JK Rowling slams Keir Starmer over his words 'trans women are women’
 

[JK Rowling slams Keir Starmer after
Labour leader says ‘trans women are women’,
as Harry Potter author says the party
can 'no longer be counted on to defend women’s rights'
Harry Potter author took aim at Keir Starmer
saying 'women's anger is growing'
She criticised Labour party on Twitter
for no 'longer defending women’s rights'
Starmer last night insisted 'trans women are women'
claiming it 'was the law'
The Labour leader called for a more
'respectful' debate on transgender issues]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/03...7091466863.jpg


[She also slammed Sir Keir for
'publicly misrepresenting' the 2010 Equality Act,
which legally protects people from
discrimination in the workplace and
in wider society, and said women's
anger was 'growing'.]



He also one of his MP's against him on this



Sign Of The Times.

Freeze her assets now.

More woke madness and another reason (if you need anymore) why starmer will never be PM

Does this woman have any personality outside of hating transwomen it's so sad to see.

Great Points LT.

JK is the way forward against this nonsense

She is quite the woman in this post author period in her successful life

Transwomen aren't women though :shrug: there's no need to pretend they are, especially when the world (and women!) have enough to deal with ATM.

She won’t be happy until trans people are completely secluded from society, such a horrible, hateful woman, it’s a shame really, she could have been a torch carrier for decent conversation but she’s chosen to just out herself as an outright bigot and go down this route, she should be thoroughly ashamed, but anti-trans rhetoric is cool these days, her and her ilk have no issues shouting about what they are and they have the backing of the establishment and the media who have found their new victims

When has she been bigoted or hateful?

and pretending its so for some woke agenda is actually moving backwards

more power to her elbow

Writing best selling books etc etc stuff like that

Defending women = Bigot....nothing new

Why do we never have trans men threatening born men with violence? Because they wouldn't bloody put up with it.

Also biological differences do actually matter... go figure

Me and my kids agree on most things.. they are lefties too. But we do differ massively on this, especially my gen z, he is disgusted by my views on this.
I am really conflicted myself too as I can appreciate the issues faced by the trans community, and yet I always find myself disagreeing with the politically advocated view on this issue.

I am all for anyone living how you like, one life .you do you and all that . But .. unless you grew up from a baby, infant, child, adolescent and young adult as a female then you haven't had the socialisation that shapes what I consider a woman. ( and obviously the same for men)
This is only my personal view, it might upset some and I am sorry for that, I've gone over and over it many many times but I can't change my stance on this.

Essentially what I'm saying is my belief is trans male and female can't be men and women as they haven't had the whole life experience.

Well hang on a minute what exactly was Starmer supposed to say ? . I'm not even a fan of his , but did JK want him to start calling trans women "MEN" ? Or something ? . Starmer knows biologically they were born male.But they identify as female now.

I have agreed with the points JK Rowling has made with protecting womens rights etc,I'm a woman myself.

But it feels like this is a pointless rant she's gone on now or am I missing something?? .

Transphobes would have loved for him to say that, thankfully the things they feel emboldened to say behind the safety of their keyboard is not the reality of the real world.

Easy to forget when her twitter antics have become more memorable than anything she's released in the last decade.

Has a politician ever singled out trans men for their support?

And yet no-one can point to anything actually bigoted or hateful...

I'm apparently a millennial, just a couple of years off being a zoomer, and I'm at odds with a lot of people my age and younger about the trans issue.

I feel like either a) I'm taking crazy pills or b) people my age and down have lost the ability to think critically about the issue of gender :joker:

Gender is a social construct, and some aspects of gender norms change through time, but males are males and females are females. How one "identifies" has nothing to do with anything, and a thought in someone's head shouldn't be put above biological realities, especially when it comes to one group's rights...

Well yeah I think most people think this way, previously left leaning people haven't all of a sudden just turned into nasty bigots for no reason (despite the narrative) there is a reason for sex based rights (specifically for women)

I think most people who enter the debate for genuine reasons know that...

There are an element who just want to stir the pot and be nasty

Like Goldheart, I honestly don't get what she wanted Starmer to come out and say here?

