JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault

[Valmy]

It is a very emotional issue. We see that kind of thing in many of these identity deals

[Sophie Scholl]

I don't think you're as well informed as you think, grumbler. Rowling is most assuredly not a "vehement supporter of trans rights" if that is what you're suggesting. That's like saying people who supported Jim Crow laws and separate but "equal" treatment for African Americans were vehement equal rights supporters. Her words and actions have made it very clear where she stands when it comes to Trans Rights and what she honestly things of trans people. She is, properly, labeled a TERF for a reason. She may not be calling for trans people to be killed, but she most assuredly is not calling for them to be treated well, treated how they wish to be treated, or given equality. The pro-Trans Rights community isn't tearing itself apart at all from what I've seen. Maybe to a misinformed and clueless moderate who is way out of his league it appears that way, but I think it might just be an issue on your end. Ultimately though, your pontificating on a partial or incorrect understanding of the issue is both pretty fucking annoying and condescending.

[garbon]

Yeah, I don't think simply saying you are an ally, qualifies you as one. And certainly not when you parrot anti-trans rhetoric and trans people tell you that your words hurt them.

[grumbler]

Again, simply declaring that Rowling is evil doesn't make her evil, nor is she required to have only make statements that not even the most sensitive trans person would feel hurt by.    Rowling's statement that "I respect every trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" is taken by the trans fanatics to be hate speech, but it seems to me that that's a problem for the trans fanatics to fix in themselves.

Now, the issue of using "people who menstruate" or "women" is a case of her just being wrong.  Not evil, not radical, just wrong.  There's a small community for whom "people who menstruate" does not mean "women," and Rowling is wrong to think that the nearly-correct term is better than the correct term.  Not evil, not radical, just wrong.  Just as the people who call her ideas "TERF" ideas are wrong.  Not evil, just wrong.  Rowling can be a woman without that idea being hateful.

[Sophie Scholl]

Just stop. Do more research. Come back and make comments at that point. Right now you're just flaunting your ignorance. It is sad and embarrassing.

[garbon]

Just stop. Do more research. Come back and make comments at that point. Right now you're just flaunting your ignorance. It is sad and embarrassing.

He doesn't really need to do research. He could read the first post of this thread.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting piece in the Indy:

I sympathised with gender-critical campaigners – until my nephew came out as trans
I clutched at everything I could find to validate my instinct that transgender identities were a millennial fad. But when I stopped to listen to my trailblazing sister, I saw that her son was thriving
Nora Mulready
2 days ago

In the last 18 months, I have experienced a powerful and precious thing – a sincere change of mind. In 2017, my nephew came out as transgender. Although I was in some ways supportive, changing pronouns and the name I called him, inside I found it challenging and hoped this "phase" would pass.

The idea that you could be "born in the wrong body", as some people frame it, or that your consciousness could be gendered, or that you could physically change your body to match your mind was far beyond my understanding and my experience of life. The rise in prominence of transgender voices awoke in me what I thought at the time was a protective rejection of a new "woke" orthodoxy, but what I now see was simply the same deep-rooted conservatism that has made human beings resistant to change throughout so much of our history.

At first, I sought out stories about de-transitioning and regret, I read the obscure paper on the so-called "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria", a popular term in gender-critical circles used to dispute the identities of transgender people. I read everything I could find that validated my instinct that the increase in transgender identity was a millennial fad, mental health issues, trauma, social contagion, fashion, patriarchy, you name it, I clutched at it. However, I did not join in the public debates because I had a family connection to a child I adore and a sister, his mother, who I love beyond words. Instead, I stayed quiet, I watched and I waited, I saw my nephew thrive, I met many wonderful trans people who simply wanted to live their lives, I listened, and I learned, a lot. Over time my views changed.

As well as my growing understanding of trans people, by taking a step back from the freneticism of the "trans debate", the contradictions in the trans-sceptic arguments became more apparent to me. On trans children, I started to struggle with reconciling the arguments that the increasing numbers of trans boys coming out was due to misogyny in our society, yet the increasing number of trans girls was despite the same misogyny. The argument is that girls feel so worthless that they opt to be boys, yet when talking about trans girls, this argument disappeared in an instant.

