• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Transwomen are not women - part 13

Status
Not open for further replies.
lionking said:
Can you give one example of JK Rowling’s transphobia?
Click to expand...

"I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who're standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society."

"Because of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter."

There's TWO examples!
 
LondonJohn said:
Erm, as a starter for 10, how about her initial infamous tweet, in which she mocked the use of the term "people who menstruate" and wrote something addressing this akin to "I'm sure there's a term for such people: wimbum, wimmin (etc)".

And this is actually a nakedly anti-trans piece of grandstanding: Rowling is, in effect, wilfully disregarding the fact that some trans men (who are men, unless you're anti-trans) menstruate - which is the exact reason why it's appropriate* to use the term "people who menstruate" (and inappropriate & non-inclusive to use the term "women" in this context).

Rowling has made plenty more anti-trans statements since this one - it just so happens that this was the one which launched her into the ranks of the anti-trans bigots.


* Oh and before the wearily predictable accusations of misogyny and so on.... the very same principle applies to something like "people with prostates": most trans women (who are women unless you're anti-trans) have prostates, so it would be similarly inappropriate and non-inclusive to say "men" in this context.
Click to expand...

Utter ********. JK was the victim of a TRA lynch mob, desperately looking for a celebrity to string up. The lynch mob also piled in over her detective book where the culprit was not trans at all, merely a cross dressing murderer.

But no surprise you adopt a typical and lazy TRA position.
 
AmyStrange said:
So, in other words, you'd consider a woman who could impregnate herself (without any type of help from a man, including artificial insemination) as an example of only one gender and not as a separate one? Gotcha.
Click to expand...

You didn't pay attention at all. Sex is not gender. I don't care how many genders you want to claim, it doesn't matter.

And the only way to really get a human with two sexes is with a mixed sex chimera. The hermaphrodite mentioned in your link are generally not true hermaphrodite despite the label. To be a true hermaphrodite, you need to produce both sperm and egg, and the DSDs described in your link do not do that.

But looking at your other link, it gets better. Oh, it gets soon much better. I'm pretty sure your link is AI generated, because its comments on how many genders seems lifted from a discussion of linguistic genders where inanimate objects get a gender despite having no sex. But that's just the warmup, because it talks about pronouns for hermaphrodites and it uses words I had never heard before like Chakats and Eponids. And guess where searching for that took me?
https://chakats.fandom.com/wiki/Chakat_Universe
These are fictional races in a science fiction universe. Quite fitting for the topic, If unintentionally so.

I wonder how you came across that link, and what made you think it was authoritative on the topic.
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
Not one that you would accept, I'm sure, so let's skip this tedious song and dance.

If Rowling is not a transphobe she has some of the all time worst PR on the planet, because boy do a lot of people think she's a transphobe. I don't think she's this inarticulate though, so seems unlikely that there has been big misunderstanding.
Click to expand...

Rather than come up with anything, you take the lazy “some people think she is” gambit. Contemptuous.
 
Matthew Best said:
I got to say I'm not really feeling Caniry as a reputable source. They can't spell or write using proper grammar, and their sources are non-existent. They just make unevidenced claims.
Click to expand...

Large language model AIs rarely do. They also can't distinguish between fact and fiction.
 
LondonJohn said:
Rowling is, in effect, wilfully disregarding the fact that some trans men (who are men, unless you're anti-trans)
Click to expand...
All my print dictionaries are anti-trans, evidently, since they propagate the archaic notion that men are adult males.

Any idea where I can pick up a newer less transphobic definition of men? I'd hate for my kiddos to look this one up and find out what we were willfully disregarding all those years.

Prediction: LJ won't actually say what "men" means in his own usage, because that would go beyond condemnation into discussion.
 
Last edited:
Matthew Best said:
You are what is known as an ipsedixitist: one who firmly asserts that something is true because another person said so, with no other evidence to back it up.

(Tip of hat to Susie Dent, whose word of the day this was a few days ago.)
Click to expand...


I can go along with that, and thanks. I like learning new words.

-
 
Ziggurat said:
You didn't pay attention at all. Sex is not gender. I don't care how many genders you want to claim, it doesn't matter.

And the only way to really get a human with two sexes is with a mixed sex chimera. The hermaphrodite mentioned in your link are generally not true hermaphrodite despite the label. To be a true hermaphrodite, you need to produce both sperm and egg, and the DSDs described in your link do not do that.

