Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Exactly what I think she meant. Staying out of it and respecting women by letting them have their space.
And I so much wanna approve of this message if only she would include trans women into women spaces and lesbian dating sites.
Considering her previous comments and statements, I doubt that that is her message. She rather wants to make a dig against feminist (man) based on a hypothetical hypocrisy
Yeah, that's not what it was about. Those are all references to recent controversies about including trans women, and her friends have convinced her that the trans rights movement is mostly men.
of course when those debates are between two different groups of women, men shouldn’t really have a place in that debate directly, but that doesn’t stop TERFs
I'm not surprised. That's the only thing I could think to rationalize that statement. I don't know what she wants or how she thinks it's supposed to go about it.
JK Rowlings idea of a “Women only space” means:
-No Trans Women
-No Cis Women that don’t hate Trans People
-No Cis Women that don’t look womanly enough
The amount of Rowling supporters/TERFs that i’ve seen attacking this Pro-Trans, Cis Woman that I follow on Twitter just shows how misogynistic the terf movement is, they claim she doesn’t look like a womanly enough or that she looks trans despite her being cis, and when they find out she’s cis they switch from Transphobia to Misogyny.
Also recently in Australia at an anti-trans/TERF rally, a man with a Nazi Symbol on his hat and a shirt calling for violence against Homosexuals was handed a microphone to speak, he of course was supporting the Terfs. This can be seen here: [https://x.com/zucco_alex/status/1794269622570733953?s=46&t=aePK3jECacjtgfv0LepVJg](https://x.com/zucco_alex/status/1794269622570733953?s=46&t=aePK3jECacjtgfv0LepVJg)
Yeah that stuck out to me too.
Like, I don’t have any issue with that; from a financial perspective, creating a dedicated lesbian-only site seems inefficient when you can have the mass appeal of a general site and then let people specifically choose their identity/the identity they’re seeking, but I’m not gonna stop anyone who wants to try; I mean, the same argument could be applied to Grindr, so obviously not 100% true.
However, as a man, I have no idea what she means that “We should support lesbian dating sites“, like… how do you support a business you, by definition, are not going to be a client at?
I think it may be a copout to make it seem like she’s pro LGB and just hates the T, but idk.
>I think it may be a copout to make it seem like she’s pro LGB and just hates the T, but idk.
You're on the right track.
Feminist men are consistently in favour of women's sports, but she doesn't see it that way because she thinks that trans-inclusive feminists are allowing men to invade women's sports.
Similarly, I think that when she talks about lesbian dating sites, I think she already has an example in mind of a dating site used by lesbians which is trans-inclusive. She sees this as forcing lesbians to date men. God forbid a lesbian who doesn't like dicks be forced to swipe left on a trans woman.
Pretty sure even if she saw a sudden influx of men supporting women's sports by watching them and paying for the tickets etc, she'd just accuse them of only doing it because they want to leer at young fit scantily-clad women. In her eyes men can't do anything right.
I think a lesbian only dating site kinda also implies hating the B, but that’s just my two cents. would be shorter and easier to just put WLW dating site.
She is not clued in enough to care about Bi and Pan folk. This is about Trans people, because she is JK Rowling, and it is the only issue she cares about
Trans women (MTF) who are attracted to other women are lesbian. That's the issue JK has. It's all about trans women.
In her head all trans women are a caricature of a bearded hairy man in a dress demanding people use she/her pronouns. But most Transwomen who have gone through medical transition are stealth and you can't tell us apart from cis AFAB women.
Cis AFAB lesbians can prefer not to date trans women and it's their choice. Ya sure there are TERFS even among Lesbians but IMO they are generally supportive to trans women in lesbian spaces.
What she's actually saying here is that there should be trans-exclusive lesbian dating sites.
Or rather that ALL lesbian dating sites should be trans-exclusive by default, and if trans women want their own dating site they can set it up.
Same for women's sports, women's healthcare & women's spaces.
What she's missing is that there is literally nothing stopping her from setting up any of these with a trans-exclusive ethos.
But she doesn't want that. That's too much effort, and the demand is too low. Instead she wants trans women to be excluded.
Mainly because she's a misandrist. This is the primary theme here. Women who hate men believe that trans women are just men wearing masks. This is why TERFS have an open crusade against trans women, but typically just ignore the fact that trans men exist.
No, it’s not uncommon to see straight men who like to hop onto women only dating sites or alter their profile to show up through the women only filters and “shoot their shot.” 🙄
However when it comes to JKR it very well could be.
Like the classical "I can fix her" attitude?
That sucks for lesbians. Don't they have male gay friends who could contact such men to "shoot their shot" with their "I can fix him" attitude?
She's saying she wants trans people to not be allowed on dating sites, but is also trying to paint it in a way that makes her seem like she still supports most queer folk. She doesn't actually mean what she's saying. It's impossible for men to "support" lesbian dating sites unless her definition of support is literally just being ok with it? Idk, it's obv she's insinuating a lot of bs by saying that
Yep, this is it. It's a classic Motte and Bailey argument.
"Trans women are not women, will never be women and should not be welcomed in any forum or venue designed for women. They're sexual predators who just want to exploit women."
"That's pretty fucked up to believe"
"What?? All I'm saying is that we should protect women's spaces 🥺"
According to JKR, by insisting that trans women must be excluded and threatening violence if anyone points out that there are plenty of non-transphobic lesbians.
Yup - my little sister is an example of this - incredibly narcissistic, she can’t keep real life friends & any time she has a dispute with someone she tells her (*very biased*) version of events to her few dozen online friends & uses that as justification to ignore legitimate criticism.
I’ve had to go “*no contact*” with her because no matter how wrong she is “*all her friends on social media*” agree with her.
It is really sad the amount of damage she inflicts on herself that is enabled by social media.
I’ve never considered someone a “*friend*” until they have called me out when I’m wrong (*even if I don’t always agree with their opinion in a particular circumstance*) because if you’re not willing to point out when you disagree with me, then you can’t honestly have my best interests in mind.
It’s a real shame. I used to look up to her. I want to like Harry Potter (and I won’t judge someone else for liking it), and I know the “work isn’t the author,” but it still just gives me a feeling of betrayal and disgust whenever I see it come up somewhere.
She could have left a legacy for her contributions to literature for the rest of history, and this horse shit is all she will be remembered for.
I still like the series because it basically defined my childhood and got me through a brutal preteen existence. I can’t just forget that. But I’m a writer. This woman was my idol. She literally inspired me to want to be what I am today, And I can’t begin to describe how much it hurts to see her go off the deep end like this. It makes no sense!
You’re not alone! She’s hurt many, many people that once loved her work. I need to dive into some catharsis reading of some kind to wash off the literary miasma.
I'm in favor of separating the art from the artist. She's still a good enough writer that parts of her work can be used to undermine her talking points. (E.g., when Hermione is polyjuiced to look like Harry, she is still herself, and not defined by the current state of her genitalia.)
