So, to be the dissenting voice in your own echo chamber, Joe, I’ll happily bring it.
J K Rowling IS the problem. Here is a household name author, a near billionaire, with a twitter followers of over 15-16 million at the times of the tweets you reference and the countless others she’s issued on the subject of trans rights. All doubling down on error and an essentialism that is disproved by the science, but that also undermines the gains of second and third wave feminism. I don’t doubt you yourself couldn’t give a fig about that. But I’d suggest that if Ms. Rowling were able to detach herself from the runaway mine cart of ‘gender critical feminism’ she’d see that she has done other women potential irreparable harm.
Let’s start with her tweet in support of Maya Forstater that you reference. She states, utterly erroneously, and without basis, that Forstater was fired for stating biological sex was real. Got news for you…I’m a trans woman and I don’t suggest for a second thta biological sex isn’t real. On the contrary I’m more fully aware of its existence that most. Forstater was fired for repeatedly and abusively misgendering a colleague. It was a violation of her terms of employment and as such the tribunal upheld her dismissal. And indeed had some scathing words to say about Ms. Forstater’s conduct. As an absolute minimum her behaviours was rude, demeaning, and unprofessional. There’s no way in hell I’d want her representing my firm.
So Joanna Rowling was being plain disingenuous. I say disingenuous, rather than mistaken because even then she had prior form, retweeting an outspoken transphobe’s view of women like me.
The ‘women who mensturate’ tweet was a huge slap in the face to all the trans men and non binary people I know who do indeed menstruate. This was no passive call for sanity. The language used did NOT exclude cis women nor denigrate them at all. Yet she chose to throw her weight around to point out that we shouldn’t be say phrases that yes are clunky but none the less exclude no-one. Ooh Inclusion there’s one of your SJW bingo buzzwords huh, Joe? The reason it matters, just in this very specific example is that because of the female-centric language used by many services trans men and AFAB non-binary people are massively disproportionately likely to avoid accessing vital healthcare. Pap smears are a glaring example. It seems trans men are real men after all - they’re embarrassed by anything girly and reluctant to access healthcare. Yet Rowling is of the opinion that trans men should be welcomed as the confused lesbians they so obviously are. SMFH.
Then there’s all the other times Rowling has doubled down on her transphobia, or to be more specific her wholesale buying into the bullshit hysteria that surrounds trans women like me. Trans men are collateral damage. Non-binary folk are invisible. Indeed Rowling’s broadside against ‘people who menstruate’ was designed to denigrate trans women not trans men. Anything to ‘protect real women’… lol I don’t have time, energy or inclination to explain why this is fallacious. But it is. In spades.
What is a threat to cis women is the increasingly draconian measures being called for to police trans women out of single sex spaces. When butch lesbians and less conventionally feminine women are being refused access to restrooms just in case they’re trans women the plot has been lost. And not by us of the so-called (lmao) SJW Persuasion. It’s those of you with conservatism in mind that are messing with cis women.
Should panties be checked at the door? This is the reduction ad absurdum of trying to police even biological sex, much less gender.
And of course you know the difference right, Joe? Between sex and gender? A knowledgeable guy like you…
Having lived with gender dysphoria for decades all I can say to cis folks like yourself and Rowling is be thankful you don’t. You couldn’t handle it. And you’d be screaming twice as loud as we do for the rest of the world to adjust.
So yeah, with the audience she has, J K Rowling IS a problem. Of her 15 million followers millions will never knowingly have met a trans person and yet will trust what she says. Cos well she’s J K Rowling. She has been ceded, or rather assumed, an authority she lacks the knowledge to adequately carry.
As for the science. Again, SMFH. Joe, transcend 4th grade, please. I would cite a number of academjc and scientific papers at this point if I thought I had any hope of reaching you. But our previous interactions haven’t inspired hope. Still I’m ever the optimist and will happily cite if I believe you’ll read them (or at least the abstracts).
Believe it or not,
PS. I’m not a fan of Harry Potter so I don’t have skin in that side of the game. I do however feel for my trans siblings who are so devastatingly bereft at what seems a massive betrayal by a woman who is, to my mind, simply human. And thus has flaws.
She should maybe stick to talking about stuff she actually knows though.