Another example is the debate about when someone should be legally recognised as their non-biological gender. Gender-critical campaigners are fighting to ensure that the government insists on medical, not just social, transition for gender identity to be legally recognised. They simultaneously accuse trans activists and even parents of trans children of "shunting them" down a medical route. This is both wildly different from the lived experience of these families, who tread carefully, sensitively, and cautiously with their children, as well as deeply hypocritical by the gender-critical campaigners who both insist on medical transition, whilst also condemning it. Again, trans people cannot win.

The final end to my sympathy for gender-critical campaigners was the collective punishment approach to trans women. All trans women are held accountable for any misdemeanour by any trans woman. This is the very epitome of prejudice. "You cannot share our toilets, you cannot share our spaces, because you might be all the same." It is a heart-breaking act of cruelty towards trans women and is reminiscent of the very worst of the American deep south attitudes towards racial integration.

My sister has said to me right from the start that this is not a free speech issue but an issue of kindness and humanity towards a group of people who are mocked and maligned daily. She would never argue that JK Rowling and Piers Morgan do not have the right to say what they think about trans identity, but would simply ask them to think about the impact of what they are saying when, for example, they mock inclusive language about menstruation, on an already very marginalised group. Instead of mocking the idea of tampon dispensers in male bathrooms, think of the trans boys and men whose lives would be made a tiny bit easier by this becoming standard. Something I now see as extremely sad about this debate is that decent high-profile people who could do so much good by standing with trans people are instead making their lives harder.

This month, we saw the death of the great Irish peacemaker, John Hume. Hume said, "Difference is the essence of humanity. Difference is an accident of birth, and it should therefore never be the source of hatred or conflict. Therein lies a most fundamental principle of peace: respect for diversity." I now hold this quote as a challenge to myself, and to us all.

We may not understand each other, we may not always feel comfortable with each other, but the peaceful coexistence of difference is humanity's greatest goal, and where it happens, it is our greatest achievement. Seeing this issue unfold within my own family taught me a profound lesson: the importance of humility in the face of something you do not understand. I am now a full trans ally, a proud aunt to a courageous 14-year-old boy, and a proud sister to his trailblazing mother who has become one of the most vocal campaigners for kindness and understanding for trans children in the UK. I now see trans acceptance as a civil rights issue, and I hope more and more people will stand with trans people in this fight.

Nora Mulready is co-director of an advocacy charity in London

[Syt]

Rowling's statement that "I respect every trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" is taken by the trans fanatics to be hate speech

Erm, no. My reading is that the trans community takes issue with her not wanting to allow trans women into ladies' restrooms, changing rooms or women refuges, because they are, after all, actually men and therefore create unsafe spaces for women.

[Josquius]

This was a pretty good look at transphobia. It explains from shortly after the linked point the problem people see in the "Let people do what they want" sort of thinking.

https://youtu.be/yCxqdhZkxCo?t=186

Basically "Let people live how they want to live" is saying trans people aren't really trans, they're just guys deciding to wear a dress for fun (and thats fine!), hence don't deserve the rights of cis-women.

[Eddie Teach]

Men already have all the rights of women.

[grumbler]

Rowling's statement that "I respect every trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" is taken by the trans fanatics to be hate speech

Erm, no. My reading is that the trans community takes issue with her not wanting to allow trans women into ladies' restrooms, changing rooms or women refuges, because they are, after all, actually men and therefore create unsafe spaces for women.

Erm, no.  That's not her position at all.  If that's the position that the trans community objects to, they are objecting to a strawman. 

What she has said is that she thinks it unsafe for women if a person can simply access women's restrooms, changing rooms, and refuges simply by stating that they are a trans woman.  She believes that there should be a process to distinguish between actual trans women and predatory men merely claiming to be trans women.  If that's the position that the trans community finds hateful, then the trans community needs to reconsider.

[garbon]

Rowling's statement that "I respect every trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" is taken by the trans fanatics to be hate speech

Erm, no. My reading is that the trans community takes issue with her not wanting to allow trans women into ladies' restrooms, changing rooms or women refuges, because they are, after all, actually men and therefore create unsafe spaces for women.

Erm, no.  That's not her position at all.  If that's the position that the trans community objects to, they are objecting to a strawman. 

