3 ms·

I was sort of expecting "the second link" to have contradictory research rather than just vague ideas about why a particular study might have been flawed. Never

I was sort of expecting "the second link" to have contradictory research rather than just vague ideas about why a particular study might have been flawed. Nevertheless, thanks for linking Rowling's wonderful, thoughtful essay. Her heart is in the right place. I might just have to read those damn books someday. I also read the "Reasonable Person's Guide". What should I assume from the fact that the biggest part of this is devoted to complaints about name-calling? The majority of humans DGAF what mean things one internet weirdo called another internet weirdo. If there are actual safety concerns for trans people (and I'm sure there are), don't obscure those concerns behind name-calling butthurt. Doing so makes the whole thing seem like some internet weirdos got bored with doxxing so they invented some new way to annoy society. Do we need a term for getting people fired for trans-"phobic" speech? Will the "reasonable guide" be updated to reflect the fact that Forstater's firing was found on appeal to have been based on impermissible discrimination?

Dylan16807 4y ago
> Her heart is in the right place. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. If you won't listen to where you're mistaken, when you're badly hurting people, your heart is not in the right place. I'm not saying that link is perfect but Rowling is wrong in many important ways. Like, I'm not going to write my own essay with better focus.
- jessaustin 4y ago
  I oppose "badly hurting people", and the "comprehensive 2015 survey" mentioned in passing indicates that trans people are being hurt, but clearly Rowling also opposes that: "Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men... So I want trans women to be safe." Nothing Rowling has said, or that Forstater or even Berns has said, has "badly hurt" someone in a physical way. One could argue that Berns probably hurt someone's feelings, but that is not important. Feelings aren't important enough to campaign about, aren't important enough to get anybody censored for, and certainly aren't important enough to get anybody fired from any job that isn't directly related to the emotional care of the general public. In some cases, our political opponents are doing evil. In many cases, including this one, they just have different opinions than we do. "Bigotry" is a real thing that real people have suffered. It isn't the same thing as disagreement, light criticism, or even name-calling. No one mentioned ITT has deprived any trans people of anything. Crying wolf doesn't help those trans people who have suffered actual bigotry. Obviously you realize that.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    And the people that listen to her and deprive trans people because of what she said don't count? It's hard for me to take a claim seriously that with how much influence she has, that hasn't happened. Even if you want to make a distinction, "crying wolf" is not the right analogy.

Dylan16807 4y ago

> Her heart is in the right place. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. If you won't listen to where you're mistaken, when you're badly hurting people, your heart is not in the right place. I'm not saying that link is perfect but Rowling is wrong in many important ways. Like, I'm not going to write my own essay with better focus.

jessaustin 4y ago
I oppose "badly hurting people", and the "comprehensive 2015 survey" mentioned in passing indicates that trans people are being hurt, but clearly Rowling also opposes that: "Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men... So I want trans women to be safe." Nothing Rowling has said, or that Forstater or even Berns has said, has "badly hurt" someone in a physical way. One could argue that Berns probably hurt someone's feelings, but that is not important. Feelings aren't important enough to campaign about, aren't important enough to get anybody censored for, and certainly aren't important enough to get anybody fired from any job that isn't directly related to the emotional care of the general public. In some cases, our political opponents are doing evil. In many cases, including this one, they just have different opinions than we do. "Bigotry" is a real thing that real people have suffered. It isn't the same thing as disagreement, light criticism, or even name-calling. No one mentioned ITT has deprived any trans people of anything. Crying wolf doesn't help those trans people who have suffered actual bigotry. Obviously you realize that.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  And the people that listen to her and deprive trans people because of what she said don't count? It's hard for me to take a claim seriously that with how much influence she has, that hasn't happened. Even if you want to make a distinction, "crying wolf" is not the right analogy.