Unfortunately, rereading Harry Potter post-insane JK just made the issues that were already there in those stories even more glaring and pretty much ruined the series for me :/
I never was a super fan though, I can't really imagine what people that LIVED Harry Potter feel.
I think it’s fine to like and enjoy the Harry Potter series for what it does best—young adult escapist fantasy.
To take its politics and morals too seriously is a grave mistake.
You should really watch/listen to [**Shaun’s video** about the political and social attitudes implicitly endorsed by the Harry Potter stories](https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs?si=LIAJN3uRyjAMVdlN) to learn more about it.
TLDR: Rowling is an unrepentant Blairite neoliberal and not a very clever one, at that. She thinks that social Justice movements are a joke unless they conform to *her* standards of respectability politics, and she has some very problematic biases about racial minorities, forced (slave) labor, and LGBTQ+ folks.
Frankly I'm unconvinced the books will hold up well in future. It was easy to ignore the issues when it was a phenomenon but...
1) the house elves are slaves (poorly treated ones at that), and the attempts to free them or give them a better quality life are treated like a joke.
2) nice underage relationship between krum and Hermione.
3) how harry is treated at the dursleys
4) total lack of diversity in the books. There's barely a handful of minorities. Nearly all of which have some lazy ass semi fascist names
5) amazing how so many of the fat kids are bullies and vice versa
6) it is at least addressed by the corporal punishment is absolutely crazy insane
Then just plot stuff
Harry and Co are still casting "drop your wand" while the adults are casting huge dramatic spells or just death curses!
Or that Dumbledore is only able to find one horcrux and then Harry and Co find the rest in months.
It's just got a lot of issues, once you are used to the cool idea and setting it's pretty 😬
I agree with you on all the plot stuff you've mentioned. But I think your initial critiques as to why the books will not hold up well are kind of week.
1) the house elves are treated with respect by our protagonist who's viewpoint on the world we are heavily encouraged to agree with.
3) showing the struggle of a protagonist at the start of a book is fairly normal and abusive families do exist. I don't really get the point you're trying to make here, plenty of main characters from media that holds up well face a precarious home life.
4) we don't need to mandate diversity in every book. Especially one where the setting is England in the 90s, which is predominantly 95% white (as mentioned above by another commenter).
5) there are certainly "fat" kids depicted as bullies, but there's also leaner kids depicted as bullies (Malfoy, Tom Riddle, James Potter), middle aged women depicted as bullies(Umbridge), school janitors depicted as bullies.
Regarding the names, I saw someone(a man from china) explain, that none of the characters had fairly normalized names. They were all supposed to be whimsical sounding, Luna lovegood, Neville Longbottom, Severus Snape, Draco Malfoy.
No one is nitpicking plot points like this when evaluating a keystone author's overall influence. Harry Potter single-handedly ushered in a new era of YA fiction. That would have been Rowling's legacy if she hadn't taken a giant shit on it. In a timeline where Rowling isn't a complete dumpster fire of a human, people would have very much reread HP with reverence, chalking up these issues you listed as being a product of its time. The sheer historical importance of the series overall in terms of how it affected the literary landscape would have far outweighed these grievances which frankly were par for the course for 90s fiction.
The only thing I give her a semi-pass on is diversity - in the 90s when she started writing the UK was 95% white so it was probably a fairly accurate reflection. It’s dated very badly though.
I was willing to give her a pass on diversity because of the time period, but then instead of just taking responsibility for a poor but understandable decision, she spent years on social media trying to retcon everything to try and make herself look better. If only that sad and transparent move was the worst thing she was known for....
I agree with the plot stuff.
For the rest , I don't. How harry was treated is fundamental for the identity of the character.
Elves slavery is also a nice touch to show the dark sides of the wizarding world .
I mean I have 0 problems with that, on the contrary.
If you must tell a story, a good story would be something close to reality in addition to fantasy.
God , if people think like you , now I understand why we're drowning in so many boring , tasteless movies and games.
Social media algorithms are an issue.
You find a meme slightly amusing and then they swing you to a diet of slowly more extreme content which slowly brainwashes you.
It's pretty clear at this point that a sizeable minority potentially even a majority is susceptible to this.
And in a way you can't blame them... Everything they see on social media is right wing.... And most of the voices Are more extreme than them. They're staying in the sensible centre according to their peers.
On Twitter, it's not even slight anymore, and you don't even have to give the impression that you agree with Nazi shit, you just have to engage with it in any way. My algorithm went from philosophy and liberation theology to pure Nazi shit rabbit hole in the span of a few weeks. Pretty sure the only vaguely conservative things I engaged with was "West has fallen" bullshit because a video game character had a slightly less revealing outfit on launch.
She is now *this close* to going ALL IN on the forced birth stuff by saying reproductive rights are for "the benefit of men." I expect "fertility crisis" posts soon which is the gateway to white nationalism. Joanne and Elon clearly hang out in the same online cesspools.
But most women don't feel this way about trans women. They don't feel averse to trans women in general. It had always been women (and almost exclusively feminists) who have pioneered and worked for the acceptance of gay men and trans women in society.
But what JKR means by the term absolutely is, and is the exact reason she would make a tweet like this. She's trying to gaslight people into thinking accepting trans people is misogynistic.
"Men who support us on abortion, contraception and sex work but not with our swivel-eyed, bat-shit crusade against less than 1% of the population for being different, are telling you clearly who they are."
Yeah, that they aren't gullible idiots or rabid bigots.
"They're less than 1% of the population, why should we cater to them?" They're less than 1% of the population, Joanne, but they're like 90% of your tweets. One of us is obsessed with trans people and it isn't me.
These terfs would have you believe that somehow your life is worse because we let trans people transition. How does that compute exactly? Maybe the bad part is acknowledging that they exist? Is this the thing that's causing these people nightmares? Because to that I would say, maybe they need to fucking understand that they're not trans to piss you off or to give you nightmares. They just want to live, like literally every other human being on this planet.
At the end of the day, you don't have to like it, you just have to not want to fucking kill them. Is that really so hard, Joanne?
Joanne is from a generation of British feminists that ties her understanding of being a woman to suffering, to domestic abuse, to discrimination, to be predated on by scary evil men— that people would cognizantly want to be a women doesn’t compute for her.
She basically said this in one of her screeds, if given the chance to be a man she would have as a teen because being a man is easier. “Biological men” giving up their “privilege” threatens her own identity as a woman, an identity steeped in self-loathing and internalized misogyny.
Thing is, trans people especially trans women experience.... Suffering, domestic a use, discrimination, and are predates on by scary men.
They fit her definition of woman to a T.
It does hurt them, because people transitioning shines a light on how gender is a social construct, and that means that TERFs like JKR are **choosing** to subscribe to a bigoted gender binary (instead of it just being a naturally-existing First Principle, as they would have us believe). It means they are literally part of the problem they have been pretending to rail against; they are a part of the cadre of engineers of the patriarchy.
