The Rowling vs. Trans People Hijack

[Sheilbh]

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.

As I say here it is focused on single sex spaces like rape crisis centres, prisons, domestic violence shelters. It's true not all men, but 99% of the reason women need those spaces is because of men.

Their position is that single sex spaces exist and are protected in law because the overwhelming risk to women is from men. Following that they think that self-ID (without the sort of safeguards in current gender recognition laws) would allow abusive men to tak advantage of those laws in order to gain access to other victims. The big story that has shaped how people are talking about this in the last few months has been a double rapist announcing that they were transitioning after they were charged and the prospect that they might be placed in a female prison.

There is also a specific complaint you see with, for example Bailey or other lesbian campaigners that in effect same-sex desire/their interpretation of their lesbian identity is being erased in replacing biological sex with gender identity.

I think transmen face less opprobrium (except in the context of trans kids where there is a different issue) - in part I think that's ultimately because biological women are less of a threat to men in general or statistically.

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.

True I just don't see much of the Matt Walsh crisis of masculinity/men need to be men and women need to get back in the kitchen stuff here.

[Admiral Yi]

It's interesting to me that there is so little controversy around non-binaries, which is the gender identity I least understand.

[Valmy]

As I say here it is focused on single sex spaces like rape crisis centres, prisons, domestic violence shelters. It's true not all men, but 99% of the reason women need those spaces is because of men.

Their position is that single sex spaces exist and are protected in law because the overwhelming risk to women is from men. Following that they think that self-ID (without the sort of safeguards in current gender recognition laws) would allow abusive men to tak advantage of those laws in order to gain access to other victims. The big story that has shaped how people are talking about this in the last few months has been a double rapist announcing that they were transitioning after they were charged and the prospect that they might be placed in a female prison.

There is also a specific complaint you see with, for example Bailey or other lesbian campaigners that in effect same-sex desire/their interpretation of their lesbian identity is being erased in replacing biological sex with gender identity.

I think transmen face less opprobrium (except in the context of trans kids where there is a different issue) - in part I think that's ultimately because biological women are less of a threat to men in general or statistically.

Or even if they were a threat to biological men the feminists would not be the ones to be upset about it. I was wondering if the feminists specifically had a problem with it.

The Lesbian thing is interesting. I mean there is no requirement as a Lesbian to be attracted to ALL women. Is she concerned that Lesbians whose partner becomes a transman could then be straight? Or their partner becomes gender-fluid so now she must either become pansexual? I don't get the problem. It is not like the existence of transwomen means all heterosexual men must therefore want to bang them.

As far as the sex protected safe space thing the only one I see as relevant is prisons. Since you are literally a captive audience. However there are already really violent and abusive women in prison. And from what I understand there are less than 10 transwomen in the entire UK prison system. If we are talking about a single digit number of people we can probably handle each one on a case by base basis. A dangerous rapist transwoman can be handled similarly to a dangerous rapist any other type of prisoner. A double rapist suddenly declaring she is a woman seems like it can be handled on an individual common sense basis.

Besides who suffers more violence and sexual abuse on a per capita basis? cis woman or trans people? We are just going to send a transwoman into a male prison?

And what about big masculine transmen? They should go to a female prison?

Again we are talking about a tiny population. It is not like hundreds of these people are going to be let loose on the prison population. If somebody is considered a danger to the other prisoners, surely there should already be steps in place.

As far as things like shelters and bathrooms I don't know. If you are the kind of man who would enter one of those spaces just to rape somebody (and frankly that seems like the worst possible places to do that) why would the fact that they are protected by law do anything to stop you? You already have no issue breaking the law.

[chipwich]

It's interesting to me that there is so little controversy around non-binaries, which is the gender identity I least understand.

There's nothing to understand. It's just gibberish.

[Barrister]

It's interesting to me that there is so little controversy around non-binaries, which is the gender identity I least understand.

There's nothing to understand. It's just gibberish.

Why do you lead with such language?

NBs reject (or don't personally accept) the idea of gender.  To the extent they want to dress ambiguously, use non-gendered pronouns, etc. then why is it anyone's concern?  If someone wants to call themselves "non-binary" then let them.

To the extent that want to use services for the gender different than their birth gender, whether it be bathrooms, salons, shelters, or whatever, then it's the same issues you have with trans people.

(There's been a couple of really fringe cases where an NB child wants to go on puberty blockers essentially forever, and whether medically that is a good idea as those drugs has quite serious side effects, but again the medical system has long dealt with people whose medical choices seem objectively stupid)

[Jacob]

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

IIRC, when TERF was first coined - or at least when I frist came across it - the "radical" part was very much not a perjorative. It was self-proclaimed radical feminists - and who used that radical label to position themselves as "the real feminists" rejecting patriarchal institutions and ideas.

While "radical feminist" is typically wielded as a perjorative right of centre, it's not necessarily so among feminists. I've known plenty of self-proclaimed radical feminists (though to be fair, prior to trans issues being current).

So I think in the context of the coining of the term TERF, radical was not a perjorative but an accurate description... though that doesn't preclude drift in usage since then.