What she has said is that she thinks it unsafe for women if a person can simply access women's restrooms, changing rooms, and refuges simply by stating that they are a trans woman.  She believes that there should be a process to distinguish between actual trans women and predatory men merely claiming to be trans women.  If that's the position that the trans community finds hateful, then the trans community needs to reconsider.

Perhaps we could look at her own words:

At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman – and, as I've said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.

Inference seems to be if they get a gender confirmation certificate then it is okay for them to use the restroom. Not sure how that works in practice though, do you wear it or provide it on demand when questioned by authorities/members of the public?

Of course, I'm not sure why the mental gymnastics is needed given it doesn't appear to be illegal for a cis-man to enter a woman's bathroom. Do we have any evidence that there's a high number of occurrences of cis-men pretending to be trans for the purposes of entering a woman's bathroom?

Shouldn't the burden of proof fall on those who want to restrict a right?

[grumbler]

Perhaps we could look at her own words:

At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman – and, as I've said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.

Inference seems to be if they get a gender confirmation certificate then it is okay for them to use the restroom. Not sure how that works in practice though, do you wear it or provide it on demand when questioned by authorities/members of the public?

Looking at her words, it is clear that my summary of her position is correct, and that the argument that she is "not wanting to allow trans women into ladies' restrooms, changing rooms or women refuges, because they are, after all, actually men and therefore create unsafe spaces for women" is untrue.

Of course, I'm not sure why the mental gymnastics is needed given it doesn't appear to be illegal for a cis-man to enter a woman's bathroom.

Interesting.  In Virginia, that would be trespassing, but UK law is different.  Do bathrooms in the UK still have labels of mens' and womens'?

Do we have any evidence that there's a high number of occurrences of cis-men pretending to be trans for the purposes of entering a woman's bathroom?

Shouldn't the burden of proof fall on those who want to restrict a right?

Do we have a legal definition of "high number?"  What "right" is being restricted here?

[viper37]

Inference seems to be if they get a gender confirmation certificate then it is okay for them to use the restroom. Not sure how that works in practice though, do you wear it or provide it on demand when questioned by authorities/members of the public?

Of course, I'm not sure why the mental gymnastics is needed given it doesn't appear to be illegal for a cis-man to enter a woman's bathroom. Do we have any evidence that there's a high number of occurrences of cis-men pretending to be trans for the purposes of entering a woman's bathroom?

Shouldn't the burden of proof fall on those who want to restrict a right?

a) there have been cases of predatory trans persons rejected from refuge for their predatory behaviour

b) the way I see it, to be declared trans, you'd have to be at least willing to live as a (in this case) female all the time, not just when it suits you.  I believe there is a lenghty process involved and hormones or no hormones, you have to dress and identify as a woman first before you are declared a woman.  I believe that is what JK Rowling is hinting at in her post.  Otherwise, any abuser could just come knocking at the door, say he's a woman and come to harrass his prey.

[Sheilbh]

Sort of. The first thing to note is that domestic violence centres already have a legal obligation to risk assess any person they take in and that doesn't change because of changes to the laws around gender recognition, it's a separate issue around their duty of care. So on a practical level most women's domestic violence shelters already take trans women with, it should be noted, few incidents.

The second is the current, lengthy process is as you say that you have to live in the gender you identify for a two year period. There's lots of evidence you need to gather, including a diagnosis by two doctors. It then gets adjudicated by a legal and medical panel. I'm not sure if it's been removed but the also had a spousal veto - even if a couple was separated (the UK doesn't have no-fault divorce I don't think). Obviously that's particularly an issue if there's also domestic violence.

But the effect of that isn't that you suddenly get access to all of these hitherto banned spaces - it's that the sex on your birth certificate and passport gets changed. It should be noted that the proposal to change the law would move us to the position in Ireland, Belgium, Spain, Argentina and other countries - so in terms of risks from this I think we can look at those countries and see their experience rather than just spitball concerns, when that has a direct effect on people's lives.

Now the practical issue is presumably until then a transwoman, living as a woman who hasn't been approved yet - or maybe just vetoed by her spouse - should continue to use the men's bathroom? Or the disabled loo? Or is it okay for her to use the woman's loo?