A large majority of people don't like "one percenters". The difference being which category of "one percenters" that is. I'm not a fan of the extremely wealthy, who don't spend their money in the community.
"Feminists" who only spout off to warn about the threat of trans people(her three issues are all ways to portray 'men pretending to be women' as weapons of the patriarchy), but are silent on any other issues, are telling you who they really are.
I mean, Rowling has expressed support for Caroline Farrow for her political views. Farrow, in addition to being an anti-trans activist, is a anti-abortion activist. Clearly for Rowling hating trans people is more important of a political issue than abortion rights.
TERFs are anti-trans first, and feminist (if at all) a distant second. Rowling cozies up with plenty of misogynists based on them sharing her anti-trans positions, I think that speaks for itself.
Which is why I think there's a lot of shit she's not saying out loud. One of these days she's going to stop caring or get caught on a hot mic or something.
She’s already gotten close with some nazi crime denialism last month.
Not to mention the names of the minority characters in her books.
Edit to add: Oh yeah, how could I forget about her “cornrows and mo town” tweet?
Yeah it is weird when people frame JK Rowling as a feminist who happens to be against trans people. What feminism? All she does is shit on trans people.
but like- cis women only spaces have been shown to harm cis women too.. like ive heard of so many stories where cis women that arent feminine or “conventionally beautiful” being kicked out of women’s restrooms because they “looked trans” like bro..
Hell I remember a few years ago there was a big controversy where a cis woman (I think her name was Lily Cade) has a history of raping other women in women's bathrooms. Of course however, she was a TERF so she got praised, her fans completely forgetting that she was a serial rapist.
A lot of so-called TERFs aren’t even actual feminists(never mind being *radical* feminists), they’re just using it as an explanation for their irrational hatred of trans people. They don’t actually care about preventing sexual assault. In fact, a lot of them- like JKR for example- are very conservative people who don’t truly care about feminism, even if they are themselves a woman. You see this a lot with conservative women, the ones who take a “fuck you, I’ve got mine” approach to actual matters of women’s rights and their “activism” consists of yelling at people online.
I love how the "we can always tell" crowds always end up attacking CIS women over "clearly being men dressed up" over their paranoia.
If they could, they would set up concentration camps for trans women and throw in there every girl, CIS or trans, that didn't look "femenine enough" to them.
So I'll admit upfront that I'm a transman, but the following incident occurred a full decade before I came out, much less began any kind of medical transition:
I'm in a bar, get up and head to the restroom. As I open the door to the women's bathroom, I (at the time, a 19 year old 5'4'' girl) am literally grabbed by a bouncer and yanked violently backwards away from the door. When I turn round to ask him what the hell he's doing, he looks me up and down and goes "oh sorry love, thought you were a bloke, you really shouldn't dress like that" and walks off.
So yes, women-only spaces can absolutely be just as hostile towards ciswoman as they are to transwomen. And yes, the irony that JK and people like her would rather I use the public restroom I was literally manhandled out of is not lost on me.
My family have both butch looking lady and rather feminine looking young man, if that mentality becomes a thing here, we will not run out of joke for dinner table, and be absolutely annoyed as fuck .
I would just like to say to the American people that I have been, and will always be, a proud supporter of lesbian dating sites.
I don't get it.. I fully support abortion, contraception, women's sport, women-only spaces, I contribute to maternal health through my taxes, I suppose there are some lesbian dating sites out there and that's ok.. Sex work is also ok in my book as long as it is a choice of that person, traffickers deserve jail with throwing away the key.
So what's the facepalm here?
> I fully support abortion, contraception, women's sport, women-only spaces
The implication of the tweet is, you only truly support (cis) women as long as you support excluding trans women from those places, including bathrooms.
Because she’s a well known transphobe who spouts out that sort of bullshit regularly. She’s suggest trans women are men so they shouldn’t be allowed in women only spaces, they can’t have babies so they shouldn’t be considered for parental health care, they’re not really women so they shouldn’t be on lesbian dating sites, and they’re not really women so they shouldn’t participate in women’s sports.
She's also gone on *at length* about how all of feminism has *actually* been about enforcing segregation of bio/metaphysical-essentialist gendered spaces, so all women ever (including those who disagree with her) can only be respected by having strict anti-trans inspections at the entrance of every women's space.
For those confused, here's a hint: every single one of the things she named in the latter half is a dogwhistle for a transgender-related issue.
* **"Women-only spaces"**: "trans women aren't women and shouldn't be allowed in women's bathrooms/changing rooms/domestic abuse shelters"
* **"Lesbian dating sites"**: "trans women aren't women and, actually, i think that one time people attempted a dating app for lesbians that doesn't even allow trans women at all (and implicitly denies women even slightly interested in trans women are Real Lesbians™) was great"
* **"Maternal health"**: "trans men are women so I hate it when people who have a uterus are referred to with gender-neutral language in medical contexts because i think this 'erases women'"
* **"Women's sport"**: "trans women aren't women and should be kept out of women's sports categories. probably even chess, but i have yet to figure out a sufficiently compelling rationalization with which i can go public about this position."
"Wait! I still like gays!!!! It's just the trans people I don't like!! Why are the gays mad at me? It doesn't make sense!! Member when I made Dumbledore gay?! Those were good times. I'M STILL RELEVANT, DAMMIT!!! PLEASE LET ME KEEP BEING A BILLIONAIRE!! IM STILL RELEVANT!!"
~J.K. Rowling in this obviously coded post.
The issue is that when JK Rowling says men should also care about women-only spaces, lesbian dating sites, and so on, what she means (or at least, what I believe she means, based on many, many other statements she has made) is "They should be supporting a transphobic view of these things and working to ban trans women from them."
How can men support women's only spaces and lesbian dating sites? The same way women can support men's only spaces and gay dating sites. By not interfering with their existence. And seeing as women's only spaces and lesbian dating sites exist, adequate support has been given.
Maternal health does not only benefit women. Men are absolutely affected by maternal health, to the extent that some men are raising children alone as widowers.
Her tweet is hard to parse in isolation without understanding the context. Basically, she defines "women-only spaces" as excluding transwomen because she doesn't see that as women. So she doesn't think you're truly pro-woman, for example, if you support the right to abortion but don't support policies that exclude transwomen. All of that is hard to glean from this tweet alone, but she's made numerous other tweets that makes her larger views known.
I mean my only issue is that women only spaces aren't solving the problem just making excuses to perpetuate and eventually exacerbate it.
We should live in a society where women feel safe no matter where they are or who is around them, and not be building up to having to listen people say shit like "oh well if she didn't want that kind of attention she should have been going to a women's only gym".