[Jacob]

As I say here it is focused on single sex spaces like rape crisis centres, prisons, domestic violence shelters. It's true not all men, but 99% of the reason women need those spaces is because of men.

What are their thoughts on where trans women rape and domestic violence victims should go for help, if they can't access services intended for women?

[Sheilbh]

As I say here it is focused on single sex spaces like rape crisis centres, prisons, domestic violence shelters. It's true not all men, but 99% of the reason women need those spaces is because of men.

What are their thoughts on where trans women rape and domestic violence victims should go for help, if they can't access services intended for women?

From my understanding they don't mind if centres make those decisions and my understanding is the majority of those centres do accept trans victims.

But they believe centres should be legally allowed to be single (biological) sex.

I was writing something really long and complicated - because our equality laws are incredibly complex and interlocking.

But it basically boils down to the meaning of sex and whether you are able to discriminate on the basis of sex. In the UK you can discriminate on the basis of sex in certain circumstances (you need good reasons that you can objectively justify) to provide certain single sex services or spaces. Courts have recently confirmed that a gender recognition certificate can change your legal sex.

If you believe, as "gender critical" feminists/"TERFs" do that sex is a biological fact with social implications (structured by a patriarchal and misogynist society) then as well as someone with a GRC not being able to be exluded on the basis of sex, but also the entire idea that you have objectively good reasons in the basis of the needs and rights of men and women to allow for single-sex services/spaces fall away. I'd note that on a purely technical drafting issue it also makes the protected characteristic of sexual orientation a bit weird because that means sexual orientation towards "persons of the same sex, persons of the opposite sex or persons of either sex" - if sex means legal sex, then they are in terms of biological sex, all the same. Which I don't think quite works.

It all kicked off in the UK because of changes to gender recognition to make it easier to get a GRC so easier to change your legal sex.

In a cards on the table style as with BBoy - I don't agree with the "gender critical" view on GRCs or gender recognition reform.

But I think the way gender recognition (especially following recent court cases) and gender recognition certificates interact with equalities law is really complex and it needs a broader review. I don't think gender recognition reform can happen without that review of equalities law in parallel.

I think the position of trans rights activists that it doesn't have any impact on equalities law is factually wrong (and the Scottish government inserting a clause in their bill that basically says their changes to law doesn't impact equalities law is legally nonsense).

[Valmy]

It's interesting to me that there is so little controversy around non-binaries, which is the gender identity I least understand.

There's nothing to understand. It's just gibberish.

Well most things are gibberish. I don't really need to understand it beyond whatever they want from me. Which generally seems to be referring to them by their new name and using "they" when referring to them. I have two such people in my life now.

Which, I have to say, is harder than one would think. I mean we already use "they" as a singular in some cases already but it is weird as hell using it as a singular in all cases.

But hey no big deal.

[Valmy]

From my understanding they don't mind if centres make those decisions and my understanding is the majority of those centres do accept trans victims.

But they believe centres should be legally allowed to be single (biological) sex.

Are they not allowed to do that? Incredible. We have state governments saying it is illegal to NOT do that.

[Sheilbh]

Are they not allowed to do that? Incredible. We have state governments saying it is illegal to NOT do that.

They are legally allowed to do that now.

It is not clear what that means following recent rulings that GRC certificate = changes your legal sex - and it's in the context of proposals to make it easier to get a GRC.

[Admiral Yi]

What are their thoughts on where trans women rape and domestic violence victims should go for help, if they can't access services intended for women?

What are the thoughts of trans advocates on where cis rape and domestic violence victims should go if they feel threatened by the presence of biological men?

[Valmy]

What are their thoughts on where trans women rape and domestic violence victims should go for help, if they can't access services intended for women?

What are the thoughts of trans advocates on where cis rape and domestic violence victims should go if they feel threatened by the presence of biological men?

Ok well I am going to go back to my experience as a child care worker here.

Well what are the thoughts of you when young children are abused their mothers? They feel threatened by women and act out, sure. Of course they do. But dealing with that is part of their recovery from their abuse. At no point are they isolated from all women, which you have to admit would be pretty challenging since the overwhelming majority of social workers are women. We work to get the child to understand that yes this person abused them but that doesn't mean all people who resemble that person are their abuser.

It seems weird to me that grown adults should receive this when literal children are expected to differentiate between their abuser and others who resemble them. Shouldn't the adults be capable of things children are expected to do?

[Barrister]

Back to JK Rowling: here's an article summing up her transphobia:

https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy

I note a lot of it is based on things she's liked on Twitter.  Some of it are comments that have already been mentioned here.

But I was amused atthe final paragraph:

January 2023: Rowling tweets that she is "Deeply amused by those telling me I've lost their admiration due to the disrespect I show violent, duplicitous rapists." The most immediate context for this comment is presumably both the backlash to Hogwarts Legacy and the ongoing backlash over Rowling's views writ large regarding trans women being dangerous predators. So a reasonable implication of Rowling's words seems to be that she considers trans women, by default, to be "violent, duplicitous rapists."

I'm going to suggest that is not in fact a reasonable implication of Rowling's words.

[Tamas]

I think the whole backlash over the PC game thing is revealing of opinion bubbles because I am not seeing it anywhere.