But looking at your other link, it gets better. Oh, it gets soon much better. I'm pretty sure your link is AI generated, because its comments on how many genders seems lifted from a discussion of linguistic genders where inanimate objects get a gender despite having no sex. But that's just the warmup, because it talks about pronouns for hermaphrodites and it uses words I had never heard before like Chakats and Eponids. And guess where searching for that took me?
https://chakats.fandom.com/wiki/Chakat_Universe
These are fictional races in a science fiction universe. Quite fitting for the topic, If unintentionally so.

I wonder how you came across that link, and what made you think it was authoritative on the topic.
Click to expand...


Hey, no one's perfect, including everyone else on this forum.

-
 
A recent tech conference and job fair was held for women and non-binary people. A large number of males identifying as non-binary showed up. And a bunch of people are pissed because they think that most of these males are just exploiting a loophole to dishonestly claim binary status so they can talk to recruiters.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/...binary-crashed-a-woke-womens-tech-conference/

Who could possibly have predicted this outcome.
 
Ziggurat said:
A recent tech conference and job fair was held for women and non-binary people. A large number of males identifying as non-binary showed up. And a bunch of people are pissed because they think that most of these males are just exploiting a loophole to dishonestly claim binary status so they can talk to recruiters.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/...binary-crashed-a-woke-womens-tech-conference/

Who could possibly have predicted this outcome.
Click to expand...

Seems like a bad strategy to communicate to potential employers that you're untrustworthy.

The tech industry proving it still has an unresolved problem with piggish men is not particularly surprising.
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
Seems like a bad strategy to communicate to potential employers that you're untrustworthy.
Click to expand...


"You can trust me to play along with your company's pursuit of gender diversity accolades and/or meeting gender diversity quotas."
 
TurkeysGhost said:
Seems like a bad strategy to communicate to potential employers that you're untrustworthy.
Click to expand...

Is it? Why? What's untrustworthy about identifying as non-binary?

The tech industry proving it still has an unresolved problem with piggish men is not particularly surprising.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that they're men? And what exactly is a man?
 
Myriad said:
"You can trust me to play along with your company's pursuit of gender diversity accolades and/or meeting gender diversity quotas."
Click to expand...

More likely: "I'm openly contemptuous of the idea of diversity in the tech industry and am far more likely to cause a sexual harassment or other illegal discrimination lawsuit if hired because of my piggish attitudes".
 
Ziggurat said:
Who could possibly have predicted this outcome.
Click to expand...
“Yesterday it became clear that there are a far greater number of cisgender men than we anticipated. Simply put, some of you lied about your gender when you registered.”

Wait, what? :(

How can anyone claim to know if someone is lying when self-identification is literally the only criterion to be considered non-binary?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
“Yesterday it became clear that there are a far greater number of cisgender men than we anticipated. Simply put, some of you lied about your gender when you registered.”

Wait, what?

How can anyone claim to know if someone is lying when self-identification is literally the only criterion to be non-binary?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Seeing as they held their conference in Florida, I suppose verifying this would be pretty much impossible.

In states with formalized self-id, like California, one could require ID cards to verify gender and opportunistic ploys like this would require more hurdles.

I have no idea on the legality of this generally, or how a public conference can discriminate in this way to start with, but this seems largely a problem that results from the ambiguity of having the state adopt of position that denies the existence of trans and non-binary people. Real problem in the US as state laws vary wildly, but one can imagine that this would be a non-issue in Canada, for example, as people's declared identity is verifiable.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
How can anyone claim to know if someone is lying when self-identification is literally the only criterion to be considered non-binary?
Click to expand...

Same way Trans people just magically know that anyone claiming to be the other gender for nefarious purposes doesn't count and isn't really "In the club."

The whole "It's pure self identification" thing is a copout and has never been true.

It's always been "Pure self identification and a magical undefined other variable that we will never clarify."

That's been one of a billion death spirals in this "The Swindon Magic Round About of Death Spirals" that walks like a discussion.

"Oh come on nobody is saying that someone can just wake up one day and go 'I'm the other sex.' Nobody is saying that. That's a total strawman."

"Okay so what's the other criteria?"

"LOOK A SQUIRREL!"
 
TurkeysGhost said:
More likely: "I'm openly contemptuous of the idea of diversity in the tech industry and am far more likely to cause a sexual harassment or other illegal discrimination lawsuit if hired because of my piggish attitudes".
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence that males claiming to be nonbinary are a particular risk for committing sexual harassment? I would be absolutely fascinated by such data.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom