JK Rowling's Anti Trans Crusade

[Arakhor]

We could fill an entire thread talking just about how the Harry Potter books are absolutely rife with all sorts of unfortunate implications, some of which might be accidental and others which are clearly intended. But as they say, power (or wealth, fame etc.) isn't inherently corrupting, but what it always does is show people who you really are.

 

[Samson]

as they say, power (or wealth, fame etc.) isn't inherently corrupting

I do not think that is what most people say.

 

[Arakhor]

I know that old phrase, yes, but I was referencing Robert Caro: "Power doesn't corrupt, it reveals".

A longer version of this sentiment is from Josiah Osgood: "Power unmasks the true identity of leaders. It brings to light weaknesses that were there all along but might have been overlooked."

 

[Farm Boy]

If you have no idea what someone is talking about, I would not advise talking about it so flippantly in a political thread. People might get the wrong idea about what you're saying.

flippant.

 

[Arakhor]

If I've understood your laconism, I was being entirely serious.

(If not, well that's what happens when you write a single word as your entire post.)

 

[Farm Boy]

I've rarely seen somebody so self flagelating described as glib.

Is this like when somebody admitting they struggle with thoughts of self harm gets slapped with "flippant?" I get that if the person doesn't matter, it would translate as that.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

She's not arguing for cis men to be blanket treated or seen as potential rapists but she does argue that trans women are a specific risk

Yes she does. I apologise, I didn't mean to imply that I think she is going after cis men as much as trans women, she obviously isn't. I'm just saying it's driven by her view that it is those "men" that are currently the biggest concern because they're the ones trying to get into bathrooms and other women's spaces. But the root problem for her is that it's men.

But also more broadly I'm talking about RFs in general. The TE is kind of an inevitable consequence of the RF as far as I see it.

 

[Arakhor]

I've rarely seen somebody so self flagelating described as glib.

Is this like when somebody admitting they struggle with thoughts of self harm gets slapped with "flippant?" I get that if the person doesn't matter, it would translate as that.

I would never dismiss anyone at risk of self-harm as flippant, assuming we both mean "disrespectfully casual". But if someone told me that someone famous was actively dangerous to their demographic, I might well not know anything about that, but I certainly wouldn't respond with any variation of "I don't really care."

 

[Perfection]

Yes she does. I apologise, I didn't mean to imply that I think she is going after cis men as much as trans women, she obviously isn't. I'm just saying it's driven by her view that it is those "men" that are currently the biggest concern because they're the ones trying to get into bathrooms and other women's spaces. But the root problem for her is that it's men.

But also more broadly I'm talking about RFs in general. The TE is kind of an inevitable consequence of the RF as far as I see it.

The whole idea that transwomen are any sort of danger in bathrooms and should be legally banned is absolutely ridiculous for anyone who gives it more than 5minutes of thought and thinks about the practical implications of such a ban, Any public figure who consistently advocates for it can safely be dismissed as a hatemongering asswipe

 

[Farm Boy]

I would never dismiss anyone at risk of self-harm as flippant, assuming we both mean "disrespectfully casual". But if someone told me that someone famous was actively dangerous to their demographic, I might well not know anything about that, but I certainly wouldn't respond with any variation of "I don't really care."

Certainly.

Thoughts and prayers.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

The whole idea that transwomen are any sort of danger in bathrooms and should be legally banned is absolutely ridiculous for anyone who gives it more than 5minutes of thought and thinks about the practical implications of such a ban, Any public figure who consistently advocates for it can safely be dismissed as a hatemongering asswipe

Yeah but the point is, that's how she sees men in general. Trans women are a danger because they are men (in her view), not because of any unique characteristic of "transness" or whatever. It's just that those are the men going in "her" spaces and are therefore the most dangerous.

Maybe that's all just academic and doesn't really make much difference, but I feel like acknowledging the root cause is beneficial.

 

[Perfection]

Yeah but the point is, that's how she sees men in general. Trans women are a danger because they are men (in her view), not because of any unique characteristic of "transness" or whatever. It's just that those are the men going in "her" spaces and are therefore the most dangerous.

Maybe that's all just academic and doesn't really make much difference, but I feel like acknowledging the root cause is beneficial.

honestly JK Rowling is sad, she probably hates everyone including herself. She just gets more twitter traction with the trans hate.

 

[Samson]

The TE is kind of an inevitable consequence of the RF as far as I see it.

There are RFs who are not TE. Plenty see feminism as part of a wider movement for equality that includes trans rights.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

There are RFs who are not TE. Plenty see feminism as part of a wider movement for equality that includes trans rights.

Well I'm sure there are, but if any group is going to be more predisposed to being TE it's going to be the RFs (RF being a subset of F as well of course, and I didn't say F).

 

[Perfection]

or feminist

 

[Voidwalkin]

Rowling looms larger in British culture than ours. She is rarely discussed amongst Americans.

The whole TERF movement doesn't really factor into the roots in much of America. It's kinda there, but the women who would exclude trans women from bathrooms gleefully would I imagine seldom describe themselves as feminists.

 

[Samson]

Rowling looms larger in British culture than ours. She is rarely discussed amongst Americans.

The whole TERF movement doesn't really factor into the roots in much of America. It's kinda there, but the women who would exclude trans women from bathrooms gleefully would I imagine seldom describe themselves as feminists.

Yeah, the british terf is defiantly distinct from the US Christian fundamentalist anti-trans. The original crop at least were pretty left wing. This is the person credited with the first recorded use:

It was meant to be a deliberately technically neutral description of an activist grouping. We wanted a way to distinguish TERFs from other radfems with whom we engaged who were trans*-positive/neutral, because we had several years of history of engaging productively/substantively with non-TERF radfems.

wikipedia

 

[Arwon]

The British and Americans have each invented their own brand of anti trans psychosis but I don't think the distinction means much in practical terms when the two hate movements work together and cross-pollinate so much

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1887432914989654163

I don't know what JK Rowling is talking about. Is there a news story behind this?

 

[EnglishEdward]

I'd assume she was talking about the election of Donald Trump as POTUS.