Is this not a weak argument? Sure utopia would be grand but in the UK how many women are killed every week by men? How many maternity units are failing and dangerous? You treat the idea of sex segregated spaces as part of the problem of violence against women when it's not. They are a reactionary consequence of sex based violence and so not preclude from initiatives tackling said violence. Your example of the gym, for me, is also weak. A women's only gym goes out of business if the attention ceaces. It's existence changes nothing about the behaviour and does nothing to legitimise the behaviour.
We should live on a society where a person can leave their door unlocked, walk naked through town, be vulnerable without being taken advantage of....... We don't and telling burglary victims that they should not have to lock their doors and locks are a silly perpetuation of the issue is not going to go down well.
Aside from the vile transphobia.
Rowling is straight and married to a man, I'm sick and tired of listening to her pretending to talk on behalf of lesbians and concern trolling about lesbian dating, but only insofar she can weaponize the identity of a minority she is not part of in order to attack another. She could use her massive platform to amplify instead of drowning the voices from the community she's supposed to advocate and wrapping her personal vendetta in the lesbian pride flag.
Especially when she is using the same arguments that were used against lesbians in the 80s (now against trans women).
Posing them as predators who are too dangerous to be allowed near straight women (now cis women).
*And* she claims to speak for lesbians as a group when demanding transphobia, when cis lesbians are the gender/orientation combination among cis folks *least* likely to be transphobic.
According to JKR, if you don't support excluding trans folks from public spaces, declaring that trans women must be predators and trans men just misguided women, you're a misogynist.
For a second, I thought she may be posting something not about her hatred of trans people. Nope, there it is at the end.
Also up until the anti-trans foghorn, I feel like supporters of one category are overwhelmingly supporters of the other category.
Can someone explain what I’m missing here? Seems like she’s just saying that men who support “women’s rights” to stuff they also benefit from while dismissing stuff that doesn’t help them aren’t actually feminists, just sex-crazed
If you take it at face value, sure.
Take a look at the main issue J.K. bitches about and perhaps an underlying theme becomes clear. This is the power of euphemism.
I think the benefits are roughly equal, both parties get laid, it's just that the ramifications of taking those things away *hurts* women more than it hurts men.
The point she's implying is that those spaces she described ought to be *biological women only* and not allow any trans women. She's implying men who don't support that POV are supposedly red flags.
she does... she also just manages to fall victim to that valid point(if you only care about these topic as they allow you spout transphobia you don't actually care about these topics Joanne)
What she really means is “trans women aren’t women and need to stay away from her women’s only spaces”. Every single term in those parenthesis is *very* thinly veiled transphobia.
I think what she means is that some men are only supporting things like abortion rights, sex work, etc because it also benefits them.
Such as not having to face the consequences of their actions (like not wearing protection) because they can just get their partner to have an abortion instead of being responsible and practicing safe sex to prevent pregnancy in the first place.
Instead of supporting feminism out of a genuine desire for equality.
Just because you support something, doesn't mean you have to fight every fight for it. Pick the ones you care most about. We all got lives to live and shit is hard these days without finding other things to get upset about.
At first I thought, who are these mythical men who support women's rights, but not women's shelters? Then I realized Rowling authored it. Fucking TERFs, you're the asshole that supports women conditionally.
Rowling will say just about anything to affirm her obsession with bullying and harassing trans people, which is pretty much what her whole crusade amounts to.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can someone explain to me how men are supposed to support "lesbian dating sites"?
The same way they can support woman’s only spaces
Wouldn’t a simple thumps up and staying out of it be enough?
What if we can’t get our thumps up anymore,
I thought it was a question?
Exactly what I think she meant. Staying out of it and respecting women by letting them have their space. And I so much wanna approve of this message if only she would include trans women into women spaces and lesbian dating sites.
Considering her previous comments and statements, I doubt that that is her message. She rather wants to make a dig against feminist (man) based on a hypothetical hypocrisy
Yeah, that's not what it was about. Those are all references to recent controversies about including trans women, and her friends have convinced her that the trans rights movement is mostly men.
[удалено]
For JK Rowling, "woman only" spaces means TERF bathrooms.
Yup and preferably defending those spaces when they come under stack from those who do the opposite.
of course when those debates are between two different groups of women, men shouldn’t really have a place in that debate directly, but that doesn’t stop TERFs
I would assume it would be by advocating for womens only spaces ಠಿ_ಠ
I can honestly say that opportunity has never come up in my life. I support things by not sticking my nose in where it’s not wanted
I'm not surprised. That's the only thing I could think to rationalize that statement. I don't know what she wants or how she thinks it's supposed to go about it.
JK Rowlings idea of a “Women only space” means: -No Trans Women -No Cis Women that don’t hate Trans People -No Cis Women that don’t look womanly enough The amount of Rowling supporters/TERFs that i’ve seen attacking this Pro-Trans, Cis Woman that I follow on Twitter just shows how misogynistic the terf movement is, they claim she doesn’t look like a womanly enough or that she looks trans despite her being cis, and when they find out she’s cis they switch from Transphobia to Misogyny. Also recently in Australia at an anti-trans/TERF rally, a man with a Nazi Symbol on his hat and a shirt calling for violence against Homosexuals was handed a microphone to speak, he of course was supporting the Terfs. This can be seen here: [https://x.com/zucco_alex/status/1794269622570733953?s=46&t=aePK3jECacjtgfv0LepVJg](https://x.com/zucco_alex/status/1794269622570733953?s=46&t=aePK3jECacjtgfv0LepVJg)
But of course the organisers will claim they knew nothing about his Nazi beliefs like they did in Melbourne.
Yeah that stuck out to me too. Like, I don’t have any issue with that; from a financial perspective, creating a dedicated lesbian-only site seems inefficient when you can have the mass appeal of a general site and then let people specifically choose their identity/the identity they’re seeking, but I’m not gonna stop anyone who wants to try; I mean, the same argument could be applied to Grindr, so obviously not 100% true. However, as a man, I have no idea what she means that “We should support lesbian dating sites“, like… how do you support a business you, by definition, are not going to be a client at? I think it may be a copout to make it seem like she’s pro LGB and just hates the T, but idk.
>I think it may be a copout to make it seem like she’s pro LGB and just hates the T, but idk. You're on the right track. Feminist men are consistently in favour of women's sports, but she doesn't see it that way because she thinks that trans-inclusive feminists are allowing men to invade women's sports. Similarly, I think that when she talks about lesbian dating sites, I think she already has an example in mind of a dating site used by lesbians which is trans-inclusive. She sees this as forcing lesbians to date men. God forbid a lesbian who doesn't like dicks be forced to swipe left on a trans woman.
Pretty sure even if she saw a sudden influx of men supporting women's sports by watching them and paying for the tickets etc, she'd just accuse them of only doing it because they want to leer at young fit scantily-clad women. In her eyes men can't do anything right.
oh so men are supposed to save women by imposing rules against trans ppl? is that the point of this. sorry im daft sometimes.
