certainly is transphobic. In exactly the same way as those who say gay men shouldn't be allowed to adopt for *undefined reason* is homophobic. And JKR is a very vocal proponent of the trans women as sexual predators trope - I have even provided evidence of that in this thread.

    I'm not getting into the whole sports thing here given no-one has been able to prove (and as there have been so many demands for 'evidence' in this thread I'll go ahead and say proof is required) this fabled 'advantage' exists in real life. Notable lack of trans women winning major events, records etc in the 45 years since Renee Richard's won the right to compete against women. So let's park that off topic tangent.

    edit to add : straight people are a mystery to me. I have on occasion enquired why some straight people do certain things. At my heading for 3 score years on this Earth, and 2 score as an out lesbian I have yet to hear a gay person laying down the rules for what it means to be straight. Do you have any examples of this happening?



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    "Why do you give weight to a straight woman defining what a lesbian is? That is the question that interests me"

    Because you don't need to be an expert to read a dictionary. If a woman (or a man, or a child for that matter) said to me that a lesbian is a woman that has a sexual orientation towards someone of the same sex, or a gay woman, I wouldn't need to quiz them on their own sexuality.

    "An aversion is exactly what it is - why do you have an issue with a transwomen being in a locked cubicle next to another locked cubicle with a cis woman in it? What, apart from using the toilet facilities for the disposal of body waste, do you think the trans woman will do in there?"

    I have absolutely no issue with shared bathrooms or changing facilities. But if the changing rooms or toilets are specific to either women or men, I think there is a reasonable expectation that the people using them will be only the sex that they are intended for.

    "This is about transwomen and the trope that they are potential sexual predators- and that most certainly is transphobic. In exactly the same way as those who say gay men shouldn't be allowed to adopt for *undefined reason* is homophobic."

    This is something I have not once said. You are projecting and I won't defend a position you have created in an attempt to put a dishonest interpretation to my words.

    edit to add : straight people are a mystery to me. I have on occasion enquired why some straight people do certain things. At my heading for 3 score years on this Earth, and 2 score as an out lesbian I have yet to hear a gay person laying down the rules for what it means to be straight. Do you have any examples of this happening?

    I don't know the questions you have asked but am willing to answer any you may have.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 423 ✭✭ CrookedJack


    It's important to note that the other paragraph related to "Straightsplaining" is the important one, it's where I empathise with other human beings and try to understand their experience. you might want to think about why you liked the two paragraphs where I criticised and ignore the one where I connect.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    I referenced the last two paragraphs because in the post above yours, I was trying to say the exact same thing.

    My comment of "very succinct post" referred to your post in it's entirety.

    I'm not sure why you are inferring what you are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 423 ✭✭ CrookedJack




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭ Orinoco


    I'll say this for JK Rowling, she really does bring all the nasty little misogynists to the yard.

    Take our hero Aidan Comerford, who made a magical transition from a transphobic 'comedian' (go find the video) to spending his entire time on Twitter abusing feminists and coming out with pretty much every men's rights, rape-apologist argument there is. This week he was 'no big dealing' the lurid rape fantasies of a trans woman as just your normal revenge fantasy. He is a deeply unpleasant man.

    Anyway, if anyone wants to quote something JK Rowling has said that is transphobic, and explain why they believe it to be so, go ahead. Otherwise it's just another case of men attempting to bring down a successful independent woman. Pathetic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭ Orinoco


    No quote from Rowling I see. The conversation is pointless until you supply them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭ Orinoco


    My apologies, you attempted this:

    “When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman ... then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.”

    Do you think that allowing men into women's spaces is safer for women, or more dangerous for women? Think hard about that, and about why we have single-sex spaces in the first place.

    And before the (incredibly predictable) "they're not men" response, how are women supposed to tell the difference between a man and a trans woman? Be specific.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    Woman means adult female human. If you allow woman to mean adult human who feels like a woman, then the word becomes absolutely moot.

    How can you feel like something which can't be defined?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭ Orinoco


    One thing you will never, ever, get in these conversations is a definition of a woman 🤣

    "transwomen are women"

    "ok that's great, what is a woman"

    "er...."



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Bannasidhe


    Many many posters here have no problem defining what a woman is - but only their definition is apparently the correct one. And it's the narrowest possible definition.

    I have been in many many 'women's spaces' over many decades where I know for a fact there were transgender women. Not once was there an issue. Not Once.

    I have been raped. By a cis Man. They space I was in made no difference.

    I have been threatened. By cis heterosexuals who took offence at my lack of femininity.

    I have been abused. By cis women who decided I was in the wrong space. Next time shall I flash my vagina at these genitalia police? How do you propose I respond when my gender is challenged in a women's toilet? Seems my word is not sufficient so should I be strip searched?

    I think women's spaces are infinitely safer when the merchants of bigotry and policers of genitals stay away from them.

    Ya'll don't seem very interested in protecting all women's safety when using these spaces.






  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,222 ✭✭✭✭ the dunne


    Excuse me?

    I'm sorry that you experienced what you did. But that has absolutely nothing with expecting biological women and men to be allowed spaces where only people of the same sex are permitted.

    My definition of woman is not very narrow. It is very specific. Like a definition should be.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement