The Rowling vs. Trans People Hijack

[Gups]

I can think of much, much, much more transphobic things than suing an organization.

Figure of speech. Obviously directly killing a trans person whilst screaming anti trans nonsense would come a fair bit higher.
Chasing after Stonewall because you object to the T part of LGBT rights is pretty damn transphobic however.

Which isn't what she did. She sued Stonewell for writing directly to her employer asking her to be sacked because of her position on gender. She lost because the communication didn't reach the person(s) who made the decision but others in the organisation.

[Admiral Yi]

Is Rowling a lesbian?

[Sheilbh]

No.

[Gups]

Stonewall also did suffer a huge reputational hit since then.

Partky because of that and particularly the refusal of Stonewall's Head of Trans Inclusion refused to give evidence unless he was accompanied by a support worker, his mother and his dog.

Partly because of the Nolan Investigates series which led to a lot of organisation ending their participation in Stonewall's Workplace Equality Index (which is a major source of their revenue).

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I'd add on the WEI that I was in a company that was part of that (and on the LGBT+ committee that ran our submission). We scored very well for many years and ended up pausing working with Stonewall.

It was before that and it wasn't really to do with the substance of trans issues either - this was maybe 6-7 years ago before there was much controversy.

But there was just from one year to the next a huge shift in what Stonewall said was "good practice" and how they were assessing employers. We paused working with them mainly because we felt we could spend that money on building up an internal DEI function. But part of what you pay for if you are joining Stonewall as a company is a Stonewall rep who is supposed to help keep you informed/aware of good practice etc - in practice in our experience they changed every year, you'd chase a lot and you'd basically only hear from them to collect your dues and give feedback on your submission. It was not a helpful body to engage with. My understanding is about 10-15 years ago they were really responsive and helpful.

And it came to a head because we were refreshing loads of policies for tras and non-binary inclusion and asked if they had any advice/guidance/good practice and they just didn't get back to us. It was really, really frustrating. My impression is there's a lot of churn at a junior to mid level and from someone who used to work there, the pay is dreadful except for the people at the top. It did leave me a little dubious of a lot of the more "corporate" charity/campaign sector (especially ones that make money from companies).

Edit: And, of course, from their perspective I imagine many of the people who join are young, idealistic and probably on the left and then end up managing the Lockheed Martin DEI account

[Barrister]

Is Rowling a lesbian?

No.  After leaving her abusive husband with her  young daughter back in the 90s, she is now seemingly happily married and with more children.

And while the "trans exclusionary" part is debated, and "radical" is kind of a pejorative, she very definitely considers herself a feminist.

[crazy canuck]

Is Rowling a lesbian?

No.  After leaving her abusive husband with her  young daughter back in the 90s, she is now seemingly happily married and with more children.

And while the "trans exclusionary" part is debated, and "radical" is kind of a pejorative, she very definitely considers herself a feminist.

I think it can be fairly said that not only does she consider herself a feminist, she is a feminist.

[Sheilbh]

I've said it before but I think it is a real difference between the US and UK on this. The loudest voices on this in the UK are actual feminists (radical or not) and not either just conservative religious folks or the Phyllis Schlafly style activist. And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right - many have long years doing activism in feminist and lesbian groups.

[Admiral Yi]

And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right

wut?

[Sheilbh]

It's a common accusation.

[Barrister]

And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right

wut?

"astro-turfed" refers to organizations trying to look like a grassroots organization, but are actually just a PR firm or activist group.

[crazy canuck]

I've said it before but I think it is a real difference between the US and UK on this. The loudest voices on this in the UK are actual feminists (radical or not) and not either just conservative religious folks or the Phyllis Schlafly style activist. And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right - many have long years doing activism in feminist and lesbian groups.

I am not sure the difference is so significant, a lot of feminists I know hold very similar views (on both sides of the border).  But they do not get the press or social media blowback of a celebrity feminist like Rowling.

As one data point, BB has already mentioned a human rights case that was adjudicated in BC, in which a trans women complained that she was discriminated against because a beauty salon refused to accept her as a client because they did not have staff who had the training to wax her male genitalia - the beauty salon won the case.  The reaction from my feminist friends was that they were relieved the law was not an ass in this instance.

[Valmy]

I've said it before but I think it is a real difference between the US and UK on this. The loudest voices on this in the UK are actual feminists (radical or not) and not either just conservative religious folks or the Phyllis Schlafly style activist. And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right - many have long years doing activism in feminist and lesbian groups.

Yeah they are true misandrists that are afraid of trans-women as threatening forces of violence and sexual abuse. It is transphobia in the most literal sense.

Do they also have an issue with transmen or gender fluid types? It always seems like the fury is almost entirely on the evil transwomen trying to do dastardly deeds. In the US there is also the idea that people are grooming the girls to reject their gender as well, in more of a "protect the children!" thing more than a fear of rampaging transmen doing evil things.

[Valmy]

I've said it before but I think it is a real difference between the US and UK on this. The loudest voices on this in the UK are actual feminists (radical or not) and not either just conservative religious folks or the Phyllis Schlafly style activist. And I don't just think they're astro-turfed by the far-right - many have long years doing activism in feminist and lesbian groups.

I am not sure the difference is so significant, a lot of feminists I know hold very similar views (on both sides of the border).  But they do not get the press or social media blowback of a celebrity feminist like Rowling.

Rowling was a hero to the younger generation, for one. The generation that is most supportive of trans people. The olds were not as big Harry Potter fans, and that is the group who most align with her way of thinking. Most young people have never heard of most big feminists from back in the day. Secondly Rowling gets into it on twitter all the time. She is making an effort to position herself as a figurehead leader of this movement, either unintentionally or not. I am sure other celebrity feminists out there agree with her, they just don't put themselves out there as much.

[Admiral Yi]

"astro-turfed" refers to organizations trying to look like a grassroots organization, but are actually just a PR firm or activist group.

10-4