5 ms·

i’m not familiar with JKR’s anti-trans speech. got a quote?

troutwine 6y ago
Might be this is the kind of thing you’re looking for: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk...
- CodeGlitch 6y ago
  > On June 6, 2020, Rowling retweeted an op-ed piece that discussed “people who menstruate,” apparently taking issue with the fact that the story did not use the word women. “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud? I'm still not convinced this is anti-trans. I mean it's reality so for people to want to cancel her over this is ridiculous (which sums up the woke-ideology pretty much).
  - troutwine 6y ago
    This pulled quote, in isolation, might not be, sure. The question about this particular complaint is whether its meant exclusively or inclusively. Does a woman who has stopped menstruating stop being a woman? Is a woman who has never menstruated and never will, in fact, not a woman? What if these people feel in their person like women? How one reads Rowling's comment in light of these questions informs one's sense of her intent. If you read Rowling's comment inclusively then it's a clumsy, ambiguous complaint about shifting language norms that is harmless and warrants a clarification. If you read the comment exclusively -- which I think is fair given Rowling's other statements over the years -- then I find it hard to read in a charitable light. It is, I admit, entirely possible that Rowling doesn't hold trans-exclusionary views and has merely, accidentally chosen ambiguous wording over the years and is pig-headed enough to be unwilling to clarify but I do find this _unlikely_ considering that she's a famously clear author who is willing to clarify (and extend) her body of work for years after the fact.
    - CodeGlitch 6y ago
      > Does a woman who has stopped menstruating stop being a woman? Equally does a man who wears women's clothes make them a woman? I'm happy for them to call themselves a trans-woman, and "she", but we have to have language that separates the sexes at the biological level. > What if these people feel in their person like women? The word "feel" in this context is extremely woolly. This is how we have gotten ourselves into this ridiculous situation where no-one can agree on anything to do with gender / sexes. > If you read Rowling's comment inclusively then it's a clumsy, ambiguous complaint about shifting language norms that is harmless and warrants a clarification. If you read the comment exclusively -- which I think is fair given Rowling's other statements over the years -- then I find it hard to read in a charitable light. It is, I admit, entirely possible that Rowling doesn't hold trans-exclusionary views and has merely, accidentally chosen ambiguous wording over the years and is pig-headed enough to be unwilling to clarify but I do find this _unlikely_ considering that she's a famously clear author who is willing to clarify (and extend) her body of work for years after the fact. So you might be partly right on this - but given her contribution to literacy and the arts and woman's rights we know she is a thoughtful, intelligent, compassionate person. Given all her positive contributions to society the hostile reaction from the trans-side is telling really.
    - nec4b 6y ago
      Do you know of any other group of people who are menstruating and are not women?
      - pseudalopex 6y ago
        Some trans men and non binary people. And many women don't menstruate.
        nec4b 6y ago
        >Some trans men and non binary people. Those are biological females (women). >And many women don't menstruate. What is your point here?
harshreality 6y ago
The tl;dr of it is that she's commented about biological femininity as a real experience distinct from trans-females. That offends the ideological extreme of the trans movement which has labelled her a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist).
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  JKR is much more clearly TE than RF.
  - Avicebron 6y ago
    why is it TE to have an opinion?
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      That’s like asking “why is it racist to have an opinion?” It’s not. Its TE (or racist, or whatever) to have a TE (or racist, or whatever) opinion.
      - zepto 6y ago
        Is it in some absolute sense for all time? Or is it only ‘TE’ within the theoretical framework of Trans activists?
        pseudalopex 6y ago
        Excluding people is exclusionary. It doesn't mean justified or unjustified.
        zepto 6y ago
        Excluding people from a category is just a way of thinking about something. Trans people exclude CIS people from the category of Trans. Do we call them CIS exclusionary? Just saying someone else is exclusionary is meaningless.

Might be this is the kind of thing you’re looking for: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk...

CodeGlitch 6y ago
> On June 6, 2020, Rowling retweeted an op-ed piece that discussed “people who menstruate,” apparently taking issue with the fact that the story did not use the word women. “‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud? I'm still not convinced this is anti-trans. I mean it's reality so for people to want to cancel her over this is ridiculous (which sums up the woke-ideology pretty much).
- troutwine 6y ago
  This pulled quote, in isolation, might not be, sure. The question about this particular complaint is whether its meant exclusively or inclusively. Does a woman who has stopped menstruating stop being a woman? Is a woman who has never menstruated and never will, in fact, not a woman? What if these people feel in their person like women? How one reads Rowling's comment in light of these questions informs one's sense of her intent. If you read Rowling's comment inclusively then it's a clumsy, ambiguous complaint about shifting language norms that is harmless and warrants a clarification. If you read the comment exclusively -- which I think is fair given Rowling's other statements over the years -- then I find it hard to read in a charitable light. It is, I admit, entirely possible that Rowling doesn't hold trans-exclusionary views and has merely, accidentally chosen ambiguous wording over the years and is pig-headed enough to be unwilling to clarify but I do find this _unlikely_ considering that she's a famously clear author who is willing to clarify (and extend) her body of work for years after the fact.
  - CodeGlitch 6y ago
    > Does a woman who has stopped menstruating stop being a woman? Equally does a man who wears women's clothes make them a woman? I'm happy for them to call themselves a trans-woman, and "she", but we have to have language that separates the sexes at the biological level. > What if these people feel in their person like women? The word "feel" in this context is extremely woolly. This is how we have gotten ourselves into this ridiculous situation where no-one can agree on anything to do with gender / sexes. > If you read Rowling's comment inclusively then it's a clumsy, ambiguous complaint about shifting language norms that is harmless and warrants a clarification. If you read the comment exclusively -- which I think is fair given Rowling's other statements over the years -- then I find it hard to read in a charitable light. It is, I admit, entirely possible that Rowling doesn't hold trans-exclusionary views and has merely, accidentally chosen ambiguous wording over the years and is pig-headed enough to be unwilling to clarify but I do find this _unlikely_ considering that she's a famously clear author who is willing to clarify (and extend) her body of work for years after the fact. So you might be partly right on this - but given her contribution to literacy and the arts and woman's rights we know she is a thoughtful, intelligent, compassionate person. Given all her positive contributions to society the hostile reaction from the trans-side is telling really.
  - nec4b 6y ago
    Do you know of any other group of people who are menstruating and are not women?
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      Some trans men and non binary people. And many women don't menstruate.
      - nec4b 6y ago
        >Some trans men and non binary people. Those are biological females (women). >And many women don't menstruate. What is your point here?

harshreality 6y ago

The tl;dr of it is that she's commented about biological femininity as a real experience distinct from trans-females. That offends the ideological extreme of the trans movement which has labelled her a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist).

dragonwriter 6y ago
JKR is much more clearly TE than RF.
- Avicebron 6y ago
  why is it TE to have an opinion?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    That’s like asking “why is it racist to have an opinion?” It’s not. Its TE (or racist, or whatever) to have a TE (or racist, or whatever) opinion.
    - zepto 6y ago
      Is it in some absolute sense for all time? Or is it only ‘TE’ within the theoretical framework of Trans activists?
      - pseudalopex 6y ago
        Excluding people is exclusionary. It doesn't mean justified or unjustified.
        zepto 6y ago
        Excluding people from a category is just a way of thinking about something. Trans people exclude CIS people from the category of Trans. Do we call them CIS exclusionary? Just saying someone else is exclusionary is meaningless.