Not surprising considering you make one mistake after another and another and another...
Ms Rowling: insightful critic of gender policy or myopic [insult]
- Thread starter TheVat
- Start date
Dont confuse the lack of willing to recognise them with them not existing. Russia has banned reassignment surgery, has almost complete lack of support for them from the government, even bans them from driving. They (the government) effectively deem them "undesirables", and discriminate against them in many aspects of life.
But I guess if you close your eyes to them you won't see them, and will think they simply don't exist. But they do, and likely in higher numbers than would ever admit to it in such an opressive society.
Ага. Хочешь русский анекдот на эту тему?
Парень приводит домой девушку, ночь любви, и всё такое. Потом она идёт в душ, а он в ожидании её начинает рассматривать комнату, и видит на полке перевёрнутый портрет. Ему становится интересно, он переворачивает портрет, и видит на нём какого то бородатого мужика. Тут его совсем распирает любопытство. Когда девушка заходит обратно в спальню, он начинает у неё выспрашивать, кто это такой на портрете. Она отказывается отвечать, парня уже совсем съедает любопытство, и он говорит ей: "это твой бывший? Ну скажи, обещаю тебе, что я не буду ревновать". Девушка у него уточняет:" ты точно меня не бросишь?" "Нет-нет" - уверяет её парень. "Ну, ок." - отвечает она ему, "это - Я".
Нет, этим запретам всего несколько лет, а у нас их и раньше не было. Либо было так мало, что это было незаметно.
Brief Notes ("Mahnàmahnà", b/w, "Glinnerwood")
So, as I was going to Sain―… wait, what, now?
Anyway, I've been having a moment, or, I suppose, more than a moment, with the phenomenon otherwise known as ¿Could you please not? It's true, that one is a fraught explanation no matter how I approach it. That is to say: If [not], then [do not]. You might think that shouldn't be so hard to figure out, but you wouldn't believe, you wouldn't believe. It's like they're hitting their marks, or reciting ritual stations.
And, then, yesterday, when I was writing the Linehan-Biggerstaff post↑, another extraordinary moment in a 2023 Times article↱, because it turns out that about a week and a half ago someone did a glinner and I missed it.
Notes:
Billen, Andrew. "Graham Linehan: the trans debate left me cancelled and broke". The Times. 17 March 2023. Archive.ph. 22 April 2025. https://archive.ph/20230317132733/h...graham-linehan-and-the-trans-debate-cgv8gqpjk
So, as I was going to Sain―… wait, what, now?
Anyway, I've been having a moment, or, I suppose, more than a moment, with the phenomenon otherwise known as ¿Could you please not? It's true, that one is a fraught explanation no matter how I approach it. That is to say: If [not], then [do not]. You might think that shouldn't be so hard to figure out, but you wouldn't believe, you wouldn't believe. It's like they're hitting their marks, or reciting ritual stations.
And, then, yesterday, when I was writing the Linehan-Biggerstaff post↑, another extraordinary moment in a 2023 Times article↱, because it turns out that about a week and a half ago someone did a glinner and I missed it.
"I have met people, people I've worked with — big names — and begged them to become involved. Begged them. Please just say, 'Graham Linehan is right,' or 'Graham Linehan has some important contributions to make on this,' anything that makes it sound as though I'm doing this for anything other than recreational cruelty. That's how I'm portrayed. Like a recreational sadist. And none of them will stand up for me."
____________________Notes:
Billen, Andrew. "Graham Linehan: the trans debate left me cancelled and broke". The Times. 17 March 2023. Archive.ph. 22 April 2025. https://archive.ph/20230317132733/h...graham-linehan-and-the-trans-debate-cgv8gqpjk
This is pretty much what it boils down to.
The whole pre-op thing that Rowling, et al, seem to obsess over is just a red herring. And this rather rare phenomenon of men dressing as women and assaulting people in restrooms has precisely nothing to do with transgender people--especially as the offenders are overwhelmingly (if not entirely) cisgender people.
With homophobia and transphobia there's always been an element where, or a contingent for whom, the objections seem wholly aesthetic. In the real world, depending upon whom you ask, a lot of women "look like men" and a lot of men "look like women". No one is obsessing over which restrooms these people should use. These days I kinda look like Osama Bin Laden (that is, extremely thin, long wispy beard and probably had Marfan Syndrome), but back when I was younger--and I shaved--I could very easily be made up to look like a runway model. However, there's a sizable contingent of creepy men (and probably some women) who maintain that runway models don't really "look like women"--you know, cuz no butt, no boobs, no curves. As far as using restrooms go, I'm not sure what the presence or absence of a dick has to do with anything.
