Whatever happened?
I think I know this one.
I think I know what happened to it, because it happened to me and to lots of other people.
It’s because it was never enough. It was never ever ever enough. More was always required.
It’s almost as if living whatever way felt comfortable was never actually the point. The point turned out to be demanding endless attention and love and hugs and ValiDation. The point turned out to be “center me at all times no matter what.” The point turned out to be to keep ratcheting up the claims of “marginalization” and bigotry and excloosion, while also ratcheting up the threats and insults and misogyny and harassment.
That’s what happened. It turned out this isn’t a social justice movement at all, but a campaign to bully women into submission and make feminism a movement for men who claim to be women.
<3
This is (continues to be) insane. Any comment on any individual situation gets turned into a general statement, and is required to have an entire volume of qualifiers, and is interpreted as a definition rather than a common description. I wonder what she (or whoever else) said that triggered this idiotic response by JW, but it really doesn’t matter, everything gets twisted no matter what it was.
This, ten thousand times this.
OK, I’m caught up now, it was in response to this tweet:
https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1518570678282301440
“Targeted”. Can’t talk about anyone without it being “targeting”. Can’t mention the fact that this man has a beard without it being a claim that all men have beards.
Sackbut:
That tweet of JKR’s is genius.
Has a beard, therefore is a man is not the same as Is a man, therefore has a beard.
Simple logical fallacy in play.
That’s the bizarre thing about the current “woke” and “third-wave” feminism — it is essentially a version of feminism that is so watered-down that its basic message has become: If you’re a man, please treat women whatever way you like! It’s all great!
Want to go to prostitutes? Oh, they are “sex workers” who just LOVE their job and are so grateful that you want to have anal sex (or whatever you want) with them. Want to hit women while having sex? Oh, that’s just “kink”! They LOVE that. You want to show your penis to women and little girls in the locker room? Great, go ahead! You’re “trans” after all. And you can call every lesbian who doesn’t want to have sex with you a bigot while you’re at it.
Et cetera, et cetera …
Another example of trans privilege. Of course there are women with beards, but they are considered ugly, masculine, freakish, and, in the past at least, worthy of putting in a circus. The fact of having a beard makes them somehow less womanly.
But if a man with a beard decides that he has the inner essence of a woman, well, that we cannot question or deride.
https://postimg.cc/7fzKLVDJ
Not even so much watered down as the opposite of itself.
Nothing happened to that. It’s still true for JKR and other gender-rejecting women. It’s TAs who don’t respect people’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. Post a photo of a Black lesbian during “Lesbian visibility week,” and TAs manufacture an attack on them personally, when it isn’t even there. In response to the pile-on for daring to post a picture of a Black lesbian (during Lesbian visibility week, no less!), post a picture of a trans identified male who claims to be a lesbian, and that’s no good either!
Heads I win, tails you lose.
Nothing JKR posted is in any way inconsistent with the principle of respecting people’s right to live how they like. That “respect” — letting people alone to make their own choices — does not obligate everyone else, or anyone else, to participate in the individual’s activities. “Respect” is a two-way street. Demands that everyone else must kowtow to transgender ideology are profoundly disrespectful to the right of everyone who doesn’t adhere to trans dogma, to live THEIR lives in a manner that is authentic and comfortable for them. You’re complaining about the wrong party’s lack of respect for how people want to live their lives. Classic DARVO.
Respecting every Christian’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them does not entail affirming Christian dogma & doctrine, nor participating in Christian ritual, nor adhering to Christian structures. Yeesh. Whatever happened to thinking about what you say before you say it?
Nullius, you’ve put your finger on it there. Respecting people of other religions in public doesn’t mean we all have to follow their religion. I am a good neighbor to the Orthodox Jews next door, but I am not giving up my barbecue.
The overreach by the TRAs is where they want to compel the belief, and expression, of others. See Nicholas Meriwether vs. Shawnee State University for an example.
People will occasionally agree that compulsion is bad, so you shouldn’t be forced to X. But then they’ll say you’re morally bankrupt garbage if you don’t and should be held accountable for that; i.e., be punished extralegally. But compulsion is totally wrong.
Yeah, sounds like God and free will. You totally have free will, but if you choose to do X, I’ll torture you for literal eternity. Just remember that you chose it. Freely.
Ah yes. They tell you you have free will, then give you a huge list of Do’s and Donts’s, and tell you that not following all of them will land you in hell after you die. Even just missing one of them just once could land you in hell when you die.