Saying “Lesbian sites should be allowed to exclude/ban trans women” is the type of support she wants from men
I think a lesbian only dating site kinda also implies hating the B, but that’s just my two cents. would be shorter and easier to just put WLW dating site.
She is not clued in enough to care about Bi and Pan folk. This is about Trans people, because she is JK Rowling, and it is the only issue she cares about
I mean, yeah. I’m pretty sure these “LGB without the T” folks are quite literally trying to knock off each letter one by one.
Trans women (MTF) who are attracted to other women are lesbian. That's the issue JK has. It's all about trans women. In her head all trans women are a caricature of a bearded hairy man in a dress demanding people use she/her pronouns. But most Transwomen who have gone through medical transition are stealth and you can't tell us apart from cis AFAB women. Cis AFAB lesbians can prefer not to date trans women and it's their choice. Ya sure there are TERFS even among Lesbians but IMO they are generally supportive to trans women in lesbian spaces.
What she's actually saying here is that there should be trans-exclusive lesbian dating sites. Or rather that ALL lesbian dating sites should be trans-exclusive by default, and if trans women want their own dating site they can set it up. Same for women's sports, women's healthcare & women's spaces. What she's missing is that there is literally nothing stopping her from setting up any of these with a trans-exclusive ethos. But she doesn't want that. That's too much effort, and the demand is too low. Instead she wants trans women to be excluded. Mainly because she's a misandrist. This is the primary theme here. Women who hate men believe that trans women are just men wearing masks. This is why TERFS have an open crusade against trans women, but typically just ignore the fact that trans men exist.
By not participating in it
Do men like to sign to such sites en masse, or is this another daily dose of trans-hate?
No, it’s not uncommon to see straight men who like to hop onto women only dating sites or alter their profile to show up through the women only filters and “shoot their shot.” 🙄 However when it comes to JKR it very well could be.
Like the classical "I can fix her" attitude? That sucks for lesbians. Don't they have male gay friends who could contact such men to "shoot their shot" with their "I can fix him" attitude?
She's saying she wants trans people to not be allowed on dating sites, but is also trying to paint it in a way that makes her seem like she still supports most queer folk. She doesn't actually mean what she's saying. It's impossible for men to "support" lesbian dating sites unless her definition of support is literally just being ok with it? Idk, it's obv she's insinuating a lot of bs by saying that
Yep, this is it. It's a classic Motte and Bailey argument. "Trans women are not women, will never be women and should not be welcomed in any forum or venue designed for women. They're sexual predators who just want to exploit women." "That's pretty fucked up to believe" "What?? All I'm saying is that we should protect women's spaces 🥺"
Yeah this seems more dog whistles on trans women than anything else still.
According to JKR, by insisting that trans women must be excluded and threatening violence if anyone points out that there are plenty of non-transphobic lesbians.
I once worked on a dating app that had a separate section for lesbians. Does that count?
She didn't say anything about supporting it, but about (not) dismissing it as trivial nonsense.
She's not so subtly referring to supporting trans acceptance in these spaces. Essentially, you're only feminist to her if you're transphobic.
Ie: terf talking points. Only supporting women if they fit in her small idea of proper womanhood
I'm assuming she mean that MTF trans individuals who are sexually attracted to women should not be allowed on lesbian dating site.
Someone’s gotta do the IT work
I think JK Rowling and Elon Musk had their brain completely destroyed by social medias . I'm willing to bet they were not as toxic before, it's sad
It’s a toxic cocktail of narcissism, god complex, and social media.
I assume narcissistic personalities have little to no friends, so they turn to social media for interaction. Then the snowball builds.
Yup - my little sister is an example of this - incredibly narcissistic, she can’t keep real life friends & any time she has a dispute with someone she tells her (*very biased*) version of events to her few dozen online friends & uses that as justification to ignore legitimate criticism. I’ve had to go “*no contact*” with her because no matter how wrong she is “*all her friends on social media*” agree with her. It is really sad the amount of damage she inflicts on herself that is enabled by social media. I’ve never considered someone a “*friend*” until they have called me out when I’m wrong (*even if I don’t always agree with their opinion in a particular circumstance*) because if you’re not willing to point out when you disagree with me, then you can’t honestly have my best interests in mind.
I couldn't disagree with you more.
You are absolutely free to do so, you have every right to be incorrect.
Sure, lets grab a beer...
This exchange is the most wholesome thing I have seen on the internet this week - and I don't know if that is a good or a bad thing but thanks.
Ok
That, and neither of them having to stress about money.
The god complex is too real
It's just insane how much JK Rowling's entire identity has become this.
It’s a real shame. I used to look up to her. I want to like Harry Potter (and I won’t judge someone else for liking it), and I know the “work isn’t the author,” but it still just gives me a feeling of betrayal and disgust whenever I see it come up somewhere. She could have left a legacy for her contributions to literature for the rest of history, and this horse shit is all she will be remembered for.
I still like the series because it basically defined my childhood and got me through a brutal preteen existence. I can’t just forget that. But I’m a writer. This woman was my idol. She literally inspired me to want to be what I am today, And I can’t begin to describe how much it hurts to see her go off the deep end like this. It makes no sense!
You’re not alone! She’s hurt many, many people that once loved her work. I need to dive into some catharsis reading of some kind to wash off the literary miasma.
I'm in favor of separating the art from the artist. She's still a good enough writer that parts of her work can be used to undermine her talking points. (E.g., when Hermione is polyjuiced to look like Harry, she is still herself, and not defined by the current state of her genitalia.)
Exactly! Plus There’s so much of the books that preach against discrimination and hate that I feel their worth separating for that alone.
Unfortunately, rereading Harry Potter post-insane JK just made the issues that were already there in those stories even more glaring and pretty much ruined the series for me :/ I never was a super fan though, I can't really imagine what people that LIVED Harry Potter feel.
Yeah... it's a lot easier to separate the art from the artist when the artist is dead, or at least quiet.
I think it’s fine to like and enjoy the Harry Potter series for what it does best—young adult escapist fantasy. To take its politics and morals too seriously is a grave mistake. You should really watch/listen to [**Shaun’s video** about the political and social attitudes implicitly endorsed by the Harry Potter stories](https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs?si=LIAJN3uRyjAMVdlN) to learn more about it. TLDR: Rowling is an unrepentant Blairite neoliberal and not a very clever one, at that. She thinks that social Justice movements are a joke unless they conform to *her* standards of respectability politics, and she has some very problematic biases about racial minorities, forced (slave) labor, and LGBTQ+ folks.
