Win stupid prizes
Two women say many stupid things about JK Rowling:
J.K. Rowling is, unfortunately, on a bit of a winning streak. For years now, she has been almost solely focused on being as transphobic as possible, and in April, she celebrated a ruling from the U.K. Supreme Court stating that transgender women cannot legally be recognized as women. You might think that becoming one of the most prominent faces of anti-trans rhetoric would make Rowling someone whom public figures want to keep their distance from…
No actually what I would think is that people who insist that men are women if they say they are should stop saying that and learn the difference between fantasy and reality.
While Rowling rakes in more cash with which she can help make people’s lives demonstrably harder, HBO is standing by its decision to work with her.
The list of charities JKR has lavishly donated to is long.
The author has time and time again declared that trans women are not women, but rather that they are men in dresses seeking to harm cis women.
That’s a lie. She doesn’t say that. I do (except for the “cis” part), but she does not.
When Rowling does opt to flag herself as an ally — when she writes that “trans people need and deserve protection” or “I want trans women to be safe” — she routinely follows up with some form of “but” that draws a thick line between trans women and all other women.
Oh yes that “thick line” between men and women. How silly to draw such a thick line, i.e. decline to agree that men are women if they say they are. What possible reason could anyone ever have for distinguishing between the two?
Some of Rowling’s former fans have branded her a TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist), and while she dislikes the label, she shares the gender-essentialist view at its core: that womanhood is fixed, intrinsic, and anatomically determined.
There is no such view. Gender atheists don’t even talk about “womanhood” – we just point out that men are not women, fixed or unfixed, intrinsic or extrinsic, anatomically determined or rabbit out of a hat determined. Women are different from men; men are different from women. To learn more see mares and stallions, rams and ewes, hens and roosters. Feelings can vary enormously, but the physical facts are what they are.
Rowling has stuck to this line for years, even though doctors and scientists agree that sex assignment and gender are not the same thing.
All of them? These two “writers” are idiots.
Top stories
Or maybe her “anti-trans rhetoric” is actually feminist philanthropy and activism, and that is what attracts other public figures to her.
Wait, what? That sex and gender are not the same thing is our point!
T and their allies are the ones who insist that gender claims (“I [male] feel like a woman,” — whatever that means) actually make the man asserting the claim into a woman. Some even insist that they are “female,” and even “a biological female”! THEY are the ones who constantly muddle and conflate sex and gender.
It’s ZERO surprise that “doctors and scientists” agree that sex and gender are not the same thing. It’s only ideologically captured doctors and scientists who promulgate propagandistic nonsense, like “sex is a spectrum,” or “sex is more complicated than you would think,” to justify conflating gender claims with actual sex.
And sex isn’t “assigned.” It’s observed and recorded. Poisoning the well with gender ideological jargon.
From the linked piece:
Gender is a term originally assigned to such things as French verbs. One can wish upon a star for anything at all, but if it appears (‘comes true’) it is more than just a bit hard to establish that the wishing was what brought it about. A sparrow can wish it was an eagle, but it would be unwise for it to act on that belief. It would be Rafferty’s rules from there on.
If changes of sex actually occurred, it would be unremarkable: Men would simply become women (or vice versa) and no one would notice. They would blend in to the population and automatically prompt the appropriate pronouns.
But people do notice, especially people like lesbians, who don’t want cocks on their partners. Or female athletes who don’t want hulking, six-plus-foot-tall competitors. Same for females needing private spaces and clinics.
The very fact that gender woo has to be enforced is proof that it is bunk. The very fact that it’s women and girls overwhelmingly who suffer proves the existence of the two separate sexes.
Sort of. It started as their point, and then they did bait and switch.
Phase 1: As Omar points out, the word “gender” wasn’t used in reference to humans at all, just to things like French nouns. (And verbs in some non-IndoEuropean languages, such as Semitic.)
Phase 2: People started using the word “gender” to refer to sex stereotypes. I think that this was feminists in the 1960s.
Phase 3: People started to use “gender” as a polite euphemism for “sex”.
Then here’s where things start to get relevant.
Phase 4: The Department of Bullshit started to say: Sex and gender are completely separate things: you can be of male sex and feminine gender, and what is important is gender, not your biological sex, and therefore that should be on your government papers.
Phase 5: Once Phase 4 was accomplished, the Department of Bullshit says: Sex and gender are exactly the same thing — see, note Phase 3 — and therefore if you have “F” as your gender on your government papers, that means Feminine Gender, which is exactly the same thing as Female Sex.
Bait and switch.
GW
Phase 6: The same people who insisted on a strong distinction between sex and gender in the first place are the most eager to conflate the categories they imposed on the rest of us, e.g. by accusing people who don’t believe in gender of ”gender essentialism” for correctly identifying other people’s sex.
Yup!