[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

He's not even that extreme. Most people complaining about it haven't even read the book, he's not even in the book a whole lot and he doesn't really dress up as women as such

Yeah I'm just going off the description , as I haven't read it . I don't see the issue either .

This whole JK Rowling drama is ridiculous, I think the stick she's getting is unfair .
I think some people already wanted to dislike her for no reason .

Even with her history of depression , I remember hearing some people who I crossed paths with IRL say "ohhh what has she got to be unhappy about with all that money "

Do they not understand anyone can be affected by mental health issues.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...just to add because I’m not sure if it’s been posted before ...but this seems to be the article that JK was accused of mocking with the tweet...

‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?

...all through the article it refers to girls, women, and gender non-binary persons who menstruate...so all inclusive...?..it doesn’t exclude ‘woman’ or change ‘woman’ in any way...so I am quite confused by her initial tweet that this seems to have sparked from...because it seems quite defensive and I'm not sure why it would be...and then this whole thing with the reaction to that and to her has escalated into something quite ugly...anyways, the article...which is being inclusive of ‘all menstruating’...because it’s specific to attention through the pandemic to providing sanitary care and giving attention to birth control etc ...when clinics that had usually provided for, had become closed through an extraordinary situation across the world...

...this was at the beginning of the pandemic quarantines and closures etc and has some great points...


https://www.devex.com/news/sponsored...nstruate-97312

The only people who can menstruate are women, even if they identify as men or non-binary. The erasure of the word "woman" to appease women who identify as something else, coupled with female spaces being compromised by transwomen, together they don't paint a very feminist pictue.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

"Transphobia" is not an opinion. It's something that either is or isn't.

Misrepresenting someone as transphobic when they've gone to the trouble of writing an entire essay outlining and explaining their opinions that are categorically not transphobic is just dumb and doesn't help anyone.

You can criticise and pick apart her opinion, but it is not transphobic.

So you oppose people thinking she's transphobic, but you, another random person on the internet (just like those who believe she is) can say with certainty, that she isn't? Your views hold as much weight as those who think she is a transphobe. You can't trash people for saying she's a transphobe and then state that she isn't and that people's views aren't opinions because you disagree with them.

Argue against the views you dislike, don't declare that they aren't opinions and thus, aren't valid.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

So you oppose people thinking she's transphobic, but you, another random person on the internet (just like those who believe she is) can say with certainty, that she isn't? Your views hold as much weight as those who think she is a transphobe. You can't trash people for saying she's a transphobe and then state that she isn't and that people's views aren't opinions because you disagree with them.

Argue against the views you dislike, don't declare that they aren't opinions and thus, aren't valid.

It's not about "opposing people thinking", I said an opinion being transphobic or not is something factual, not subjective. It either is or it isn't. Labelling anyone who doesn't go along with trans organisations opinions on sex based rights transphobic is moronic. It's far too complex an issue for everyone to agree on. Yet, JK Rowling is the one who can't process criticism?

I can say with absolute certainty that the opinions she has shared on the subject are not transphobic, because I can both read and apply common sense.

I don't oppose people thinking she's wrong, picking apart her words and arguing against her views, but they're not doing that. They're calling her a TERF to shut down her opinion WITHOUT any actual argument against what she's said by simply just telling her that by not agreeing with them she's transphobic. It's utter bull. She can be completely wrong in what she's saying, but that doesn't make her transphobic in the slightest.

She literally explained her opinions in an actual essay (actual opinions not a retweet of a funny slogan on a t-shirt), but people don't want to hear because they say the very fact she has opinions on it at all is transphobic. That's what is invalid.

[user104658]

In short it's all ad hominem (literal definition being a statement that attacks the person, rather than the argument) and it's just rubbish debate and not worth listening to. "I think what Rowling said is transphobia because [analysis of her words]" is an opinion worth listening to. "Rowling is a transphobe because REEEEEE dumb old hag!!!" is... I suppose... an opinion, but not one worth giving the time of day. It's also extremely misogynistic but then (ironically) an absolute boatload of "Anti-TERF" rhetoric is dripping in misogyny.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

In short it's all ad hominem (literal definition being a statement that attacks the person, rather than the argument) and it's just rubbish debate and not worth listening to. "I think what Rowling said is transphobia because [analysis of her words]" is an opinion worth listening to. "Rowling is a transphobe because REEEEEE dumb old hag!!!" is... I suppose... an opinion, but not one worth giving the time of day. It's also extremely misogynistic but then (ironically) an absolute boatload of "Anti-TERF" rhetoric is dripping in misogyny.

Agreed.