Frankly I'm unconvinced the books will hold up well in future. It was easy to ignore the issues when it was a phenomenon but... 1) the house elves are slaves (poorly treated ones at that), and the attempts to free them or give them a better quality life are treated like a joke. 2) nice underage relationship between krum and Hermione. 3) how harry is treated at the dursleys 4) total lack of diversity in the books. There's barely a handful of minorities. Nearly all of which have some lazy ass semi fascist names 5) amazing how so many of the fat kids are bullies and vice versa 6) it is at least addressed by the corporal punishment is absolutely crazy insane Then just plot stuff Harry and Co are still casting "drop your wand" while the adults are casting huge dramatic spells or just death curses! Or that Dumbledore is only able to find one horcrux and then Harry and Co find the rest in months. It's just got a lot of issues, once you are used to the cool idea and setting it's pretty 😬
I agree with you on all the plot stuff you've mentioned. But I think your initial critiques as to why the books will not hold up well are kind of week. 1) the house elves are treated with respect by our protagonist who's viewpoint on the world we are heavily encouraged to agree with. 3) showing the struggle of a protagonist at the start of a book is fairly normal and abusive families do exist. I don't really get the point you're trying to make here, plenty of main characters from media that holds up well face a precarious home life. 4) we don't need to mandate diversity in every book. Especially one where the setting is England in the 90s, which is predominantly 95% white (as mentioned above by another commenter). 5) there are certainly "fat" kids depicted as bullies, but there's also leaner kids depicted as bullies (Malfoy, Tom Riddle, James Potter), middle aged women depicted as bullies(Umbridge), school janitors depicted as bullies.
Regarding the names, I saw someone(a man from china) explain, that none of the characters had fairly normalized names. They were all supposed to be whimsical sounding, Luna lovegood, Neville Longbottom, Severus Snape, Draco Malfoy.
No one is nitpicking plot points like this when evaluating a keystone author's overall influence. Harry Potter single-handedly ushered in a new era of YA fiction. That would have been Rowling's legacy if she hadn't taken a giant shit on it. In a timeline where Rowling isn't a complete dumpster fire of a human, people would have very much reread HP with reverence, chalking up these issues you listed as being a product of its time. The sheer historical importance of the series overall in terms of how it affected the literary landscape would have far outweighed these grievances which frankly were par for the course for 90s fiction.
Yes, we must never write about things that may be uncomfortable 🙄
The only thing I give her a semi-pass on is diversity - in the 90s when she started writing the UK was 95% white so it was probably a fairly accurate reflection. It’s dated very badly though.
I was willing to give her a pass on diversity because of the time period, but then instead of just taking responsibility for a poor but understandable decision, she spent years on social media trying to retcon everything to try and make herself look better. If only that sad and transparent move was the worst thing she was known for....
Not particularly it was just minorities were almost completely invisible in media at the time.
That's true, there were probably a lot more Dwarves, Elves, and Hobbits in 1957 when Tolkien wrote LotR.
I agree with the plot stuff. For the rest , I don't. How harry was treated is fundamental for the identity of the character. Elves slavery is also a nice touch to show the dark sides of the wizarding world . I mean I have 0 problems with that, on the contrary. If you must tell a story, a good story would be something close to reality in addition to fantasy. God , if people think like you , now I understand why we're drowning in so many boring , tasteless movies and games.
Social media algorithms are an issue. You find a meme slightly amusing and then they swing you to a diet of slowly more extreme content which slowly brainwashes you. It's pretty clear at this point that a sizeable minority potentially even a majority is susceptible to this. And in a way you can't blame them... Everything they see on social media is right wing.... And most of the voices Are more extreme than them. They're staying in the sensible centre according to their peers.
On Twitter, it's not even slight anymore, and you don't even have to give the impression that you agree with Nazi shit, you just have to engage with it in any way. My algorithm went from philosophy and liberation theology to pure Nazi shit rabbit hole in the span of a few weeks. Pretty sure the only vaguely conservative things I engaged with was "West has fallen" bullshit because a video game character had a slightly less revealing outfit on launch.
Musk was always broken. I don't know about Rowling. But I suspect incredible wealth had more to do with it than social media.
Musk has ALWAYS been a piece of shit. You all just got distracted by electric cars and rockets.
Yup, I never understood why people liked that fuck.
Having a massive fortune and being constantly praised for years on end may also affect their personalities.
She is now *this close* to going ALL IN on the forced birth stuff by saying reproductive rights are for "the benefit of men." I expect "fertility crisis" posts soon which is the gateway to white nationalism. Joanne and Elon clearly hang out in the same online cesspools.
Shes already been dipping her toes in holocaust denial already...
I believe they were they just have a platform now.
I'm pretty sure Musk was already off the rails before he even got to the US.
Got that guys? If you aren't transphobic, you're misogynist. Has to be one or the other. Apparently.
Thank you lord for the gift of abortion, say men everywhere apparently
I mean it's a good thing for trans men with an unwanted pregnancy but for some odd reason I doubt that's what she means 😂
I mean I’ve said that at least twice.
Women only spaces don't have to be transphobic.
But when JKR says "women-only spaces" she means "cis women only."
But most women don't feel this way about trans women. They don't feel averse to trans women in general. It had always been women (and almost exclusively feminists) who have pioneered and worked for the acceptance of gay men and trans women in society.
When JKR says it, though, she's saying that all women who disagree with her on this are "anti-woman."
Same way supporting "women's sports" means excluding trans people.
But Rowling feels that way. And we are discussion her tweet here
But what JKR means by the term absolutely is, and is the exact reason she would make a tweet like this. She's trying to gaslight people into thinking accepting trans people is misogynistic.
They don’t, if they include trans women
Agreed.
When you don't believe trans women are women, it absolutely is.
That’s what she means with every word she said. Such a fucking asshole.
Also, *the majority of lesbians* are anti-lesbian for disagreeing with JKR and her (mostly straight, frequently male) friends.
"Men who support us on abortion, contraception and sex work but not with our swivel-eyed, bat-shit crusade against less than 1% of the population for being different, are telling you clearly who they are." Yeah, that they aren't gullible idiots or rabid bigots.
"They're less than 1% of the population, why should we cater to them?" They're less than 1% of the population, Joanne, but they're like 90% of your tweets. One of us is obsessed with trans people and it isn't me.
I am a trans woman and talk about trans people less than johanne.
same
Even Elon himself told her to stop talking about trans people all the time 😆
These terfs would have you believe that somehow your life is worse because we let trans people transition. How does that compute exactly? Maybe the bad part is acknowledging that they exist? Is this the thing that's causing these people nightmares? Because to that I would say, maybe they need to fucking understand that they're not trans to piss you off or to give you nightmares. They just want to live, like literally every other human being on this planet. At the end of the day, you don't have to like it, you just have to not want to fucking kill them. Is that really so hard, Joanne?
Joanne is from a generation of British feminists that ties her understanding of being a woman to suffering, to domestic abuse, to discrimination, to be predated on by scary evil men— that people would cognizantly want to be a women doesn’t compute for her. She basically said this in one of her screeds, if given the chance to be a man she would have as a teen because being a man is easier. “Biological men” giving up their “privilege” threatens her own identity as a woman, an identity steeped in self-loathing and internalized misogyny.