Fourth-wave feminism actually does broaden itself to other culture theory participants, like LGBT+. With its cyberfeminism sub-category even desiring the introduction or creation of dozens of new (non-binary) genders. But 4th-wave movements are merely one facet of a very complicated feminist landscape.
For instance, a problem that the "gender critical" (GC) branch of radical feminism has with trans-women is that they regard the latter as perpetuating patriarchal gender norms that were used to subjugate women in the past. That includes their feeling or belief that they were biologically predetermined to be female rather than male (have female brains in the wrong body, or whatever). For GC radical feminists, gender is a learned social construct and has no grounding in being fixed by nature.
In terms of GC's historical roots dating back to the '60s and '70s, gender identity is thus an oppressive form of caste or class system that must be eliminated rather than encouraged (or at least be de-fanged to the point of no longer being an obstacle to radical equality).
Shulamith Firestone: "The end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally."
Gender dysphoria is thus tenable and acceptable in GC radical feminism due to gender dysphoria's allowance that this distress can contingently result from social factors rather than innate origins.
Rowling, however, is an eclectic feminist rather than a radical one -- that is, she pragmatically picks and chooses from the whole gamut of feminist philosophy. Ergo, appealing to advocates of gender dysphoria when convenient:
JK Rowling: "Lisa Littman had dared challenge one of the central tenets of trans activism, which is that a person’s gender identity is innate, like sexual orientation. Nobody, the activists insisted, could ever be persuaded into being trans."
But she's correct (for the most part) when asserting that the gender critical club should (in the context of its ideology) be no more hostile to trans-women than it is to born women who perpetuate classic gender stereotypes that they regard as belonging to oppressive patriarchal tradition.
JK Rowling: "None of the gender critical women I’ve talked to hates trans people; on the contrary. Many of them became interested in this issue in the first place out of concern for trans youth, and they’re hugely sympathetic towards trans adults who simply want to live their lives, but who’re facing a backlash for a brand of activism they don’t endorse. The supreme irony is that the attempt to silence women with the word ‘TERF’ may have pushed more young women towards radical feminism than the movement’s seen in decades."
_
Last edited:
So I guess the reason we don't have such bans in the UK is because they don't exist here, right?
You're hilarious, when something is real, you deny it exists because you haven't seen it, but something that has never been shown to exist is definitely real.
(Emphasis added.)
This is one of those times where Rowling's remarks start to sound awfully... curious. OK, "concern for (the kids)". Sounds reasonable, but has Rowling actually looked into this matter?
A five year study in the US shows that medical intervention among transgender minors is exceptionally rare--less than 0.1 percent of minors, or around 800 kids over this five year period and medical professionals overwhelmingly support these interventions:
Gender-affirming care is rare, study says— Harvard Gazette
Fewer than 1 in 1,000 transgender youth receive hormones or puberty blockers.
news.harvard.edu
Moreover, follow-up studies on kids have shown extremely low levels of regret:
(Emphasis added.)
Now these regrets pertain solely to regrets regarding medical care. As my mother likes to remind me, she regrets having had a knee replacement surgery roughly 20 years back (my mother is a small woman and the knee she was given was made for, and researched almost exclusively upon, much larger men, as is the case with roughly 99 percent of medical research and yeah, that's an exaggeration, but not by much). There's a lot of research on regret over surgery and medical interventions generally, and with respect to pretty much anything and everything, the percentages are typically much, much higher. I regret pretty much every so-called "anticonvulsant" I ever bothered to waste my time on (it would seem that anticonvulsants mostly work on people who've had like 3 seizures over the past two decades--not a high success rate with people who can't even tell you how many seizures they've had in the past month).
When people profess "concern for (the kids)", they rely ought to have some solid numbers to back up their "concerns".
Я не знаю, что есть у вас в Великобритании. Возможно, у вас нет других проблем, кроме как обсуждать всем обществом - "имеет ли право баба с членом обоссать крышку от унитаза в женском туалете". Наверное, мы в России ещё не так продвинуты.So I guess the reason we don't have such bans in the UK is because they don't exist here, right?
Yes, like putting a stop to the invasion of Ukraine and the bombing of innocent people, children and hospitals.
No, not really. Do you?
Sure, be a Gopnik.
Is it really so common in Russia for men with dicks to piss on toilet seats?
Not to worry, soon, most of your men will be dead from the war.
Our government and courts are able to discuss many topics in parallel. And matters involving discrimination against minority sections of society are such topics. We could ignore them, of course. We could even make life really difficult for them. Demean them. Ridicule them. Take away their driving licences etc. But we generally consider ourselves better than that.