I think basically EVERYONE knows, it's just that there's this "tried and tested" prescribed methodology of "fighting back against this" that's been taken on - the slogans, mantras, refusing to engage in good faith, declaring debate offensive, the idea that any questioning or dissent is akin to hatred or more ludicrously "murder", and also an entire disingenuous demeanor that goes with it (that can be summed up with the :idc: emoji). You could collectively call it "stonewalling".

It doesn't really work any more but for whatever reason there are a large group of people still forging ahead with it. Probably because they don't actually have any other way to do it because, as a consequence of doing things this way, they have no solid understanding of their own cause and the arguments offered up are immature and riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies. If you point those out, they just fall back on "getting rly angry" and the names come out (TERFs, harpies, murderers etc.). 95% aimed at women of course :shrug:.

No, being a bigot = being a bigot, but you defending bigots in the name of ‘protecting women’ is nothing new

That’s exactly what she and her hateful horde want people to do, they don’t want trans people, especially trans women, to be recognised as what they are, they want them marginalised and separated away from the rest of society because they don’t see them as legitimate, that’s what it all boils down to

Most people just want proper safeguarding analysis to be done before forging ahead with irreversible changes to the law, and for reasonable debate where everyone stops pretending that there's no difference (sports, fairness in competition) and no risk (self-ID, exploitation of loopholes by predators). The argument seems to boil down to "predatory men won't exploit loopholes" which sadly just shows absolutely zero awareness of the risk women face from predatory men, and apparently, absolutely no desire to try to understand that risk. Any loopholes that haven't been adequately considered WILL be exploited. It's not a risk - it's a certainty.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that there aren't bigots who simply don't like "the idea" hanging onto the coat-tails of the debate and using it as a shield to be petty, vindictive and cruel. Of course there are, there always are in any debate. Using that as justification to "no debate" the issue and tar everyone with concerns as being "just like those people" is a deflecting tactic and absolute nonsense. High school stuff. No place at all in the real discussion - and yet it's rhetoric that's bleeding into the politics and legislation of the issue (because of most politician's endless drive to appeal to populism).

To add to the above - JK Rowling is blatantly not one of those people using it as an excuse to be hateful. She has followers who do fall into that category, certainly. That's neither her fault nor her problem and none of what she has actually said is particularly unreasonable - although it's clear she's becoming increasingly frustrated.

What has she said that's bigoted?

When has she said this?

But they do want transwomen to be recognised as what they are ...

Trump said last night in his speech that when he gets back in the White House he will be stopping men from competing in women's sports.

rhetoric like "hateful horde" is just not helpful

A real feminist.

I understand the whole safeguarding, the issue is sensitive. And predators will always take advantage. And yes women's rights is important.

And some so called "activists" are insane.

But I just CAN'T see where JK is coming from on this new TIRADE of hers ,it seems she just wants to have a go at Starmer..... And I'm NOT even a big fan of his. How did she want him to refer to trans women?.

It's NOT like he said anything bad ,but she's chosen to be offended.

you have successfully just answered your own question :laugh:

Personally I don't feel Caitlin Jenner had the most positive impact. Sure, for the trans community she was a hero and the transition raised a lot of awareness with the media attention.
However, from my perspective I saw someone who effectively leap frogged over a huge part of what most consider an integral part of transition. Living as a female prior to surgery.

In July 2015 Caitlin won a 'Woman of the year' award, she had only come out to her family in April.
The award was presented by Abby Wambach, who that year had inspired the world by kissing her partner following a soccer win.

Taking the award from a woman who had been as if not more pivotal in the LGBTQ+ community seemed like .. male privilege.

The fact that in February that year Caitlin (then Bruce) had killed a 69yr old woman by driving recklessly. She escaped any accountability for that, again smacked of privilege due to status.

The fact that once transitioned Caitlin was for a long while a right wing mouthpiece was a massive kick in the face for those struggling. She didn't appear to acknowledge the struggle that had formed the crux of her acceptance speech. And it became clear to me that in her opinion rights and change are bought, not a right.

OK Liam [emoji106]

Kind of ironic how some biological men think they know better on this subject.

Isn't it?