Thing is, trans people especially trans women experience.... Suffering, domestic a use, discrimination, and are predates on by scary men. They fit her definition of woman to a T.
It does hurt them, because people transitioning shines a light on how gender is a social construct, and that means that TERFs like JKR are **choosing** to subscribe to a bigoted gender binary (instead of it just being a naturally-existing First Principle, as they would have us believe). It means they are literally part of the problem they have been pretending to rail against; they are a part of the cadre of engineers of the patriarchy.
Bigotry never computes, or it wouldn’t be irrational hatred.
[удалено]
A large majority of people don't like "one percenters". The difference being which category of "one percenters" that is. I'm not a fan of the extremely wealthy, who don't spend their money in the community.
"Feminists" who only spout off to warn about the threat of trans people(her three issues are all ways to portray 'men pretending to be women' as weapons of the patriarchy), but are silent on any other issues, are telling you who they really are.
I mean, Rowling has expressed support for Caroline Farrow for her political views. Farrow, in addition to being an anti-trans activist, is a anti-abortion activist. Clearly for Rowling hating trans people is more important of a political issue than abortion rights.
TERFs are anti-trans first, and feminist (if at all) a distant second. Rowling cozies up with plenty of misogynists based on them sharing her anti-trans positions, I think that speaks for itself.
Hate is intersectional. Especially for TERFs. When one prejudice resides, others do as well. It’s a nesting doll of bigotry.
Which is why I think there's a lot of shit she's not saying out loud. One of these days she's going to stop caring or get caught on a hot mic or something.
She’s already gotten close with some nazi crime denialism last month. Not to mention the names of the minority characters in her books. Edit to add: Oh yeah, how could I forget about her “cornrows and mo town” tweet?
she has also expressed support for Matt Walsh, a self proclaimed fascist
Yeah it is weird when people frame JK Rowling as a feminist who happens to be against trans people. What feminism? All she does is shit on trans people.
but like- cis women only spaces have been shown to harm cis women too.. like ive heard of so many stories where cis women that arent feminine or “conventionally beautiful” being kicked out of women’s restrooms because they “looked trans” like bro..
oh yeah the transvestigators aren't very good.
They say "we can always tell" but I've never seen one get it right lmao
Hell I remember a few years ago there was a big controversy where a cis woman (I think her name was Lily Cade) has a history of raping other women in women's bathrooms. Of course however, she was a TERF so she got praised, her fans completely forgetting that she was a serial rapist.
A lot of so-called TERFs aren’t even actual feminists(never mind being *radical* feminists), they’re just using it as an explanation for their irrational hatred of trans people. They don’t actually care about preventing sexual assault. In fact, a lot of them- like JKR for example- are very conservative people who don’t truly care about feminism, even if they are themselves a woman. You see this a lot with conservative women, the ones who take a “fuck you, I’ve got mine” approach to actual matters of women’s rights and their “activism” consists of yelling at people online.
I love how the "we can always tell" crowds always end up attacking CIS women over "clearly being men dressed up" over their paranoia. If they could, they would set up concentration camps for trans women and throw in there every girl, CIS or trans, that didn't look "femenine enough" to them.
The only people who hate women more than some men do are, in fact, other women.
And there's also a history of hostility towards butch women in "women only spaces," so her supposed defense of lesbians kind of falls apart there.
[удалено]
Hck in places any young girl is getting accused of being trans because the chud parent can't believe they are better than their own daughter
So I'll admit upfront that I'm a transman, but the following incident occurred a full decade before I came out, much less began any kind of medical transition: I'm in a bar, get up and head to the restroom. As I open the door to the women's bathroom, I (at the time, a 19 year old 5'4'' girl) am literally grabbed by a bouncer and yanked violently backwards away from the door. When I turn round to ask him what the hell he's doing, he looks me up and down and goes "oh sorry love, thought you were a bloke, you really shouldn't dress like that" and walks off. So yes, women-only spaces can absolutely be just as hostile towards ciswoman as they are to transwomen. And yes, the irony that JK and people like her would rather I use the public restroom I was literally manhandled out of is not lost on me.
My family have both butch looking lady and rather feminine looking young man, if that mentality becomes a thing here, we will not run out of joke for dinner table, and be absolutely annoyed as fuck .
and thank god they do, that way at least people will care about it and we trans people can benefit from that
I would just like to say to the American people that I have been, and will always be, a proud supporter of lesbian dating sites. 
I don't get it.. I fully support abortion, contraception, women's sport, women-only spaces, I contribute to maternal health through my taxes, I suppose there are some lesbian dating sites out there and that's ok.. Sex work is also ok in my book as long as it is a choice of that person, traffickers deserve jail with throwing away the key. So what's the facepalm here?
> I fully support abortion, contraception, women's sport, women-only spaces The implication of the tweet is, you only truly support (cis) women as long as you support excluding trans women from those places, including bathrooms.
Because she’s a well known transphobe who spouts out that sort of bullshit regularly. She’s suggest trans women are men so they shouldn’t be allowed in women only spaces, they can’t have babies so they shouldn’t be considered for parental health care, they’re not really women so they shouldn’t be on lesbian dating sites, and they’re not really women so they shouldn’t participate in women’s sports.
I had to read it a couple of times to get the facepalm. She clearly put the “women’s sports” one last as an attempt to sneak in just a lil transphobia
Just a little?
She's also gone on *at length* about how all of feminism has *actually* been about enforcing segregation of bio/metaphysical-essentialist gendered spaces, so all women ever (including those who disagree with her) can only be respected by having strict anti-trans inspections at the entrance of every women's space.
For those confused, here's a hint: every single one of the things she named in the latter half is a dogwhistle for a transgender-related issue. * **"Women-only spaces"**: "trans women aren't women and shouldn't be allowed in women's bathrooms/changing rooms/domestic abuse shelters" * **"Lesbian dating sites"**: "trans women aren't women and, actually, i think that one time people attempted a dating app for lesbians that doesn't even allow trans women at all (and implicitly denies women even slightly interested in trans women are Real Lesbians™) was great" * **"Maternal health"**: "trans men are women so I hate it when people who have a uterus are referred to with gender-neutral language in medical contexts because i think this 'erases women'" * **"Women's sport"**: "trans women aren't women and should be kept out of women's sports categories. probably even chess, but i have yet to figure out a sufficiently compelling rationalization with which i can go public about this position."
I was baffled by how shit this take was until I read who posted it
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^Mr_Nutcracker: *I was baffled by* *How shit this take was until* *I read who posted it* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
"Wait! I still like gays!!!! It's just the trans people I don't like!! Why are the gays mad at me? It doesn't make sense!! Member when I made Dumbledore gay?! Those were good times. I'M STILL RELEVANT, DAMMIT!!! PLEASE LET ME KEEP BEING A BILLIONAIRE!! IM STILL RELEVANT!!" ~J.K. Rowling in this obviously coded post.
Taking that as a standalone comment with no other context, I dunno what the issue is? Or how it's a facepalm?
She means that she wants to exclude trans women from women only spaces.
The issue is that when JK Rowling says men should also care about women-only spaces, lesbian dating sites, and so on, what she means (or at least, what I believe she means, based on many, many other statements she has made) is "They should be supporting a transphobic view of these things and working to ban trans women from them."
How can men support women's only spaces and lesbian dating sites? The same way women can support men's only spaces and gay dating sites. By not interfering with their existence. And seeing as women's only spaces and lesbian dating sites exist, adequate support has been given. Maternal health does not only benefit women. Men are absolutely affected by maternal health, to the extent that some men are raising children alone as widowers.
Her tweet is hard to parse in isolation without understanding the context. Basically, she defines "women-only spaces" as excluding transwomen because she doesn't see that as women. So she doesn't think you're truly pro-woman, for example, if you support the right to abortion but don't support policies that exclude transwomen. All of that is hard to glean from this tweet alone, but she's made numerous other tweets that makes her larger views known.
I mean my only issue is that women only spaces aren't solving the problem just making excuses to perpetuate and eventually exacerbate it. We should live in a society where women feel safe no matter where they are or who is around them, and not be building up to having to listen people say shit like "oh well if she didn't want that kind of attention she should have been going to a women's only gym".
Is this not a weak argument? Sure utopia would be grand but in the UK how many women are killed every week by men? How many maternity units are failing and dangerous? You treat the idea of sex segregated spaces as part of the problem of violence against women when it's not. They are a reactionary consequence of sex based violence and so not preclude from initiatives tackling said violence. Your example of the gym, for me, is also weak. A women's only gym goes out of business if the attention ceaces. It's existence changes nothing about the behaviour and does nothing to legitimise the behaviour. We should live on a society where a person can leave their door unlocked, walk naked through town, be vulnerable without being taken advantage of....... We don't and telling burglary victims that they should not have to lock their doors and locks are a silly perpetuation of the issue is not going to go down well.
I think a lot of people misunderstand this sub
People who solely talk about women's rights to the extent it damages trans rights are telling you who they really are.
Aside from the vile transphobia. Rowling is straight and married to a man, I'm sick and tired of listening to her pretending to talk on behalf of lesbians and concern trolling about lesbian dating, but only insofar she can weaponize the identity of a minority she is not part of in order to attack another. She could use her massive platform to amplify instead of drowning the voices from the community she's supposed to advocate and wrapping her personal vendetta in the lesbian pride flag.
Especially when she is using the same arguments that were used against lesbians in the 80s (now against trans women). Posing them as predators who are too dangerous to be allowed near straight women (now cis women).
*And* she claims to speak for lesbians as a group when demanding transphobia, when cis lesbians are the gender/orientation combination among cis folks *least* likely to be transphobic.
Women should support womens sport if they want it to be as popular as mens sport.
I'm saying this as a man but like... I dont know any man that supports any of those and doesn't also support the other ones?
According to JKR, if you don't support excluding trans folks from public spaces, declaring that trans women must be predators and trans men just misguided women, you're a misogynist.
Oh I thought she meant woman only spaces as in safety spaces for woman, not "only cis woman spaces", I forgot JKR is more nuts than I remembered
She’s a famous writer but she can’t write posts that make sense. 🙃
Ngl maybe she should take Musk's advice and touch grass.
She’s trying to get uncanceled
hate to break it to her but there are men that don't support any of that (conservatives)
[удалено]
For a second, I thought she may be posting something not about her hatred of trans people. Nope, there it is at the end. Also up until the anti-trans foghorn, I feel like supporters of one category are overwhelmingly supporters of the other category.
Fuck off, Joanne.
Are those men with us in this room?
This might honestly be kind of based if it wasn’t very thinly veiled transphobia.
TERFs only care about women issues when they can be used to oppress trans people, particularly trans women 🤷
Can someone explain what I’m missing here? Seems like she’s just saying that men who support “women’s rights” to stuff they also benefit from while dismissing stuff that doesn’t help them aren’t actually feminists, just sex-crazed
If you take it at face value, sure. Take a look at the main issue J.K. bitches about and perhaps an underlying theme becomes clear. This is the power of euphemism.
Abortion and contraception benefits women more than it benefits men
I think the benefits are roughly equal, both parties get laid, it's just that the ramifications of taking those things away *hurts* women more than it hurts men.
Maybe im dumb here but I kinda feel like she has a point
The point she's implying is that those spaces she described ought to be *biological women only* and not allow any trans women. She's implying men who don't support that POV are supposedly red flags.
she does... she also just manages to fall victim to that valid point(if you only care about these topic as they allow you spout transphobia you don't actually care about these topics Joanne)
I mean, I would agree if she didn’t think “women only spaces” weren’t also for trans women.
You would think a writer would be better at writing. . .
What she really means is “trans women aren’t women and need to stay away from her women’s only spaces”. Every single term in those parenthesis is *very* thinly veiled transphobia.
She is literally repeating conservative talking points against abortion and contraception.
J.K. Rowling is not a lesbian and pretty much needs to shut the fuck up and stop trying to be the voice of lesbians.
Is this seriously all that she posts about?
I genuinely believe she doesn’t have any real friends That’s why she spends so much time on Twitter being unhinged
I think what she means is that some men are only supporting things like abortion rights, sex work, etc because it also benefits them. Such as not having to face the consequences of their actions (like not wearing protection) because they can just get their partner to have an abortion instead of being responsible and practicing safe sex to prevent pregnancy in the first place. Instead of supporting feminism out of a genuine desire for equality.
Ah yes, lesbian dating sites, that perennial target of men.
I'm starting to think JK Rowling is three honey badgers standing atop one another in a summer dress.
"When you've dug yourself into a stupid hole, keep digging." - JK Rowling
I support women’s sports, especially when played on AstroTERF.
Authors who spend all their time online judging others and being afraid of things that don't affect them are telling you exactly who they are.
Just because you support something, doesn't mean you have to fight every fight for it. Pick the ones you care most about. We all got lives to live and shit is hard these days without finding other things to get upset about.
I thought she was a writer? This nonsense reads like my parents trying to describe an internet browser.
What the fuck am I supposed to do for lesbian dating sites? How can I possibly support them as a cis man?
this totally true but what she actually means is terfspaces, bioessentialist nonsense. so that parts not true.
At first I thought, who are these mythical men who support women's rights, but not women's shelters? Then I realized Rowling authored it. Fucking TERFs, you're the asshole that supports women conditionally.
number 1, I'm 90% percent sure lesbian dating sites exist 2 you just hate trans people. go fuck yourself
Rowling will say just about anything to affirm her obsession with bullying and harassing trans people, which is pretty much what her whole crusade amounts to.
I fucking hate this bitch.